How this site sources its claims.

Government and primary sources come first: the Congressional Record, House Clerk roll calls, CBO estimates, Census Bureau data, USAFacts, and OpenSecrets/FEC filings. Advocacy-group figures, including district-level impact estimates and organizational scorecards like those from the League of Conservation Voters or Heritage Action, are used where they add real information, but they are labeled as advocacy sources and kept visually and textually distinct from primary government data. A reader should never have to guess which kind of source is behind a number.

Evidence favorable to Huizenga gets included, not filed away. The agriculture record is one example: where it holds up, that gets said plainly. A site that only prints the negative isn't credible, and credibility is the entire point of doing this with citations in the first place.

Where primary-source documentation runs thin on a given topic, that gap gets stated rather than papered over with a confident-sounding paraphrase of a weaker source. Trade and manufacturing policy is the current example; the write-up on that pillar will say so directly.

Structure comes before copy. Each pillar gets a research pass to confirm what can actually be documented before any final draft gets written, so the site's architecture doesn't end up built around a claim nobody can source.

Static HTML and CSS, deployed to Cloudflare Pages. No tracking scripts, no ad network, no data collection beyond whatever Cloudflare's own edge logging does by default.