Election Integrity

What this measures

Does this candidate support verifiable elections grounded in citizen accountability, free from machine manipulation, mass mail-in, or foreign interference?

Why it matters

If you cannot trust the count, nothing else on this scorecard matters. Christian consent of the governed (Romans 13:1 properly understood) requires elections that the people can verify with their own eyes. Hand-counted paper ballots, photo voter ID, single-day in-person voting — these are not partisan positions, they are the engineering specifications for a government that claims its authority from God through the consent of the governed. Mass mail-in voting, electronic tabulation no citizen can audit, private election funding from Mark Zuckerberg, ballot harvesting — these break the chain. This is why Election Integrity sits in the God First tier rather than as a sub-bullet of America First.

The 5 scored questions

Each question is binary (True / False / null). True earns +2 points. Null is "not yet verified from primary sources" — neither penalized nor credited. Use the toggle below to see the wording for federal, state, or local officials — the moral spirit is identical across tiers; what changes is the chair making the call. Read the tier architecture explainer →

1. Q1. Candidate supports hand-counted paper ballots and opposes electronic voting machines
   Q1. Candidate (state SoS/legislature) has voted for state hand-count requirements / opposed electronic voting machines
   Q1. Candidate (city clerk/county election official) supports hand-counted paper ballots at local precincts where state law permits
2. Q2. Candidate supports photo voter ID with citizenship verification
   Q2. Candidate (state SoS/legislature) has voted for state photo voter ID + citizenship verification at registration
   Q2. Candidate (city clerk/election official) enforces state photo voter ID + citizenship verification at local precincts
3. Q3. Candidate supports single-day in-person voting with absentee only for verified medical/military exceptions
   Q3. Candidate has voted to restrict state early-voting windows + tighten state absentee qualifications to verified medical/military
   Q3. Not scored at the local tier — federal/state-only question.
4. Q4. Candidate opposes mass mail-in voting, drop boxes, and ballot harvesting
   Q4. Candidate has voted against state mass mail-in voting expansion, against state drop-box deployment, and against legalizing ballot harvesting
   Q4. Not scored at the local tier — federal/state-only question.
5. Q5. Candidate opposes private election funding ("Zuckerbucks") and foreign-government election interference
   Q5. Candidate (state SoS/legislature) has voted to ban state acceptance of private election grants ('Zuckerbucks') + state penalties for foreign interference
   Q5. Candidate (city clerk/council) refused acceptance of private election-administration grants ('Zuckerbucks')

Key bills, votes, and laws we track

• Save Voter ID Act / SAVE Act (HR 22) — Federal proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration.
• Voter Confidence Act variants — Mandates hand-counted paper ballots in federal elections. Co-sponsors tracked.
• Anti-Zuckerbuck legislation (state-level) — Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania state-by-state tracking.
• For the People Act / Freedom to Vote Act — Democratic-sponsored federalization of mass mail-in — opposition is scored positively.

Organizations and PAC vectors we score

• True the Vote — Election-integrity training + investigation tracker.
• Public Interest Legal Foundation — Voter-roll integrity litigation tracker.
• Election Integrity Network (Cleta Mitchell) — Coalition-membership tracking.
• Center for Tech and Civic Life — Recipient of "Zuckerbucks" — partnership disqualifies.
• Brennan Center for Justice — Mass-mail-in advocacy — alignment scored negatively.

Where this lives in the scorecard

This category contributes 10 of 60 in the ✝ God First tier (60 pts total) and 10 of 100 in the grand total. See the full scoring system for the 60/40 weighting rationale and the letter-grade scale (A 90+ / B 80 / C 70 / D 60 / F <60).