The consent rule in one sentence
Describe the consent mechanism that actually exists, completely, and never assert one that does not. Everything else on this page is detail on that sentence. Registration reviewers verify the URLs, read the pages, and cross-check the story against the samples, so a filing is a description of reality, not a piece of persuasive writing.
Compliant opt-in sources
A compliant source is any mechanism where the person knowingly agreed to receive recurring texts from the named program, with the disclosures visible at the moment they agreed.
- A web form with an unticked checkbox: the supporter fills the form and affirmatively checks a box consenting to recurring texts, with the five disclosures and a privacy policy link on the form itself. The consent box is never pre-checked and never bundled into a donation as a condition.
- A keyword, text-to-join: the supporter texts a keyword to the program's number, and the place the keyword is published carries the disclosures. The filing includes where people actually see the keyword instructions.
- A paper card or sign-up sheet: valid when the printed material shows the disclosures and the filing carries hosted proof of it, covered below.
- An event or canvass script capture: same rule as paper, because a reviewer cannot hear the script. The physical or written material that the supporter saw is what gets proven.
Whatever the mechanism, the first message the supporter receives confirms the enrollment: program name, frequency, rates language, a HELP contact, and STOP instructions. If several mechanisms are genuinely in use, the filing lists all of them rather than picking the tidiest one.
What does not count
The sources below are where political programs most often go wrong, usually not from bad faith but from conflating a lawful contact list with an opt-in list. Registration treats those as different things, and so should the filing.
- A voter file. Lawful to hold, central to political outreach, and not an opt-in. Nobody on a voter file consented to receive texts from your program by being a registered voter, and a filing that describes the voter file as the consent mechanism gets rejected.
- Purchased or rented lists. The consent, if any ever existed, belongs to whoever collected the numbers, for whatever they collected them for. It does not transfer.
- Implied or inferred consent. Attending an event, donating, or following a candidate is support, not enrollment in a texting program.
- Pre-checked boxes and buried consent. Consent has to be an affirmative act. A pre-ticked box, or texting terms hidden inside unrelated fine print, fails the disclosure standard on its face.
The five disclosures
Wherever the phone number is collected, whether a web form, a paper card, or a canvass script, five things are disclosed at the point of collection, with a visible link to the privacy policy alongside them:
- The program or brand name, so the supporter knows who will be texting
- The phrase Message and data rates may apply
- The expected message frequency
- Reply HELP for help
- Reply STOP to opt out
The disclosures live where the number is collected, not only in a later auto-reply. The confirmation message then repeats the core of them, which is what makes the paper trail complete end to end.
Hosted proof for offline opt-ins
If consent is collected somewhere a reviewer cannot browse to, such as a paper form, an event sheet, an app screen, or a page behind a login, the filing includes a publicly accessible screenshot or photo of that material showing the disclosures. Keyword programs include proof of where people actually see the number and the keyword instructions. The test is simple: could a stranger, given only the filing, see what the supporter saw? If not, the filing is not done.
What reviewers read on the website
Registration reviewers open the committee's website and read two pages. Both need to exist, be live on the committee's own domain, and contain specific elements.
The privacy policy
- What data the program collects and how it is used
- An explicit statement that texting opt-in data and consent will not be shared with or sold to third parties, which is the single most rejection-prone omission in political filings
The terms page
- The program or brand name and a description of the program
- Message and data rates may apply
- The message frequency
- A support contact and the HELP and STOP instructions
- A link to the privacy policy
- The carrier liability disclaimer for delayed or undelivered messages
These are the elements reviewers check for, not template language to paste. The committee's counsel owns the wording; what this list buys you is never getting rejected for a missing element.
P2P, A2P, and the consent question
A persistent piece of folklore says peer-to-peer texting is exempt from all of this. The registration reality is narrower: however a message is sent, traffic on registered routes is filed with a consent story, and the carrier systems apply their consent standards to political senders with no special exception. Whether any particular outreach is lawful is a separate, legal question for counsel; whether a filing passes review is the question this page answers, and the answer never includes asserting consent that does not exist.
Where this lands for a real program: opted-in supporter lists run on the registered program with everything above in place, and the broader outreach strategy, including how P2P fits, is designed with your account partner against the committee's actual list sources. The final-week operational side of this lives in the GOTV week deliverability guide.
Questions partners ask
Is a voter file a valid opt-in list for 10DLC registration?
No. A voter file is a lawful data source for political outreach, but it is not an opt-in mechanism, and a registration filing that describes it as one gets rejected. The consent field must describe a mechanism where the person actually agreed to receive texts: a form, a keyword, a signed card.
Can we text a purchased or rented list?
Not under an A2P registration that claims opted-in traffic. Purchased and rented lists carry no consent the filing can point to. If a program's outreach model depends on contacting people who have not opted in, that is a strategy conversation with your account partner, not a registration field to word cleverly.
What has to appear where the phone number is collected?
Five disclosures at the point of collection: the program or brand name, the phrase Message and data rates may apply, the expected message frequency, Reply HELP for help, and Reply STOP to opt out, plus a visible link to the privacy policy. A later auto-reply does not substitute for showing them up front.
Our opt-ins happen on paper at events. Does that work?
Yes, if the paper shows the disclosures and the filing includes hosted proof: a publicly accessible photo or scan of the actual card or sign-up sheet. Reviewers cannot see a clipboard, so the filing has to show it to them. Trust us, the form says it, is not a filing.
Does the first message have to confirm the opt-in?
Yes, for every opt-in method. The first message confirms enrollment and carries the program name, frequency, Message and data rates may apply, a HELP contact, and STOP instructions. The STOP reply confirms the brand name and that no further messages will come; the HELP reply gives the brand name and a real contact.