Research-grade prototypes
The platform can host comparative election experiments without forcing a municipality to adopt a reform before the evidence exists.
For philanthropic partners
The project is useful to donors who want civic work that can be examined from more than one ideological angle: it is focused on voter expression, administrative clarity, and transparent local experimentation.
Why philanthropic capital matters
The platform can host comparative election experiments without forcing a municipality to adopt a reform before the evidence exists.
The mountain interface and linked policy data make abstract election design questions easier to explain to voters, journalists, and civic leaders.
Support can fund small, auditable pilots in specific jurisdictions where the tradeoffs of expressive ballots can be observed in practice.
Built to earn trust across ideological lines
People concerned about the spoiler effect can inspect whether broader voter choice produces stronger consensus outcomes.
People concerned about governmental overreach can trace promises back to the actual office that has legal authority to act.
Election data, offices, voters, and policy issues live in one schema, which creates a cleaner base for audits and public explanation.
The project treats reform as something to be tested in simulations and pilots rather than sold as a slogan.
What support could fund next
Improve reliability around election aggregation, simulation, and data integrity so demonstrations are credible under scrutiny.
Expand explainer pages, walkthroughs, and example elections so non-technical stakeholders can evaluate the concept quickly.
Create richer mock jurisdictions, offices, and policy issue trees that make the mountain interface feel concrete rather than abstract.
The repository currently models 0 active elections, 4733 offices, 10 topics, and 40 issues.