I recently read a thought-provoking article on Omega4America’s Substack titled “Paper Ballots, Voter ID and Unicorns” that raises important questions about election integrity. The author makes some valid points about address verification being a critical vulnerability in our current mail-in ballot system—and I encourage you to read the full article to engage with those arguments.
However, the article also contains a claim that deeply concerns me as both a Christian and a constitutional conservative: the assertion that phone-based voting is “inevitable” and that Republicans should prepare for this future rather than resist it.
With respect to the author’s expertise in technology, I must vehemently disagree. Phone-based voting would represent a catastrophic abandonment of constitutional principles and biblical standards of justice. Here’s why this is a battle worth fighting—and why “inevitability” is a lie designed to make us surrender without debate.
I welcome your thoughts in the comments. Let’s reason together about what election integrity truly requires.
What Omega4America Got Right
Before I explain my concerns, let me acknowledge where the article makes excellent points:
Address verification is indeed critical. The author’s research showing mail-in ballots sent to Walmarts, gas stations, and vacant lots—then collected by third parties—exposes a genuine vulnerability that deserves immediate attention. This isn’t theoretical; they’ve documented it across swing states.
The voter integrity movement has credibility problems. When advocates focus on solutions that don’t address actual fraud methods, it does make the entire cause look unserious to policymakers.
We need multiple safeguards. The author is right that no single solution fixes everything.
These are valuable insights. I’m grateful for researchers doing the hard work of data analysis to expose election anomalies.
But the article’s casual acceptance of phone-based voting as our inevitable future? That’s where we must draw a line in the sand.
The Biblical Foundation: God Demands Honest Weights and Measures
Before diving into constitutional arguments, let’s establish the biblical principle at stake.
“You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor” (Leviticus 19:15). God’s Word demands justice in all our dealings—especially in how we govern ourselves and choose our leaders.
The Lord is explicit about honest measurement: “Unequal weights are an abomination to the LORD, and false scales are not good” (Proverbs 20:23). In ancient Israel, merchants who used false weights to cheat customers faced God’s judgment. How much more seriously should we take the “weights and measures” of democracy—the votes that determine who governs?
Phone-based voting creates a system where votes cannot be verified, audited, or proven accurate. It’s a scale that no one can examine. We’re asked to simply trust that the digital database is honest—with no physical evidence and no way to independently verify the truth.
This violates the biblical principle of transparency and accountability. As believers, we should demand systems where truth can be verified, not hidden behind unauditable code and hackable servers.
“For we can do nothing against the truth, but only for the truth” (2 Corinthians 13:8). Truth requires evidence. Phone voting eliminates evidence.
The Constitutional Crisis Phone Voting Would Create
1. The Constitution Requires Verifiable, Auditable Elections
The article argues that “if you can secure the entire financial system, health care system with phone communication, it can be done for voting.”
This comparison fundamentally misunderstands what makes elections constitutionally different from banking.
The Constitution grants states authority to administer elections (Article I, Section 4), but this authority must operate within constitutional boundaries. Our system requires that election results be verifiable, auditable, and subject to judicial review. When election disputes arise—and they inevitably do—courts must have evidence to examine.
Phone-based voting makes this impossible.
Financial fraud is detectable and reversible. If someone hacks your bank account, you can dispute the charges, freeze the account, and reverse fraudulent transactions. Banks have detailed logs showing every transaction, and they can be subpoenaed as evidence.
Votes must be anonymous and irreversible. Once cast, there’s no way to “dispute” your vote without destroying ballot secrecy. Phone voting creates an unfalsifiable system where fraud becomes undetectable and unprovable. There’s no physical ballot to recount, no chain of custody to examine, no audit trail that courts can meaningfully review.
We would be asking Americans to place blind faith in whoever controls the digital infrastructure—whether that’s a government agency, a Silicon Valley corporation, or potentially a hostile foreign power that breached the system.
The Supreme Court has recognized that states have compelling interests in preventing fraud and maintaining public confidence in elections (Crawford v. Marion County, 2008). Phone voting demolishes both interests.
2. Ballot Secrecy Is a Constitutional Safeguard—Phone Voting Destroys It
The author dismisses concerns about phone voting as “Luddite” thinking. But there’s a reason the secret ballot has been considered essential to free elections since the late 1800s: it protects voters from coercion, intimidation, and vote-buying.
When you vote from your phone, how do we know:
- Your abusive spouse isn’t standing over you, demanding to watch you vote?
- Your employer isn’t requiring you to prove how you voted?
- You weren’t paid $100 and required to show photographic evidence of your vote?
- A union boss isn’t “helping” dozens of workers vote—while watching?
- Nursing home staff aren’t “assisting” elderly residents who can’t really consent?
The answer is: we cannot know. And that’s the fatal flaw.
Scripture warns us to “take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them” (Ephesians 5:11). Phone voting doesn’t expose darkness—it creates shadows where coercion thrives unseen. It enables the very “works of darkness” that ballot secrecy was designed to prevent.
The moment voting moves to phones, the secret ballot disappears. Constitutional protections evaporate. Votes become subject to purchase, coercion, and intimidation—with no way to detect or prevent it.
3. Digital Systems Are Vulnerable—Election Fraud Would Become Invisible
The article claims that securing phone-based voting is simply a technical problem we can solve. But the National Academy of Sciences, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), and virtually every election security expert vehemently disagree.
Here’s why phone voting is fundamentally different from phone banking:
Banking systems are breached constantly—banks lose billions to cybercrime annually. Credit cards are stolen. Accounts are hacked. The difference is that financial fraud is (usually) detectable and reversible. Election fraud in a phone-based system would be invisible and permanent.
Consider the vulnerabilities:
- Server-side manipulation: Whoever controls the backend database can alter vote totals with zero physical evidence
- Man-in-the-middle attacks: Votes can be intercepted and changed in transit
- Malware: Phones can be infected with code that changes votes before they’re cast
- SIM-swapping: Phone numbers can be hijacked to cast fraudulent votes
- Denial of service: Voters can be blocked from voting during crucial hours
- Foreign interference: Nations like China, Russia, and Iran have sophisticated cyber warfare capabilities and routinely penetrate U.S. networks
Scripture warns: “The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it” (Proverbs 22:3). We see the danger clearly. Advanced democracies like France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Ireland have banned internet voting after examining these risks. They’re not backward—they’re prudent.
Why would we ignore these warnings and rush headlong into a system that makes election fraud undetectable?
4. The Guarantee Clause Demands We Can Prove Elections Are Honest
Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution requires the United States to guarantee every state “a Republican Form of Government”—meaning representative government where the people actually choose their leaders.
Phone-based voting makes it impossible to guarantee election results reflect the will of voters. When results can’t be audited, verified, or proven, how can we ensure we still have a republic?
A system where citizens must simply trust that a digital database accurately recorded their votes—with no physical evidence, no audit trail, and no meaningful oversight—is not a republic. It’s whatever those who control the servers decide it is.
“When justice is done, it is a joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers” (Proverbs 21:15). True justice requires the ability to prove truth and expose lies. Phone voting eliminates both capabilities.
The Dangerous “Inevitability” Narrative
The Omega4America article claims phone voting is inevitable—that young people expect it, that technology always wins, that resistance is futile.
This is the most dangerous argument in the piece, because it’s designed to bypass debate and manufacture consent.
Nothing is inevitable except what we allow.
The article mocks those who believe paper ballots could return, calling them “crazies” breathing “concentrated craziness.” But consider: France, one of the world’s most technologically advanced nations, uses hand-counted paper ballots for all elections. They do this deliberately, after examining digital alternatives.
Are the French “Luddites”? Or are they prudent people who understand that some things—like verifiable election results—are too important to entrust to hackable technology?
“Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:13). We’re called to be sober-minded, not swept along by claims of inevitability. We’re called to think clearly and act wisely.
When someone tells you resistance is futile, they’re trying to conquer you without a fight. Don’t surrender.
What Biblical Wisdom and Constitutional Fidelity Require
Rather than accepting phone-based voting, we should insist on systems that honor both Scripture’s call for honest weights and the Constitution’s requirement for verifiable elections:
- Paper ballots with robust chain of custody – Physical evidence that can be recounted and audited
- Voter ID requirements – Ensuring those casting ballots are who they claim to be
- Address verification (as Omega4America correctly emphasizes) – Stopping ballots to ineligible addresses
- Limited, secured absentee voting – For those truly unable to vote in person, with strict verification
- Transparent counting processes – Where citizens can observe every step
- Risk-limiting audits – Statistical verification that counts are accurate
These aren’t competing solutions—they’re complementary safeguards that work together. The author is right that address verification matters. But that doesn’t mean voter ID and paper ballots don’t also matter.
An Invitation to Dialogue
I respect Omega4America’s research on address verification—it’s valuable work that deserves attention. But I cannot accept the premise that phone-based voting is inevitable or desirable.
I welcome your thoughts below. Read the original article for yourself. Where do you agree? Disagree? What safeguards do you believe are most critical?
As Christians committed to biblical truth and constitutional governance, we must think deeply about these issues. We cannot simply accept technological “progress” that undermines the very foundations of verifiable democracy.
“Buy truth, and do not sell it; buy wisdom, instruction, and understanding” (Proverbs 23:23). Truth has a cost. It’s less convenient than lies. It requires work to verify and maintain. But it’s worth every bit of effort—because without verifiable truth, we lose everything else.
Phone-based voting would sacrifice truth on the altar of convenience. As believers and patriots, we must refuse that trade.
The republic our founders established—and the just governance God demands—requires nothing less.
What are your thoughts? Should we embrace phone-based voting or fight for verifiable systems? Share your perspective in the comments below.
Take Action:
- Contact your state legislators – Urge them to reject internet or phone-based voting proposals
- Support comprehensive election integrity – Including voter ID, address verification, and paper ballots
- Educate others – Share why convenience must never trump constitutional safeguards
- Stay engaged – Monitor your state’s election laws and proposed changes
Our republic is worth the fight. Our votes are too precious to entrust to unverifiable technology.
“Stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1). Don’t let anyone tell you that surrendering election integrity is inevitable.
