A ballot printing issue led to widespread voting problems in Cambria County, Pennsylvania Tuesday morning, according to officials.
Cambria County Commissioner Scott Hunt confirmed that the voting problem was caused by how the ballots were printed, and not a problem with the machines.
He confirmed to WJAC that mail-in ballots are not affected by this problem.
County Solicitor Ron Repak said the machine would not read the ballot markings, based on how they were printed adding they conducted tests before Election Day, but because of the nature of the problem, the mistake was not able to be discovered until voting commenced.
Repak is urging voters to continue to cast their ballots and trust that their votes will be counted.
First, elections officials are hand counting ballots that were delivered into drop boxes earlier Tuesday. Second, they have express voting machines to help speed up the process. Third, officials have ordered additional ballots and hope to commence with normal voting by Tuesday afternoon.
A court order has extended voting times from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. in Cambria County. In the filing, election officials reported that the Electronic Voting System in Cambria County experienced a software malfunction, which prevented voters from scanning their completed ballots.
Until the issue can be solved, county election officials report that voters can fill out their paper ballot and have it placed in a secure and locked drop box.
Voters reported that some polling places were not following that directive earlier, instead turning people away and telling them to come back later.
Repak said that poll watchers are on site to guarantee that ballots are secured.
He also said that Cambria County will now be using express voting machines to help voters get through the lines faster.
It's unclear how long it will take to resolve the problem, but Repak confirmed there are measures in place to make sure everyone can vote.
.Here are the top political news stories for today.
This situation in Cambria County couldn’t come at a worse time. Harris’s campaign has been built on themes of hope, unity, and a smooth democratic process. Now, with voting delays and miscommunication, this plays into Trump’s hands, giving him more fuel to push his ‘rigged election’ narrative.
@SeafowlNoraGreen1yr1Y
I see the angle, but the Harris campaign should step up here by emphasizing transparency and the measures being taken to fix the problem. They can present this as a moment for responsible leadership, highlighting their commitment to every vote being counted. It’s a chance to show how they’ll handle crisis and uphold democracy.
I don’t think so. Trump’s message on this issue is direct: he’s for 'draining the swamp' and fixing a 'broken' system. Voters who are angry about these issues don’t necessarily see his rhetoric as negative—they see it as truthful. They want someone who recognizes the flaws and promises to fight against them. Harris’s optimism is appealing, but it risks sounding naive in moments like this
But doesn’t that approach risk alienating swing voters? Trump’s constant accusations of rigging and corruption could turn off those undecided voters who just want a reliable process. Harris’s positive tone might be what they’re looking for, especially if she comes out strong on supporting a transparent resolution in Cambria.
That’s true, but look at the difference in messaging. Harris is trying to remain above the fray, talking about unity and stability. Trump’s tactics are more about exploiting every crack in the system to energize his base. He’s vocal and combative, and right now, that plays well in a battleground state where people are frustrated with the voting process.
Exactly. Trump’s campaign can point to this and say, 'Look, once again, the system’s failing voters.' It’s validating for his base, which already believes the system is skewed against them. From a strategic standpoint, it’s a clear advantage for him in Pennsylvania.
Here we go again! Another election with 'technical issues' in a battleground state. How convenient. Cambria County is crucial, and this affects people’s faith in the entire process. How are we supposed to trust these results?
Join in on more popular conversations.
