That’s a fairly common approach. That’s how I’ve been voting in Indiana for decades.

This is how it's done in Texas.

I agree and like to point out the downvotes to your comment raise a "red" flag itself

I'm pretty sure if I looked I could find you:

1. A voter registration of a T R D* in the Detroit area in the 1970s

2. A death certificate for T R D from the 1980s

3. A record of a T R D voting in the Detroit area in the 2020 election.

That's because T R D from #1 and #2 was my uncle, who grew up in the Detroit area, and died in the 1980s; and the T R D from #3 is my brother, who also grew up in the Detroit area, and is still alive and well.

It turns out that 1) a lot of people are named after their relatives. And also, 2) a lot of people still live where those relatives lived. And, 3) a lot of those relatives, being from the previous generation, have died. Any intersection of #2 and #3 will give you the "evidence of dead people on the voter rolls" (or "evidence of dead people voting") that we've been hearing so much about.

How big is that intersection in a state with 10 million people?

(* Full name redacted, but I have a very specific T R D in mind)

You can do this but with anonymized private key cards.

I've only worked on one US election (Colorado 2014), but they did check people off a database when they voted. So some places already do this. Unfortunately that database went down multiple times during the day, leading to long queues and delays for voters.

In Australia, we do a similar check, but using paper rolls and cross-check for duplicates afterwards. No computer to go down means no delays. If they find a duplicate they investigate, and if there's ever enough to make a difference, they would re-run the election in that area. Once we lost a box of votes and they had to re-run the election across a whole state to make sure.

1. Already exist in various forms, for the purposes of voting.

2. See #1.

3. When people vote by mail, they get ticked off in #1. This doesn't happen immediately, because mail-in ballots can be claimed lost or found to be spoiled (with opportunity for correction), and because they have to be cross-referenced against in-person votes - which is why it takes days or weeks for all ballots to be tallied.

People running elections aren't stupid. They've already thought of all this.

Unfortunately, the barrier to making false or completely unsubstantiated allegations about wide-spread voter fraud is zero, so every Tom, Dick, and Harry is currently throwing in their two cents on the matter. (Bonus points if they don't actually understand, or actively pretend to mis-understand how the process currently works.)

I'd give those claims the time of day when their proponents are ready to put some skin in the game, and swear on them under penalty of perjury.

> Central database of all citizens.

That's like saying a shotgun can cure cancer. The tradeoffs required are so laughably bad your solution is not worth considering.