Any voter may be required to cease using the device, but no voter may be removed from the polling place for using a device until after the voter has cast his ballot." Consider changing the sexist language in this paragraph and any other places similar language occurs. The easiest way to avoid this problem is to use plural constructions. This sentence would become: Voters may be required to cease using such devices, but voters may not be removed from the polling place until after they have cast their ballots."

C. has three subsections. Those subsections should use parallel construction to improve the readability of the section.

Current C

Grounds for regulating [or prohibiting the] use of electronic devices [by authorized representatives of candidates and political parties] include [but are not limited to ] (i) the making or receiving of calls that interfere with or become disruptive to the voting process; (ii) the making or receiving of calls in an attempt to solicit or influence any person in casting his vote; [or ] (iii) the [usage of the camera function to film within the polling place or beyond the 40-foot prohibited area; or (iv) the] person using the device is conducting himself in a noisy or riotous manner at or about the polls so as to disturb the election.

More readable C

Grounds for regulating [or prohibiting the] use of electronic devices [by authorized representatives of candidates and political parties] include [but are not limited to ] (i) making or receiving of calls that interfere with or become disruptive to the voting process; (ii) making or receiving of calls in an attempt to solicit or influence any person in casting his vote; [or ](iii) [using the camera function to film within the polling place or beyond the 40-foot prohibited area; or (iv) using the device in a noisy or riotous manner at or about the polls so as to disturb the election.

D3 is different from 24.2-802 C although I suspect the intend was not to change it. In 24 2-802 C, "each candidate or petitioner and governing body or chief executive officer", recommends to the Court "an equal number of the officers of election to be recount officials." The proposed D3 contains the sentence, "Such list shall note recommended recount officials who the court may appoint if the officials and alternates recommended by the parties to the recount are not of sufficient number to conduct the recount within a reasonable period." The D3 language seems to me ambiguous about whether the parties could recommend recount officials to the Court who had not been election officials in the election. If my reading is a possible interpretation, then I think we could have chaos trying to incorporate people who have had no training as officers of elections.

Section E seems to take away from the Court the possibility of asking for information directly from the localities. This assertion of control over the Court is easily remedied by adding a phrase to the last sentence in E. The electoral board of each county or city in which the recount is to be held shall provide the requested information to the SecretaryCommissioner of the State Board Department of Elections or directly to the Court if so requested.

town hall

Finally, in G, in every other location in this revision paper ballot is changed to printed ballot. I'm not entirely sure why printed is better than paper, but if it is, shouldn't it be changed here?