I was a poll worker in Chicago's latest election so I have done some reading and research about the paper and electronic voting machines. Before I worked the polls, I had no idea the wide array of user edge cases I had to prepare for, particularly with the wheelchair bound (quadriplegic or not) and the visually-impaired. Electronic machines are vastly more suited for the disabled. The paradox is that I found administering the e-voting machines more annoying than paper ballot, because people more frequently requested the latter, so I just didn't get as much practice throughout the day. I personally prefer the paper ballots, but I do see a very pragmatic reason for having e-voting machines used in tandem at polling locations, and not just by the disabled.

I don't know where you're going with the whole Dieselgate thing. But I do agree that part of the appeal of e-voting is the ADA accessibility. Can you point me to where you found in your research where voting officials felt "obligated" or otherwise encouraged to ignore everything else for the sake of compliance? Just because a bank is forced to install a wheelchair ramp doesn't mean they remove the door locks.