Composite 6.62 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 678, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No military service record. Career in public service as a prosecutor (Prince George's County State's Attorney 2011–2018) and executive (County Executive 2018–2024) before the Senate. The absence of military service is noted, not scored.
The 14 measures
Each measure is scored 0–10 against an anchored example, with a cited source. Hover/expand why? for the reasoning.
| # | Measure | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| M01 | Duty to Constitution & Rule of Law | 7 | why?First-year senator with a short federal record; the constitutional-fidelity evidence available is ordinary good conduct, sworn and seated through the normal process, no documented breach of the oath. No criterion-8 process-subversion conduct of any kind. Held at upper-middle on a thin but clean record, confidence-adjusted for tenure rather than inflated. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?Early but genuine bipartisan output: co-sponsored the Road to Housing Act that cleared the Banking Committee in its first bipartisan housing markup in over a decade, original co-sponsor of the bipartisan GENIUS Act, and introduced the U-FIGHT Act with Senator Lummis (R). Reaching across the aisle for legislative product rather than denying the other side a win. Strong for a freshman; held below the top tier pending a longer record. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents as enemies who do not belong; her public posture frames disagreement as policy difference. Partisan press-release framing exists (e.g. 'puts Republicans on record') but that is ordinary contested argument, not belonging-denial. No criterion-10 enemy-making pattern. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?As a former prosecutor and county executive she held coercive state power and there is no documented weaponization of it against political rivals; she created a unit to handle public-corruption and police-misconduct cases. No criterion-class abuse-of-power conduct. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Conventional partisan messaging without documented incitement or targeting of individuals for confrontation. No criterion-10 conduct. Middle, ordinary political combativeness, neither restraint-exemplary nor a documented drag. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 5 | why?Documented fiduciary appearance-concern: improperly claimed homestead exemptions on two non-primary-residence properties for over a decade, plus a senior-citizen tax break she did not qualify for on a DC property inherited from her grandparents, saving roughly $14,000 (2005–2017) and at least $2,600 since 2020. No charge, no finding of intent; she said she was unaware and moved to repay. Weighed as an appearance-concern, not a finding of fact, but a real one on a personal-financial-attention duty, and partly self-corrected. Middle. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 6 | why?Active-duty standard: she readily calls out the other side (ordinary), but the higher bar, calling out her own side's misconduct at cost, has no documented instance yet in a short tenure. No documented own-side breach she stayed silent on either. Middle, confidence-adjusted for tenure. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?Discretion test: the available datapoint cuts modestly against, accepting tax exemptions she did not qualify for, even if inadvertent, is a failure to scrutinize a personal benefit. Offset by her stated move to repay once flagged. No instance of refusing an unearned advantage on the record. Middle. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 7 | why?No documented public/private contempt gap; the 2018 editorial assessment of her county tenure described an unblemished ethical reputation. Upper-middle on a clean but limited public-character record. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 7 | why?Early constituent-service orientation toward Maryland priorities, housing cost, health screening, through bipartisan vehicles. No documented donor-capture or constituent-abandonment conduct. Upper-middle for a freshman. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 6 | why?Scored on office-attributable / personal-enrichment conduct only, NOT raw wealth. The only relevant item is the improper tax-break savings, which predate her Senate seat and are personal-tax errors, not office-driven self-dealing, foreign revenue, or family-payment schemes. No office-attributable enrichment on record. Held at solid-middle: the tax matter is an appearance-concern that touches personal-financial stewardship but is not a custodial breach of office. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Conventional institutional decorum in her first year; worked through regular committee process (Banking markup) rather than spectacle. No documented norm-breaking. Upper-middle, tenure-limited. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 7 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern. Her account of the tax matter ('unaware') drew some press scrutiny over a property-records conflict, but that is a contested characterization, not an established lie. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substantive engagement on housing finance and health-policy specifics rather than pure messaging, drawing on executive-branch governing experience. Middle-to-upper for a first-year member; a deeper substantive command will be assessable with more tenure. [source] |
Why not higher, the points withheld
The standard is the seat; the ceiling is a perfect 10. Every withheld point traces to documented conduct, weighed where the measures and attributes say it belongs, shown openly here, the same way the earned points are.
| Where | Documented conduct | Mitigation weighed |
|---|---|---|
| M06 | Improperly claimed homestead exemptions on two non-primary residences for over a decade and a senior-citizen tax break she did not qualify for on a DC property (~$14,000 saved 2005–2017; ~$2,600 since 2020 in MD) ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety, personal-tax attention | No charge or finding of intent; stated she was unaware and moved to repay once flagged, weighed as appearance-concern, not finding of fact |
| M08 | Accepted unearned tax advantages without scrutiny ↳ Discretion test, personal-benefit scrutiny | Inadvertent per her account; repayment initiated |
| M11 | Same improper tax-break savings ↳ Personal-financial stewardship | Pre-office, personal-tax error, NOT office-driven self-dealing or enrichment; not penalized as a custodial breach |
| Pillar III | The tax-break matter (Stewardship) is a real personal-financial-attention drag ↳ Stewardship drag | No exploitation of office; self-correction initiated |
The Four Pillars, worthy to be followed?
A separate axis from the 14 measures. The measures ask did their conduct meet the standard; the Pillars ask is this someone worthy to be elevated and followed at all. The two can diverge, when they do, the divergence is the finding.
| # | Pillar | Score | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | Trust & Loyalty
| 7 | why?Attributes: Selfless Service, Steadiness, Loyalty to office, a long local-government record of seating and serving through normal process, no documented breach. Held at upper-middle by the thinness of the federal record rather than any drag toward Self-Interest or Collapse. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Self-Reflection, the tax-break matter is a real drag toward the Stewardship/Self-Scrutiny opposite; her move to repay once flagged is partial self-correction. Sound-middle, tenure- and appearance-limited. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, Accountability, used prosecutorial power to pursue public corruption and police misconduct rather than rivals; bipartisan legislative vehicles in year one. No drag toward Exploitation; the tax matter is a personal-stewardship note, not an abuse of office. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, an early, mostly clean record carrying one documented fiduciary appearance-concern. The legacy is still being written; scored honestly at sound-middle pending a longer body of conduct. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 26/40 |
Total 26/40, Adequate-to-Sound. The pillars hold at honest middles: a clean local-government character record and credible bipartisan start, weighed against the documented tax-break appearance-concern and the inherent limits of a first-year federal tenure. Confidence-adjusted, not inflated.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“This package represents the first bipartisan markup of housing legislation out of the Banking Committee in more than a decade.”
On the Road to Housing Act clearing committee · Office of Senator Alsobrooks press release · CIVIC · cite
“I was unaware of any tax credits attached to that property and have reached out to the District of Columbia to resolve the issue and make any necessary payment.”
Responding to the CNN report on improper tax exemptions · Washington Post, Sept 22 2024 · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Angela Deneice Alsobrooks (born February 23, 1971). U.S. Senator from Maryland since January 3, 2025, the first Black senator from Maryland and the third Black woman elected to the U.S. Senate. Previously State's Attorney for Prince George's County (2011–2018) and Prince George's County Executive (2018–2024), the county's first female and first Black female executive. Defeated former Governor Larry Hogan (R) in the 2024 general election with ~54.6% of the vote.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
First-year senator (119th Congress); too short a roll-call record for a stable DW-NOMINATE placement or a Lugar Bipartisan Index score. Early signature work is bipartisan: co-sponsored the Road to Housing Act of 2025 (passed Banking Committee unanimously in its first bipartisan housing markup in over a decade); original co-sponsor of the bipartisan GENIUS Act on stablecoins; introduced the U-FIGHT Act with Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY). Caucus alignment and party-line votes are NOT scored, only conduct against the oath.
3. Constitutional Moments
No high-stakes constitutional-fidelity test has yet arisen in her short federal tenure. The record to date is ordinary good conduct: sworn and seated through normal process, regular-order committee work, no documented breach of process or norm. This section will fill in as her tenure lengthens.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Conventional partisan messaging without a documented enemy-making or incitement pattern. Press framing such as "puts Republicans on record" is ordinary contested argument, not belonging-denial. No criterion-10 conduct. Net middle-to-upper; restraint is the default posture on the available record.
5. Fiduciary Profile
The one documented fiduciary concern is the property-tax matter surfaced during the 2024 campaign: a CNN investigation found she had improperly claimed homestead exemptions on two non-primary residences for over a decade and a senior-citizen tax break she did not qualify for on a DC property inherited from her grandparents, saving roughly $14,000 (2005–2017) plus at least $2,600 since 2020 in Maryland. No charge and no finding of intent; she stated she was unaware and moved to repay. Weighed as an appearance-concern, not a finding of fact, and importantly NOT as office-driven enrichment, these are pre-office personal-tax errors, not self-dealing. Her county-level ethical reputation was described as unblemished in a 2018 editorial.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No criterion-8 process-subversion and no criterion-10 enemy-making pattern. The property-tax matter is the only sustained ethics concern and is an appearance-concern without charge, finding of intent, or office attribution. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A first-year senator with a clean local-government character record and a credible bipartisan start, carrying one honest fiduciary appearance-concern (the property-tax matter) that is weighed as appearance and not as office-driven enrichment. There is no capping conduct of any kind. The score lands in the honest middle, sound but tenure-limited, because a short federal record cannot yet demonstrate the rarer high-cost tests (own-side call-outs, constitutional stands) that lift a record into the top tier. Re-assessable upward or downward as her tenure produces more conduct evidence.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · U.S. Senate (alsobrooks.senate.gov)
Tier 2: CNN, improper tax deductions investigation · Washington Post, back-taxes response · Ballotpedia
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Senate office · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.