Composite 6.3 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Adequate band at credit 651, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No documented military service on record. Green is an attorney and former state-court justice of the peace prior to Congress. Service to country is honored as context where present; its absence is not scored against the officeholder.
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?Procedural fidelity to the oath. Green has used constitutional channels heavily (multiple Trump impeachment
resolutions are the process working, NOT a process drag, not penalized here). The genuine drag is conduct
on the House floor: censured 224-198 in March 2025 for disrupting the President's joint address and refusing
the Speaker's order to take his seat, then removed again in February 2026 for the same kind of protest. That
is a real breach of the chamber's order rules, a decorum/process drag, weighed honestly. It is heckling and
protest, NOT process subversion: he did not use a legal-on-its-face power to defeat a constitutional purpose, did not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (Democrat, no signatory), and did not attempt to overturn a
certified result. Upper-middle, marked down for the documented disruptions, not floored.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 6 | why?Reach-across-the-aisle conduct. Green is a reliable progressive partisan who sits in the lower-middle band of
the Bipartisan Index; he sponsors and co-sponsors across party lines occasionally but is not a notable
bridge-builder. This scores cross-aisle working behavior, not ideology or party, middle, no exceptional
bipartisan record and no documented refusal-to-engage pathology either.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 6 | why?Persons-of-equal-worth conduct. Green's defining protest, the February 2026 "Black People Aren't Apes" sign, responding to a video depicting the Obamas as apes, was an affirmation of human dignity, which weighs
positive on this attribute. His rhetoric is sharp and adversarial toward political opponents but stays on the
"wrong-on-policy/wrong-on-conduct" side of the line; no documented pattern of casting citizens or opponents
as sub-human or as not belonging. Middle-positive.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 8 | why?Restraint from weaponizing state power against rivals. No documented instance of Green using government power
to target political opponents. His record is the inverse posture, pursuing accountability through the
impeachment process rather than extra-constitutional means. No criterion-class conduct.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Rhetorical conduct. Green is a confrontational, theatrical communicator, the cane-raising shout during the
2025 address, the protest signs. His message content targets policy ("you do not have a mandate to cut
Medicaid") and a specific racist depiction, not the personhood of broad groups. The drag is form and decorum, not dehumanizing substance. Middle: disruptive style, no incitement or enemy-making pattern.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?Fiduciary/character appearance. Two weighed appearance-concerns, neither a finding: (1) the 2008 dispute with
former staffer Lucinda Daniels, assault allegations were withdrawn and the matter resolved by joint statement
"without payment, promise or receipt of any money"; an uncharged, dismissed allegation is an appearance-concern, never a finding. (2) A 2021 arrest at a voting-rights protest, resolved by a paid fine with the House Ethics
matter closed, minor civil disobedience. Both weighed, not converted into breaches. Middle.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?Call-out-your-own-side-at-cost. The higher bar is criticizing one's OWN party at political cost. Green's
record of confrontation is overwhelmingly directed at the opposing party and administration; little documented
evidence of him challenging his own caucus or leadership at cost to himself. Middle, no demonstrated own-side
accountability and no notable failure either.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 7 | why?Discretion test, using latitude well when no one compels it. Green accepted censure and physical removal as
the price of his protests rather than seeking cover; he owned the disruptions publicly as deliberate acts of
conscience over Medicaid and a racist depiction. That is consistent, non-evasive use of his discretion, even
where the form is contested. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 7 | why?Public/private consistency. No documented gap between an off-camera persona and the public one; Green's
combative, conviction-driven posture appears the same in committee, on the floor, and in interviews. No
documented hypocrisy pattern. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Constituent-over-self alignment. Green frames his protests explicitly around constituent need (Medicaid
recipients in his Houston district) and has long-serving district presence; standard constituent-service
operation. No documented donor-capture conduct. Middle-positive.
[source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 8 | why?Office-attributable enrichment ONLY (raw wealth is not scored). No documented self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue attributable to Green's office. The 2008 dispute
resolved with no money changing hands. The House Ethics matters on record did not find financial
self-enrichment. High, clean on the office-enrichment standard.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 5 | why?Institutional decorum, the measure most directly hit. Green was censured by the full House (224-198) for
disrupting the President's joint address and refusing the Speaker's repeated order to maintain decorum and be
seated, then was removed from the chamber a second consecutive year in 2026. Whatever the merit of the message, repeated disruption of a constitutional set-piece and defiance of the presiding officer's order is a genuine, documented decorum drag. Scored on conduct, not on the cause. Below middle.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 7 | why?Truthfulness conduct. No documented sustained pattern of knowing falsehood; Green's contested statements are
sharp characterizations and policy claims, not a record of fabricated facts. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substance over performance. Green serves on House Financial Services and has a long legislative record, but
his national profile is built heavily on symbolic protest rather than substantive legislative authorship or
deep policy command. Some real committee substance, weighed against a heavily performative public posture.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| M01 | Censured by the House (224-198, March 2025) for disrupting the President's joint address and refusing the Speaker's order to be seated; removed from the chamber again Feb 2026 ↳ procedural/decorum fidelity to chamber order rules | Protest/heckling, NOT process subversion, no Texas v. PA amicus, no attempt to overturn a certified result; impeachment use is the process working and is not penalized |
| M12 | Two consecutive years of removal from a presidential address to Congress for sign/outburst protests; full-House censure for the first ↳ institutional decorum / respect for the presiding officer and the chamber | Cause was non-violent and message-driven; weighed on conduct form, not on the message |
| M06 | 2008 dispute with former staffer Lucinda Daniels (assault allegation withdrawn, resolved without payment); 2021 protest arrest resolved by paid fine, Ethics matter closed ↳ fiduciary/character appearance-of-impropriety | Withdrawn/dismissed allegation is an appearance-concern, never a finding; the 2021 matter was minor civil disobedience |
| M07 | Confrontation directed overwhelmingly at the opposing party; little documented own-side call-out at cost ↳ active-duty call-out-your-own-side standard | No own-side failure of integrity documented either, this is absence of the higher mark, not a breach |
| M02 | Lower-middle Bipartisan Index posture; reliable partisan voting ↳ cross-aisle working conduct (not ideology) | Occasional bipartisan co-sponsorship; no refusal-to-govern pathology |
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: Conviction, Courage, Steadiness. Green accepts personal cost (censure, removal) for conscience-driven protest and does not evade ownership of his acts. Held below the top tier by the question of whether the chosen form serves the institution he swore to uphold. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Authenticity, Consistency, the public and private persona match, and the convictions are durable. Drag toward Temperance's opposite from the impulsive, repeated floor disruptions that drew formal sanction. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Protection (frames protest around Medicaid constituents and human dignity), no Exploitation. Drag from a confrontational influence style that models chamber-rule defiance, influence one would weigh carefully before propagating. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Moral conviction and a dignity-affirming signature moment, against a legacy weighted toward symbolic confrontation and two formal removals. Honest middle, real conviction, real decorum cost. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 25/40 |
Total 25/40, Adequate. The trust/conviction pillar holds highest; the decorum and institutional-form drags pull the integrity and influence pillars to honest middles.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“You do not have a mandate to cut Medicaid.”
Shouted during Trump's joint address to Congress; led to his censure · Texas Tribune · CONTESTED · cite
“Black People Aren't Apes”
Sign held during the 2026 State of the Union, responding to a video depicting the Obamas as apes; led to his removal · NBC News · CONTESTED · cite
“Congressman Alexander Green and Lucinda Daniels have both resolved and settled their respective disputes without payment, promise or receipt of any money.”
Joint statement resolving the 2008 dispute; allegations withdrawn · CBS News · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Alexander N. "Al" Green (born September 1, 1947). U.S. Representative for Texas's 9th congressional district 2005-2026, serving 11 terms. Member, House Committee on Financial Services. Attorney; co-founder of a Houston law firm and former justice of the peace in Harris County; past president of the Houston NAACP. Lost the May 2026 Democratic primary runoff for the redrawn 18th District to fellow Rep. Christian Menefee after his 9th District was redrawn; will leave Congress in January. Recently-departing member, in scope.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Reliable progressive Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee across two decades. Lower-middle Bipartisan Index posture; partisan DW-NOMINATE profile. Best known nationally for repeatedly forcing impeachment votes against President Trump (a constitutional-process use, recorded as process working, not as a conduct drag) and for two consecutive protest disruptions of presidential addresses that drew a full-House censure and two chamber removals. Policy positions are not scored in either direction.
3. Constitutional Moments
Used the constitutional impeachment process repeatedly, recorded as the process functioning, not penalized. The contested moments are conduct on the House floor: the March 2025 censure (224-198) for disrupting the joint address and refusing the Speaker's order, and the February 2026 removal during the State of the Union. These are weighed as decorum/process drags (M01, M12), explicitly distinguished from process subversion, Green did not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and made no effort to overturn a certified result.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Confrontational, theatrical, conviction-driven. The signature moments are protest acts, the cane-raising Medicaid shout, the "Black People Aren't Apes" sign. Message content targets policy and a specific racist depiction rather than the personhood of broad groups; the drag is decorum and disruption, not dehumanization or incitement. No documented sustained enemy-making pattern.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue on record. The 2008 Daniels dispute resolved with no money exchanged and the allegation withdrawn; the 2021 protest arrest closed with a paid fine. Both are weighed appearance-concerns, not findings. Clean on the office-enrichment standard.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. The floor disruptions are decorum breaches that drew formal censure, but they are non-violent protest and do not meet Criterion 8 (process subversion: no amicus signature, no effort to overturn a certified election) or Criterion 10 (sustained enemy-making/incitement: message-driven protest, not a pattern of casting citizens as enemies). Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
An honest middle. Green is a conviction politician who accepts personal cost for his protests and runs clean on the financial-fiduciary standard, with a dignity-affirming signature moment. Against that, the standard records real, documented decorum drags: a full-House censure and two consecutive removals from presidential addresses for disrupting the chamber and defying the presiding officer. Those are conduct breaches of institutional order, weighed on form, not on the cause, but they are protest, not process subversion or incitement, and carry no severity flag. The impeachment record and policy positions are deliberately not scored. Adequate band: real conviction, real institutional-form cost.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile + H.Res.189 · House Committee on Ethics
Tier 2: Texas Tribune, 2025 censure · NBC News, 2026 SOTU removal
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House Ethics, matter relating to Rep. Green · Voteview / DW-NOMINATE · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.