Whenever I'm in my car I'm usually listening to Minnesota Public Radio. It's a nice change from KDWB, where I heard the same mindless songs over and over again (sure, I love the beat, but I felt like my brain was starting to ooze out my ears after a while).

Lately there's been a lot of talk on MPR about the state-wide Minnesota recount. The Al Franken and Norm Coleman race ended too close and triggered the mandatory recount. No biggie, except for the massive amount of man-hours it will take to put hands and eyes on every single ballot cast in the state.

One of the concerns talk show guests have expressed on the air is the fact that some people don't mark their choice by filling in the circle next to the name. Rather, they put an X over the circle, or a check mark, or maybe even just a line. The problem is that, in Minnesota, ballots are counted using an optical scanning device, which detects the dark marks we pencil into the little circles. However, they don't "see" those X's or check marks or other type of marking. So what happens in the recount is that every ballot must be hand-counted, so all those un-recognizable marks of intent get tallied.

You'd think that if those marks of intent aren't counted in any election, then the results are always wrong. I don't remember the statistics, but they say the percentage of people who use a method other than filling in the bubble is very small, so if results are clearly favoring one candidate, those odd marks wouldn't make any difference.

Why wouldn't someone follow the directions, though? We're told that our votes count, that every person's choice is taken. But those people, whether they realize it or not, are in a sense removing themselves from that. They're not being counted. Why would anyone do that?

I suppose it could be a generation gap. One guest this morning I was listening made a generalization and said older people can be in the category of X-marks-the-spot-ers. Perhaps they aren't familiar with the idea that computers do most of the work these days, and computers simply aren't as smart as people are. Not yet, anyway.

Some are likely in a rush and are trying to shave precious seconds off their booth time so they're not late for work. I'd think that if you're willing to risk being late for work, you'd think your vote is important enough to make sure you cast it correctly.

My age might play a part in this as well. Not only am I incredibly aware of how computers do or  don't (as is often the case) work, but I am also one of those brought through years of standardized testing in school.

I remember having to sit at my own table in my junior high school gymnasium to take a "bubble test," as I liked to call them. The rules were strict - if we even so much as looked around the room before we turned in our scorecards, the teacher would suspect us of cheating. Every test sheet and scorecard had printed in big bold lettering to use ONLY a Number 2 pencil and to fill the circle completely, not partly, not an X, or else the answer would not get registered.

I've taken more of these tests than I can remember. Every year it seemed we had one in grade school. I had to take one before I entered high school. I took another for the ACT exam (twice), a couple more for Advanced Placement (AP) course exams, a college placement test, and myriads more in college for course quizzes, mid-terms, and final exams. I've been brainwashed with "fill in the circle completely, and use only a Number 2 pencil."

It just seems like a strange concern, to have to check for the people who either didn't read the directions or didn't look closely enough to notice there were directions.

I guess my point is that no, following directions isn't always that critical. Does it really matter if you drive once around a round-about or twice before getting off? Not really. But when it comes to taking advantage of a constitutional right, conformity isn't always a bad idea.