Reply #18: yes, caution is good, but if you read the text of the bills [View All]

[garybeck]

and not just the word "ballot" or "paper record" it is very clear.

Holt's bill says very clearly that DREs are allowed:

"or a paper print-out
of the voter's vote produced by a ... electronic voting machine,
so long as in each case the record permits
the voter to verify the record."

this sentence is very clear. it is saying that DRE machines are allowed, as along as a paper record accompanies the electronic vote. This is why the first sentence of the bill calls for a paper record and not a paper ballot.

If the first sentence of the bill called for a paper ballot, would not allow DRE machines and that sentence would not be in the rest of the bill.

I'm glad the committees are still reviewing the language, but I have to say it's pretty clear. They say specifically that DREs are allowed. And that is very different than a paper ballot bill banning DREs.

I think perhaps the confusion is that most people don't realize a DRE can still be a DRE if it produces a paper record. It is still casting the vote electronically and there is no assurance that the e-vote matches the paper record printout. that is the problem.