Composite 6.42 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Adequate band at credit 662, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
- Eight years in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve
- Mobilized to active duty during the Gulf War, 1992 (Camp Lejeune / Jacksonville, NC)
- Member, For Country Caucus (military veterans); serves on House Armed Services Committee
Service to country is honored here as context, not as a score. The character demonstrated within it is weighed as conduct where it belongs; the badge contextualizes the record but does not move the composite.
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 | 6 | why?No documented breach of the oath or attack on constitutional process. Took office January 2017, so could not have signed the Dec 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and is not among its 126 House-Republican signatories. No fake-elector, election-overturning, or appointment-blocking conduct on record. Held at a solid-middle 6 rather than higher because the affirmative record is a conventional partisan member's, no documented instance of constraining power against his own side's interest at personal cost, which is what lifts M01 into the upper tier. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 6 | why?Member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, the bipartisan For Country Caucus (veterans), and the Climate Solutions Caucus, genuine cross-aisle affiliations. But his measured Bipartisan Index score (~0.48, ranked ~292nd in the 118th House) is middling, not top-quartile. Real bipartisan intent on infrastructure and shipping reform, modest demonstrated cross-aisle output. Upper-middle by intent, pulled to 6 by the index. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or citizens as outsiders who do not belong. Rhetoric is conventional-partisan and issue-focused; sharp criticism of officials (e.g., calling for a Defense Secretary's resignation, ICE-raid oversight confrontation) is policy/accountability heat, not anti-belonging enmity. Persons-of-equal-worth standard substantially met. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals, no process-subversion conduct, no criterion-8 capping event. As a rank-and-file House member he has limited unilateral power; nothing in the record shows it turned to defeat a constitutional purpose. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?Career rhetorical posture is restrained and constituent/policy-oriented. No documented slurs, dehumanizing language, or sustained inflammatory pattern. Heated moments are aimed at official conduct, not at opponents' personhood. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 7 | why?No OCE referral, House Ethics matter, or sanction on record across nearly a decade in office. Clean accountability ledger. Held at 7 rather than higher because the record shows an absence of adverse findings, not an affirmative, documented record of self-accountability or owning a costly mistake. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?The active-duty M07 standard is calling out one's OWN side at cost. Carbajal is a reliable party-line member with no documented instance of breaking from his caucus on a matter of principle at personal political cost. His cross-aisle work is collaborative rather than confrontational toward his own side. Honest middle, no demerit for misconduct, but no demonstrated independent courage either. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 7 | why?No documented abuse of discretionary privilege, no preferential self-dealing, no documented misuse of office perquisites. Discretion test substantially met on the available record. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented private/public contempt gap, no leaked off-camera conduct contradicting his public posture. Scored at 6 rather than higher because the absence of contrary evidence is not the same as affirmative documentation of integrity between the two faces; default solid-middle. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Generally tracks a safe Democratic district's preferences; attentive constituent-service record (veterans' courts funding, homelessness legislation). No documented donor-over-constituent capture. Middle, competent representation without a standout demonstrated independence from donor or party pressure. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 8 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment. No documented self-dealing, family payments from the office, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. Negligible-to-no active stock-trading conflict profile. Raw wealth is explicitly NOT penalized. Clean on the office-enrichment standard. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 6 | why?Conventional institutional decorum; no documented disruption of regular order, no spectacle-over-institution pattern. Routine, respectful floor and committee conduct. Solid-middle, honors the institution without a standout institutional-fidelity moment. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern. Public statements are conventional partisan framing within the normal bounds of political advocacy; no record of repeated demonstrable factual misrepresentation. Solid-middle. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substantive committee engagement across Armed Services (as a Marine Reserve veteran), Agriculture, and Transportation & Infrastructure; chair of the USMMA Board of Visitors. Workmanlike substance. Note from the record: many authored measures beyond post-office namings do not advance, competent but not a heavyweight legislative craftsman. Solid-middle. [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 from his own caucus on principle at personal political cost; reliable party-line member ↳ active call-out duty, calling out one's own side at cost | No misconduct; the gap is absence of demonstrated independent courage, not a breach |
| M02 | Bipartisan Index ~0.48, ranked ~292nd in the 118th House, middling despite Problem Solvers / For Country Caucus membership ↳ demonstrated cross-aisle output vs. stated bipartisan affiliation | Genuine bipartisan-caucus participation and intent; collaborative infrastructure/shipping work |
| M01 | Affirmative record is a conventional partisan member's; no documented stand constraining power against his own side at cost ↳ oath-fidelity at personal cost | No process-subversion, no capping conduct; could not have signed Texas v. PA (took office 2017) |
| M14 | Many authored measures beyond post-office dedications do not advance through committee ↳ legislative substance/craft | Substantive committee engagement and veterans/maritime work; not a demerit for misconduct |
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, Loyalty, Steadiness, a Gulf War-era Marine reservist and durable district representative with a clean accountability ledger. Held at solid-middle because loyalty runs reliably to party and constituents without a documented moment of costly courage that would lift the pillar. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, consistent issue commitments (veterans, climate, infrastructure) and no integrity breach. No standout Self-Reflection/Teachability event documented (owning a costly error), so it holds at the honest middle rather than higher. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, constituent-protective service (veterans' courts, homelessness) and no Exploitation; M11 is clean on office-enrichment. No documented use of power to constrain power against his own interest, which caps the pillar at middle. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, a clean, conventional record without scandal. No criterion-class conduct. Lacks the rare institutional-fidelity moment that would push legacy into the upper tier; an honorable, unremarkable middle. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 24/40 |
Total 24/40, Adequate. A clean, conventional record: no scandal, no capping conduct, but also no documented moment of costly independent courage. The pillars sit at an honest middle.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“As a Member of Congress, I have the right to conduct oversight, but I was denied entry.”
After being denied entry while attempting oversight of an ICE enforcement operation in Carpinteria, CA · Rep. Carbajal public statement · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
“Bipartisan solutions are how we actually deliver for working families.”
Federal Issues Roundtable, Santa Barbara, describing Problem Solvers Caucus work · Santa Barbara Independent · CIVIC · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Salud Otoniel Carbajal (born November 18, 1964, Moctezuma, Sonora, Mexico). U.S. Representative for California's 24th Congressional District (Santa Barbara County and parts of San Luis Obispo and Ventura counties) since January 2017 (115th–119th Congresses). U.S. Marine Corps Reserve 1984–1992, mobilized to active duty during the Gulf War. Former Santa Barbara County Supervisor (2004–2017). University of California, Santa Barbara (B.A.); Fielding Graduate University (M.A.). Member of the Problem Solvers Caucus, For Country Caucus, and Climate Solutions Caucus.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar Center–McCourt Bipartisan Index middling (~0.48, ranked ~292nd in the 118th House) despite bipartisan caucus membership. Serves on the Committees on Armed Services, Agriculture, and Transportation & Infrastructure; chairs the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy Board of Visitors. Signature focus: veterans (Santa Barbara Veterans Treatment Courts funding, veteran-homelessness legislation), climate, ocean shipping/supply-chain reform, and infrastructure. The record shows extensive co-sponsorship but limited advancement of authored measures beyond commemorative bills, competent rather than heavyweight. Policy positions are not graded here in either direction.
3. Constitutional Moments
Took office January 2017, therefore not a signatory to the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and not among its 126 House-Republican signatories. No fake-elector, election-overturning, or process-subversion conduct on record. No documented institutional-fidelity moment at personal cost either; the record is a clean conventional one rather than a profile-in-courage one.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Restrained, constituent- and policy-oriented public posture across nearly a decade. No documented slurs, dehumanizing language, or sustained inflammatory pattern. Sharp criticism of officials (calling for a Defense Secretary's resignation; confronting an ICE enforcement denial of oversight access) is policy and accountability heat directed at conduct, not anti-belonging enmity toward opponents or citizens.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No OCE referral, House Ethics matter, or sanction on record. No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family payments from the office, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. Negligible active-trading conflict profile. Raw wealth is not penalized under the standard. Clean fiduciary ledger on the conduct dimensions the framework scores.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No process-subversion (criterion 8): he took office after December 2020 and is not a Texas v. PA signatory. No sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (criterion 10). Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
Carbajal presents a clean, conventional House record. There is no scandal, no ethics finding, no capping conduct, and no enrichment, the negative ledger is empty, which the standard credits honestly. What is also absent is the rare affirmative material that lifts a record into the upper tier: a documented stand against his own side at cost, a top-tier bipartisan output, or an institutional-fidelity moment under pressure. The result is an honest middle, Adequate. A reliable, unremarkable steward of his district and oath, scored against a fixed standard rather than a partisan curve.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Office of Congressional Conduct · House Financial Disclosure (Clerk)
Tier 2: Lugar Center–McCourt Bipartisan Index · GovTrack member profile · Ballotpedia
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.