SB 44 would create a new option in New Hampshire election law for voters in precincts using electronic ballot counting devices to request that their ballot be counted by hand. Under the bill, the request would be made when the voter presents the ballot to the moderator, and the moderator would then place the ballot in the compartment on the side of the electronic counting device rather than having it processed through the machine. The bill is framed as a narrow procedural change affecting how ballots are handled at the precinct level.
The measure amends RSA 659 by adding a new section on "Machine Count; Hand Count" and would take effect 60 days after enactment. Its practical effect would be to give individual voters in machine-count precincts a choice between machine tabulation and hand counting, while leaving the overall election system and use of electronic ballot counting devices in place. The bill does not appear to change voter eligibility, ballot access, or election outcomes standards, but it would require local election officials to accommodate and segregate ballots requested for hand counting.
Impact
SB 44 would add a new election administration rule to RSA 659, creating a statutory right for a voter in a precinct using an electronic ballot counting device to request a hand count of that ballot. This would affect moderators and other local election officials by requiring them to accept and separately handle ballots designated for hand counting, while still using the electronic device for other ballots. The bill would not eliminate machine counting, but it would create a parallel handling process within precincts that use ballot-counting equipment.
Sentiment
Based on the available record, the bill appears to have been treated as a technical or procedural election-law proposal rather than a broadly controversial measure. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, so there is no documented floor debate or formal vote sentiment to assess. The bill’s narrow scope suggests it may have been presented as a voter-choice and election-administration issue, with support likely centered on ballot-handling flexibility and transparency.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is the operational burden on election officials and the compatibility of individual hand-count requests with precincts that rely on electronic counting devices. Supporters would likely view the bill as expanding voter choice and confidence in ballot counting, while opponents may worry about added complexity, slower processing, and the possibility of inconsistent handling across precincts. Because no transcripts or votes are provided, specific arguments from legislators or stakeholders are not available in the record.