Composite 4.92 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Unfit band at credit 533, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
- U.S. Naval Academy graduate, 1986; Naval Aviator flying the S-3 Viking
- 26 years of service (14 active, 12 reserve); operated from 13 aircraft carriers
- Combat operations in the Persian Gulf, Bosnia, and Kosovo; recalled to active duty after September 11, 2001
Service to country is honored here as context, not as a score. No specific in-service conduct event is scored as a measure; the badge contextualizes the record without moving 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 constitutional-fidelity high mark on record, but also no process-subversion capping conduct
attributable to him. Seated January 3, 2021, AFTER the December 11, 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, so he is NOT a signatory and cannot be charged with that crit-8 act (verified against the 126-member
signatory list and his sworn-in date). His January 6, 2021 floor objections to the Arizona and
Pennsylvania electoral slates are the constitutional process functioning and are NOT scored against him
here per the contamination rule; a bare floor objection alone is not capping conduct. Held at the middle:
ordinary oath-fidelity, no demonstrated stand at cost, no documented subversion.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 4 | why?Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index placed Franklin roughly 172nd in the House with a slightly negative score
(~-0.012) for the 118th Congress, below the chamber median for cross-aisle lawmaking. Not a scorched-earth
partisan record, but no notable record of placing institution or country over a party win either.
Below-middle on demonstrated bipartisan conduct, scored on the index, not on ideology.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 5 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or constituents as enemies who do not belong, and no documented
high-mark defense of an opponent's personhood either. The persistence in objecting to other states' electors
after the January 6 riot reflects a contested theory of the election rather than an anti-belonging slur.
Middle: neither a documented breach of equal-worth nor an affirmative defense of it.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 5 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals or critics, and no documented use of office to
constrain abuse either. The January 6 objections do not rise to crit-8 process subversion under the strict
standard (no amicus signature; a bare floor objection is not capping). Middle: an unremarkable rule-of-law
record with no affirmative protective stand.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 5 | why?Rhetoric runs to standard partisan messaging without a documented sustained incitement or enemy-making
pattern, and without a documented high-mark of rhetorical restraint at cost. Middle.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 4 | why?Franklin failed to disclose 31 stock transactions within the STOCK Act deadlines, a genuine fiduciary
transparency lapse weighed as an appearance-concern, not a finding (no public sanction adjudicated). Partial
mitigation: he sought an Ethics-advised extension, worked with his broker to identify the missing trades, and
filed corrected reports through Ethics counsel rather than concealing them. Below-middle: a real disclosure
breach with after-the-fact correction.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 4 | why?No documented instance of calling out his own side at cost, the higher bar for an active-duty member. The
record runs the other way: he stayed with the objection bloc even after the riot. Below-middle on the
affirmative call-out duty; not scored on the certification vote itself per the contamination rule.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?Resigned his Lakeland city commission seat effective the day he was sworn into Congress, avoiding a
dual-office overlap, a small clean-discretion data point. No documented self-serving exploitation of
discretionary authority. Slightly above middle on a thin record.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 5 | why?No documented gap between a public posture and private conduct, and no affirmative evidence of consistent
off-camera character either. Middle by default on a limited record.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 5 | why?Routine constituent and district representation (committee work on Veterans' Affairs, district services)
without a documented donor-capture pattern overriding constituent interest. Middle: ordinary
representational service, neither a standout nor a documented breach.
[source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 6 | why?Net worth (~$23M) is pre-office wealth from a 20-year insurance career (Lanier Upshaw / BKS-Baldwin
Group equity) and is NOT scored as enrichment, raw wealth is excluded by rule. No documented
office-attributable self-dealing, family payments, office-info trades for profit, or foreign-government
revenue. The late STOCK Act disclosures are scored as a transparency lapse under M06, not as
office-driven enrichment here. Held slightly above middle: no documented office-enrichment breach, with a
minor deduction for the disclosure-discipline shadow that touches the appearance of trading propriety.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 5 | why?No documented spectacle-driven institutional disruption and no standout record of institutional stewardship.
A conventional, low-drama floor presence. Middle.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 4 | why?Advanced the contested claim that the Arizona/Pennsylvania electoral slates were "elected illegally," a
theory rejected by courts and by the constitutional count, and persisted after the January 6 violence.
Scored here as a truthfulness/factual-fidelity concern (distinct from the certification vote itself).
No broader documented sustained-falsehood pattern beyond the 2020-21 election claims keeps it below-middle
rather than at the floor.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Brings real substantive grounding, a 26-year naval-aviation career, an MBA, two decades running an
insurance firm, and active legislating on Veterans' Affairs (ACCURATE Act, SCHEDULES Act of 2026). Slightly
above middle on substance-over-talking-points, on a still-developing congressional record.
[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 | Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index ~172nd in the House, slightly negative (~-0.012), 118th Congress, below chamber median ↳ below-median cross-aisle conduct | Not a scorched-earth partisan; index-based, not ideological |
| M06 | Failed to disclose 31 stock transactions within STOCK Act deadlines (reported 2025) ↳ Fiduciary transparency lapse, appearance-concern | Sought Ethics-advised extension, identified missing trades with broker, filed corrected reports through Ethics counsel; no public sanction adjudicated |
| M07 | Stayed with the electoral-objection bloc after the January 6 riot; no documented call-out of his own side at cost ↳ active call-out duty unmet | Certification vote itself not scored per contamination rule |
| M13 | Asserted Arizona/Pennsylvania slates were 'elected illegally', a court-rejected claim he repeated after the riot ↳ factual-fidelity concern | No broader sustained-falsehood pattern documented beyond the 2020-21 election claims |
| M11 | Late STOCK Act disclosures cast a shadow on trading-propriety appearance ↳ disclosure-discipline appearance | Raw wealth (~$23M) is pre-office and excluded; no documented office-driven enrichment |
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: Selfless Service and Steadiness are evidenced by long naval service and a clean dual-office resignation, but loyalty to the constitutional count is shadowed by persisting in the electoral objection after the January 6 violence. Middle. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 4 | why?Attributes: Authenticity and Conviction are present, but the STOCK Act disclosure lapse and the court-rejected 'elected illegally' claims pull toward the opposites of Integrity and Self-Reflection. The after-the-fact disclosure correction keeps it from the floor. Below-middle. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 5 | why?Attributes: ordinary Stewardship and constituent Protection without documented Exploitation, and without a documented affirmative protective stand. Middle. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 4 | why?Attributes: a developing record with real substantive grounding (Veterans' Affairs work), drag toward Love-of-Truth's opposite from the election claims and the disclosure shadow. Below-middle. |
| TOTAL: Weak | 18/40 |
Total 18/40, Adequate-to-thin. The pillars track the conduct composite: a competent, conventional record with two real drags (post-riot objection persistence and the STOCK Act lapse) and no offsetting high marks.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“I still plan to object to the certification of Joe Biden's victory.”
Statement that he would proceed with electoral-vote objections despite the Capitol riot earlier that day · Florida Politics · CONTESTED · cite
“I made my resignation effective January 3, the day I was sworn into Congress.”
On resigning his Lakeland city commission seat to avoid holding dual office · Ballotpedia / public record · CIVIC · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Clifford Scott Franklin (born August 23, 1964). U.S. Representative for Florida, FL-15 (2021-2023), FL-18 (2023-present). Born in Thomaston, Georgia; raised in Lakeland, Florida. U.S. Naval Academy 1986; Naval Aviator (S-3 Viking), 26 years active and reserve service, retiring as Captain. MBA, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. President & CEO of Lanier Upshaw insurance agency (2000-2020), then Managing Partner after the BKS/Baldwin Group merger. Lakeland city commissioner 2017-2021. Sworn into Congress January 3, 2021.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index placed Franklin roughly mid-pack in the House (~172nd, slightly negative score) for the 118th Congress, below the chamber median on cross-aisle lawmaking. Committee work centers on Veterans' Affairs; 2026 legislating includes the ACCURATE Act and the SCHEDULES Act of 2026. Voted to object to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral slates on January 6, 2021, recorded here as the constitutional process and NOT scored on policy merits, per the framework's refusal to grade certification votes as conduct.
3. Constitutional Moments
Seated January 3, 2021, after the December 11, 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, so he is not among its 126 House-Republican signatories (verified). On his first day in office (January 6, 2021) he voted to sustain objections to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral votes and publicly stated he would proceed with the objections after the Capitol riot. Under the strict standard these floor objections are the constitutional process functioning and do not, alone, constitute crit-8 process subversion; the underlying "elected illegally" claim is weighed separately under factual fidelity (M13).
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Conventional partisan messaging without a documented sustained incitement or enemy-making pattern, and without a documented high-mark of restraint at cost. The notable rhetorical drag is the court-rejected assertion that the Arizona/Pennsylvania slates were "elected illegally," repeated after the January 6 violence.
5. Fiduciary Profile
Net worth (~$23M) derives from a 20-year insurance-industry career (Lanier Upshaw equity rolled into the BKS/Baldwin Group), pre-office wealth, not office-driven enrichment, and excluded from M11 by rule. The genuine fiduciary concern is a STOCK Act lapse: 31 stock transactions disclosed past their deadlines, weighed as an appearance-concern. Mitigation: he sought an Ethics-advised extension, reconstructed the missing trades with his broker, and filed corrected reports through Ethics counsel; no public sanction has been adjudicated.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class capping conduct under any of the eight criteria. Critically: Franklin was sworn in January 3, 2021, AFTER the December 11, 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, so he is not a signatory and cannot be charged with that crit-8 act. His January 6, 2021 floor objections are a bare certification-process objection, which the standard expressly holds is NOT crit-8 on its own. No documented sustained enemy-making/incitement pattern (crit-10). Flag count: zero. The election claims and the STOCK Act lapse are weighed as ordinary conduct/appearance concerns within the measures, not as capping flags.
7. What The Framework Says
A competent, conventional first-to-third-term record that lands in the honest middle. There is no process-subversion capping conduct attributable to him: he was seated after the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and a bare Jan-6 floor objection is not, by the strict standard, crit-8. The real drags are genuine but bounded, below-median bipartisanship, a STOCK Act disclosure lapse he corrected after the fact, the persistence in objecting after the riot, and the court-rejected "elected illegally" claim. Offsetting them is a substantive professional background and clean dual-office discretion, but no high-mark stand at cost. Adequate, with real but non-capping concerns.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Clerk roll-call records (Jan 6, 2021) · Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, 126 Representatives signatory list
Tier 2: Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Florida Politics, post-riot objection statement · STOCK Act late-disclosure reporting
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House.gov biography · GovTrack · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.