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

← Roster

656
Adequate
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
25/40
Moderate
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 6.35 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

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

Lands in the Adequate band at credit 656, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)

★ Service to Country
None (civilian) · n/a · n/a

No military service record. Public-service background is civilian: Director, Florida Division of Emergency Management (2019-2021); Florida House of Representatives (2012-2018); Broward County Commission (2022-2023). Listed for completeness; 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 6
why?
Seated January 2023, could not have signed the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (Dec 2020) and is not on the 126-signatory list; no process-subversion conduct attaches. No documented attempt to defeat a constitutional purpose by legal-on-its-face means. Held at upper-middle rather than higher: as a freshman the affirmative record of constraining power against his own side is thinner than the apex tier, and one notable separation-from-party gesture (the DOGE caucus) ended as a publicized exit rather than a sustained institutional stand. [source]
M02 Party Over Country 7
why?
Genuine cross-aisle posture: co-founded the Bipartisan Disaster Preparedness and School Safety caucuses, reintroduced the EAGLES Act with Mario Diaz-Balart (R), and instituted a standing weekly lunch with a rotating Republican member. Tempered honestly downward because the formal Lugar Bipartisan Index for the 118th placed him at roughly -0.149 (rank ~161), below the historical average, the documented behavior is real but the measured legislative bipartisanship is middling. Upper-middle on the conduct of seeking common ground, not on raw index. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 6
why?
No documented pattern of casting opponents as illegitimate or as people who do not belong; the bipartisan- lunch initiative actively models the opposite. The drag is a recurring willingness to trade sharp personal jabs in committee (the Comer 'we know who's taking more medication' retort, Sept 2024), which is heated and personal even where bipartisan-instigated. Persons-of-equal-worth largely respected; temperance lapses in the heat of hearings keep it at upper-middle, not higher. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 7
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against rivals and no criterion-class process-subversion conduct. Oversight-committee confrontations (challenging Chair Comer over a family loan) are accountability-seeking within the committee's purpose, not abuse of state machinery against an opponent. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 6
why?
Rhetoric is generally substantive and policy-anchored, including candidly declaring a effort he had joined a 'complete failure,' which is honest self-correction rather than enemy-making. The drag is a taste for combative one-liners in hearings and on cable. No sustained incitement or dehumanization pattern (criterion 10 not met); the deductions are for temperance, not for casting opponents as enemies. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 6
why?
No ethics finding, censure, or sanction on record. The genuine fiduciary appearance-concern is active individual-equity trading (AVGO, NVDA, CSCO and others) while serving on Judiciary and Foreign Affairs, a member-stock-trading optics drag weighed as appearance, not as a documented breach or proven use of nonpublic information. Middle: clean record, real appearance-concern. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 7
why?
Met the harder bar of calling out something at cost: as the first Democrat to join the DOGE caucus he could have left quietly, but publicly judged the effort 'dead' and a 'complete failure' on the merits, crossing the partisan expectation in both directions. Demonstrates the active call-out duty. Below apex because the call-outs are more rhetorical than legislatively costly. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 6
why?
Prior crisis-management service (FL Division of Emergency Management director, 2019-2021, COVID response) shows discretionary stewardship under pressure. No documented instance of choosing personal advantage when unobserved, but also no singular self-sacrifice-of-advantage anchor; honest middle on the discretion test. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 7
why?
No documented private/public contempt gap; the combative-in-public, deal-making-in-private reputation are consistent rather than two-faced, he appears on adversarial outlets and keeps standing cross-aisle relationships off camera. No evidence of a hidden contradiction to the public posture. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 6
why?
Constituent-facing record is solid, disaster-preparedness focus rooted in district experience and Nonprofit Security Grant advocacy. Held at middle for want of an extended verified record (freshman/ sophomore tenure) and no standout constituent-over-donor anchor; no exploitation evidence either way. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 6
why?
Scored ONLY on office-attributable enrichment, not raw wealth. No self-dealing, family payroll, office- information trade, or foreign-government revenue is documented. Net worth (~$11.5M est.) and pre/non-office assets are NOT penalized. The single drag is the appearance dimension of active individual-stock trading while in office; absent any proven office-information advantage it is a modest appearance deduction only. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 6
why?
Honors regular order and committee process and uses the institution's tools (oversight questioning, bipartisan caucuses) as intended. The decorum drag is the relish for theatrical, personal hearing exchanges that prioritize the viral moment over institutional gravity. Net upper-middle. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 6
why?
No sustained documented-falsehood pattern; his public posture is fact-anchored and he has publicly contradicted convenient narratives on his own side (the DOGE assessment). Held at honest middle for a short record rather than a long, fully verified truth-telling track. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 7
why?
Real subject-matter command in emergency management and disaster response, carried from running Florida's response apparatus into the EAGLES Act and the Disaster Preparedness Caucus. Substance over talking points in his domain; upper-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.

WhereDocumented conductMitigation weighed
M02 Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index for the 118th Congress placed him at roughly -0.149 (rank ~161), below the historical average
↳ measured legislative bipartisanship below the documented cross-aisle posture
Active, verifiable common-ground conduct: weekly GOP lunch, bipartisan caucuses, EAGLES Act with a Republican cosponsor
M03 Recurring sharp personal jabs in committee (the Sept 2024 'we know who's taking more medication' retort to Chairman Comer)
↳ Temperance lapse in heated exchanges
Largely bipartisan-instigated; no pattern of dehumanizing opponents as people who don't belong
M06 Active individual-equity trading (AVGO, NVDA, CSCO) while seated on Judiciary and Foreign Affairs
↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety (member stock trading)
No ethics finding, sanction, or documented use of nonpublic information; weighed as appearance only
M11 Same active stock-trading optics dimension during committee service
↳ Appearance dimension only, NOT raw wealth, which is not penalized
No office-attributable enrichment, self-dealing, family payments, or foreign-gov revenue documented
M05 Taste for combative cable and hearing one-liners
↳ Temperance/rhetorical-restraint drag
Substantive policy core; honest self-correction on his own side's DOGE effort; no incitement pattern
Pillar II Combative public style sits in tension with the bipartisan-bridge brand (Consistency/Temperance)
↳ Consistency/Temperance drag
Authenticity + willingness to break with own-side narrative keep the drag modest
Pillar IV Member-stock-trading appearance-concern plus the viral-confrontation habit temper the legacy (Integrity/Justice)
↳ Integrity/Justice drag
Clean ethics record and genuine cross-aisle relationship-building dominate

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: Steadiness Under Pressure, Selfless Service, Loyalty to oath over faction, emergency-management service under crisis and a documented willingness to break with his own side's narrative (the DOGE 'failure' verdict) evidence independence. Held below higher tiers by a still-short federal record.
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, candid even when it cuts against his party; drag toward Temperance's opposite in combative hearing exchanges keeps it at honest 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: Stewardship, Accountability, Protection, uses oversight and disaster-policy tools for their intended purpose; no exploitation of power. Tempered by the member-stock-trading appearance-concern.
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, clean ethics record and real bridge-building weigh positive; the viral-confrontation habit and stock-trading optics are drags toward Ego/Favoritism that temper but do not define a still-young record.
TOTAL: Moderate 25/40

Total 25/40, Adequate-to-Sound range. A solid, honest mid-career civic record: real bipartisan conduct and crisis competence, with temperance and appearance drags counted plainly.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“DOGE was a complete failure. Complete failure. Nothing has been made more efficient.”

Declaring the DOGE caucus 'dead' after being the first Democrat to join it · The Hill · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite

“I want the chairman to show the American people that we didn't just waste millions of taxpayer dollars to issue this book report.”

Oversight Committee hearing challenging the impeachment-inquiry report · The Hill · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite

“We know who's taking more medication.”

Retort to Chairman Comer in a heated Oversight exchange · The Hill · CONTESTED · cite

“I'll have lunch with a Republican colleague every week to forge bipartisan relationships.”

Standing weekly bipartisan-lunch initiative (paraphrase of office announcement) · House office release · CIVIC · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Jared Evan Moskowitz (born 1980/1981). U.S. Representative for Florida, elected FL-23 in 2022, seated January 2023; running in the redrawn FL-25 for 2026. Democrat. Member, House Judiciary Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee. Previously: Director, Florida Division of Emergency Management (2019-2021); Broward County Commissioner (2022-2023); Florida House of Representatives (2012-2018). Parkland-area legislator known for disaster-preparedness and school-safety work.

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

Freshman-to-sophomore House Democrat with a cross-aisle public posture: co-founder of the Bipartisan Disaster Preparedness Caucus and the Bipartisan School Safety and Security Caucus; reintroduced the EAGLES Act with Mario Diaz-Balart (R); instituted a standing weekly lunch with a rotating Republican member; first Democrat to join the Congressional DOGE Caucus (which he later publicly declared defunct). The formal Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index for the 118th Congress nonetheless placed him below the historical average (~-0.149, rank ~161), documented bridge-building behavior outpaces the measured legislative index. Policy positions are not scored here in either direction.

3. Constitutional Moments

No process-subversion conduct attaches: seated January 2023, he is not on the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory list (that document predates his service by two years). His notable independence moments are conduct-of-office: joining and then publicly repudiating the DOGE caucus on the merits, and pressing oversight questions across the partisan grain. No criterion-8 or criterion-10 conduct on record.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

Substantive and policy-anchored at core, with a documented taste for combative, viral hearing exchanges and cable sparring. The sharpest instances (the 'medication' retort to Chairman Comer) are personal and heated but largely reciprocal and bipartisan-instigated, not a sustained pattern of casting opponents as enemies who do not belong. Weighed as a temperance drag on M03/M05, not as criterion-10 enemy-making.

5. Fiduciary Profile

No ethics finding, censure, or sanction on record. Estimated net worth ~$11.5M (House FD range $2.5M-$15.9M for 2023); raw wealth is not scored. The genuine appearance-concern is active individual-equity trading (AVGO, NVDA, CSCO, XLE and others) while seated on Judiciary and Foreign Affairs, weighed as a member-stock- trading optics drag on M06/M11, not as a documented breach or proven use of nonpublic information.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. He could not have signed the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (seated 2023; not on the 126-signatory list), and no sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern is documented, heated hearing exchanges do not meet the criterion-10 bar. Flag count: zero.

7. What The Framework Says

An honest mid-record. Moskowitz brings real bipartisan conduct, standing GOP lunches, bipartisan caucuses, a Republican-cosponsored bill, and genuine crisis competence from running Florida's emergency-management apparatus, plus a documented willingness to break with his own side's narrative when he judged the DOGE effort a failure. The standard counts the drags plainly: a measured bipartisan index below the historical average, a member-stock-trading appearance-concern, and a taste for theatrical, personal hearing confrontations that prioritize the viral moment over institutional gravity. No process-subversion and no enemy-making pattern. Adequate-to-Sound, with the temperance and appearance drags honestly weighed.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House financial disclosures (eFD)

Tier 2: Lugar Center / McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House financial disclosures (eFD) · Lugar Center Bipartisan Index · Wikipedia

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

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: