Our Methodology: How We Identify Conflicted Politicians
Transparency is the foundation of accountability. RigWatch uses objective, publicly available data to identify members of Congress whose financial interests may conflict with their constituents' interests. We don't target individuals—we teach patterns.
The Five Criteria
A member of Congress is flagged as "conflicted" if they meet two or more of the following criteria. All data comes from public records filed with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and congressional financial disclosures.
1. Industry Concentration
Threshold: Single industry provides >40% of campaign funds
Why it matters: When one industry dominates a politician's funding, their votes tend to align with that industry's interests. This creates a conflict between serving constituents and serving donors.
Example: Senator receives 67% of campaign funds from pharmaceutical industry, then votes against drug price negotiation.
2. Large Donor Dependence
Threshold: >75% of funds from donations over $200
Why it matters: Politicians who rely on large donors spend more time with wealthy contributors than with average constituents. Small donor support (under $200) indicates grassroots backing.
Data source: FEC itemized contribution reports
3. Voting Alignment
Threshold: Votes favor top 3 donor industries >80% of the time
Why it matters: The clearest indicator of conflict is voting behavior. When votes consistently align with donor interests rather than constituent interests, follow the money.
Method: We track votes on industry-relevant legislation and compare to donor data.
4. Wealth Surge
Threshold: Net worth increased >50% while in office
Why it matters: Congressional salary is $174,000 per year. Dramatic wealth increases during office raise questions about conflicts of interest and the source of income.
Data source: Annual congressional financial disclosures
5. Active Stock Trading
Threshold: >50 stock trades per year while serving on relevant committees
Why it matters: Members of Congress have access to non-public information. Heavy stock trading, especially in industries their committees oversee, creates obvious conflicts of interest.
Data source: STOCK Act disclosure reports
The Database
We maintain a database of approximately 200-300 members of Congress who meet two or more of these criteria—roughly 40-45% of Congress based on current public records. When we write articles about specific examples, we randomly select from this pool.
Why Random Selection?
Random selection serves three purposes:
- It demonstrates we're teaching patterns, not attacking individuals
- It shows these problems are systemic, not partisan
- It prevents accusations of bias or targeting
What This Is Not
This is not character assassination. We don't claim politicians are corrupt in the criminal sense. Most politicians genuinely believe they're serving the public good. The system itself creates perverse incentives that lead to conflicting interests.
This is not partisan. Both parties have members who meet these criteria. The rigging is bipartisan.
This is not speculation. Every statement we make about a politician's finances, donors, or votes is backed by public records. We link to sources.
Our Commitment
We commit to:
- Using only public records (FEC, congressional disclosures, voting records)
- Providing direct links to source documents
- Correcting errors quickly when they're brought to our attention
- Updating our database as new financial disclosures are filed
- Remaining transparent about our methodology
Questions?
This methodology is a living document. If you have questions, suggestions for improvement, or concerns about our approach, we want to hear them. The goal is accountability through transparency, and that includes accountability for our own methods.
All data sources are public. You can verify everything we report. That's the point.