Non-Partisan Election Advocacy

When you participate in vote report auditing with Actual Vote, you’re doing non-partisan work to improve election transparency and strengthen democracy — nothing more and nothing less. This page discusses what that means in practice, why it matters, and how America Counts holds itself to this standard.

Why non-partisanship is essential to what we do

Actual Vote’s power comes from its credibility. If people on both sides of the political spectrum trust that the process is fair and the findings are honest, then those findings carry real weight — whether they confirm that vote reporting was accurate or reveal that it wasn’t.

The moment Actual Vote is perceived as favoring one party over another, that credibility disappears. A finding of “no discrepancies” would be dismissed by the other side as a cover-up. A finding of discrepancies would be dismissed as a political hit job. The evidence would be exactly the same, but it would lose its ability to resolve disputes — which is the entire point.

This is why America Counts’s non-partisan commitment isn’t just a nice value statement. It’s structurally necessary for the work to function.

What non-partisanship looks like at America Counts

Non-partisanship doesn’t mean we have no opinions about elections. It means that our work — the auditing itself, the way we present findings, the way we engage with the public — is guided by evidence and methodology rather than by a desired political outcome.

Here’s what that looks like in practice:

We follow the evidence wherever it leads. When an Actual Vote analysis confirms accurate reporting in a district won by either party, we report that. When it surfaces discrepancies, we investigate and report those too — regardless of which party might benefit from the finding.

We present facts without speculation about motive. When we describe real situations involving vote reporting problems, we stick to documented facts with citations and withhold judgment on accusations that haven’t been definitively resolved. We describe what happened and how Actual Vote could have helped clarify the situation — not who was at fault or why.

We welcome participation from everyone. As we explain on our trustworthiness page, Actual Vote is structurally resistant to partisan abuse. We actively encourage partisans of all stripes to use the tool, because using it can only produce honest evidence about vote reporting — regardless of the user’s political motivation.

We select examples for methodological relevance, not political messaging. When we present stories of vote reporting problems to demonstrate why independent auditing is needed, we select them based on how clearly they demonstrate specific vulnerabilities — not based on which party they portray in a favorable or unfavorable light. We try to represent a range of states, time periods, and circumstances. The point of any individual story is never “this party cheated.” It’s “here is a situation where independent evidence would have given everyone a clearer picture.”

We are transparent about our own work. Every Actual Vote recording is archived publicly at av.democracycounts.org. Every analysis we publish can be independently verified against the same public data we used. We don’t ask anyone to trust us on faith — we ask them to check our work.

How to distinguish genuine non-partisanship from the appearance of it

If you’ve spent any time looking into election integrity, you’ve likely noticed that the term is used by a wide range of organizations — some genuinely non-partisan, others using the language of non-partisanship as cover for partisan aims. This is a real problem, and it’s one that America Counts takes seriously, both because it affects public trust in the field and because we don’t want to be mistaken for something we’re not.

Here are some characteristics that tend to distinguish genuinely non-partisan election work from organizations that merely claim the label:

Evidence-first vs. conclusion-first. A genuinely non-partisan organization starts with methodology, collects evidence, and reports what it finds. An organization masquerading as non-partisan starts with a preferred conclusion and selects evidence to support it. Look at whether an organization’s findings ever go against the interests of the party they seem aligned with. If every single finding conveniently supports one side, that’s a signal.

Transparency about methods vs. appeals to authority. Genuine non-partisanship invites scrutiny. If an organization publishes its methodology, makes its underlying data available, and welcomes independent verification, it’s demonstrating confidence in its own integrity. If it asks you to trust its conclusions based on credentials, endorsements, or emotional appeals without making the underlying evidence available, be cautious.

Inclusive participation vs. selective recruitment. An organization committed to non-partisan election integrity welcomes participants regardless of their political affiliation — because broader participation makes the work stronger. An organization that recruits primarily from one political community, or whose messaging is designed to appeal to one side’s grievances, may be using “election integrity” as a vehicle for partisan mobilization.

Consistent standards vs. selective outrage. Watch for whether an organization applies the same standards to all elections. If an organization is deeply concerned about vote reporting accuracy only in districts where its preferred party lost, but shows no interest in auditing districts where its preferred party won, its concern isn’t about integrity — it’s about outcomes.

Descriptive findings vs. inflammatory framing. Genuine election integrity work describes what the evidence shows in measured, precise language. Organizations using non-partisan branding for partisan purposes tend toward inflammatory language, insinuation, and framing designed to stoke anger rather than inform.

None of these tests is definitive on its own. But taken together, they provide a reasonable framework for evaluating whether an organization’s non-partisan claims are backed by non-partisan practice.

Your role as an Actual Vote user

When you use Actual Vote and talk about your experience with others, you’re representing this work. Here are some principles to keep in mind:

Frame your participation around transparency, not outcomes. You’re helping to independently verify vote reporting — not trying to prove that any particular candidate won or lost. The goal is evidence, not a predetermined conclusion.

Be honest about what the evidence shows. If your Actual Vote analysis confirms that vote reporting was accurate, say so — even if you were hoping to find problems. If it reveals discrepancies, report them factually without speculating about who’s responsible or why.

Don’t use Actual Vote as a prop for partisan arguments. It’s tempting to point to your participation as proof that “the other side” is cheating. Resist this. The strength of Actual Vote is that it produces evidence everyone can evaluate. The moment you attach partisan framing to it, you undermine that strength.

Invite people across the political spectrum to participate. The more diverse the pool of Actual Vote users, the more credible the findings. If your Actual Vote community is drawn entirely from one political camp, that’s a vulnerability — not a strength. Actively encourage people who disagree with you politically to participate.

When challenged, point to the evidence. If someone questions your motives or the legitimacy of Actual Vote, you don’t need to argue. You can point them to the public archive at av.democracycounts.org, to the published reports, and to the reasons the system is trustworthy. The evidence speaks for itself.

The bottom line

The landscape of “election integrity” organizations is crowded and confusing. Some are doing careful, evidence-based work. Others are using the language of integrity as a vehicle for partisan aims. America Counts is committed to being in the first group — not just in our stated values, but in every aspect of how we operate: our methodology, our transparency, our inclusion, and our findings.

We believe that genuinely non-partisan election auditing is one of the most valuable things Americans can do for democracy right now. We invite you to hold us to that standard — and to help us demonstrate what it looks like in practice.