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

← Roster

638
Adequate
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
24/40
Moderate
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 6.15 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

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

Lands in the Adequate band at credit 638, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)

★ Service to Country
None · N/A · N/A

McBath has no personal military service. She has noted a family military tradition (father, brother, nephew, cousin served). Family service is biographical context only and is not scored as conduct.

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 7
why?
No documented conduct subverting a constitutional process. Seated January 2019; not a signatory to the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (cross-checked, Democrat, not on the 126-member list) and no fake-elector or certification-defeat conduct. Constitutional-process votes (impeachment, certification) are the process working and are NOT scored here per the contamination rule. Upper-middle: a clean oath-fidelity record without an affirmative high-cost defense-of-process moment that would lift it higher. [source]
M02 Party Over Country 5
why?
The conduct signal here is cross-aisle willingness to let the other side win, scored on documented behavior not party. Her Lugar Bipartisan Index score (118th Congress) was approximately -0.67, ranking ~237th, below the cooperation average, which the Index classifies as poor. She does brand bipartisanship in gun-safety and small-business work, but the measured cross-aisle output is below median. Middle, leaning low on the documented index. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 6
why?
No documented pattern of casting opponents or citizens as enemies who do not belong; her signature register, gun-violence prevention rooted in her son Jordan Davis's murder, is grief-driven and broadly inclusive rather than dehumanizing. No criterion-10 enemy-making pattern. Held at upper-middle rather than high because the public-belonging record is competent but not anchored by a documented cross-the-aisle defense-of-an-opponent's-dignity moment. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 7
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against rivals, no abuse-of-office conduct, no criterion-class process subversion. Clean on the abuse axis. Upper-middle reflects an absence of documented abuse rather than an affirmative power-constraining anchor. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 6
why?
Rhetorical register is generally measured and personal-testimony driven; no documented sustained incitement or dehumanizing-language pattern. Partisan heat in advocacy is policy heat and is NOT scored. Upper-middle: restrained on record, without a standout civility-at-cost moment. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 6
why?
One fiduciary appearance-concern is on record: a February 2020 OCE and FEC complaint filed by Americans for Public Trust (an NRCC-aligned watchdog) alleging improper coordination with Everytown for Gun Safety, her former employer, during her 2018 campaign. It produced no finding, no sanction, and no charge, weighed as an appearance-concern, never a finding, and discounted for its partisan provenance. Middle reflecting the unresolved appearance without an adverse outcome. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 6
why?
The active-duty standard is calling out one's OWN side at cost. No prominent documented instance of McBath breaking with her party leadership at personal cost. She has worked across the aisle on narrow gun-safety measures, but the higher own-side-accountability bar is not clearly met on the record. Middle. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 6
why?
Discretion test, using office for self over duty. No documented instance of seeking preferential treatment or abusing discretionary authority. The 2023 forced district switch (6th to 7th and back) was a response to a Republican-drawn gerrymander that gutted her DeKalb base, not self-dealing. Clean but without an affirmative high-discretion anchor. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 6
why?
No documented private-versus-public contempt gap; no reporting of an off-camera reputation diverging from the public one. Upper-middle on absence-of-contradiction; no affirmative anchor lifting it higher. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 6
why?
Constituent-versus-donor alignment. Her core agenda (gun-violence prevention, health-care and prescription costs, veterans, small business) tracks documented constituent concern in suburban Atlanta. No documented donor-capture conduct. The Everytown coordination appearance-concern (m06) is the only donor-adjacent flag and produced no finding. Middle-to-upper. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 7
why?
M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment, self-dealing, family payments, office-info trades, or foreign-government revenue. No documented evidence of any such enrichment on McBath's disclosures. Raw wealth is excluded per the contamination rule. Clean on the office-enrichment axis; held at 7 pending fuller disclosure review rather than as a deduction. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 6
why?
Institutional decorum. No documented stunts, contempt citations, or sustained norm-breaking on the floor. Conducts herself within regular order. Upper-middle on a clean decorum record without a standout institution-over-spectacle anchor. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 6
why?
Truthfulness. No documented sustained-falsehood pattern; her highest-profile public communication is grounded in her own family's documented experience. The 2020 NRCC 'Lyin' Lucy' framing is partisan messaging, not a documented factual finding, and is not scored. Upper-middle. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 6
why?
Substantive command versus talking points. Demonstrates genuine, lived subject command in her core domain (gun-violence prevention) and engages substantively on health care and small business. Breadth across the full policy span is less documented; the low bipartisan-cooperation index also tempers the substance-into-law signal. Middle-to-upper. [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
M02 Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index (118th Congress) ~ -0.67, ranked ~237th, below the cooperation average the Index classifies as poor
↳ cross-aisle cooperation deficit (conduct, not party)
Brands and pursues bipartisan gun-safety and small-business work; index measures sponsorship/cosponsorship patterns, not stated intent
M06 February 2020 OCE and FEC complaints (Americans for Public Trust) alleging Everytown coordination during 2018 campaign
↳ fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety
No finding, no sanction, no charge; partisan (NRCC-aligned) provenance, weighed as appearance-concern only, never a finding
M07 No prominent documented instance of breaking with own party leadership at personal cost
↳ own-side accountability not affirmatively demonstrated
Narrow cross-aisle gun-safety engagement on record
M14 Substantive depth concentrated in core domain; low cross-aisle index limits documented substance-into-law breadth
↳ policy-breadth / enactment signal
Genuine lived command of gun-violence-prevention policy

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?
6
why?
Attributes: Conviction, Steadiness, Selfless Service, a record of sustained, grief-rooted public conviction with no documented disloyalty to the oath or collapse under pressure. Held at middle by the absence of a documented own-side-accountability or high-cost-courage moment that would lift it.
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: Authenticity, Conviction, her advocacy is authentically rooted in her son's murder, a genuine source of integrity. The 2020 Everytown coordination appearance-concern is an unresolved (no-finding) drag toward the opposite; net middle.
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: Protection, Stewardship, uses office toward constituent-aligned protective ends (gun-violence prevention, health costs) with no documented Exploitation. Held at middle by a thin cross-aisle cooperation record and no power-constraining anchor.
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, Love of Truth, no documented sustained-falsehood or abuse pattern; a coherent, testimony-driven public legacy. Tempered by the low bipartisan index and the unresolved appearance-concern; net middle, an honest in-progress record.
TOTAL: Moderate 24/40

Total 24/40, Adequate. An honest middle: a clean conduct record with authentic conviction, tempered by a measurably low cross-aisle cooperation index and one unresolved (no-finding) appearance-concern. No extraordinary high-cost-courage anchor lifts the pillars above the middle band.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“I dedicated my life to preventing other families from experiencing the pain that my family has had to endure.”

On entering Congress after the 2012 murder of her son Jordan Davis · House official biography · CIVIC · cite

“I will be spending some time focusing on my husband's health, and I cannot make a decision to run for governor or not at this moment.”

Suspending her 2026 gubernatorial exploratory bid to care for her husband Curtis amid cancer complications; remained in the House · Georgia Public Broadcasting · PRINCIPLED · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Lucia Kay "Lucy" McBath (born June 1, 1960, Joliet, Illinois). U.S. Representative for Georgia, 6th District 2019-2023 and since 2025; 7th District 2023-2025 (a forced switch after a Republican-drawn 2021 gerrymander altered the 6th). First elected in 2018, narrowly defeating Republican incumbent Karen Handel. A former Delta flight attendant, she became a national gun-violence-prevention advocate after her 17-year-old son Jordan Davis was murdered in the 2012 "Loud Music" shooting in Jacksonville, Florida. In March 2025 she suspended a 2026 gubernatorial exploratory bid to care for her husband and remained in the House, where she is running for re-election in 2026, confirming Congress-cohort scope.

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index (118th Congress) approximately -0.67, ranked ~237th, below the cooperation average, classified as poor by the Index. DW-NOMINATE places her in the Democratic caucus mainstream. Core legislative focus: gun-violence prevention (her signature domain), health-care and prescription-drug costs, veterans, and small business. Policy positions are NOT scored in either direction per the framework; the bipartisan-cooperation index is read as a conduct signal of cross-aisle willingness, not as ideology.

3. Constitutional Moments

Seated January 2019, after the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, which she therefore could not have signed (and did not; cross-checked against the 126-member Republican signatory list, and she is a Democrat). No fake-elector, certification-defeat, or process-subversion conduct on record. Constitutional-process votes she cast (impeachment, certification) are the process working and are excluded from scoring per the contamination rule.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

A measured, testimony-driven public register grounded in her family's documented experience of gun violence. No documented sustained incitement, enemy-making, or dehumanizing-language pattern. Partisan advocacy heat is policy heat and is not scored. The 2020 NRCC "Lyin' Lucy" label is opposition messaging, not a documented factual finding.

5. Fiduciary Profile

No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue on her House disclosures. The one fiduciary appearance-concern is a February 2020 OCE/FEC complaint (Americans for Public Trust, NRCC-aligned) alleging improper coordination with Everytown for Gun Safety, her former employer, during the 2018 campaign; it produced no finding, no sanction, and no charge, and is weighed as an appearance-concern only. Raw wealth is excluded from M11 per the framework.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Not a Texas v. PA amicus signatory (seated 2019; cross-checked); no fake-elector or certification-subversion conduct (criterion 8); no documented sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (criterion 10). Flag count: zero. The only sustained concern is a no-finding 2020 ethics/FEC appearance-concern, weighed as an appearance, not a finding.

7. What The Framework Says

An honest middle. McBath's conduct record is clean, no documented abuse of office, no process subversion, no enemy-making pattern, no office-attributable enrichment, and her public conviction on gun-violence prevention is authentically rooted in her son's murder. What holds the record in the Adequate band rather than higher is the measured absence of high marks: a notably low cross-aisle cooperation index, no documented own-side accountability at cost, and one unresolved (no-finding, partisan-filed) appearance-concern. A solid, in- progress conduct record without an extraordinary anchor.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Financial Disclosures (Clerk)

Tier 2: Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · House official biography · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Wikipedia

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

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: