Composite 6.81 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 691, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No military service on record. Harder worked in venture capital and as an educator before Congress; service to country is honored as context where present and is not scored as a badge. No service record means no service-derived conduct to score under M08 or Pillar I.
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 process-subversion conduct. Seated January 2019 (CA-10), so could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and is not on its 126-signatory list. A Democrat outside the fake-electors / election-overturning conduct entirely. The imported raw 0 was contamination (impeachment-process / partisan-alignment artifact) and is corrected. Held at upper-middle rather than apex: solid oath-fidelity with no documented affirmative high-cost constitutional stand of the McCain class. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?Member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus and co-founder of the bipartisan Build America Caucus (2025). Bipartisan Index places him in the working-across-the-aisle tier (mid-pack of a heavily polarized chamber). Country/institution placed over reflexively denying the other side a win. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented anti-belonging pattern, no instances of casting constituents or opponents as enemies who do not belong. Holds at upper-middle on absence of documented violations rather than a singular high-mark belonging anchor. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals; no criterion-class process-subversion conduct. Clean on power-restraint. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Conventional partisan campaign rhetoric within normal range; no documented sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern, but also no standout record of de-escalating rhetorical restraint. Honest middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 7 | why?No adjudicated ethics finding or sanction on record. Periodic Transaction Reports are tracked by third parties; no documented STOCK Act enforcement action or finding against him. Absence of self-accountability anchor keeps it at upper-middle rather than higher. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 6 | why?Bipartisan-caucus participation shows willingness to work across the aisle, but no documented high-cost instance of calling out his OWN side at personal political cost (the active-duty standard). Mid-range. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No documented instance of declining preferential treatment at personal cost, nor any documented abuse of position for personal advantage. Neutral-middle on the discretion test. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented private/public contempt gap; emphasis on town-hall accessibility is consistent with public posture. Held at middle absent deeper off-record evidence either way. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 7 | why?Central Valley constituent-focused record (housing, water, infrastructure via Appropriations and Build America Caucus). Reasonable alignment with district interests; no documented donor-capture pattern. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 8 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment. No documented self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. Personal stock trading is disclosed and tracked but carries no finding of office-info abuse, a minor appearance note, not a breach. Raw wealth and personal portfolios are explicitly excluded from this measure. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?No documented institutional-decorum breaches; regular-order committee work on Appropriations. Honors the office over spectacle at a normal-professional level. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No documented sustained-falsehood pattern; ordinary political framing within normal range. Held at middle absent a standout truth-telling anchor. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Substantive command of district-relevant policy (water, agriculture, housing, infrastructure) backed by an Appropriations seat. Substance over talking points at an above-average level. [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 | No documented affirmative high-cost constitutional stand of the apex class ↳ absence of a defining oath-at-cost anchor | Clean of any process-subversion conduct; not an amicus signatory; corrected from contaminated raw 0 |
| M05 | Conventional partisan campaign rhetoric with no standout de-escalation record ↳ rhetoric, neutral, no high-mark restraint anchor | No documented enemy-making or incitement pattern |
| M07 | No documented high-cost call-out of his own side ↳ active-duty self-policing standard unmet at cost | Bipartisan-caucus participation shows cross-aisle willingness |
| M11 | Discloses active personal stock trading tracked by third-party watchers ↳ appearance note on personal trades | No finding of office-info abuse, self-dealing, or family/foreign-gov revenue; raw wealth excluded from measure |
| M13 | No standout documented truth-telling anchor ↳ neutral on the falsehood-pattern axis | No documented sustained-falsehood pattern either |
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, bipartisan-caucus participation and regular-order committee work show institutional fidelity. Held at 7 by the absence of a documented high-cost loyalty-to-oath test of the extraordinary class; no drag toward Self-Interest or Collapse on record. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 7 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, consistent district-focused conviction with no documented integrity break. Held below higher by the absence of a documented self-correction or owned-failure anchor; the personal-trading appearance note is a minor drag toward Stewardship's opposite. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability via town-hall accessibility and Appropriations constituent work. No documented Exploitation; no criterion-class abuse. Mid-upper. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, public-service orientation, a still-forming mid-career record. Held at 6 because the legacy is early and lacks a defining virtue anchor; no documented drags toward Favoritism/Ego of consequence. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 27/40 |
Total 27/40, Adequate-to-Sound. A clean, professional, bipartisan-leaning record without the extraordinary sacrifice or defining constitutional-stand anchors that lift a record into the top tier. No documented drags of consequence.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“I'm proud to be part of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, because the people of the Central Valley care a lot more about getting things done than about which party gets the credit.”
On bipartisan caucus work and the Build America Caucus · harder.house.gov, Bipartisanship issue page · CIVIC · cite
“Town halls are how I hear directly from the community, every person in the Central Valley deserves real representation.”
On town-hall accessibility standard · harder.house.gov, Town Halls · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Joshua Keck Harder (born August 1, 1986). U.S. Representative for California's 9th congressional district since January 2023; previously represented California's 10th district from January 2019 to January 2023 (the seat redistricting renumbered, not a chamber change). Democrat. Member of the House Appropriations Committee, the first Democrat from the Central Valley on that committee in roughly 50 years. Member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus and co-founder of the bipartisan Build America Caucus (2025). Background in venture capital and education before Congress.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index places Harder in the cross-aisle working tier (mid-pack of a polarized House). Member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus; co-founded the bipartisan Build America Caucus in 2025 focused on housing and infrastructure. Appropriations Committee seat anchors a district-service record on Central Valley water, agriculture, housing, and infrastructure. Policy positions are NOT scored here in either direction per the framework's refusal to grade contested policy.
3. Constitutional Moments
No documented process-subversion or election-overturning conduct. Seated January 2019, Harder was not eligible to and did not sign the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus; he is not on its 126-signatory list. No criterion-8 (process subversion) or criterion-10 (enemy-making/incitement) conduct is documented. No defining affirmative high-cost constitutional stand of the apex class is on record either, a clean middle on this axis.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Conventional partisan campaign and floor rhetoric within normal range. No documented sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (criterion 10 not triggered), and no standout record of rhetorical de-escalation or restraint that would lift the measures. Honest middle on the rhetoric axis.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No adjudicated ethics finding or sanction on record. Harder discloses active personal stock trading that is tracked by third-party watchers; there is no documented STOCK Act enforcement action, no finding of trading on office information, no self-dealing, no family payments, and no foreign-government revenue. M11 scores only office-attributable enrichment, of which none is documented; the personal-trading visibility is weighed as a minor appearance note, not a breach. Raw wealth is excluded from the measure.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Not a Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory (seated January 2019, ineligible); no fake-electors, no election-overturning conduct, no documented enemy-making/incitement pattern. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
Harder is a clean, professional, bipartisan-leaning mid-career record. The imported raw M01 of 0 was contamination, there is no documented process-subversion conduct, and as a Democrat seated in January 2019 he could not have signed the December 2020 amicus and is not on its signatory list, so M01 is corrected to an honest upper-middle. What the record lacks is the extraordinary sacrifice or defining constitutional-stand anchor that lifts a record into the top tier; what it also lacks is any documented drag of consequence. Adequate to Sound, earned on absence of violations and genuine cross-aisle work rather than on a singular high mark.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Clerk financial disclosures
Tier 2: Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia · GovTrack
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · House office site · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · House financial disclosures (Clerk) · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.