Purpose: Define Elections and Voting requirements using the National Security five-column SMART-D matrix, including candidate metrics, source links, comparator context, public value, guardrails, targets, and gaps.
Phase Boundary: Requirements review and metrics source-method review only. Metrics scoring, report-card use, legislative mapping, issue grades, member grades, rollups, leaderboards, letters, calls, and action tools remain disabled until later approval.
Red text = bad current value, bad trend, missing critical data, or unfavorable gap. Green text = favorable value or improving trend. Amber text = context-dependent, incomplete, or source-method review needed. Neutral/gray text = descriptive value that is not inherently good or bad.
| Requirement | Metric / Measurement | Top Countries / Sources | Value to the American People | Gap / Target / Timeframe |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Requirement ID: DEM-FUN-001 Category: Elections and Voting / Election Security and Auditability Lead agency/component: EAC, CISA, DOJ, state election offices Requirement: The system shall define, measure, and report whether elections are secure, auditable, verifiable, legally administered, and protected against fraud, interference, intimidation, and unlawful manipulation. Distinctness test: One election integrity and auditability outcome; separate from voter access and representation. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Election security, audit, and certification integrity coverage Unit: Percent / index Period: Most recent federal election cycle reviewed Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: EAC EAVS source link; CISA Elections source link Automation feasibility: Medium. EAVS and CISA materials can be tracked; state certification/audit evidence is fragmented. |
Comparable practice / metric: Election integrity and electoral democracy indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link; V-Dem source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Protects the right to choose leaders through a process citizens can verify and trust. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Election security must not be used as a pretext for suppressing lawful voters or rejecting lawful results. |
Target: 100% documented lawful certification and audit coverage for federal elections Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-FUN-002 Category: Elections and Voting / Voter Access Lead agency/component: EAC, Census Bureau, DOJ, state election offices Requirement: The system shall define, measure, and report whether eligible citizens have practical, equal, and non-discriminatory access to voter registration, ballot access, early voting, absentee or mail voting where applicable, accessible polling places, and accurate election information. Distinctness test: One voter access outcome; separates access from fraud/security controls. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Eligible voter registration and turnout access indicator set Unit: Percent / index Period: Most recent federal election cycle and latest Census voting supplement Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Census Voting source link; EAC EAVS source link Automation feasibility: Medium-high for turnout and registration; medium-low for polling-place access and state-law review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Voter turnout and electoral participation indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Makes the right to vote real in practice, not merely available on paper. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Access improvements must preserve lawful eligibility and election integrity without discrimination. |
Target: Increase eligible-citizen registration and turnout while reducing avoidable access barriers Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-FUN-003 Category: Elections and Voting / Public Election Evidence Lead agency/component: EAC, state election offices, courts, CISA Requirement: The system shall identify and display public evidence concerning election rules, ballot counting, certification, recount procedures, audits, and results reporting. Distinctness test: One public-evidence requirement; does not judge partisan outcomes. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Election evidence source-link completeness Unit: Percent Period: Most recent federal election cycle source registry Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: EAC, state election office records, official canvass/certification records, court records Automation feasibility: Medium. Source-link checks can be automated; evidence quality requires source review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Public election result transparency practices Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Lets citizens inspect election processes instead of relying on rumor or unsupported claims. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Evidence display must avoid publishing private voter data or misleading partial records. |
Target: 100% of public election process claims linked to official or high-quality evidence Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-FUN-004 Category: Elections and Voting / Election Standards Lead agency/component: EAC, CISA, DOJ, state legislatures and election offices Requirement: The system shall identify national, state, and local election-administration standards relevant to democratic performance and distinguish between required standards, best practices, and policy proposals. Distinctness test: One standards-classification requirement; separates law, best practice, and proposal. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Election standard classification completeness Unit: Percent Period: Latest annual standards/source registry review Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: EAC EAVS source link; CISA Elections source link Automation feasibility: Medium. Standard registries are maintainable; legal status needs human review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Election administration standards and best-practice references Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: International IDEA source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Helps citizens see which election rules are law, which are best practice, and which are policy proposals. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: The site must not present a proposal as law or confuse best practices with constitutional requirements. |
Target: 100% of election-standard references labeled as law, official guidance, best practice, or proposal Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
| Requirement ID: DEM-FUN-005 Category: Elections and Voting / Peaceful Transfer and Certification Lead agency/component: Congress, courts, state election officials, National Archives, DOJ Requirement: The system shall define and track evidence related to peaceful transfer of power, acceptance of lawful election outcomes, certification integrity, and prevention of political violence or unlawful interference. Distinctness test: One peaceful-transfer/certification outcome; separate from voter access and turnout. Status: Reviewer-ready after source-method review |
Metric: Certification and peaceful-transfer integrity status Unit: Status / count / index Period: Most recent presidential and congressional election cycle Current value: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Current trend: Candidate / source-method review required before scoring. Trend basis: Prior comparable period or release-to-release trend to be selected during source-method review. Data source: Official certification records, court records, congressional proceedings, DOJ and public incident records Automation feasibility: Medium-low. Milestones can be tracked; violence/interference evidence requires legal and source review. |
Comparable practice / metric: Peaceful transfer and electoral democracy indicators Comparable value: To be selected during comparator review. Comparable trend: To be selected during comparator review. Source link: Freedom House source link; V-Dem source link Reviewer caution: Comparable democracy indicators provide context and potential targets, but they are not one-to-one measures of U.S. constitutional, federal, election, or congressional performance. |
Public value: Prevents political power from being seized by force, fraud, intimidation, or bad-faith refusal to accept lawful results. Legal / civil-liberty guardrail: Must distinguish lawful challenges and court process from unlawful intimidation, violence, or bad-faith refusal to honor lawful outcomes. |
Target: 100% lawful certification and transfer milestones completed without unresolved unlawful-interference finding Gap: Pending approved baseline Timeframe: V1 source-method review before public scoring Target note: Target is proposed for reviewer use and should be confirmed against the approved Democracy metrics catalog. |
Review the candidate election metrics against the existing Democracy metrics set, then approve or revise source-method rules for voter access, election security, certification, and peaceful transfer.