Reply #6: they cited the banks improperly [View All]

The article's subtitle was misleading:

"Government, banking officials claim it's not necessary".

There were no banking officials quoted that I can see.
Its a fracking false argument anyway.
This is our elections we are talking about,
held 1 time a year or every so many years, and not on
permanently and professionally installed ATMS, and with
totally different checks and balances and rules.

Having worked in banking,I have not seen any transaction that was
not backed up with paper, either an individual slip of paper or
a report of the transaction.

A bank I worked at processed 30K + pieces of paper for about 20 branches,
they used an optical scan machine to scan the docs 2 different ways.

This machine worked well, it did kick out some rejects, and we handled those
manually to correct the data created by the scanned images.

Opponents of paper are back, and using any excuse they can.

It would be cheaper to throw away the DREs and buy optical scan, it would
save these paperless states money in 1 year.

If money really were the issue, Maryland would have purchased optical scanners
with the money Ehrlich gave them, instead of Diebold e-poll books.