Composite 6.39 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Adequate band at credit 659, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
- No military service on record
Blake Moore has no military service record. Prior to Congress he worked in the U.S. Foreign Service and in management consulting and economic development. Service to country is honored as context, not scored; its absence is likewise not penalized. Character is scored as conduct in office, where it belongs.
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?On Jan 6, 2021 Moore voted AGAINST both the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral objections, certifying the result in the minority of his own party (121 R objected on AZ, 136 on PA). His stated ground was constitutional: Congress lacks authority to disqualify a state's certified electors. Seated January 2021, he could not have signed the Dec 2020 Texas v. PA amicus and did not, no process-subversion conduct. Affirmative defense of the constitutional count at intra-party cost; held below the apex tier reserved for career-defining sacrifice purely for the oath. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?Member of the bipartisan Republican Governance Group; one of 47 Republicans to vote for the Respect for Marriage Act and a vote to keep Liz Cheney in leadership, repeated willingness to cross his caucus on institution-over-faction grounds (scored as cross-party conduct, NOT on the policy merits). Upper-middle for documented bipartisan posture without a long-arc co-sponsorship record yet established. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 6 | why?No documented instance of casting opponents or constituents as people who do not belong; rhetoric is consistently measured and process-focused. Held at solid-middle rather than higher only for the absence of a signature affirmative belonging-defense anchor of the McCain/Lakeville class. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals. The defining datum is the inverse, he declined to use the certification process to defeat its constitutional purpose, voting to count the votes. No criterion-class conduct. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?Career rhetorical restraint with no documented inflammatory or enemy-making episodes; describes opponents in policy terms. As Conference Vice Chair his messaging role is partisan-promotional but stays within ordinary political bounds. Solid-middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 5 | why?Failed to timely disclose 70+ stock and option trades worth $70K-$1.1M, then missed a second deadline on three further trades, a documented federal transparency-law lapse that earned a financial-ethics 'danger' rating. Mitigation: trades were adviser-executed at arm's length, he consulted the Ethics Committee and paid the late fee in full. A genuine fiduciary appearance-concern, partly owned; middle. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 6 | why?Active-duty standard met at cost on the highest-stakes test, calling the count constitutional and certifying against 120+ of his own party on Jan 6, plus the Cheney and RFMA breaks. Held at upper-middle rather than higher because much of his profile is conference-leadership message discipline, the inverse of routine own-side call-out. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No documented abuse of discretionary office for personal benefit. The STOCK Act lapse is a disclosure-timing failure, not a documented exploitation of office information. Solid-middle; no affirmative discretion-test anchor of the McCain-POW class on record. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented public/private contempt gap; off-camera reputation is consistent with the measured public posture. Solid-middle absent deeper longitudinal record. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Sustained engagement on district-relevant fiscal and defense priorities; the Jan 6 certification vote prioritized constitutional duty over the loud faction of his base. No documented donor-over-constituent capture. Solid-middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 6 | why?Scored ONLY on office-attributable enrichment, not raw wealth. No documented self-dealing, family payments, office-info trades, or foreign-government revenue. The STOCK Act late disclosures are a transparency failure that creates an information-asymmetry appearance-concern (the very risk the Act guards against), but no finding of trading on office information; adviser-executed at arm's length. Middle, weighed as appearance not finding. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 6 | why?Elected and re-elected Conference Vice Chair (fifth-ranking House Republican), colleagues entrust him with an institutional-stewardship role, and his floor/process conduct honors regular order. Solid-middle; the role is partly message-management rather than pure institution-over-spectacle. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No documented sustained-falsehood pattern; his Jan 6 statement affirmed the legitimacy of the certified result and the limits of congressional power. Solid-middle. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substantive committee command on Ways and Means (Health, Social Security, Trade) and Budget; most-successful-freshman legislative output with four bills signed into law. Substance over talking points; upper-middle held at solid-middle for a still-developing record. [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 | STOCK Act: failed to timely disclose 70+ stock/option trades worth $70K-$1.1M (2021) and missed a second deadline on three further trades; earned a financial-ethics 'danger' rating ↳ Fiduciary transparency / appearance-of-impropriety | Adviser-executed at arm's length; consulted the Ethics Committee and paid the late filing fee in full |
| M11 | Late/incomplete STOCK Act disclosures create the information-asymmetry appearance the Act exists to prevent ↳ Disclosure-transparency appearance-concern | No finding of trading on office information; not office-driven enrichment, weighed as appearance not breach |
| M01 | No career-defining oath sacrifice of the apex class; the certification stand, while real and against his party, is one episode in a short tenure ↳ Below-apex constitutional record | The Jan 6 certification vote against 120+ co-partisans is a genuine institutional-fidelity mark |
| M07 | Much of the public profile is Conference Vice Chair message discipline, the inverse of routine own-side call-out ↳ Active call-out duty partly met | Cheney, RFMA, and Jan 6 breaks are documented own-side dissent at cost |
| Pillar III | STOCK Act transparency lapse (Stewardship) sits against an otherwise clean exploitation record ↳ Stewardship drag | No Exploitation; owned and cured the lapse |
| Pillar IV | Short tenure limits the durable-legacy evidence base (Integrity/Justice still accruing) ↳ Confidence/tenure drag | The certification stand is the kind of moment a durable institutional legacy is built on |
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: Courage, Steadiness, Loyalty to oath over faction, the Jan 6 certification vote against the bulk of his own party, on stated constitutional grounds, is the load-bearing evidence. Held at 7 rather than higher by a short tenure and the absence of an apex-class sacrifice. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, Teachability, consistent moderate-governance posture and willingness to break with the caucus. Drag toward the opposite from the STOCK Act disclosure lapse, partly offset by owning and curing it. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 6 | why?Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability, used institutional standing (Conference Vice Chair, Ways and Means) within ordinary bounds; no documented Exploitation. The disclosure lapse is a Stewardship drag, not an abuse of power. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, a still-accruing record anchored by the certification stand. Confidence-adjusted downward for short tenure; the contested STOCK Act episode tempers but does not define. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 25/40 |
Total 25/40, Adequate. The pillars track an honest middle: a real institutional-fidelity mark on Jan 6 and steady cross-party conduct, against a documented transparency lapse and a tenure too short for the durable-legacy evidence the top tier requires.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“I could not in principle object or vote to agree to the objection, but I promise that I will fight for every American's voice to be heard and every voter to have trust in our system.”
Statement on his vote against the electoral-college objections, Jan 6-7 2021 · Office of Rep. Blake Moore, press release · PRINCIPLED · cite
“Congress does not have the constitutional authority to disqualify a state's certified electors.”
Explaining the constitutional ground for certifying the result against his party's objections · Salt Lake Tribune / KUER coverage of Utah delegation votes · CIVIC · cite
“I worked in consultation with the Ethics Committee and have paid the late filing fee in full.”
Response to the STOCK Act late-disclosure report on 70+ trades · Salt Lake Tribune · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Blake Douglas Moore (born 1980). U.S. Representative for Utah's 1st congressional district since January 2021; running in 2026 for Utah's 2nd district following mid-cycle redistricting. Vice Chair of the House Republican Conference since November 2023, the first Utahn elected to House or Senate leadership and the fifth-ranking House Republican. Member, House Ways and Means Committee (Health, Social Security, Trade subcommittees) and House Budget Committee. Former U.S. Foreign Service officer and management consultant; member of the bipartisan Republican Governance Group.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Center-right Republican with a documented moderate-governance streak: one of 47 House Republicans to vote for the Respect for Marriage Act (2022), a vote to retain Liz Cheney in leadership, and an endorsement of a citizenship pathway for certain undocumented immigrants. Most-successful-freshman Republican by legislation enacted, with four bills signed into law in the 117th Congress. Now on Ways and Means (tax) and Budget, focused on fiscal/debt policy. The Jan 6, 2021 vote to certify against the bulk of his own conference is recorded as institutional/process conduct, NOT graded on policy in either direction.
3. Constitutional Moments
The defining moment is January 6, 2021: Moore voted against both the Arizona and Pennsylvania electoral objections, certifying the result in the minority of his party (121 Republicans objected on AZ, 136 on PA). His stated ground was that Congress lacks constitutional authority to overturn a state's certified electors. Seated in January 2021, he was not in office for the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and is not a signatory. He also voted for a January 6 investigation. No process-subversion conduct on record.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Measured and process-focused throughout his tenure; no documented inflammatory, enemy-making, or incitement episodes. As Conference Vice Chair his public role is partisan message amplification, but his rhetoric stays within ordinary political bounds and characterizes opponents in policy terms. No sustained falsehood pattern; his Jan 6 statement affirmed the legitimacy of the certified result.
5. Fiduciary Profile
The documented concern is a STOCK Act lapse: in 2021 Moore failed to timely disclose 70-plus stock and option transactions worth $70,000 to $1.1 million, then missed a second deadline on three further trades, drawing a financial-ethics 'danger' rating and a Campaign Legal Center complaint to the Office of Congressional Ethics. Mitigation: the trades were adviser-executed at arm's length, he consulted the Ethics Committee and paid the late filing fee in full. A genuine fiduciary appearance-concern, a transparency failure, with no finding of trading on office information and no documented office-driven enrichment.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. He did not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (not yet in office) and is not a Jan 6 process-subversion actor, to the contrary, he voted to certify. No sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern. The STOCK Act episode is a fiduciary appearance-concern handled through ordinary ethics channels, not a criterion-class flag. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
An honest Adequate-to-Sound middle. The load-bearing positive is real: on January 6, 2021, Moore voted to count the electoral votes against 120-plus members of his own party, on stated constitutional grounds, and was not part of the Dec 2020 amicus or any process-subversion effort. That, plus steady cross-party conduct (Respect for Marriage Act, the Cheney leadership vote, Republican Governance Group membership), carries the record. The standard records the drag honestly, the STOCK Act late-disclosure lapse and a tenure still too short for an apex-class legacy. No capping flags; the verdict turns on the final credit gate.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): GovTrack, House Vote #10, Jan 6 2021 (electoral objection) · Congress.gov member profile
Tier 2: Salt Lake Tribune, STOCK Act late disclosure · Campaign Legal Center, OCE complaint
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack, Jan 6 2021 House Vote #10 · House financial disclosures · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.