Composite 6.69 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 683, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No military service record. Career background is in public education, faith-and-community initiatives (Ohio Gov. Strickland administration), early-childhood education (Preschool Promise, StrivePartnership), and Cincinnati City Council. Scored on conduct only; no service component.
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 | 8 | why?Seated January 2023, could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and post-dates the 2020 certification dispute entirely. No documented process-subversion, fake-elector activity, or election-denial conduct; the record shows ordinary participation in constitutional process. High for a clean oath record, held below the apex tier reserved for a costly, demonstrated stand for the oath against one's own side when nothing compelled it, no such defining moment is yet on record for a member two terms in. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 8 | why?Top-quartile bipartisanship: ranked roughly 127th on the Lugar Center Bipartisan Index, and a dual member of the Problem Solvers Caucus and the New Democrat Coalition, both cross-aisle/centrist blocs. Sustained, documented willingness to co-sponsor across party lines rather than denying the other side a win. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?Rhetoric consistently frames opponents and adversaries as people of equal worth rather than enemies, 'blaming Israel or the Palestinians only perpetuates the awful status quo,' and repeated calls for self-determination on all sides. No documented anti-belonging instance. Upper-middle; no apex anchor of defending an opponent's dignity at personal cost before a hostile crowd. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 8 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals, no abuse-of-office pattern. No criterion-class conduct on record. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?General rhetorical restraint and a problem-solver public posture; no documented sustained inflammatory or enemy-making pattern. One partisan-opponent claim of a misleading campaign ad exists (NRCC) but is a contested adversary allegation, not an established falsehood. Net upper-middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 4 | why?Filed an August 2024 disclosure reporting 91 stock transactions (spouse and a joint trust) late, some dating to January 2023, a STOCK Act timeliness violation ($200-per-violation penalty class). Sharpened by the appearance concern that he had publicly branded himself a financial-ethics crusader and campaigned against congressional stock trading. Mitigated by self-reporting once discovered and by divesting the holdings in March 2025. A genuine fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety drag, late transparency, not a finding of corruption. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 6 | why?Has publicly challenged elements of his own party (criticizing Democratic critics of Israel and urging his caucus toward a stated position), a real instance of calling out one's own side. Held at the middle because the documented call-outs are within comfortable ideological territory rather than a costly stand against his own coalition's clear majority on a defining vote. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No documented abuse of discretion or preferential self-treatment. The STOCK Act lapse is weighed under M06/M11; absent a clean discretion anchor at cost, this rests at a solid middle. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented private-versus-public contempt gap; the bipartisan, problem-solver public posture is not contradicted by a documented off-camera record. Middle for absence of either strong corroboration or contradiction. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Centrist, district-fit voting in a competitive swing seat (OH-01) consistent with constituent preference rather than donor or caucus capture. The STOCK Act episode is a minor constituent-trust drag but not constituent-vs-donor capture. Solid middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 5 | why?Scored ONLY on office-attributable enrichment. The late-disclosed trades ($203K-$1.6M, spouse/joint trust) are a transparency/timeliness breach, not evidence of office-information trading or self-dealing, no finding of trading on official knowledge. Raw household holdings are not penalized. The middle reflects the appearance risk of holding individual equities (incl. defense/tobacco names) while serving, resolved by divestiture, not any proven office-driven enrichment. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Institutional-respect posture: emphasizes bipartisanship and regular cross-aisle process, no documented spectacle-over-institution conduct. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern. One opponent-sourced 'misleading ad' allegation (NRCC) is a contested partisan claim, not an established finding. The self-branding as an ethics reformer while late on his own disclosures is an honesty-of-presentation drag held at the middle. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substantive background (educator, Harvard Divinity, Cincinnati council reform work, Preschool Promise) and Energy & Commerce committee work including a Congressional Review Act resolution on AI prior-authorization. Competent substance over talking points; solid middle for a two-term member without a signature legislative command achievement yet. [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 |
|---|---|---|
| M06 | August 2024 STOCK Act filing reported 91 late stock transactions (spouse + joint trust), some dating to January 2023; valued $203,091-$1.645M ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety, late financial transparency | Self-reported once discovered; divested the holdings in March 2025; $200-per-violation penalty class, not a corruption finding |
| M11 | Held and traded individual equities (incl. defense contractors and a tobacco company) while serving, disclosed late ↳ appearance-risk of office-conflicted holdings | No evidence of trading on official information or office-driven enrichment; resolved by divestiture, disconnect/appearance only |
| M13 | Branded himself a financial-ethics crusader and campaigned against congressional stock trading while late on his own disclosures ↳ honesty-of-presentation drag (self-branding vs. conduct) | Corrected once discovered; the underlying trades were spouse/trust, not personally directed insider trades |
| M01 | Two-term member with no demonstrated apex-tier stand for the oath against his own side at personal cost ↳ absence of an apex oath anchor (not a fault, opportunity-limited) | Clean record; post-dates 2020; no process-subversion to penalize |
| Pillar IV | The ethics-crusader-vs-late-disclosure gap is a documented Integrity asterisk ↳ Integrity/Justice drag | Self-correction and divestiture temper it; no propagated harm |
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, Cross-aisle Loyalty to institution over faction, top-quartile bipartisanship and dual centrist-caucus membership evidence a coalition-building disposition. No documented drag toward Self-Interest in the constitutional sense; held below apex by the absence of a demonstrated costly stand. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Self-Reflection, corrected the STOCK Act lapse once discovered and divested. Held at the middle by the Consistency drag between the ethics-reformer brand and the late disclosures; the self-correction keeps it from falling further. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, Accountability, used office for substantive cross-aisle work (AI prior-authorization CRA, committee bills). No documented Exploitation; the financial-conflict appearance is the only meaningful drag, resolved by divestiture. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, measured rhetoric and a problem-solver posture build a constructive legacy; the ethics-crusader-vs-late-disclosure asterisk is a real Integrity drag that tempers without erasing a generally honorable two-term record. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 26/40 |
Total 26/40, Adequate. A genuinely bipartisan, measured-rhetoric record carrying one real fiduciary transparency blemish, self-corrected. Honest middle.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“Israel is at war with Hamas, but it is more awful and complicated than just that. Blaming Israel or the Palestinians only perpetuates the awful status quo that has led us to this war.”
Statement on the Israel-Hamas war · landsman.house.gov post · CIVIC · cite
“As soon as Greg learned of the transactions, he immediately reported them.”
Spokeswoman's response to the STOCK Act late-disclosure report · Washington Free Beacon · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
“Members of Congress are using insider information to get rich trading stocks. That's crazy.”
Reelection campaign ad, later contrasted with his own late stock-trade disclosures · Washington Free Beacon (reporting on the ad) · CONTESTED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Gregory John Landsman (born December 4, 1976). U.S. Representative for Ohio's 1st congressional district since January 3, 2023, defeating 13-term incumbent Steve Chabot in 2022. Democrat. Born and raised in Cincinnati to a Jewish family; B.A. economics/political science, Ohio University (1999); M.A. theological studies, Harvard Divinity School (2004). Former public high-school teacher; director of faith-based and community initiatives under Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland; led Preschool Promise and StrivePartnership. Cincinnati City Council 2018-2022. Member, House Energy & Commerce Committee.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar Center / McCourt Bipartisan Index: top-quartile (~127th in the House). Dual member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus and the New Democrat Coalition. Energy & Commerce Committee, Subcommittees on Health, Communications & Technology, and Environment. Leading (with Rep. Suzan DelBene) a Congressional Review Act resolution to end use of an AI model for Medicare prior-authorization decisions. Voteview ICPSR 22338. Two-term member representing a competitive swing district (OH-01).
3. Constitutional Moments
Seated January 2023, post-dates the 2020 election-certification dispute and the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus entirely; could not have signed it and is not a signatory. No documented process-subversion, fake-elector, or election-denial conduct. The record reflects ordinary participation in constitutional process.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Measured, problem-solver public posture. On the most polarizing issue of his tenure, the Israel-Hamas war, he explicitly rejected enemy-framing ('blaming Israel or the Palestinians only perpetuates the awful status quo') and called for self-determination on all sides. He has also publicly pressed his own party. No documented sustained inflammatory or enemy-making pattern. One opponent-sourced (NRCC) 'misleading ad' allegation exists as a contested partisan claim, not an established finding.
5. Fiduciary Profile
The central fiduciary concern is an August 2024 STOCK Act late-disclosure filing covering 91 stock transactions from his spouse and a joint trust, some dating to January 2023, valued $203,091-$1.645M. Sharpened by the appearance concern that he had publicly branded himself a financial-ethics crusader and run a campaign ad against congressional stock trading. Mitigated by self-reporting once discovered and by divesting the holdings in March 2025. A genuine transparency/appearance-of-impropriety drag, late filing, not a finding of insider trading or office-driven enrichment.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Seated 2023, so no possibility of the Criterion-8 process-subversion conduct (no Texas v. PA signature, no 2020-certification dispute). No documented Criterion-10 enemy-making or incitement pattern; rhetoric is the inverse. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
An honest Adequate. Landsman's bipartisan record is real and well-documented, top-quartile on the Lugar Index, dual centrist-caucus membership, measured rhetoric that refuses enemy-framing even on the hardest issues. He carries one genuine blemish the standard counts: a STOCK Act late-disclosure of nearly a hundred spouse/trust trades, made sharper by his own ethics-crusader branding, and resolved by self-correction and divestiture rather than sanction. No process-subversion is possible on the timeline, and none is alleged. A generally honorable two-term record with a real transparency asterisk, not yet earning the apex tier, well clear of the floor.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · U.S. House Financial Disclosures / STOCK Act filings
Tier 2: Lugar Center Bipartisan Index · Washington Free Beacon, STOCK Act reporting
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Voteview / DW-NOMINATE · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.