Composite 4.69 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
An honest middle that lands below the bar. Moore's documented conduct shows no process-subversion power and no office-driven enrichment, but it carries a real and active candor concern: a multi-year pattern of overstating his own military service (claimed "six years" / "Staff Sergeant (Ret.)" against an NGB Form 22 showing ~2.5 years and cadet status) made sharper by his 2024 signature on a letter attacking another candidate for the very same category of conduct. Weighed as an appearance-concern, not a finding, but the self-contradiction drags candor and consistency. Below-median cross-aisle willingness compounds the middling result. Not capping; simply not yet a record that clears the oath bar on character.
- Entered active duty Mar 15, 1989, Fort Jackson SC for basic training (DD Form 220)
- NGB Form 22 lists total service ~2 years 6 months 21 days; honorable discharge effective Jul 10, 1991
- 2026 allegations dispute his public claims of ~six years and 'Staff Sergeant (Ret.)' rank
Military service is honored as context, never scored as a badge. What IS scored as conduct is the documented discrepancy between Moore's public service claims and his service paperwork (M06/M13), a candor question, weighed as an appearance-concern because the allegations remain unadjudicated.
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 | 5 | why?Floor objection to the Arizona/Pennsylvania electors on Jan 6, 2021. Per the framework's contamination
rule, a bare floor objection, the constitutional process being used, even unwisely, is NOT scored as
process-subversion and does NOT trigger criterion 8. Moore was sworn in Jan 3, 2021, so he could not
have signed the Dec 11, 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and he is not on the 126-signatory list. No
fake-electors role, no documented use of legal-on-its-face power to defeat a constitutional purpose. The
score sits at a middling 5 reflecting an absence of affirmative oath-defense conduct rather than any
capping subversion.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 4 | why?2023 Lugar Bipartisan Index ranked Moore 243rd with a negative score (-0.61232), below the House
median on cross-party cosponsorship. This is scored as conduct (willingness to work across the aisle and
let the other side share a win), not as policy or ideology. Freedom Caucus membership is a caucus
alignment and is NOT itself penalized. Below-median, not a floor.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 5 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or constituents as enemies who do not belong, and no
incitement pattern, criterion 10 does not attach. An August 27, 2025 Daphne town hall ended with Moore
leaving early amid heckling; a minor constituent-engagement note, not an anti-belonging instance. Middle.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 5 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals, and no criterion-8 process-subversion power
exercised. The Jan 6 floor objection alone does not meet the capping standard. Neutral-middle: no abuse
on record, no affirmative restraint-of-power anchor either.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 5 | why?Partisan rhetoric consistent with his caucus, but no documented sustained enemy-making or dehumanizing
pattern reaching criterion 10. Policy heat is not scored. Middle.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 4 | why?Two appearance-concerns, neither a finding. (1) 2014 state-level arrest for felony perjury / false
statements tied to the Hubbard grand-jury matter, Moore was ACQUITTED of all charges, so it is weighed
as a resolved appearance-concern, never a finding. (2) 2026 allegations that he materially overstated
his military service over many years (claimed "six years"/"Staff Sergeant (Ret.)" against an NGB Form 22
showing ~2 years 6 months and cadet status). The candor concern is real and self-inflicted but remains
an allegation; scored as a fiduciary/character drag, not a proven violation.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 4 | why?The higher bar here is calling out one's OWN side at cost. No documented instance of Moore breaking with
his own party or coalition at personal cost. The opposite appears: he joined a coalition letter attacking
an opposing-party candidate on service-record grounds while himself carrying an unresolved service-record
candor concern. Below-middle for absence of own-side accountability.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 5 | why?No documented discretion-test moment, no instance of declining a preferential benefit or personal
advantage for principle, and none of abusing one either. Neutral-middle on absence of evidence.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 5 | why?No documented gap between a private contempt and a public posture. The service-record concern is an
overstatement-outward issue, not a documented private/public hypocrisy of character toward people.
Middle.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 5 | why?Represents a safe district broadly aligned with constituent preference; no documented donor-over-
constituent betrayal on record. Neutral-middle absent a specific anchor either way.
[source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 6 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment (self-dealing, family payments, office-information
trades, foreign-government revenue). No documented office-driven enrichment, no STOCK Act violation, no
self-dealing pattern surfaced. Raw wealth is NOT penalized. Slightly above middle for a clean
office-enrichment record.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 4 | why?Ordinary institutional decorum with two drags: leaving an August 2025 constituent town hall early under
heckling (an engagement lapse), and the broader pattern of using an unearned/overstated military title in
official correspondence, which touches institutional candor. No major decorum breach on record. Below
middle.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 4 | why?Truthfulness measure. A documented multi-year discrepancy between Moore's public service claims and his
NGB Form 22 is an active candor concern, weighed as an appearance-concern rather than an adjudicated
falsehood. It is sharpened by his signature on a 2024 letter accusing an opponent of "falsely claiming
military service", the same category of conduct alleged against him. The self-contradiction is the drag.
Held at 4, not lower, because the allegations are unadjudicated.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 5 | why?Functional legislative competence consistent with a multi-term member; no standout substantive-mastery
anchor and no documented incompetence. Middle.
[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 |
|---|---|---|
| M02 | 2023 Lugar Bipartisan Index rank 243rd, score -0.61232, below House median on cross-party cosponsorship ↳ cross-aisle willingness (conduct, not policy) | Caucus alignment itself not penalized; reflects measured cross-party behavior only |
| M13 | Documented multi-year discrepancy between public service claims ('six years', 'Staff Sergeant (Ret.)') and NGB Form 22 (~2yr 6mo, cadet status); signed 2024 letter attacking an opponent for the same category of conduct ↳ candor / self-consistency | Allegations unadjudicated, weighed as appearance-concern, not a finding; held at 4 not lower |
| M06 | 2014 Alabama felony perjury/false-statements arrest (Hubbard grand jury); plus 2026 service-record candor allegations ↳ fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | Acquitted of all 2014 charges; 2026 matter unadjudicated, both weighed as appearance, never findings |
| M07 | No documented instance of calling out his own side at personal cost; joined a coalition attack-letter against an opposing-party candidate ↳ own-side accountability duty | None on record |
| M12 | Left an Aug 2025 town hall early under constituent heckling; used overstated military title in official correspondence ↳ institutional decorum / constituent engagement | No major decorum breach otherwise on record |
| Pillar IV | Service-record candor concern made sharper by attacking an opponent for the same conduct (Integrity/Love of Truth drag) ↳ Integrity/Justice drag | Unadjudicated allegation; weighed, not treated as proven |
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
| 5 | why?Steadiness and loyalty to his coalition are evident, but there is no documented selfless-service or courage-at-cost anchor to lift this above neutral. No major drag toward the opposites either. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 4 | why?Held below middle by the Consistency drag: a public self-presentation (service record) at odds with the documentary record, sharpened by attacking an opponent for the same conduct. No evidence of self-correction or ownership on that point. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 5 | why?No documented exploitation of office for private gain and no office-driven enrichment (Stewardship intact), but also no protective-of-the-vulnerable anchor. Neutral. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 4 | why?The unresolved candor concern and the 2014 acquitted-but-real appearance-concern temper the legacy pillar. Integrity drag dominates; no offsetting moral-courage anchor on record. |
| TOTAL: Weak | 18/40 |
Total 18/40, Adequate-to-middling. The pillars hold at the conduct composite because there is neither an extraordinary character anchor lifting them nor a capping subversion sinking them; the recurring drag is candor.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“We're going to try to win this election for our president, at least make it fair and free.”
On objecting to the 2020 electoral count, days after being sworn in · WSFA, Jan 2021 · CONTESTED · cite
“I've worn those combat boots.”
Campaign self-description of military service; later contested by 2026 service-record allegations · Patriot TV summary of campaign materials · CONTESTED · cite
“(Signed) Staff Sergeant, Army National Guard (Ret.)”
Signature on a coalition letter accusing an opposing candidate of falsely claiming military service; rank/status later disputed against his NGB Form 22 · Fox News, Aug 2024 Walz letter · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Felix Barry Moore. U.S. Representative for Alabama's 1st congressional district since 2025; previously represented Alabama's 2nd district 2021–2024. Member of the House Freedom Caucus. Court-ordered redistricting in 2024 placed him in the same district as fellow Republican Jerry Carl, and Moore won the incumbent-on- incumbent primary. As of 2026 he is a candidate in the Republican primary for the U.S. Senate from Alabama while still holding his House seat. Served in the Army National Guard (1989–1991 per NGB Form 22). Prior service in the Alabama House of Representatives.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Multi-term House Republican, Freedom Caucus member. 2023 Lugar Center Bipartisan Index: rank 243rd, score -0.61232, below the House median on cross-party cosponsorship. Voting record is conventionally conservative; per the framework, policy and ideology are NOT scored. The conduct-relevant legislative signal is the below-median cross-aisle behavior (M02), recorded as conduct, not as a partisan demerit.
3. Constitutional Moments
Jan 6, 2021: as a newly sworn-in member (Jan 3, 2021), Moore objected on the House floor to the Arizona and Pennsylvania electors. Under the framework this bare floor objection is the constitutional process operating, it is NOT process-subversion and does not trigger criterion 8. He was not in office on Dec 11, 2020 and is not among the 126 signatories of the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus. No fake-electors role and no other legal-on-its-face power used to defeat a constitutional purpose appears on the record.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Partisan rhetoric consistent with his caucus; no documented sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern reaching criterion 10. The notable rhetorical-character concern is not heat but candor: the 2024 attack- letter posture against an opponent's service claims sits uneasily beside the 2026 allegations that Moore overstated his own. Policy heat is not scored; the candor self-contradiction is.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No documented office-driven enrichment, STOCK Act violation, self-dealing, family-payment, or foreign-government-revenue concern, M11 is clean on the office-attributable standard, and raw wealth is not penalized. The fiduciary drag is character-of-candor, not financial: a 2014 Alabama felony perjury/false- statements arrest (ACQUITTED of all charges, appearance-concern, never a finding) and the 2026 service-record allegations (unadjudicated, weighed as appearance, not proven).
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. The Jan 6 floor objection alone does not meet criterion 8 (process subversion), Moore signed no amicus, played no fake-electors role, and the bare objection is the constitutional process operating. No criterion-10 enemy-making/incitement pattern on record. Flag count: zero. The verdict-determining factor is conduct quality (candor, cross-aisle willingness), not any capping flag.
7. What The Framework Says
Barry Moore is an honest middle that lands below the bar. He carries no capping flag: no process-subversion power, no enemy-making pattern, no office-driven enrichment. What holds the record down is character of candor, a documented multi-year overstatement of his own military service, made sharper by his signature on a 2024 letter attacking an opponent for the same conduct, together with below-median willingness to work across the aisle and no instance of calling out his own side at cost. Both the 2014 acquittal and the 2026 service-record matter are weighed as appearance-concerns, never findings. The standard does not punish his party, his policy, or his Jan 6 vote as such; it records the candor concern honestly and concludes the record does not yet clear the oath bar on character.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · U.S. House financial disclosures
Tier 2: Lugar Center Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · House financial disclosures · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.