Composite 4.27 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Support is foreclosed by a confirmed capping severity flag (sustained enemy-making), independent of the composite. At credit 489 (Failing band) the record does not clear the support line on conduct.
Documented pattern (not one heated line, not policy heat) of casting fellow citizens and a colleague as persons who do not belong: on an April 2025 podcast she called Black Rep. Al Green "boy," baselessly claimed his disability cane is "a prop" concealing a weapon, and called LGBTQ people "fairies"; in February 2026 she prayed that "ungodly" persons be removed from "places of authority." This is sustained enemy-making/othering directed at people by category. It does not rise to incitement of violence, but it meets the criterion-10 pattern standard and caps the record (forecloses support).
Evidence: WBIR, Harshbarger responds to backlash over 'boy'/'fairies' remarks · WJHL, Harshbarger criticized for comments about Black congressman, trans people
A capping flag forecloses an Author's Verdict of "supported" regardless of the composite; a terminal flag suspends the number entirely. Conduct is weighed on documented evidence, applied symmetrically. How flags work →
- No military service on record
No military or uniformed service on record. Career background is as a licensed pharmacist and pharmacy business owner in northeast Tennessee prior to election. Noted for context only; 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 | 6 | why?Seated January 2021, so could NOT have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (verified against timing, she was not yet a member). On Jan 6 2021 she voted to sustain the objections to Arizona and Pennsylvania electors; a bare floor objection alone is treated here as the constitutional process operating, NOT as criterion-8 process subversion, and is not contamination-scored against her oath fidelity. No documented attempt to defeat certification by extra-procedural means. Held at the middle: no affirmative subversion, but also no affirmative defense of the institution at cost. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 5 | why?Below-historical-average Bipartisan Index (negative scores across the 117th and 118th). Caucus/party alignment is NOT scored as conduct in either direction; what is scored is the conduct of governing-over-winning, and the record shows little affirmative cross-aisle institution-building. Middle, leaning neutral, a partisan record is not a character finding by itself. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 3 | why?On an April 2025 podcast she called a Black colleague (Rep. Al Green) 'boy,' baselessly claimed his mobility cane is 'a prop' that might conceal a weapon, and referred to LGBTQ people as 'fairies.' These are documented anti-belonging instances directed at colleagues and citizens by category, the direct opposite of treating persons as of equal worth. Low. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 6 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals; no criterion-8 process-subversion conduct (she was not seated in time to sign the Dec 2020 amicus, and a Jan-6 floor objection alone does not qualify). Middle, absence of abuse, not affirmative restraint of power. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 3 | why?Documented degrading rhetoric: racial-coded address of a colleague, a slur for LGBTQ citizens, and a February 2026 prayer that 'ungodly' persons be removed from 'places of authority.' This is dehumanizing speech, not policy heat. Low. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 4 | why?Failed to timely disclose 700+ stock trades (worth up to ~$10.9M) within the STOCK Act's 45-day window; Campaign Legal Center filed an OCE complaint. A genuine fiduciary appearance-concern (an uncharged/unresolved complaint, weighed as appearance, not a finding); her office attributed it to a financial advisor's error, partial mitigation, but the duty is non-delegable. Below middle. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 3 | why?The active-duty standard is calling out one's OWN side at cost. No documented instance of breaking with her party at personal cost on a matter of principle. Low, the harder duty is unmet on the record. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 5 | why?No notable documented evidence on the discretion test in either direction, no record of declining preferential treatment, nor of seeking it. Neutral middle for lack of dispositive evidence. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 5 | why?The podcast revealed contempt off the House floor, but it is consistent with, not a hidden gap from, her public posture, and after backlash she reposted a clip rather than concealing it. No documented private/public hypocrisy gap. Middle. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 3 | why?Documented pattern of casting fellow citizens and a colleague as people who do not belong, racial-coded mockery of a disabled colleague, an LGBTQ slur, and a prayer to remove 'ungodly' persons from authority. This is enemy-making conduct (see criterion-10 severity flag), driving the measure to the floor. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 3 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable concerns, not raw wealth. The relevant fact is office-information-trading appearance: 700+ undisclosed trades (up to ~$10.9M) in companies, some seeking federal contracts or lobbying, held outside the STOCK Act window during her first months in office. Weighed as an appearance-concern (OCE complaint unresolved), not a conviction. Low. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 4 | why?Public mockery of a colleague by racial-coded address and a baseless weapon insinuation degrades the decorum the office owes the institution. Below middle. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 4 | why?The baseless 'his cane is a prop / might hide a weapon' claim about a colleague is a documented falsehood, alongside endorsement of unsubstantiated election-irregularity framing in the Jan 2021 objection statement. Below middle, not a sustained career-long falsehood machine, but real documented instances. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?A licensed pharmacist who brings genuine domain substance to pharmacy-benefit-manager and healthcare legislation (PBM Act, drug-pricing work). Substance is present in her lane; held at upper-middle, not higher, given a narrow legislative footprint. [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 |
|---|---|---|
| M03 | April 2025 FAME Ministries podcast: called Black colleague Rep. Al Green 'boy,' claimed his mobility cane is 'a prop' that might conceal a weapon, and called LGBTQ people 'fairies' ↳ Persons of Equal Worth, anti-belonging by category | Framed as 'love them into the love of Christ'; does not erase the slurs |
| M10 | Documented pattern of othering colleagues/citizens (April 2025 slurs + Feb 2026 prayer to remove 'ungodly' persons from authority) ↳ Enemy-making, casting persons as not belonging | No incitement to violence or directed confrontation; capped at pattern-level, not the most severe tier |
| M11 | 700+ stock trades (up to ~$10.9M) not disclosed within the STOCK Act window in her first months in office; some firms sought federal contracts/lobbying ↳ Office-information-trading appearance-concern | Attributed to a financial advisor's error; OCE complaint unresolved, weighed as appearance, not a finding |
| M06 | STOCK Act disclosure failures; CLC filed OCE complaint Aug 2021 ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | Non-delegable duty; advisor-error explanation is partial only |
| M07 | No documented instance of calling out her own side at personal cost ↳ Unmet active-call-out duty | - |
| M05 | Degrading public rhetoric toward a colleague and LGBTQ citizens ↳ Rhetorical restraint failure | - |
| Pillar II | The 2025 podcast is a break from the dignity-of-persons standard (Authenticity present but Temperance/Self-Reflection absent, reposted the clip rather than retracting) ↳ Temperance/Self-Reflection drag | - |
| Pillar III | STOCK Act disclosure lapse on federally-interested firms (Stewardship) + power-posture rhetoric toward fellow citizens (Protection inverted) ↳ Stewardship/Protection drag | - |
| Pillar IV | Slurs as influence one would not want propagated (Justice/Love of Truth) + the cane-weapon falsehood (Integrity) ↳ Integrity/Justice drag | - |
Partisan gamesmanship, identified & set aside
A fixed standard has to refuse the partisan narrative as much as it refuses the partisan defense. These are the loud public accusations the standard did not count, debunked, overstated, unadjudicated, or simply policy rather than conduct, named openly so the score rests only on what is actually established. The same discipline is applied to every record, on every side.
| Accusation | Verdict | Why it's set aside |
|---|---|---|
| Diana Harshbarger was complicit in the AIMS pharmaceutical fraud, selling mislabeled Chinese drugs to dialysis patients, that sent her husband to federal prison. | unproven legal conclusion | Her husband Robert Harshbarger pleaded guilty in 2013 (48 months prison, ~$848K restitution, $425K forfeiture). Diana was NEVER charged, indicted, or named as a defendant in the criminal case. The criminal liability is her husband's, not hers. Corporate records do show she was listed as an officer/shareholder of AIMS, which legitimately contradicts her campaign's flat 'no role or involvement' claim (that misrepresentation is fair game), but the leap from 'listed as an officer' to 'criminally complicit in the fraud' is an unproven legal conclusion no prosecutor ever pursued. Set aside the imputed criminality; the disputed 'no role' statement itself is separate. |
| Harshbarger illegally colluded with her son Bobby's state-senate campaign and a dark-money PAC (East Tennessee Conservatives) through a shared treasurer, violating campaign-finance law. | dismissed allegation | The complaint was filed by state Sen. Ken Yager, an ally of Bobby's primary opponent Jon Lundberg, in a contested 2024 GOP primary. It centered on Bobby's race and treasurer Thomas Datwyler, with Diana implicated only via the shared treasurer. Referred to TN AG Jonathan Skrmetti, the investigation could form no concrete finding (Datwyler refused to be interviewed), and the TN Registry of Election Finance dismissed the matter in spring 2025 at Yager's own request. No adjudicated violation against Diana Harshbarger. (Tennessee Lookout, WJHL, 2024-2025.) |
| The Harshbargers were caught engaging in dirty campaign tactics by stealing/removing an opponent's yard signs. | dismissed allegation | This concerns her husband Bob Harshbarger, not the officeholder: he received a summons July 30, 2024 for removing Sen. Lundberg's signs. All charges were dismissed on Aug. 29, 2024 (WJHL, 'Campaign sign case against Bob Harshbarger dismissed'). It is both not the officeholder's own conduct and a dismissed, never-adjudicated charge, it cannot count against a fixed conduct standard for Diana Harshbarger. |
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
| 4 | why?Attributes: Courage, Selfless Service, Steadiness, Loyalty. Reliable to her party but no documented instance of courage at personal cost against her own side (M07). The Jan-6 objection is treated as constitutional process, not subversion, and is not held against this pillar. Below middle for the absence of demonstrated selfless-service-over-faction. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 4 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Self-Reflection, Teachability. Authenticity is present, but Self-Reflection/Teachability are absent in the 2025 episode, she reposted a clip rather than retracting. The STOCK Act lapse adds an integrity drag. Below middle. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 3 | why?Attributes: Protection, Courage in Conflict, Stewardship, Accountability. Influence used to demean fellow citizens (the inverse of Protection) and a stewardship lapse on federally-interested holdings. Low. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 3 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Moral Courage, Justice, Love of Truth. The slurs and the baseless cane-weapon claim are influence one would not want a child to model; Justice and Love of Truth are the dominant drags. Low. |
| TOTAL: Unfit | 14/40 |
Total 14/40, Weak. The pillars hold low because the strongest documented conduct on record (the 2025 dehumanizing rhetoric, the disclosure lapse) cuts against the character attributes the pillars measure, and the affirmative-courage attributes are unmet on the record.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“Gosh dang it, boy, put that… He does not need that cane. That cane is a prop.”
FAME Ministries podcast, referring to Rep. Al Green (D-TX), who uses a cane for stability · WBIR / WJHL reporting · CONTESTED · cite
“I've never saw so many fairies in the White House dancing around… my job is to love them into the love of Christ, and I've got to watch what I say.”
Same podcast, referring to LGBTQ people · WJHL reporting · CONTESTED · cite
“I rise today to object to the certification of the Electoral College votes from states that failed to count all legal ballots.”
Floor objection to electoral certification (constitutional-process objection, scored as process not subversion) · Harshbarger House office statement · CONTESTED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Diana Lynn Harshbarger (born January 1, 1958). U.S. Representative for Tennessee's 1st Congressional District since January 2021 (R-TN1). A licensed pharmacist who owned and operated a pharmacy business in northeast Tennessee before election; first elected in 2020, running for re-election in the August 6, 2026 Republican primary. No prior elected office; no military service.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Below-historical-average Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index across the 117th–118th Congresses. Legislative focus concentrated in healthcare and pharmacy policy, leveraging her pharmacist background, e.g., the PBM Act (H.R.8779, 2026) targeting pharmacy-benefit managers, and drug-pricing measures. A narrow but domain-credible footprint. Party-line voting record; policy positions (Ukraine aid, Fiscal Responsibility Act, Medicaid drug coverage) are NOT scored here in either direction.
3. Constitutional Moments
January 6, 2021: as a freshly-seated member she voted to sustain the objections to Arizona's and Pennsylvania's electors. Under this framework a bare floor objection is the constitutional process operating and is NOT criterion-8 process subversion; she was seated in January 2021 and therefore could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (verified against the timing). No documented extra-procedural attempt to defeat certification.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
The defining documented rhetoric is degrading rather than restrained. On an April 2025 FAME Ministries podcast she addressed Black colleague Rep. Al Green as "boy," asserted his mobility cane is "a prop" that might conceal a weapon (a baseless claim), and called LGBTQ people "fairies." In February 2026 she prayed that "ungodly" persons be removed from "places of authority." Taken together these form a documented pattern of othering, captured in the criterion-10 severity flag.
5. Fiduciary Profile
In 2021 she failed to disclose more than 700 stock trades, worth between roughly $728,000 and $10.9M, involving her and her husband, within the STOCK Act's 45-day window; some involved companies that seek federal contracts or lobby. The Campaign Legal Center filed a complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics in August 2021. Her office attributed the failure to a financial advisor's error. Weighed here as an unresolved appearance-concern (office-information-trading appearance), not a finding or conviction.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
One capping severity flag under criterion 10 (sustained enemy-making / othering of citizens and a colleague by category, the April 2025 podcast slurs plus the February 2026 "remove the ungodly from authority" remark). No criterion-8 process-subversion flag: she was not seated in time to sign the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and a bare Jan-6 floor objection does not qualify. The STOCK Act matter is an unresolved appearance-concern, not a severity flag. Flag count: one (capping).
7. What The Framework Says
The record is capped by a documented criterion-10 pattern: public, categorical degradation of a colleague and of citizens, the "boy" remark and baseless cane-as-weapon claim aimed at a disabled Black colleague, the "fairies" slur, and the prayer to strip "ungodly" persons of authority. That pattern forecloses support regardless of the composite. Independently, the STOCK Act disclosure failure on federally-interested holdings and the absence of any documented courage against her own side weigh the record down. Her genuine pharmacy-domain substance is real but does not offset conduct that runs against the dignity-of-persons core of the oath. Does not clear the bar.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · GovTrack Jan 6 2021 House Vote #10 · Office of Congressional Ethics complaint (via CLC)
Tier 2: WBIR, 'boy'/'fairies' remarks · WJHL, comments about Black congressman, trans people · Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Campaign Legal Center, OCE complaint · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.