Going through the review queue I rejected this edit because I thought it could be controversial. It changes the meaning of the post and makes it opaque who says what. Later the edit was approved.
Should it be?
No, it should not be approved. This was my attempt to comply with MichaelKingsmill's suggestion that I should "improve his answer," in the comments to his answer. I protested, because I believed that there was no saving his answer. The entire answer was full of misinformation, so the only way to save it would be to note all the mistakes (striking out the incorrect statements), or deleting the answer. I didn't know if that was Michael's intent, because he deleted the comment thread. It was a misunderstanding on my part. Feel free to correct the errors, if you like.
The part about the cost of birth certificates/marriage licenses is disingenuous since you never established that getting a Photo ID/Voter ID required obtaining a birth certificate. You are just doing what PBS is doing. Since a Concealed Carry Permit can be used as a form of Voter ID in Texas, I could say, "Finally, there is the cost of the documentation to secure the ID itself. The cost of a Concealed Carry Permit is $140. A CCP is required in some states to carry a concealed firearm."
The only information you have left is the cost of transportation, from a report from an advocacy group. That data may, or may not be accurate. The real problem, is that you didn't actually answer the question. Do “free” Voter IDs cost $25 in any state? Georgia and Tennessee don't require a Photo ID to vote (absentee), so you are left with Kansas which offers the documentation free of charge. If you can provided some estimates using maximum distances from any location to a DMV office, you might have a valid answer.
I am of the position that the edit should have been incorporated into a second answer by the original poster leaving the community to decide on the relative merits of the two responses. However, as the original answer in question is my own, I chose to leave it for the other trusted users to make the judgement so as to avoid an appearance of bias.
Given the controversial nature of these types of potential edits in the future, my vote would be to encourage separate answers but am open to other suggestions...
I apologize - I misread it the first time as desired edits. I agree - that the changes really were unwarranted and should be a separate answer. I have rolled back the changes (nothing is undo-able!).