This comes as Pennsylvania’s widespread use of touch-screen voting is viewed with suspicion by supporters of Donald Trump.

Many already feel the Republican presidential nominee is campaigning upstream, and Trump has suggested that if he loses, it will be because voting systems in Pennsylvania and elsewhere are rigged.

“I think paper ballots that the voter fills in circles with ink that are read by optical scanners would be a good way to go,” said Rep. Brad Roae, R-Crawford, a member of the House State Government Committee.

That committee is considering a review of election technology, which would include recommendations to update the state’s voting machines.

Any effort won’t come in time to allay concerns about the November presidential election, Roae noted.

One possible suggestion, as he said, is requiring paper ballots. Philadelphia and 49 of the state’s 67 counties use touch-screen voting.

Just 1 in 6 voters live in counties where votes are recorded on paper.

Ohio and West Virginia use touch-screen voting systems that spit out paper records for voters to double-check, according to the lobbying group Verified Voting.

Among other neighboring states, Delaware and New Jersey exclusively use touch-screen systems like Pennsylvania’s.

New York, Maryland and the New England states use paper-ballot systems.

Even before the first early votes are cast, Trump and his supporters say he won’t get a fair shake.

In support of their theories about a system vulnerable to tampering, Trump and other conservatives note results from Philadelphia four years ago, when 59 precincts reported no votes for the Republican, Mitt Romney.

“Trump could win if people don’t listen to the media. They make Trump look like an idiot,” said Mark Garver, who lives on Maryland’s Eastern Shore and attended an appearance by Trump’s running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, in Lancaster this week.

“And it depends on how much voter fraud there is,” he said.

But an analysis of Philadelphia’s vote found the results did not obviously point to fraud, since the 59 precincts that voted exclusively for President Barack Obama represented only about 3 percent of the city’s total vote and were in African American neighborhoods.

Nationally 93 percent of black voters backed Obama.

The website that analyzed the vote, Factcheck.org, run by the Annenberg Center for Public Policy, concluded that Romney’s poor performance in the inner-city “isn’t all that surprising once the full context is known.”

Election officials in Pennsylvania insist the system is secure – a conclusion underscored by former state Supreme Court Justice Correale Stevens, a Republican.

A group of voters sued in 2006 to get the state to stop using touch-screen machines. But in a February 2015 decisions, Stevens wrote there’s no evidence that touch-screen voting is less accurate than paper-ballot systems.

Fraud can be perpetrated with paper ballots, too, he said.

Ed Allison, director of voter registration in Lawrence County, said too many people are involved in Election Day activities for fraud to go undetected.

Touch-screen voting is “just as accurate,” he said. “That’s been proven.”

Jeff Greenburg, director of voter registration in Mercer County, said he gets annoyed by the hypocrisy of politicians who are satisfied with the integrity of the election systems when they win, but gripe when they lose.

“I don’t like the fear-mongering,” he said. “There are always going to be a percentage of folks who will never trust the government, who will never trust the system.”

Greenburg said opportunities to rig a touch-screen voting system are limited, and any misconduct likely would be caught before votes were submitted.

Election officials cross-reference the number of votes cast with the number of voters who show up, and they would notice if someone managed to make multiple votes, he said.

The machines are not Internet-connected, which rules out hacking from afar, he said. The only way fraud could happen is if someone working in the elections office tampered with the equipment or a voter managed to do it at the polls.

Election officials mitigate that potential by segregating jobs among election workers. No one person is responsible for preparing machines, testing them and double-checking results, Greenburg said.

Shirley Crowl, Cambria County election director, said the county has 438 touch-screen voting machines as well as 75 backups for emergencies and parts.

The county purchased the machines when it operated more than 160 voting precincts. Today, there are only 133 precincts in the steadily shrinking county.

She said the machines have held up well over the years – but battery replacement “and other general maintenance” have been ongoing as needed.

“Right now, we’re fine with what we have,” Crowl said, saying she sees no reason to replace the machines.

“The issues we’ve had have been routine stuff. We maintain them on an ongoing basis and try to keep them as well-maintained as possible.”

In the county, that means regular testing, particularly in the days and weeks leading up to an election. 

Batteries are checked, charged and then tested to make sure they will hold up on Election Day.

A “clearing test” is performed on machines to ensure old tallies are dumped.

Logic and accuracy testing is also performed to try to make sure the machines will function as expected in upcoming elections.

“We do a lot of testing to make sure everything is running the way it’s supposed to,” Crowl said.

Local and state officials say a look into replacing voting machines is now in the early stages, and the current machines ought to last another five years.

“You can’t say there won’t be problems, but we don’t expect any,” said Wanda Murren, a spokeswoman for the Department of State, which oversees elections.

In the spring presidential primary, the only hiccup was caused by a storm-related power failure, she said.