SCORECARD · TOM BARRETT accountability readout

Tom Barrett dossier →

Republican U.S. House · MI-7 full conduct profile →
78/100
HIGH CAPTURE-RISK INDEX
How this number is built ↓
Silence risk25%
99
Contradiction risk25%
80
Connection density20%
56
Donor influence10%
74
Fact density10%
87
Constituency deviation5%
51
Voting misalignment5%
0

Weighted composite, 0–100. Identical to the figure on the Congress monitor. Each bar is the component's normalised 0–100 contribution before weighting.

01

Silence on donor-funded topics 9

Topics where donors have documented interests but the official has no public statement on record. Silence is the absence of expected speech — not proof of intent.

All silence flags for Tom Barrett →
02

Vote-vs-platform contradictions 1

Roll-call votes that contradict the official's own stated platform commitments. Each links to the bill and the contradiction rationale.

9.1% of 11 rated votes contradicted the stated platform
  • H.R. 1834 ↗ NAY_UNVERIFIED 2026-01-08
    ACA Enhanced Premium Tax Credits Extension (Restoring ACA Subsidies Through 2028)
    why contradicted?
    [against_constituent] Barrett voted against extending ACA premium tax credits that help 23,000 people in MI-07 afford health insurance. The bill passed 230-196 with 17 Republicans breaking ranks to join Democrats. Barrett's nay vote came after premiums had already doubled following expiration of the credits on December 31, 2025, and after his earlier vote for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which slashed Medicaid. Constituents, including an Okemos woman with multiple sclerosis who called the ACA 'a lifesaver,' made final pleas for Barrett to support the extension.
Full voting record + platform comparison →
03

Broken promises 0

Documented public commitments paired with the documented action that broke them. Each carries a primary-source citation for the violation.

No documented broken promises on file.

04

Documented contradictions 4

Stated-position-vs-revealed-conduct contradictions analysed against the official's commitments, scored by strength of the contradiction.

  • platform_vs_vote SCORE 90
    Barrett's first-vote messaging framed him as a protector of Michigan families, but his deciding vote for the OBBB Act directly threatened an estimated 24,700 MI-07 residents' Medicaid coverage and imperiled 4,125 clean energy jobs plus a $500 million GM grant in his own district, undermining his claim that he puts Michigan families first.
  • position_evolution SCORE 60
    Barrett ran on a platform of '100% PRO LIFE — NO EXCEPTIONS' in 2022, including legislation to criminalize abortion. By 2024, after Michigan voters passed Proposal 3 (56.7% to 43.3%) enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution, Barrett claimed the issue was 'settled' and deleted his anti-abortion platform from his website, presenting himself as no threat to reproductive freedom. This represents a political repositioning on abortion from an absolutist anti-abortion stance to an acceptance of the state constitutional settlement, coinciding with a shift in electoral strategy.
  • position_evolution SCORE 60
    Barrett has a long record as an uncompromising abortion opponent — '100% pro-life with no exceptions' — but during a competitive general election campaign in a swing district he attempted to minimize the issue with an ill-considered remark that his opponent's gender made reproductive rights irrelevant, suggesting strategic repositioning rather than a genuine change in conviction.
  • position_evolution SCORE 60
    Barrett campaigned as a veterans' champion but cast the deciding vote for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which veterans' groups and constituents criticized for cutting health care and food assistance programs on which many veterans depend. The contradiction between his veteran-advocate identity and his budget vote was highlighted by a Veterans Day press conference organized by Michigan Families for Fair Care.
Contradictions ledger →

What this scorecard does and doesn't claim

Every figure above is a count of records the platform already holds, each click-through-able to its source. The scorecard adds no inference, no forecast, and no narrative — it aggregates what is documented.

A populated scorecard is not a finding of corruption. It documents the volume of stated-vs-revealed tension, donor-adjacent silence, and broken commitments on the public record for this official. Silence in particular is the absence of an expected statement; it can have innocent explanations and is never presented as proof. Read each item's source before drawing conclusions.

⌗ Cite this
Permalinkhttps://www.goblinhouse.net/scorecard/congress-b001321
CitationGoblin House. "Tom Barrett — Responsibility Scorecard" (accountability scorecard). Goblin House — The Architecture of Secrecy. Accessed October 19, 2026. https://www.goblinhouse.net/scorecard/congress-b001321.

Sourced from public records and content-hashed; verify via /attestation, standard at /methodology.