Composite 6.44 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
A short freshman tenure with a clean conduct record and no criterion-class flags. Normal attendance, a handful of documented bipartisan NDAA amendments, and no documented weaponization, enemy-making, self-dealing, or sustained-falsehood pattern. The April 2026 Hegseth impeachment filing is the constitutional oversight process working and is NOT scored against her, it is a use of the mechanism, not an abuse. Support is withheld not for any fault but because the composite lands in an honest middle (Adequate band) below the 700 endorsement threshold: the record is too thin by tenure to clear the bar, lacking a costly own-side call-out, a demonstrated bipartisan index, or a sacrifice-level oath anchor. A clean slate, not yet an endorsement.
No military service record. Pre-Congress public service: Phoenix City Council (District 7), 2021-2024, including a term as Vice Mayor; United Nations climate-policy work prior to elected office. Listed here as biographical context, not scored as conduct.
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?No documented conduct undermining constitutional order or the separation of powers. Seated January
2025, she could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and there is no
election-subversion, fake-elector, or certification-obstruction conduct on record. Her use of the
impeachment power against a Cabinet secretary (April 2026) is the constitutional mechanism operating
as designed and is expressly NOT scored here as a fault. Held at upper-middle, not apex: a two-year
tenure offers no sustained, costly oath-defense anchor of the kind that earns a 9.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 6 | why?Documented bipartisan reach for a freshman, four bipartisan amendments offered to the FY2026 NDAA, and bipartisan cosponsorship across health and immigration files. No Lugar Bipartisan Index score
yet exists for so short a tenure, so this is a tenure-limited middle rather than a demonstrated
top-quartile mark. No conduct placing party over institution on record.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented instance of denying an opponent's or constituent's personhood or equal worth. Her
public rhetoric is partisan-policy heat (impeachment advocacy, immigration), which is not scored.
No anti-belonging instance on record; held at upper-middle absent a documented high-mark
personhood-defense anchor.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals, no abusive investigations, no
retaliation conduct. As a minority-party freshman she has held no gavel to weaponize; the record
is clean of criterion-class process conduct.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Rhetoric runs hot in advocacy ("the rhetoric has crossed every line," "Pete Hegseth is complicit")
but stays directed at officials' official conduct and policy, which the standard does not penalize.
No documented pattern of casting citizens or opponents as enemies who do not belong. A charged
register without a documented restraint anchor lands at a clean middle.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?One pre-Congress appearance-concern: as a Phoenix council member she was among several who used a
city suite for non-policy events (2022), a council-wide perception issue, no finding against her
individually, and the council subsequently banned the practice. Weighed as a minor appearance
footnote, not a finding. No congressional ethics matter on record. Solid middle.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?The higher bar here is calling out one's OWN side at cost, and there is no documented instance of
Ansari breaking with her party leadership or co-partisans at personal cost. Her accountability
energy (the Hegseth articles) is aimed across the aisle, which is the easier direction. Absent a
documented own-side call-out, this sits at a true middle; not penalized for impeachment votes or
caucus alignment.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?Missed 11 of 548 roll-call votes (2.0%), on par with the chamber median, a diligent freshman
attendance record. No documented instance of using office discretion for personal preferential
treatment. Honest middle: reliable presence, no standout discretion-test anchor either way.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented gap between private conduct and public posture, no leaked contempt, no two-faced
reporting. Absent the long public record that would let consistency be strongly verified, this is a
neutral-positive middle on the available evidence.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Documented constituent-service work, $830K Community Project Funding for Central Arizona Shelter
Services, immigration-relief legislation for her district's population. No documented donor-over-
constituent conduct. Middle, reflecting genuine district focus without a long enough record to
grade reliability across cycles.
[source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 8 | why?Scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment. No documented self-dealing, family payments,
office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. No STOCK Act or disclosure-timing issues on
record. Clean on the only thing this measure grades; held below apex only because a single-term
disclosure history is a thin base.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?No documented breach of institutional decorum, no censure, no floor-conduct sanction, no
spectacle-over-process incident. Uses regular legislative channels (amendments, CPF requests, formal articles of impeachment) rather than disruption. Upper-middle for a clean freshman decorum
record.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No documented sustained-falsehood pattern. Her impeachment-articles claims are framed as factual
allegations within a constitutional pleading, not demonstrated fabrications, and are weighed as
contested advocacy rather than falsehood. Clean middle on the available record.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Demonstrates substantive engagement on her focus areas, climate/energy policy (her pre-office
specialty), health, immigration, and detailed NDAA amendments reflecting command of the underlying
issues. Substance over talking points within a focused portfolio; held at middle by the limited
breadth a two-year record can show.
[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 | No documented instance of breaking with her own party/leadership at personal cost; accountability energy aimed across the aisle (the easier direction) ↳ active-duty call-out of one's own side, not met on record | Short tenure; absence of evidence, not evidence of deference |
| M06 | Pre-Congress (2022) Phoenix city-suite use for non-policy events, alongside several council members ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | Council-wide perception issue, no individual finding; practice subsequently banned; not a congressional matter |
| M02 | No established Lugar Bipartisan Index score; bipartisan reach limited to a handful of freshman NDAA amendments ↳ tenure-limited bipartisan evidence | Documented bipartisan amendments are a positive directional signal |
| M05 | Charged advocacy register ('crossed every line,' 'complicit') ↳ rhetorical heat | Directed at officials' official conduct/policy, NOT enemy-making toward citizens; not a scored fault, reflected only as absence of a restraint anchor |
| Pillar III | Reliability across cycles unproven on a single-term record (Stewardship genuine via CPF and district work) ↳ Reliability drag, tenure-limited | Zero documented Exploitation; real constituent Protection work |
| Pillar IV | Legacy unformed on a two-year record (Integrity/Justice not yet stress-tested over time) ↳ Legacy drag, tenure-limited | No documented integrity breach; clean base to build on |
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
| 6 | why?Attributes: Selfless Service, Steadiness, Loyalty to the oath, diligent attendance (2% missed) and use of formal constitutional channels show reliable institutional presence. Held at a clean middle by the absence of a costly, sacrifice-level loyalty anchor on a two-year record. No drag toward Self-Interest or Collapse. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, clearly conviction-driven (climate, immigration, oversight). No documented self-reflection/teachability anchor yet, and the 2022 suite footnote is a minor Consistency note; nets to an honest middle. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, genuine constituent protection via CPF and district-specific legislation. No documented Exploitation of power, and as a minority freshman she has held no gavel to weaponize. Reliability across cycles simply unproven yet. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, no documented integrity breach; a clean but unformed legacy on a short record. Sits at middle because virtue here is graded on a body of evidence she has not yet accumulated. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 24/40 |
Total 24/40, honest middle. The Four Pillars track the conduct composite closely: a clean record without the long evidentiary base that pushes the strongest dossiers higher. No pillar carries a criterion-class drag.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“As the daughter of Iranian immigrants who fled a regime, and as an American Congresswoman who swore an oath to the United States Constitution, I cannot stand by while these violations continue.”
Statement filing articles of impeachment against the Secretary of War · ansari.house.gov press release · CIVIC · cite
“I offered four common-sense, bipartisan amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act.”
FY2026 NDAA floor process · ansari.house.gov press release · PRINCIPLED · cite
“$830,000 in Community Project Funding for Central Arizona Shelter Services to serve people experiencing homelessness in downtown Phoenix.”
FY2026 appropriations constituent funding · ansari.house.gov press release · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Yassamin Ansari (born 1992). U.S. Representative for Arizona's 3rd congressional district since January 3, 2025 (119th Congress); Democrat. Daughter of Iranian immigrants. Prior service: Phoenix City Council (District 7) 2021-2024, including Vice Mayor; United Nations climate-policy advisory work. The youngest woman serving in the 119th Congress and Democratic Freshman Class President.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Freshman member, 119th Congress. Focus areas (sponsored/cosponsored): Health (~24%), Immigration (~20%), International Affairs (~16%), Energy, Housing & Community Development, Science/Technology, Government Operations, Public Lands. Offered four bipartisan amendments to the FY2026 NDAA. Sponsored H.R. 8740, the Iranian Temporary Immigration Relief Act (2026). Secured FY2026 Community Project Funding for her district. No Lugar Bipartisan Index score yet (tenure too short). No DW-NOMINATE stability data over a single term.
3. Constitutional Moments
April 2026: announced and filed six articles of impeachment against the Secretary of War (Hegseth) over the Iran strikes, alleging unauthorized war, targeting of civilians, mishandling of classified information, and obstruction of oversight. Under the framework this is the constitutional impeachment mechanism operating as designed, a use of process, not a subversion of it, and is NOT scored as a fault. Seated after December 2020, she is not a Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory and has no election-subversion conduct.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
A charged advocacy register on national-security and immigration matters ("the rhetoric has crossed every line," officials are "complicit"), directed at officeholders' official conduct rather than at citizens or opponents as a class. The standard does not penalize policy heat or accountability rhetoric aimed at conduct. No documented pattern of enemy-making or incitement toward citizens. No high-mark restraint anchor on the short record, so M05 sits at a clean middle.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No office-attributable enrichment on record, no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue, and no disclosure-timing issues. The only appearance-concern is pre-Congress: a 2022 Phoenix city-suite use for non-policy events shared by several council members, with no individual finding and a subsequent policy ban. Weighed as a minor footnote, not a finding.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No process-subversion (Criterion 8): seated after December 2020, no amicus signature, no election or certification subversion. No sustained enemy-making or incitement (Criterion 10): advocacy heat is aimed at official conduct, not at casting citizens as enemies. Flag count: zero. No capping or terminal flag.
7. What The Framework Says
Ansari presents a clean freshman conduct record. There is no documented weaponization, self-dealing, enemy-making, election subversion, or sustained falsehood, and the headline event of her tenure, the Hegseth impeachment filing, is the constitutional process working and is not scored against her. What the standard cannot yet find is the other side of the ledger: a costly own-side call-out, a demonstrated bipartisan index, a sacrifice-level oath anchor. The composite therefore lands in an honest middle, above the bar on a clean slate, but built on a two-year evidentiary base. Sound on the conduct available.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Clerk roll-call / disclosure records
Tier 2: GovTrack member statistics · Ballotpedia · Axios Phoenix (2022 suite ethics)
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · House financial disclosures · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.