Former President Donald Trump Required “Paper ballots, voter ID, and same-day voting” have been proposed as steps to improve election integrity. Republicans and conservative activists, rightly concerned about corrupt election tactics, support these ideas. While concerns about election fraud are real, the proposed solutions share a common weakness in implementation: manpower.

The challenge with paper, ID, and voting on Election Day is the massive increase in manpower required to make it happen, especially counting paper ballots and staffing polling places to handle the huge numbers of voters voting in person. When it comes to mobilizing election workers and poll watchers, Republican volunteers and conservative activists are overwhelmed by large numbers of union members and paid employees. (Related: Debbie Wuthnow: Should I consider early voting this election?)

But if we want paper voting, it is critical that we examine the potential consequences of such a change. Far from being an easy solution, history and logistics show that paper voting poses serious challenges that all Americans should consider carefully.

Workforce imbalance

One of the most overlooked issues with moving to paper-only ballots is the labor-intensive nature of manual counting. In a large jurisdiction like Harris County, Texas, there can be over 100 separate elections or propositions on the ballot. Counting one million votes by hand means counting roughly 100 million votes individually, which poses a huge logistical challenge. Not only is this process time-consuming, but it is also prone to more human error than a machine-based count. After all, in many cases, humans developed machines to relieve them of tedious, repetitive tasks.

Moreover, when it comes to election staff, there is an unequal distribution of resources. Democrats, who often rely on organized labor, have the advantage of paid poll workers, while Republicans tend to rely on volunteers. A clear example of this imbalance was evident in Detroit ahead of the 2024 election, where approved Republican poll watchers were outnumbered by their Republican counterparts. 7 to 1This made it impossible for Republicans to effectively monitor the voting process.

This imbalance could put Republicans at a significant structural disadvantage if election results become more dependent on the manual hand-drawn process of paper ballots.

The historic failure of paper voting

The notion that paper ballots are a more secure and transparent way to vote is not true in reality. New York's infamous Tammany HallUsing their corrupt paper-ballot system, Tammany Hall has controlled the city's politics, and with it the state and federal governments, off and on for nearly 150 years. Tammany Hall operatives stuffed ballot boxes with votes, manipulated vote counts, and used intimidation to help their candidates stay in power. Similarly, the notorious “Box 13” Scandal The 1948 Senate primary in Texas, where blatant fraud helped Lyndon B. Johnson win, demonstrated how susceptible paper ballots are to manipulation when one party controls the voting procedure from start to finish.

The role of human error

Although paper ballots may seem like a safeguard against fraud, they also increase the risk of human error during counting. The tedious and repetitive task of counting millions of ballots by hand can easily lead to mistakes. In contrast, machines are designed to handle this process efficiently and with far fewer errors. Machines can malfunction or be misprogrammed, but proper testing under trained, nonpartisan observation can detect most problems. Thus, a properly tested machine system will always be more accurate than a human counter. Also, most states already use hybrid systems, where the votes are cast on paper, but machines scan and count them, leaving a paper trail for audits if necessary.

A balanced approach is the solution

Rather than an all-out return to paper voting, a balanced approach using both technology and a paper vote record is more prudent. Modern systems for scanning paper ballots leverage the speed and accuracy of machines while providing a verifiable paper vote record. Ensuring representatives of both major parties oversee the voting and counting process is the best way to maintain transparency and trust.

Conservatives should be wary of the unintended consequences of paper-only ballots. Past experience shows that paper ballots are not a panacea for election security. Moreover, manual counting is labor-intensive and could further widen the gap between paid Democratic election staff and Republican volunteers, leading to conservatives being underrepresented in precincts and counts. By improving and oversight of the existing system, conservatives can ensure both transparency and efficiency without ceding electoral advantage to left-leaning paid staff.

There is no silver bullet to restoring confidence in our elections: the stakes are too high, and partisans will constantly be investigating and trying to gain an advantage, legal or illegal, which means our elected representatives need to be constantly vigilant and closing election loopholes, every election.

Chuck DeVore is the Chief of State Initiatives for the Texas Public Policy Foundation. He served in the California State Assembly and currently serves as a Lt. Colonel in the U.S. Army Reserves. He is the author of “Crisis of the House Never United.”

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.

As an independent, nonpartisan news service, all content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation is available free of charge to any legitimate news publisher with a large readership. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and affiliation with the DCNF. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.