Skip to main content

Larry Johnson

Democrat

CO-08 Primary · U.S. House

Non-Incumbent · Public Record
PIP Political Integrity Pledge · Political Integrity PAC
  • No Corporate PAC Money
  • Stock Trading Ban
  • Lobbying Ban for Former Members
  • Overturn Citizens United

Primary: June 2026 Last updated 2026-04-28

T Transparency
14.5%

Top negative drivers

  • T2 No proactive financial disclosure beyond FEC minimums. No tax returns released. No reform legislation named. 0/4
  • T3 No documented position on stock trading bans, blind trusts, or conflict of interest prevention. 0/4
  • T5 FEC committee registered but no financial reports filed. No donor transparency tools or disclosure. 0/4
View all 25 criteria
  • T1 Campaign exists; contact email listed on Ballotpedia. No town halls, office hours, or access commitments documented. 1/4
  • T2 No proactive financial disclosure beyond FEC minimums. No tax returns released. No reform legislation named. 0/4
  • T3 No documented position on stock trading bans, blind trusts, or conflict of interest prevention. 0/4
  • T4 Describes self as "unbought and unbossed" opposing special interests. No specific legislation or PAC rejections. FEC shows zero financial activity. 2.25/4
  • T5 FEC committee registered but no financial reports filed. No donor transparency tools or disclosure. 0/4
  • T6 Facebook page exists; general campaign statements. No newsletter, policy explainers, or regular communication. 1/4
  • T7 No debates, editorial board interviews, forums, or media appearances documented. Did not complete Ballotpedia or VoteSmart surveys. 0/4
  • T8 No endorsements identified. No questionnaire responses published. No organizational engagement documented. 0/4
  • T9 Facebook page exists. No evidence of regular substantive policy communications or consistent engagement. 1/4
  • T10 Government should work for people not special interests. Plain language but no policy explainers or detailed materials. 1/4
  • T11 Campaign mentions making healthcare affordable. No specific price transparency mechanisms named. 1/4
  • T12 Campaign mentions making housing affordable. No cost transparency tools or mechanisms named. 1/4
  • T13 No documented position on consumer cost transparency, hidden fees, or banking fee disclosure. 0/4
  • T14 No documented position on spending dashboards, earmark disclosure, or open data. 0/4
  • T15 No documented position on AI transparency, disclosure requirements, or technology accountability. 0/4
  • T16 No documented position on law enforcement accountability, body cameras, or oversight boards. 0/4
  • T17 No documented position on immigration system transparency or USCIS modernization. 0/4
  • T18 No documented position on education transparency, per-pupil disclosure, or outcome dashboards. 0/4
  • T19 Campaign mentions defending democracy. No specific election transparency mechanisms named. 1/4
  • T20 Opposes special interests; wants government to work for people. No specific accountability mechanisms named. 1/4
  • T21 No documented press availability, media interviews, or press engagement. 0/4
  • T22 No fact-checker coverage. Claims are general and not verifiable-false. Default 2/4 baseline for zero coverage. 2.63/4
  • T23 No documented position on whistleblower protections or IG independence. 0/4
  • T24 No documented position on FOIA reform, open government records, or proactive publication. 0/4
  • T25 Has positions but very limited actions to compare. Campaign registered with FEC but no financial filings. 1/4
E Efficiency
6.3%

Top negative drivers

  • E1 No proposals with evaluation mechanisms, sunset clauses, or benchmarks documented. 0/4
  • E3 No documented position on government effectiveness evaluation or regulatory review. 0/4
  • E5 No documented position on IT modernization, digital services, or government technology. 0/4
View all 25 criteria
  • E1 No proposals with evaluation mechanisms, sunset clauses, or benchmarks documented. 0/4
  • E2 References Trump tariffs and cost-of-living crisis. No specific research citations or data-driven framework. 1/4
  • E3 No documented position on government effectiveness evaluation or regulatory review. 0/4
  • E4 Campaign exists with contact email. No documented community resources or constituent service offerings. 1/4
  • E5 No documented position on IT modernization, digital services, or government technology. 0/4
  • E6 FEC committee registered Aug 2023; ran in 2024 unaffiliated. No fundraising data or organizational capacity documented. 1/4
  • E7 No documented bipartisan or cross-stakeholder collaboration. 0/4
  • E8 No documented proposals addressing implementation pathways, phasing, or obstacles. 0/4
  • E9 Claims 25-year career helping small businesses. No independent verification found. 1/4
  • E10 No documented position on filibuster reform, committee restructuring, or procurement reform. 0/4
  • E11 Campaign mentions affordable healthcare. No specific efficiency mechanisms named. 1/4
  • E12 Campaign mentions affordable housing. No specific supply mechanisms named. 1/4
  • E13 No documented position on energy system efficiency, grid modernization, or renewables. 0/4
  • E14 No documented position on immigration processing efficiency or USCIS modernization. 0/4
  • E15 No documented position on education system efficiency or teacher investment. 0/4
  • E16 No documented position on evidence-based public safety or violence intervention. 0/4
  • E17 No documented position on workforce development, apprenticeships, or sector partnerships. 0/4
  • E18 No documented position on spending efficiency, audits, or procurement reform. 0/4
  • E19 No documented position on infrastructure delivery or permitting reform. 0/4
  • E20 No documented position on national security cost-effectiveness or diplomacy-first approaches. 0/4
  • E21 No documented position on government processing speed or backlog reduction. 0/4
  • E22 No documented position on fiscal responsibility, deficit reduction, or CBO adherence. 0/4
  • E23 No documented position on acting on GAO/IG recommendations. 0/4
  • E24 No documented position on reforming failing programs or evidence-based alternatives. 0/4
  • E25 No documented position on agency oversight, IG independence, or performance reviews. 0/4
A Affordability
16%

Top negative drivers

  • A3 No affordability-focused constituent services documented. 0/4
  • A4 No documented position on antitrust, competition, or market concentration. 0/4
  • A5 No documented household cost impact analysis or family-level policy framing. 0/4
View all 25 criteria
  • A1 References cost-of-living crisis, tariffs raising prices, higher rents. No specific engagement mechanism documented. 2.25/4
  • A2 References cost-of-living crisis generally. No specific economic data citations or district-specific data. 1/4
  • A3 No affordability-focused constituent services documented. 0/4
  • A4 No documented position on antitrust, competition, or market concentration. 0/4
  • A5 No documented household cost impact analysis or family-level policy framing. 0/4
  • A6 Campaign references cost-of-living crisis and tariffs. No specific legislative response or community resources. 1/4
  • A7 No documented position on redirecting waste toward affordability. 0/4
  • A8 No documented position on holding corporations accountable for price increases. 0/4
  • A9 Discusses strengthening the middle class. No consistent household-level framing with quantified impacts. 1/4
  • A10 Affordability appears central to messaging (middle class, healthcare, housing). No 3+ policy actions documented. 2.25/4
  • A11 Mentions making healthcare affordable. No specific mechanism named. 1/4
  • A12 Mentions making housing affordable. No specific mechanism named. 1/4
  • A13 No documented position on education affordability, universal pre-K, or student loan relief. 0/4
  • A14 No documented position on tax policy for working families. 0/4
  • A15 No documented position on consumer protection, CFPB, or junk fee bans. 0/4
  • A16 No documented position on minimum wage, PRO Act, or overtime. 0/4
  • A17 No documented position on food affordability, SNAP, or school meals. 0/4
  • A18 No documented position on energy affordability, LIHEAP, or rate reform. 0/4
  • A19 No documented position on transportation affordability. 0/4
  • A20 References cost-of-living crisis and strengthening middle class. No coherent cross-cutting strategy. 1/4
  • A21 Has general affordability rhetoric. No prior-role actions to compare against rhetoric. 1/4
  • A22 Explicitly commits to protecting Social Security and Medicare as programs every American pays into. 2.88/4
  • A23 No documented proposals addressing highest-need populations or targeted programs. 0/4
  • A24 Discusses middle class broadly. No specific proposals covering multiple demographics. 1/4
  • A25 No endorsements from affordability-related organizations. 0/4

Scored from publicly available information. Research in progress.

Platform research is in progress.

Non-Incumbent · Public Record

Scored on publicly available information only — platform statements, prior office, news coverage. Same criteria as the Questionnaire pathway, without direct candidate input.

Scoring Summary

Axis Base Pledge Bonus Final
Transparency 14.5% 14.5%
Efficiency 6.3% 6.3%
Affordability 16% 16%
Overall TEA Average of the three axes 12.3%

Financial Breakdown

Financial detail — individual giving, PAC contributions, transfers, and personal finances — will appear here when FEC data ingestion ships. This tab is reserved so the layout stays consistent when the feature launches.

Support Us