Composite 4.57 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Does not clear the bar. The record is sub-threshold: no abuse, no enrichment, no incitement, and the Jan 6 objection is credited neutrally as the constitutional process working, but the 2020-21 amplification of an unproven stolen-election narrative is a real fidelity-and-truth drag, and there is no offsetting high mark of sacrifice or own-side courage at cost. The later 'fair and square' admission helps and is weighed honestly. Adequate, not supported.
Institutional-norm / process subversion. As a House member (NC-13) Budd was one of the 126 Republicans who signed the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to discard four other states' lawfully certified electors (GA/MI/PA/WI), then voted to sustain the Jan 6 objections after the Capitol attack. Joining litigation to nullify other states' Article II certifications is an affirmative use of a legal-on-its- face instrument to defeat the constitutional purpose it serves, the same conduct flagged on Banks and Aderholt, applied consistently here. Capping, not terminal: he was a co-signatory rather than an architect and the effort failed, so the number computes, but the documented effort to void certified results forecloses an Author's Verdict of "supported." Partially mitigated (weighed in M01, not the flag) by his Sept 2021 on-record admission that Biden won "fair and square" and is "the legitimate president."
Evidence: Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief of 126 Representatives (Dec 11 2020); Budd among NC signatories
A capping flag forecloses an Author's Verdict of "supported" regardless of the composite; a terminal flag suspends the number entirely. Conduct is weighed on documented evidence, applied symmetrically. How flags work →
No military service on record. Ted Budd's background is in business (owner of ProShots, a firearms retail and training range) and farming/agribusiness, with degrees from Appalachian State, Dallas Theological Seminary, and Wake Forest. The absence of a service record is neither credited nor penalized; only conduct in office 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 | 2 | why?Casting an in-process objection vote is the constitutional tool working and is NOT penalized. What IS weighed, and what drives this to the floor tier, is that Budd SIGNED the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to discard four other states' lawfully certified electors, then sustained the objection on the evening of Jan 6 after the Capitol attack, on top of December 2020 stolen-election amplification. Joining litigation to nullify other states' certifications is process-subversion (Criterion-8 capping flag); per the rule that a crit-8 flag cannot sit beside a mild M01, this lands at the floor (2), consistent with Banks and Aderholt who signed the same brief. Held at 2 rather than 1 because he was a co-signatory, not the architect, and later admitted on record (Sept 2021) that Biden won 'fair and square' and is 'the legitimate president', a genuine, if belated, fidelity recovery that the standard credits. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 4 | why?Bottom-third bipartisan output in the Senate (ranked 79th in the 118th Congress Bipartisan Index), with little cross-party signature legislation. This is scored as a conduct signal about placing country/institution over party in the legislative craft, NOT as a partisan or ideological penalty; the same low-collaboration standard would apply to a Democrat. Below middle on the country-over-party measure. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 6 | why?No documented pattern of casting fellow citizens or opponents as enemies who do not belong, and no Criterion-10 enemy-making pattern on record. Ordinary partisan disagreement is not belonging-denial. Solid middle. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 3 | why?Signing litigation to have other states' certified electors discarded is the use of a legal/institutional instrument to overturn a lawful result, abuse of process at constitutional scale, distinct from the M01 fidelity breach and scored here as the audit treats amicus signatories (parallel to Aderholt). Not the criterion-class targeting of a named individual and he was a co-signer rather than the drafter, so below middle rather than floored. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 5 | why?Standard partisan heat with no documented incitement or pressure-to-confront pattern (Criterion 10 does not apply). The one real rhetorical drag is the 2020-21 amplification of unproven fraud claims; mitigated by the later candid acknowledgment of Biden's legitimacy. Middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 5 | why?Two appearance-concerns, both weighed as appearances and not as findings of fact. (1) Feb 2021: signed a COVID proxy-vote letter while reportedly attending CPAC; a Campaign for Accountability complaint was filed but produced no charge or sanction, uncharged, weighed only. (2) The AgriBioTech bankruptcy litigation was PRE-OFFICE family business; it settled in 2005 for $6M with no admission of liability. Neither is office-attributable self-dealing. Score reflects the residual appearance drag only. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 4 | why?The active-duty standard: calling out one's OWN side at cost is the higher bar. Budd's Sept 2021 statement that Biden 'won fair and square' and is 'the legitimate president', made against prevailing MAGA pressure during his own primary, is a modest own-side honesty mark. But there is no sustained pattern of calling out own-side misconduct at real cost; on the broader stolen-election episode he largely went along. Below middle. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 5 | why?No notable discretion test (no documented instance of refusing a personal advantage at cost, and no documented abuse of discretion). Neutral middle, absence of evidence in either direction. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented gap between a private posture and a public one; no on-the-record contempt-behind-closed-doors instance. Solid middle. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Ordinary representational fidelity; roll-call attendance on par with the Senate median (about 2.9% missed). No documented dereliction. Solid middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 6 | why?No office-attributable enrichment on record: Budd does not trade individual stocks and faces no insider-trading allegation. The AgriBioTech matter is pre-office family business, not office-driven. Per the standard, raw or pre-office wealth is never penalized, only office-driven self-dealing scores, and none is documented. Solid middle reflecting clean office-conduct on this axis. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 6 | why?Conventional institutional decorum; no documented floor-conduct violation, censure, or spectacle-over-institution incident. Solid middle. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 4 | why?The documented drag is the 2020-21 amplification of an unproven stolen-election narrative ('irregularities and constitutional violations') used to justify the objection. This is a real truthfulness concern. It is partially redeemed, not erased, by his later candid, on-record admission that Biden won legitimately. Below middle: a genuine falsehood-amplification episode with a genuine retraction. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 5 | why?Ordinary substantive engagement across Armed Services, Intelligence, Commerce and Small Business committees; competent issue work without a signature record of deep policy command. Neutral middle, substance present, not distinguished. [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 |
|---|---|---|
| M01 | Objected to the AZ and PA electoral counts on Jan 6, 2021, and amplified the stolen-election narrative (Dec 2020 'irregularities and constitutional violations' statement; Combat Voter Fraud Act); continued the objection the evening of Jan 6 after the Capitol attack ↳ Constitutional-fidelity drag, narrative amplification around the objection | The objection VOTE itself is the constitutional tool and is not penalized; he was a rank-and-file objector, not an orchestrator (no Criterion-8 flag); later admitted Biden won 'fair and square' |
| M13 | Amplified unproven 2020 election-fraud claims to justify the objection ↳ Truthfulness, falsehood amplification | Publicly retracted in Sept 2021, acknowledging Biden as 'the legitimate president' |
| M02 | Ranked 79th in the Senate on the Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index (118th Congress); little cross-party signature legislation ↳ Country/institution-over-party in legislative craft | Scored as a symmetric conduct signal, NOT an ideological penalty |
| M06 | Feb 2021 COVID proxy-vote letter signed while reportedly at CPAC (Campaign for Accountability complaint, no charge/sanction); pre-office AgriBioTech bankruptcy litigation settled 2005 ($6M, no admission) ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | Both are weighed as APPEARANCES, not findings; AgriBioTech is pre-office and not office-attributable |
| M07 | No sustained pattern of calling out own-side misconduct at cost ↳ Active-duty call-out standard | Sept 2021 'fair and square' admission against MAGA pressure is a modest own-side honesty mark |
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
| 5 | why?Attributes: Courage, Selfless Service, Steadiness, Loyalty, the loyalty was largely to party and to a contested election narrative rather than to the institution under pressure; the later 'fair and square' admission shows some independent courage. Middle, with a real drag toward Self-Interest during the 2020-21 episode. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 4 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Self-Reflection, Teachability, the public reversal on the 2020 result reads as either belated honesty (Teachability) or expedient repositioning (a drag on Authenticity/Consistency). The unresolved ambiguity holds this below middle. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Protection, Courage in Conflict, Stewardship, Accountability, no documented abuse or exploitation of power; ordinary stewardship and no weaponization of office. Solid middle; no strong affirmative protection mark either. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 5 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Moral Courage, Justice, Love of Truth, the stolen-election amplification is a real Love-of-Truth drag, tempered but not erased by the retraction; the rest of the record is conventional. Middle. |
| TOTAL: Weak | 20/40 |
Total 20/40, Adequate. The pillars track the conduct composite closely: no extraordinary sacrifice or institutional-fidelity high mark, and a genuine 2020-21 truth-and-fidelity drag that the later recantation softens without resolving.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“He did. He's the legitimate president.”
AP interview, asked whether Biden won the 2020 election 'fair and square' · Newsweek / Associated Press · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
“Millions of Americans believe there were consequential problems in November's presidential election.”
Statement announcing he would object to the Electoral College count · Budd House office statement · CONTESTED · cite
“The mob violence I witnessed at the Capitol on January 6th was not representative of our country and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.”
Statement after the Capitol attack; he nonetheless continued his objection that evening · Budd House office statement · CONTESTED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Theodore Paul "Ted" Budd (born October 21, 1971). Junior U.S. Senator from North Carolina since January 3, 2023 (term ends 2029); previously U.S. Representative for NC-13 2017-2023. Raised on a Davie County farm; BBA Appalachian State (1994), MA Dallas Theological Seminary (1998), MBA Wake Forest (2007). Owner of ProShots firearms retail/training range. No military service. Committees: Armed Services, Intelligence, Commerce, Small Business, Joint Economic.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Bottom-third on the Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index (ranked 79th in the Senate, 118th Congress); reliably conservative voting record (high Heritage Action scores). Roll-call attendance near the Senate median (~2.9% missed over 2017-2026). Legislative focus on immigration enforcement, agriculture/AI, the Second Amendment, and national security. Policy positions are NOT scored on merit in either direction, per the framework, the Bipartisan Index figure enters only as a symmetric country-over-party CONDUCT signal.
3. Constitutional Moments
The defining episode is the 2020-21 election-certification chapter. As a House member, Budd announced and cast objections to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral counts on Jan 6, 2021, having amplified stolen-election claims in the preceding weeks. Casting an objection is the constitutional process operating as designed and is not penalized as such; the scored conduct is the surrounding narrative amplification and the choice to continue the objection after witnessing the Capitol attack. He was a rank-and-file objector, not an architect of fake electors or a clock-running scheme, so no Criterion-8 process-subversion flag. In September 2021 he stated on the record that Biden won "fair and square" and is "the legitimate president."
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Generally conventional partisan rhetoric with no documented incitement or enemy-making pattern (Criterion 10 does not apply). The one real rhetorical drag is the 2020-21 amplification of unproven election-fraud claims, partially mitigated by the later candid acknowledgment of Biden's legitimacy. No documented Senate-floor decorum violations.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No office-attributable enrichment on record: Budd does not trade individual stocks and faces no insider-trading allegation. Two appearance-concerns are weighed (not as findings): a Feb 2021 COVID proxy-vote letter signed while reportedly attending CPAC (an ethics complaint was filed, with no charge or sanction), and the pre-office AgriBioTech bankruptcy litigation involving his family's seed business, which settled in 2005 for $6M with no admission of liability. The AgriBioTech matter is pre-office and not office-driven; raw or inherited wealth is not penalized under this standard.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
One CAPPING severity flag, Criterion 8, Institutional-norm / Process Subversion (confirmed). Budd signed the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to discard four other states' certified electors and sustained the Jan 6 objection after the Capitol attack, joining litigation to nullify other states' certifications is process-subversion, scored the same as fellow signatories Banks and Aderholt. It is CAPPING, not terminal, he was a co-signatory rather than the architect and the effort failed, so the composite still computes, but the documented effort to void certified results forecloses an Author's Verdict of "supported." No Criterion-10 enemy-making/incitement pattern on record. No terminal-tier conduct. His Sept 2021 admission that Biden won "fair and square" is weighed as a genuine fidelity recovery in M01, not in the flag. Capping flag count: one.
7. What The Framework Says
Ted Budd lands in the Adequate band on conduct. There is no documented abuse of office, no enrichment scheme, no incitement pattern, and no orchestration to overturn an election, so none of the capping flags apply, and the objection vote itself is treated as the constitutional tool working. What holds the record down is the 2020-21 chapter: amplifying an unproven fraud narrative and pressing the objection even after the Capitol attack, a genuine truthfulness-and-fidelity drag. His later on-record admission that Biden won legitimately is weighed as partial own-side honesty against pressure, softening but not erasing the drag. Bottom-third bipartisan output enters only as a symmetric country-over-party signal, never as a policy penalty. A conventional, sub-threshold record: honest middles, real drags, no extraordinary marks.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · Counting of electoral votes (Jan 6-7 2021), Ballotpedia compilation of official record
Tier 2: Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Newsweek / AP, Budd 'fair and square' admission
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.