But what you're doing is asking ID to serve the role of voter registration. ID is to prove ID.
And what problem are you trying to solve? If it's impersonation fraud - JohnQ shows up and requests JasperL's ballot - the address doesn't solve that problem, requiring an ID that says "JasperL" solves it. So you're trying to solve some OTHER problem. Fine, which one and how big is that problem and how will matching addresses help, given the availability of absentee ballots and presumably legitimate addresses?
Finally what NONE of the people supporting "voter ID" laws ever even nod to is the trade-off. What we want is for 1) all eligible and registered voters to be able to vote, and 2) to prevent ineligible voters from voting. But the problem is those pushing "voter ID" laws completely IGNORE point 1). It's never discussed or the numbers considered at all.
And if to solve ineligible voters problem, and there are 3 of them in Tennessee per year, you effectively kick 10,000 eligible citizens off the rolls, is that a good policy change? To me, obviously not, unless the POINT is to reduce voting rolls, which of course is the point of these new rules.
