Voting Reform Debate Continues

State Administrator of Elections Linda Lamone has long been the state's most ardent defender of the much despised touch-screen voting machines. In testimony before Sheila Hixon's (D-Silver Spring) House Ways and Means Committee, Lamone proposed allowing voters who don't trust the machines to vote on paper but says that there is not enough time to wholly switch voting systems.

The time issue seems at least a bit of a red herring. Couldn't some counties shift to a new system even if there is not enough time for all to make the change? And even if we really cannot do it by 2008, shouldn't we begin a change now so we can do it by 2010? Otherwise, won't we hear the same excuses again after 2008? It seems that there is not enough time if we have a long debate over the new system but that we could make a shift if the legislature settled on an alternative in short order.

Lamone's proposal is even more mysterious, however, because one would assume that operating two systems of voting might be more confusing than simply changing from one to the other. However, Lamone's proposal was not clear in the Gazette article. Is she essentially proposing that the state misuse provisional ballots and allow people who prefer paper to vote that way? Or is she proposing a separate set of paper ballots? If so, how would they be counted?

Anyone out there have more information?