Composite 6.52 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 671, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No record of U.S. military service. Amodei's pre-office background is law (Nevada Attorney General's office, private practice) and the Nevada Legislature. Service to country is honored where present; its absence is not a penalty, only conduct against the oath is 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 | 8 | why?On Jan 6 2021 Amodei voted to UPHOLD Arizona's certified electoral votes and stated the authority to certify rests with the state's Secretary of State, Governor, AG and Chief Justice, explicitly declining to join the overturn effort. He did NOT sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus. His later no-votes on the second impeachment and the Jan-6 commission are the constitutional process working and are NOT scored here as oath-defense failures. Upholding the certified count at a moment of party pressure is the affirmative oath conduct that lifts this above the middle; held below the apex reserved for sacrificing political life for the oath. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?Genuinely cross-aisle by the bill-sponsorship/cosponsorship measure, top-quartile-to-upper-middle across recent Congresses, strongest on Nevada public-lands and appropriations work. Country/institution placed over denying the other side a win on substantive workhorse legislation. Not apex because the bipartisanship is transactional-appropriations rather than oath-defining stands. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 6 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or constituents as people who do not belong. Rhetoric is plainspoken, occasionally blunt, but the record shows ordinary partisan disagreement rather than dehumanization. An honest middle: respectful baseline, no high-mark anchor of defending an opponent's personhood at cost. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals; no amicus signature, no fake-elector involvement, no procedural subversion of a constitutional purpose. The Jan-6 certification vote is the inverse, he respected the lawful process. No criterion-class conduct. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Restrained, low-temperature rhetoric across a long career, no documented incitement or sustained enemy-making. The 2019 'put it through the process' moment shows he can speak measuredly even on a charged question. Honest middle: no inflammatory pattern, no standout civic-rhetoric high mark. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?No Ethics Committee sanction, no documented STOCK Act violation, no resolved or pending finding on the public record. Middle reflects an ordinary clean-but-unremarkable fiduciary record rather than affirmative, demonstrated self-accountability that would push it higher. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?ACTIVE-DUTY standard: the higher bar is calling out one's OWN side at cost. In Sept 2019 Amodei said 'let's put it through the process,' was read as the first Republican to back the inquiry, then within an hour walked it back to leadership and the White House as Facebook anger mounted. That retreat under party pressure is the documented case of NOT holding a call-out line when it cost something. His Jan-6 certification vote cuts the other way (independent of party pressure). Net a true middle, neither a sustained call-out record nor a capitulation pattern. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?Discretion test: no documented misuse of discretionary power for personal or factional benefit, and no documented refusal of a tempting advantage at cost either. The Jan-6 vote is mild positive evidence of choosing the lawful path over the convenient one. Honest middle. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented gap between a private contempt and a public face, no leaked hot-mic disparagement of constituents or colleagues. Absent evidence of either a virtuous or a hypocritical off-camera record, scored at the neutral middle. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Steady constituent and public-lands service for northern Nevada across seven terms; representation tracks the district's center-right preference without a documented donor-over-constituent capture pattern. Solid-middle institutional service, no standout fiduciary high mark. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 7 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment, self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, foreign-government revenue. None is documented: no notable congressional stock-trading flags, no STOCK Act violation, no family-payment or foreign-revenue finding. Raw wealth is NOT penalized. Upper-middle for a clean office-enrichment record, short of an apex that would require affirmative divestiture-type stewardship. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Long-serving appropriator who works the institution through regular order rather than spectacle; low-drama, process-respecting floor and committee posture across his tenure. Honors the institution over performance. Held below apex absent a defining decorum stand at cost. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern. His Jan-6 statement grounded the certification in the actual chain of state certifying officers rather than fraud claims, a positive truth-fidelity data point. Middle-plus, no standout truth-telling stand. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Demonstrated substantive command of appropriations and Nevada public-lands/mining policy, workhorse legislative competence over talking points. Substance is real; below apex because the depth is regional-portfolio rather than landmark national lawmaking. [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 |
|---|---|---|
| M07 | Sept 2019: said 'let's put it through the process' on the impeachment inquiry, was read as the first House Republican to back it, then walked it back to leadership and the White House within an hour under constituent/party pressure ↳ Duty to Call Out, active-duty standard not met when it cost something | Not a capitulation pattern; offset by the independent Jan-6 certification vote |
| M03 | No high-mark anchor of defending an opponent's personhood at cost ↳ Persons of Equal Worth, respectful baseline without standout | No anti-belonging or dehumanization pattern either |
| M02 | Bipartisanship is transactional-appropriations rather than oath-defining ↳ Country-over-party, real but not apex | Genuinely top-quartile by the Bipartisan Index measure |
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 demonstrated: Steadiness, Loyalty to the constitutional process, the Jan-6 vote to uphold Arizona's certified electors under party pressure is the clearest evidence. Held at 7 by a drag toward Self-Interest visible in the 2019 walk-back, where the call-out line was not held. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Authenticity, plainspoken Conviction on workhorse policy. Drag toward Consistency's opposite in the 2019 impeachment-inquiry reversal under pressure. Solid-middle: no documented hypocrisy, but no demonstrated self-correction at cost either. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Stewardship and Accountability through long appropriations and public-lands service; no Exploitation, no abuse of power, no procedural subversion, no office enrichment. Used the seat for ordinary district protection rather than power-aggrandizement. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity and institutional Reliability across seven terms with a clean ethics record; the Jan-6 certification is a genuine legacy data point on the right side of the oath. Below high tier because the legacy is competent-and-clean rather than marked by a defining stand. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 26/40 |
Total 26/40, Adequate-to-Sound. The pillars cluster in the honest middle: a clean, competent, process-respecting record with one real drag (the 2019 walk-back) and one real credit (the Jan-6 certification vote).
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“The authority to certify electors lies with the Arizona Secretary of State, joined by the Governor, the Attorney General, and the Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court.”
Statement explaining his vote to uphold Arizona's certified electoral votes · Amodei House office news release · PRINCIPLED · cite
“Let's put it through the process and see what happens.”
Asked about the Trump impeachment inquiry; he walked the remark back to GOP leadership within the hour as constituent backlash mounted · Washington Post, Sept 28 2019 · CONTESTED · cite
“Context, facts, and due process are not, in my view, optional.”
Statement explaining his vote against the second article of impeachment · Amodei House office news release · PRINCIPLED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Mark Eugene Amodei (born June 12, 1958). U.S. Representative for Nevada's 2nd Congressional District since a September 2011 special election, the first Republican to win a U.S. House seat for Nevada in modern times and the state's lone Republican in the House for much of his tenure. Prior service: Nevada State Senate (2002-2010, including a term as Senate Republican leader) and Nevada Assembly; lawyer (Nevada Deputy Attorney General, then private practice). Senior House Appropriations Committee member. Announced February 2026 that he will not seek re-election in 2026; term runs through January 3, 2027.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index upper-tier in recent Congresses (ranked roughly 37th with a BPI near 0.695 in the 117th), reflecting heavy cross-aisle cosponsorship on appropriations and Nevada public-lands legislation. Center-right voting record. Signature focus: Nevada public lands, mining, military installations (Fallon, Nellis), and appropriations. His impeachment and Jan-6-commission no-votes are recorded as institutional/process conduct and are NOT graded on policy merits, per the framework's refusal to score contested policy in either direction.
3. Constitutional Moments
Jan 6 2021: voted to UPHOLD Arizona's certified electoral votes and grounded the vote in the lawful chain of state certifying officers; did NOT sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and did NOT join the overturn effort, the affirmative pro-oath conduct on the record. His subsequent no-votes on the second impeachment and the Jan-6 commission are the constitutional process operating as designed and are weighed as protected process conduct, not as oath failures. The 2019 impeachment-inquiry walk-back is the one documented moment of retreating from a call-out line under party pressure (scored at M07).
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Plainspoken, low-temperature, occasionally blunt, no documented incitement, enemy-making pattern, or dehumanization of opponents or constituents. The most cited rhetorical episode (the 2019 'put it through the process' remark and same-day walk-back) reflects conformity pressure, not inflammatory speech. Net middle: a respectful baseline without a standout civic-rhetoric high mark.
5. Fiduciary Profile
Clean fiduciary record on the public account: no Ethics Committee sanction, no documented STOCK Act late-filing violation, no notable congressional stock-trading flags, and no family-payment or foreign-government-revenue finding. M11 scores only office-attributable enrichment, of which none is documented; raw wealth is not penalized.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Amodei did NOT sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and voted to certify the 2020 election, the Criterion-8 (process subversion) cross-check is NEGATIVE. No Criterion-10 (sustained enemy-making/incitement) pattern exists. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A clean, competent, honest-middle record. The affirmative credit is real: he voted to uphold the certified 2020 electoral count under party pressure, declined the amicus, and grounded the vote in the lawful certifying process, the oath conduct that matters most in that moment. The honest drag is the 2019 impeachment-inquiry walk-back, where he retreated from a call-out line once it cost him. His impeachment and commission no-votes are NOT held against him, because the framework refuses to score the constitutional process working. Adequate-to-Sound: a workhorse appropriator with a clean ethics record and one genuine pro-oath stand, short of the defining stands that earn the higher tiers.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House office Jan-6 certification statement
Tier 2: Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia profile
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack profile · Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.