DOCUMENT: CLS-REBUILD · CLASSIFICATION: PUBLIC METHODOLOGY: SYMMETRIC · STATUS: ACTIVE

← Roster

629
Adequate
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
25/40
Moderate
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 6.05 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.

Falls in the Adequate band, short of the support bar. The bipartisan-cooperation record is genuinely strong and weighs in her favor, but the fiduciary-appearance cluster, the recurring STOCK Act late-filing pattern and the 2020 SBA letter whose rule-change outcome benefited a household business, holds the composite below the line. Both concerns are uncharged and contested, weighed as documented appearances rather than proven breaches; that honest weighting is exactly why the record lands at Adequate and not lower. No capping conduct. Support: not cleared.

★ Service to Country

No military or uniformed service on record. Pre-congressional career in Nevada education nonprofits (founder/leader of Communities In Schools of Nevada and related education-philanthropy work). Listed for completeness; no service element is scored.

The 14 measures

Each measure is scored 0–10 against an anchored example, with a cited source. Hover/expand why? for the reasoning.

#MeasureScoreWhy
M01 Duty to Constitution & Rule of Law 6
why?
No documented subversion of a constitutional process. As a Democrat seated since 2019 she voted to certify the 2020 election and is not on the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory list (a Republican filing), that conduct is correctly NOT scored against her, and certification votes themselves are the constitutional process working and are never penalized. Held at an honest middle rather than higher because the affirmative record is ordinary institutional participation, not a documented stand for the oath at personal cost. [source]
M02 Party Over Country 8
why?
A genuine top-tier bipartisan record: ranked among the ten most bipartisan House members (7th in the 118th Congress, 10th in the 117th) on the Lugar–McCourt Index, which measures cross-party bill sponsorship and co-sponsorship, behavioral, not rhetorical. Country-and-institution-over-tribe is the attribute scored, and the documented pattern is strong. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 7
why?
No documented pattern of anti-belonging rhetoric or casting opponents/citizens as enemies who do not belong. The cross-party working posture (M02) cuts the other way. Upper-middle: clean on this axis with no extraordinary affirmative defense-of-an-opponent anchor on record to push higher. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 6
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against rivals or critics. The fiduciary concern that exists (the SBA/PPP letter benefiting a family business) is scored under M06/M11 as a self-dealing appearance, not as abuse of state power against an adversary. Honest middle, no criterion-class conduct. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 7
why?
Restrained public rhetoric consistent with a member who tops bipartisan indices; no documented sustained incendiary or dehumanizing pattern. Upper-middle, clean, without a standout high-mark moment. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 4
why?
Two distinct fiduciary appearance-concerns, weighed as appearances and not findings. First: roughly 200 stock trades (between $267K and $3.3M) filed late under the STOCK Act across 2020-2021, a Campaign Legal Center ethics counsel said they did not appear to be intentional concealment, but treating the deadline "as a suggestion, not the law" is a real diligence lapse. Second, and heavier: an April 7, 2020 letter to SBA/Treasury urging that gaming small businesses be made PPP-eligible; SBA changed the criteria weeks later and her husband's company (Full House Resorts, where the household held stock and options) received $5.6M in loans. A FACT complaint sought an OCE investigation; no formal finding, sanction, or charge resulted, and her office says she had no role in the company's loan decision. Uncharged and contested, so weighed as a documented appearance-of-self-dealing drag, not as a proven breach. The two together pull the fiduciary measure below the midline. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 5
why?
The active-duty standard here is calling out one's own side at cost. The bipartisan record shows cross-party cooperation, but there is no documented instance of publicly confronting her own party or leadership on principle at personal cost. Honest middle: cooperative, but no recorded own-side call-out. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 5
why?
The discretion test asks whether private power is used for self over duty. The SBA/PPP episode is the one place the record bears on this: legal-on-its-face constituent advocacy that also benefited a household business, a contested appearance, not a proven choice of self over duty. No clean high-mark example of refusing a personal benefit either. Honest middle, with the appearance weighed. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 6
why?
No documented private-versus-public contempt gap; the off-camera reputation is not the subject of any sourced concern. Middle-default in the absence of either a documented hypocrisy or a standout consistency anchor. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 6
why?
Sustained district-service posture (federal funding for Nevada, Appropriations seat) reflects genuine constituent representation. Tempered by the recurring perception, fair or not, that some financial conduct served household over constituent interests. Net honest middle. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 4
why?
This measure scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment, not raw household wealth. The household's Full House Resorts holdings and her husband's CEO compensation are NOT penalized as private wealth. What is weighed is the office-attributable appearance: an official April 2020 letter to SBA/Treasury that preceded a rule change making her husband's gaming company eligible for $5.6M in PPP loans, and the separate cluster of late-filed STOCK Act trades (including reported committee-adjacent timing concerns on defense-sector stock). All of it is uncharged and contested, no OCE finding, no sanction, so it is weighed as a documented appearance of office-linked self-dealing, not as a proven breach. Below the midline on that appearance. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 6
why?
Ordinary institutional decorum; no documented spectacle-over-institution conduct, and the bipartisan working posture supports regular-order behavior. Honest middle without a standout institutional-fidelity anchor. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 6
why?
No documented sustained-falsehood pattern. The one truthfulness asterisk is the 2020 announcement of "ending her marriage" amid the ethics scrutiny, with the divorce reportedly not finalized for more than three years afterward, a contested framing concern, not an established lie, and noted as a light drag rather than a finding. Honest middle. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 6
why?
Substantive Appropriations-committee work (including Military Construction/VA) shows working command of the spending process rather than talking-point posture. Honest middle, competent and engaged, without a signature substantive achievement that pushes to the top tier. [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.

WhereDocumented conductMitigation weighed
M06 April 7, 2020 letter to SBA/Treasury urging PPP eligibility for gaming small businesses; SBA changed criteria weeks later and husband's company Full House Resorts received $5.6M in loans; FACT filed an OCE complaint
↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-self-dealing
Uncharged and contested, no OCE finding, sanction, or charge; her office says she had no role in the company's loan decision; weighed as appearance, not breach
M06 ~200 stock trades worth $267K-$3.3M filed late under the STOCK Act across 2020-2021
↳ Fiduciary diligence lapse
Campaign Legal Center counsel said it did not appear to be intentional concealment; late, not undisclosed
M11 Office-attributable appearance: official SBA letter preceding a rule change that benefited a household business; STOCK Act timing concerns on defense-sector stock while on the relevant Appropriations subcommittee
↳ Office-linked self-dealing appearance (NOT raw wealth, which is not penalized)
All uncharged/contested; no formal finding; raw household wealth and spousal compensation explicitly excluded from the score
M13 2020 'ending her marriage' announcement amid ethics scrutiny, with divorce reportedly not finalized for 3+ years
↳ Truthfulness/framing concern
Contested framing, not an established falsehood; light drag only
Pillar III The SBA/PPP appearance and late-filing pattern bear on Stewardship and Accountability of the public trust
↳ Stewardship/Accountability drag
No proven breach; strong constituent-service record offsets in part
Pillar IV The recurring ethics-appearance cloud is an asterisk on the legacy (Integrity)
↳ Integrity drag
Top-tier bipartisan legacy and no criterion-class conduct keep the drag modest

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.

#PillarScoreWhy
I Trust & Loyalty
  • Would I follow them into uncertainty or adversity?
  • Would I trust them with my life or reputation?
  • Would I trust them to lead others honorably when the stakes are high?
7
why?
Attributes: Reliability, Cooperation, Steadiness. The top-tier bipartisan record evidences genuine cross-tribe trust-building and institutional cooperation. No documented disloyalty to the constitutional order; held below the apex by the absence of any own-side-call-out-at-cost moment.
II Aspiration & Integrity
  • Do I admire their values and how they live them?
  • Do they reflect the kind of person I hope to become?
  • Do I feel challenged to be better because of their example?
6
why?
Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Self-Reflection. Consistent constituent-service conviction, but the ethics-appearance cluster (SBA/PPP, late filings) and the contested marriage-announcement framing pull integrity to an honest middle. No proven breach, but the appearances are real and weighed.
III Protection & Influence
  • Would I trust this person to protect what I love most?
  • Would I trust them to influence someone I care deeply about?
  • Would those under their authority be safer and better for it?
6
why?
Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability, Protection. Real district protection via Appropriations work, dragged by the office-linked self-dealing appearance that is the central concern in this record. No exploitation proven; the appearance keeps it mid.
IV Legacy & Virtue
  • Would I be proud if my child grew up to be like them?
  • Do they embody the virtues I want carried into the future?
  • If their influence continued in others, would the world be better or worse?
6
why?
Attributes: Integrity, Justice, Service. A durable bipartisan-builder legacy with a recurring ethics-appearance asterisk. No criterion-class conduct; the drags temper rather than define.
TOTAL: Moderate 25/40

Total 25/40, Adequate. The bipartisan-cooperation pillar is the strongest; the fiduciary-appearance cluster holds the integrity and protection pillars at honest middles. No capping conduct.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“I was doing my job.”

Responding to whether her SBA/PPP advocacy benefited her husband's gaming company · The Nevada Independent · CONTESTED · cite

“For the SBA to take the position that these small businesses are not eligible for needed aid because of their involvement in the gaming industry belies the economic realities of their location.”

Letter to SBA/Treasury urging PPP eligibility for gaming small businesses · Rep. Lee press release / SBA letter · CONTESTED · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Suzanne Marie "Susie" Lee (née Kelley; born November 7, 1966). U.S. Representative for Nevada's 3rd Congressional District (southern Las Vegas and much of unincorporated Clark County) since January 3, 2019; member of the House Appropriations Committee. A Democrat, she came to Congress from a career in Nevada education philanthropy. Running for re-election in 2026.

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

Ranked among the ten most bipartisan members of the U.S. House on the Lugar Center–McCourt School Bipartisan Index (7th in the 118th Congress, 10th in the 117th), a behavioral cross-party sponsorship/co-sponsorship measure, scored as conduct (M02), not policy. Serves on Appropriations, including the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies subcommittee. Policy positions are not graded in either direction per the framework.

3. Constitutional Moments

As a Democrat seated since 2019, she participated in the 2020 election certification (the constitutional process working) and is not among the 126 House signatories of the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, that conduct is correctly not charged to her, and no Criterion-8 process-subversion concern exists in the record. No documented Criterion-10 enemy-making pattern.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

Restrained public rhetoric consistent with a member who tops bipartisan indices. No documented sustained incendiary or dehumanizing pattern. The notable rhetorical asterisk is non-policy: the 2020 "ending her marriage" announcement amid ethics scrutiny, with the divorce reportedly not finalized for more than three years, weighed as a contested framing concern under M13, not as an established falsehood.

5. Fiduciary Profile

The central concern in this record. Two appearance-of-impropriety clusters, both uncharged and contested: (1) roughly 200 STOCK Act trades worth $267K-$3.3M filed late across 2020-2021, described by a nonpartisan ethics counsel as not appearing to be intentional concealment, but a real diligence lapse; and (2) an April 7, 2020 letter to SBA/Treasury urging PPP eligibility for gaming small businesses, after which SBA changed its criteria and her husband's company, Full House Resorts, received $5.6M in loans. The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust filed an OCE complaint; no formal finding, sanction, or charge resulted, and her office maintains she had no role in the company's loan decision. Office-attributable wealth APPEARANCE is weighed under M11; raw household wealth and spousal compensation are explicitly NOT penalized.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No Criterion-8 process subversion (Democrat, certified the 2020 election, not an amicus signatory). No Criterion-10 sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern. The fiduciary appearance-concerns are weighed as appearances, not findings, and do not rise to criterion-class severity. Flag count: zero.

7. What The Framework Says

Susie Lee presents a split record under the fixed conduct standard. The strength is real and behavioral: one of the most bipartisan members of the House, with no documented anti-belonging rhetoric, no process subversion, and no enemy-making pattern. The drag is also real and centers on fiduciary appearance: a recurring STOCK Act late-filing pattern and an official 2020 SBA letter whose rule-change outcome benefited a household business, both uncharged and contested, and so weighed as documented appearances rather than proven breaches. The standard records both honestly. The cooperation record lifts the composite toward the middle; the office-linked self-dealing appearance holds it short of the support bar. Adequate, not Sound.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile / voting record · Lugar Center–McCourt Bipartisan Index

Tier 2: Las Vegas Review-Journal, late STOCK Act filings · The Nevada Independent, PPP/SBA episode · FACT, OCE complaint

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Lugar Center Bipartisan Index · Wikipedia

Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: