Composite 6.69 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
A clean conduct record with no documented integrity, abuse-of-power, or incitement concerns across more than a decade in the House. Carried by the institutional-fidelity role, ranking member of the House Ethics Committee, the body that polices the chamber's own, and by a genuine, sourced thread of bipartisan lawmaking (Moving FIRST Act with Smucker (R-PA), the COMMUTE Act, FAA runway-safety amendments) that runs against a low Lugar partisan-collaboration percentile. Held in the Sound range, not higher: the bipartisan output is real but modest, and there is no apex-tier costly stand against his own side on record. No capping flags. Honest, sound.
No military service record. Civilian career: small-business owner (restaurants) in Contra Costa County, Concord City Council and Mayor, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, California State Assembly and Senate, then U.S. House (CA-11 2015-2022, CA-10 2023-present). Chronic lymphocytic leukemia survivor; founder of the Congressional Cancer Survivors Caucus. Listed as biographical context, 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?No documented subversion of a constitutional process. He voted to certify the 2020 election, the
constitutional process working, which is NOT scored either way, and could not have signed the Texas v.
Pennsylvania amicus (a House-Republican brief; he is a Democrat and is not on the signatory list).
Affirmatively serves as ranking member of the House Ethics Committee, an oath-aligned guardian role.
Upper-middle: fidelity to process is documented; no apex-tier costly defense of the constitutional order
against his own side on record.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 6 | why?A genuine but modest bipartisan-cooperation record. The Lugar percentile is low (partisan-aligned
legislator), but BPI measures cross-aisle bill activity, not ideology, and the sourced output is real:
the Moving FIRST Act with Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), the COMMUTE Act, four FAA runway-safety amendments
passed in a bipartisan reauthorization, and DeSaulnier-Carter cancer-navigation legislation. Middle:
concrete cross-aisle product, but not a top-quartile institutionalist.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented anti-belonging conduct, no instance of casting opponents or constituents as people who do
not belong. Public posture as Ethics ranking member is procedural and even-handed (statements on Gaetz, Mills, Cherfilus-McCormick investigations applied to members of both parties). Solid upper-middle; no
high-mark cross-tribe defense anchor of the McCain/Lakeville class on record.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals. The inverse is on record: as ranking member of
Ethics he participates in even-handed enforcement of House rules against members of his own party as well
as the other. No criterion-class conduct.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?Rhetoric is partisan-newsletter standard ("Countdown to Republican Shutdown") but stays inside policy
heat, no documented pattern of casting opponents as enemies who don't belong, no incitement. Policy heat
is explicitly not penalized. Upper-middle restraint.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 7 | why?No ethics complaint, sanction, or appearance-concern of record against DeSaulnier personally. He sits as
the senior Democrat on the very committee that adjudicates such matters. Clean fiduciary posture; held at
7 absent an affirmative, costly self-accountability anchor that would push higher.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?The active-duty standard is calling out one's OWN side at cost. No documented instance of DeSaulnier
publicly breaking with his party or leadership on a matter of principle at personal cost. His even-handed
Ethics enforcement touches co-partisans (Cherfilus-McCormick, Gaetz statement) but is institutional duty, not a volunteered costly stand. Honest middle, no demerit, no credit for a stand not taken.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No documented instance of either abusing or conspicuously refusing a discretionary advantage. A
long-tenured CLL survivor who returned to full House work after serious illness and a 2022 fall, steady
service, but not a scored discretion-test event. Middle, for absence of evidence either way.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 7 | why?No documented private-versus-public contempt gap; no leaked off-camera conduct contradicting the public
posture. The on-record reputation is consistent. Upper-middle absent a documented integrity gap.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Steady constituent-facing institutional service, local transportation funding, faulty-guardrail safety, cancer-survivor caucus work, in a safe Democratic district. Solid representation; held at middle absent a
documented willingness to diverge from his own coalition for constituent interest.
[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 personal financial-disclosure or STOCK-Act concern of record.
Clean on the only thing this measure scores; raw wealth and partisan alignment are excluded by rule.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Honors the institution: accepted the ranking-member seat on the House Ethics Committee, the chamber's
self-policing body, and worked its even-handed enforcement with the Republican chair (joint Guest-DeSaulnier
updates on the Mills probe). Procedural respect for the institution over spectacle. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 7 | why?No documented pattern of sustained falsehood. Partisan framing in newsletters is within normal advocacy;
no record of repeated, fact-checked false claims of the kind that would drag this measure. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Substantive command of his domain: transportation and infrastructure policy carried into law (Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law provisions, FAA runway-safety amendments, COMMUTE/Moving FIRST data-driven mobility
bills). Substance over talking points in his lane. Upper-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 |
|---|---|---|
| M02 | Low Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index percentile (~330th, 118th Congress); cross-aisle output real but modest ↳ bipartisan-cooperation depth, measured on cross-aisle bill activity, not ideology | Concrete bipartisan bills (Moving FIRST w/ Smucker R-PA, COMMUTE Act, FAA safety amendments) keep this at a middle, not a floor |
| M07 | No documented instance of breaking with his own party/leadership on principle at personal cost ↳ active call-out duty not affirmatively met | Even-handed Ethics enforcement reaches co-partisans, but as institutional duty, not a volunteered costly stand, scored neutral, not as a demerit |
| M10 | Safe-seat representation; no documented divergence from his coalition for constituent interest ↳ constituent-vs-coalition independence | Steady, documented local service offsets |
| M08 | No documented discretion-test event in either direction ↳ absence of evidence, scored to middle, not credited or penalized | - |
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: Steadiness, Selfless Service, Loyalty to the institution, returned to full House duty through serious illness and injury, and accepted the demanding, low-glory Ethics ranking-member seat. No documented drag toward Self-Interest or Collapse. Held below the apex tier for absence of a singular costly stand. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 7 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Consistency, a coherent public record with no documented integrity gap or self-dealing. Held at 7 for absence of a documented teachable self-correction or costly break from his own side. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability, Protection, used committee power for even-handed enforcement and for substantive infrastructure/safety policy. No drag toward Exploitation. Middle: institutional service is real but the influence is workmanlike rather than transformative. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 7 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, institutional fidelity, a clean record built around guarding the chamber's own rules. Contested only by a modest bipartisan footprint and a safe-seat partisan voting pattern, which temper but do not blemish. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 27/40 |
Total 27/40, Sound. The pillars track the conduct composite closely: a clean, institutionally-faithful record without an extraordinary sacrifice or costly-stand anchor to push it into the top tier.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“The American people deserve a Congress that polices its own conduct fairly, regardless of party.”
On accepting the ranking-member role on the House Ethics Committee (paraphrase of public-record posture; verify exact wording before publication) · House Ethics Committee role announcement · CIVIC · cite
“We worked across the aisle to give cities the tools and data to actually fix congestion.”
On the COMMUTE Act / Moving FIRST Act bipartisan transportation work (paraphrase of public-record posture; verify exact wording before publication) · DeSaulnier transportation legislation releases · PRINCIPLED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Mark James DeSaulnier (born March 31, 1952). U.S. Representative for California's 10th district (2023-present); previously CA-11 (2015-2022). Restaurateur and small-business owner before politics; Concord City Council and Mayor; Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors; California State Assembly (2006-2008) and State Senate (2008-2014). Democrat. Member, House Transportation & Infrastructure and Education & Workforce committees; ranking member, House Committee on Ethics. Chronic lymphocytic leukemia survivor and founder of the Congressional Cancer Survivors Caucus.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
DW-NOMINATE strongly left-of-center (~-0.98, 118th Congress) and a low Lugar Bipartisan Index percentile (~330th), a reliably partisan voting profile. That said, his enacted/advanced product carries a real cross-aisle thread: provisions in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Moving FIRST Act with Rep. Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), the COMMUTE Act, four FAA runway-safety amendments in a bipartisan reauthorization, and cancer-navigation legislation with Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA). Per framework rules, partisan alignment and party-line votes are NOT scored; only documented conduct is.
3. Constitutional Moments
Voted to certify the 2020 electoral count, recorded as the constitutional process working and NOT scored in either direction. Did not sign (and as a Democrat could not have signed) the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus. Accepted the ranking-member role on the House Ethics Committee, participating in even-handed enforcement that has reached members of both parties (Gaetz, Mills, Cherfilus-McCormick), including co-partisans.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Standard partisan-advocacy register in constituent communications ("Countdown to Republican Shutdown"), which stays within policy heat and is not penalized. No documented pattern of enemy-making, dehumanization, or incitement. Public posture in his Ethics role is deliberately procedural and even-handed.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No personal ethics complaint, sanction, or appearance-concern of record. No documented self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. He sits as the senior Democrat on the House Ethics Committee. Clean on every dimension this standard scores; raw wealth is excluded by rule.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any criterion. He did not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (Republican brief; verified against the signatory composition), voted to certify the 2020 election, and has no documented pattern of enemy-making or incitement. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
DeSaulnier presents a clean, institutionally-faithful conduct record. The load-bearing positives are real but workmanlike: the ranking-member seat on the body that polices the House's own conduct, and a documented cross-aisle legislative thread that runs against an otherwise partisan voting profile. The honest limits are recorded too, a low bipartisan-cooperation percentile, a safe-seat voting pattern, and no apex-tier costly stand against his own side. No capping flags, no integrity concerns. Sound, and earned at the lower end of it.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Committee on Ethics
Tier 2: Lugar Center / McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia · OpenSecrets
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · OpenSecrets · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.