TOM STUCKEY
Associated Press ANNAPOLIS, Md. -
With Maryland facing what could be its most hotly contested election season ever, it's no surprise that election-related issues have grabbed the attention of lawmakers during the 2006 legislative session.

Some of the debate in the General Assembly has been highly partisan, with Republicans charging that Democrats are trying to stack the deck by making it easier to vote and Democrats saying Republicans want to restrict voting rolls because they fear a big turnout will hurt their candidates.

But the biggest election issue, which cuts across party lines, involves the electronic voting machines of Ohio-based Diebold that are scheduled to be used by all Maryland voters this year. With doubts growing about the reliability of the machines, a campaign to return to the days of paper ballots, at least for one year, is gaining momentum in the General Assembly.

Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich, who approved purchase of the Diebold Accuvote-TS voting system in 2003, now questions the reliability of the touchscreen machines.

"I no longer have confidence in the State Board of Elections' ability to conduct fair and accurate elections in 2006," the governor said in a letter last month.

Many members of the General Assembly share his concerns, and voting rights activists are keeping up an attack on the system, arguing that the machines are vulnerable to hackers who could manipulate results and that fraud would be impossible to detect because there are no paper records that could be used for recounts in disputed elections.

The electronic machines have their defenders, including Linda Lamone, state elections laws administrator.

"We've got a good history with this system with two statewide elections under our belt with no problems of any significance," Lamone said. She and other proponents of the Diebold system say the kinds of fraud and manipulation feared by critics are impossible because of tight security measures implemented by state and local officials.

Lamone noted that a survey commissioned by the State Board of Elections showed Marylanders who used the Diebold machines in the 2004 primary and general elections found they were easy to use and had a high degree of confidence that their votes were recorded accurately.

She said many local election officials agree with her that trying to bring in a new system on such short notice "could spell disaster for administering the elections this year."

But the House Ways and Means Committee voted 20-3 on Friday to scrap the Diebold touchscreen machines for at least this year and use paper ballots with an optical-scan system for the primary and general elections. That would give the state two years to resolve questions about the touchscreen machines and add printers that would produce a paper copy of each ballot.

With the optical-scan system, voters indicate their choices by using pencils to complete an arrow or fill in a circle next to the names of candidates. They feed the completed ballots into a machine, which records the votes and stores the ballots so they could be used for a re-count.

Elections throughout the country are conducted on a hodgepodge of systems, including touchscreen, optical scan, punch card and lever machines. Only a few states have uniform statewide systems, with most leaving it up to local officials to decide which type to use.

A study released last month by Election Data Services, a political consulting firm that tracks election equipment, said about 80 percent of registered voters will use new-generation machines, either computers equipped with touchscreen technology or paper ballots with optical-scan counting systems, in this year's elections. About 10 percent will use lever machines and about one in 33 voters will use the punch cards that played a major role in the disputed presidential election in Florida in 2000.

Delegate Sheila Hixson, D-Montgomery, chairwoman of the Ways and Means Committee, noted that Maryland uses an optical-scan system for absentee balloting. An optical-scan system also was used in 19 counties before the Diebold machines were purchased for the 2004 election.

"We're not trying to bring in new technology," Hixson said. "This is about voter confidence."

There appears to be less support for a change in the voting system in the Senate, where Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller dismisses Ehrlich's letter in February as "an election-year ploy."

"Up until two weeks ago, the governor had the utmost confidence in our election system," Miller said.

"Now, and only now, the governor says he'd like a paper ballot. That would cost $50 million for all new machines, and he hasn't put a cent in the budget," Miller said.

Sen. Paula Hollinger, D-Baltimore County, chairwoman of the committee that handles election issues in the Senate, said her committee is examining whether anything needs to be done before the September primary to change or improve the voting system.

"I think we're going to wait to see what the House does," she said.

If the Democrat-controlled legislature decides to scrap the Diebold system for one election cycle, Ehrlich will have to come up with the money to lease the machines. Ehrlich's press secretary, Greg Massoni, said the governor isn't making any commitments yet because he wants to see what the cost would be before agreeing to additional spending.

While there is some bipartisan agreement on voting machines, three election bills enacted over Ehrlich's veto early in the session and one issue still on the agenda have split the legislature along party lines.

Ehrlich and GOP leaders complained bitterly about the Democratic decision in January to override vetoes of bills that:

- allow Marylanders, for the first time, to vote during the week prior to Election Day;

- allow absentee ballots to be used by anyone without cause, such as being away on Election Day;

- allow voters to cast ballots if they show up at the wrong precinct.

Ehrlich said the three laws are "an invitation to fraud," potentially allowing people to vote more than once. Democrats responded that Republicans are afraid if more people vote, it will help Democratic candidates.

The other potentially disruptive election-related issue that remains on the agenda is legislation that would allow felons to vote as soon as they are released from prison. Under current law, they have to wait three years to vote.

"That (loss of voting privileges) has always been part of the punishment," said House Minority Leader J. Lowell Stoltzfus, R-Somerset.

All of those measures taken together "are a rather lethal combination," he said.

Democrats maintain the purpose of the new laws is to encourage more people to participate in a basic right of democracy.

"They (Republicans) are just concerned that maybe making voting more convenient will somehow help Democrats," House Majority Leader Kumar Barve said.