Here is a quote as to why voter caging is wrong:

Voters targeted by caging are often the most vulnerable: soldiers deployed overseas, those who are unfamiliar with their rights under the law, and those who cannot spare the time, effort, and expense of proving that their registration is valid. On the day of the election, when the voter arrives at the poll and requests a ballot, an operative of the party challenges the validity of their registration. Ultimately, caging works by dissuading a voter from casting a ballot, or by ensuring that they cast a provisional ballot, which is less likely to be counted.

While the challenge process is prescribed by law, the use of broad, partisan challenges is controversial. For example, in the United States Presidential Election of 2004, the Republican Party employed this process to challenge the validity of tens of thousands of voter registrations in contested states like Florida, Nevada, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The Republican Party argued that the challenges were necessary to combat widespread voter fraud. The Democratic Party countered that the challenges were tantamount to voter suppression, and further argued that the Republican Party had targeted voter registrations on the basis of the race of the voter, in violation of the federal Voting Rights Act law.

Monica Goodling cited the existence and concern about "vote caging" in her written and oral testimony to the United States House Judiciary Committee on May 23, 2007, mentioning that Tim Griffin, who was appointed as interim United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, would have allegations of vote caging arise if ever presented to be confirmed by the Senate to the office, and that the Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty "failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of allegations that Tim Griffin had been involved in vote-caging during his work on the president's 2004 campaign."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_caging

Yes, it's a blog, but the basic facts are there and documented, albeit I wouldn't quite believe every source given. I quoted it mainly because it does do a very good job of explaining why caging is wrong. To me, it describes why caging is used quite well. Caging is not done to confirm that someone lives where they say they do, it is done to stop someone from voting by making it difficult for them to prove they live where they say they do. HUGE difference to my mind.

And, Bucco, since when is the St. Petersburg Times a blog? cologal's original post used that as her quote, not a blog. It is a legitimate article about a legitimate issue.