Military & pay
Not enough evidence
Selected official actions: 0 · Full scoring review incomplete
Kansas · Senate · Republican
Roger Marshall
Military, family and veteran policy record.
Official campaign website ↗ · View election race
Source review: 2026-09-27. Campaign pages assessed; selected official actions, where listed, are reviewed separately.
Independent candidate profile. Not authorized or endorsed by any candidate or campaign. Read the editorial disclaimer.
Directory listing — ballot confirmation pending · Roster source ↗
Estimated chance of winning: 63% · Senate model · Race forecast and methodology
House forecasts describe party outcomes; they are not individual candidate odds. Missing odds are not a zero-percent chance.
Campaign review and legislative review are separate. Campaign statements are not treated as delivered results or scored voting records.
PUBLISHED POSITION ASSESSMENT
What the candidate publicly states
The campaign gives specific legislative references for veterans and describes military construction and aerospace workforce priorities. These are more checkable than general support statements, but the campaign’s descriptions still require independent legislative and outcome verification.
Reviewed 2026-09-27. Assessment of the named public campaign pages only; not an exhaustive archive, ballot certification or complete record review.
Published sources reviewed
Policy summary: potential benefits and tradeoffs
Potential effects below are analysis, not guaranteed outcomes. An evidence gap is not a negative finding.
Military & pay
No specific proposal identified in the published sources reviewed.
The listed sources do not provide enough detail for a candidate-specific benefit or tradeoff assessment in this area. This is a gap in these sources, not a finding of opposition.
Military families
No specific proposal identified in the published sources reviewed.
The listed sources do not provide enough detail for a candidate-specific benefit or tradeoff assessment in this area. This is a gap in these sources, not a finding of opposition.
Veterans
Campaign statement
His campaign cites support for the PACT Act and the Major Richard Star Act.
Potential benefit
The cited policies concern toxic-exposure benefits and concurrent retirement and disability compensation.
Tradeoff or unresolved question
Individual roll calls, sponsorship and current legislative status still need independent review here.
Defense contracting
Campaign statement
His campaign highlights military construction, aerospace investment and workforce training in Kansas.
Potential benefit
Could support local defense infrastructure and skilled employment.
Tradeoff or unresolved question
Local investment does not by itself establish procurement efficiency or benefits for military households.
Policy-alignment scores
Alignment with our published policy criteria, not a measure of patriotism or a recommendation on how to vote.
Military families
Not enough evidence
Selected official actions: 0 · Full scoring review incomplete
Veterans
Not enough evidence
Selected official actions: 0 · Full scoring review incomplete
How scores work, evidence requirements & limitations →
Selected official record
No official actions have yet been reviewed for this profile. This does not mean the candidate has no record. A challenger’s lack of congressional votes is not counted against them.
Read the existing issue-by-issue campaign guide →
Other profiles in this race
Compare source coverage as well as policy positions. These are the profiles currently covered, not a certified ballot roster.
Explore congressional roll calls on Sailor Bob Civics ↗ · Policy news · All candidate profiles
Independence & editorial disclaimer
DutyStation publishes these profiles as independent editorial research. This page is not authorized, sponsored, approved or endorsed by any candidate, campaign or political party. Inclusion, campaign links and published responses do not constitute an endorsement by DutyStation, and a campaign’s participation does not mean it endorses our assessment.
DutyStation is not an official government, Department of Defense, military service or Department of Veterans Affairs publication. Names, images and links identify the subjects and sources; they do not imply affiliation or endorsement.
Policy summaries, potential benefits, tradeoffs and any scores are editorial assessments under our published methodology, not measures of patriotism or recommendations on how to vote. Forecasts are estimates, not guarantees. Missing information, an unpublished score or a campaign’s lack of response is not evidence of opposition to the military, military families or veterans.
Profiles may use AI-assisted research and summarization, which can contain errors. Coverage is incomplete and reflects the sources and review dates shown; positions and records can change. Check the linked original sources. Campaign statements and responses represent the campaign’s own claims, not independently verified outcomes. When published, responses will be attributed and distinguished from DutyStation’s analysis; providing a response does not confer editorial control.
For additions or factual corrections, email [email protected] with the profile link, the disputed passage and supporting sources. DutyStation will review submissions and correct material where the evidence supports a change. External websites are controlled by their respective publishers.