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

← Roster

521
Unfit
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
19/40
Weak
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 4.76 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

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

Lands in the Unfit band at credit 521, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)

★ Service to Country
None · None · None

No military service record. Civilian background: U.S. Department of Defense / contracting work and West Virginia House of Delegates (2017-2019) prior to two terms as WV State Treasurer (2021-2025).

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 5
why?
First-term Representative seated January 2025, could NOT have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and was not in office for the Jan-6 certification, so no Criterion-8 process-subversion conduct attaches. No documented effort to overturn a certified election, run out the clock on an appointment, or otherwise use legal-on-its-face power to defeat a constitutional purpose. The record is thin on either affirmative oath-defense or oath-breach; held at the honest middle pending a longer tenure. Not scored on caucus alignment or any procedural vote (the constitutional process working is not a demerit). [source]
M02 Party Over Country 5
why?
A single first term provides too little floor record to score bipartisanship with confidence. Co-sponsored the Laken Riley Act, which drew some cross-party support, but the early profile is largely party-line. No documented signature cross-aisle authorship yet, and no documented refusal to ever work across the aisle. Middle, confidence-adjusted for short tenure. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 4
why?
The documented drag is the April 2025 CECOT visit, where Moore posed giving a two-thumbs-up in front of caged detainees and posted it publicly, a real Persons-of-Equal-Worth concern, treating incarcerated human beings as a backdrop for a triumphant photo. Weighed as conduct (the gesture, not the underlying immigration policy, which is not scored). It is a single documented instance rather than a sustained anti-belonging pattern, so it lowers the measure without triggering a Criterion-10 cap. No other documented dehumanizing conduct on record. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 5
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against political rivals. As Treasurer he wielded a statutory blacklist of financial firms (2022 WV law), but that was an institutional/policy action against corporate entities under color of existing state law, not the targeting of a personal or political opponent, outside the M04 abuse-of-power frame and not scored as policy. No Criterion-class conduct. Middle. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 4
why?
Rhetoric is combative and movement-branded but largely policy-framed (immigration, ESG, OPT), which is not scored in either direction. The CECOT thumbs-up gesture is the one documented instance crossing from policy heat into a dignity concern, pulling this below the midpoint. No documented sustained pattern of casting citizens or opponents as enemies who do not belong, so no Criterion-10 cap. A real drag, weighed honestly. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 5
why?
No documented STOCK Act violation, ethics referral, or sanction on record as of mid-2026; not named among the 2025 disclosure-delinquency reporting. Filed Q1 2026 FEC reports on schedule. As Treasurer, critics characterized the anti-ESG bank blacklist as a costly "political stunt," but that is a contested policy judgment, not a fiduciary self-dealing finding. Clean-but-thin: middle, no affirmative accountability record to lift it higher. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 3
why?
The active-duty standard is calling out one's OWN side at cost. No documented instance of Moore publicly breaking with his party or the administration on a matter of principle during his first term; the public posture is consistent alignment with the President's platform, with the President's endorsement. Absence of any documented at-cost dissent holds this below the middle. Not penalized for any individual policy vote. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 5
why?
The discretion test asks whether the officeholder forgoes preferential treatment available to them. No documented instance either way in a short tenure, neither a documented refusal of a perk nor a documented abuse of one. Defaults to the honest middle, confidence-adjusted. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 5
why?
No documented private-versus-public contempt gap; no reporting of an off-camera persona at odds with the public one. Thin record; nothing to move it off the middle in either direction. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 5
why?
Documented constituent-service work, secured FY26 appropriations and a $1.67M Barbour County ambulance station for the district. Balanced against an early voting profile closely tracking national party priorities rather than a distinctive WV-constituent line. Net middle: real district-level delivery, no documented donor-over-constituent breach. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 6
why?
M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment, self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, foreign-government revenue. None documented. Estimated net worth (~$630K) is mid-pack for the House and not penalized as raw wealth. No documented office-driven enrichment, which holds this above the middle; not at the top only because the first-term disclosure record is short and limited. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 5
why?
No documented breach of institutional decorum, no censure, no floor-conduct sanction. The CECOT photo is a spectacle-over-gravity concern weighed primarily under M03/M05; institutionally there is no documented pattern of degrading House process. Conventional committee service (Appropriations). Middle. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 5
why?
No documented sustained pattern of demonstrable falsehoods on the public record. Rhetoric is sharp and movement-aligned, but the available record does not establish a habitual-falsehood finding. Thin record; honest middle. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 6
why?
Demonstrates working command of his lane, financial/fiscal policy from four years as State Treasurer and active Appropriations Committee work delivering specific FY26 line items. Substance over pure talking points in his areas of focus, which lifts this slightly above the middle despite the short congressional tenure. [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
M03 April 2025 CECOT prison visit, posed giving two thumbs up in front of caged detainees and posted it publicly
↳ Persons of Equal Worth, dignity/anti-belonging concern
Single documented instance, not a sustained pattern; does not trigger a Criterion-10 cap
M05 CECOT gesture crosses from policy framing into a documented dignity concern
↳ Rhetoric, spectacle at the expense of human dignity
Most rhetoric is policy-framed (immigration/ESG), which is not scored; one documented instance
M07 No documented instance of breaking with his own side at cost during the first term
↳ Active call-out duty unmet
Short tenure, absence of evidence, not evidence of a breach; confidence-adjusted
M02 Largely party-line early profile; no signature cross-aisle authorship yet
↳ Bipartisan-cooperation record thin
Insufficient first-term floor data to score with confidence
M10 Voting profile tracks national party priorities more than a distinctive WV-constituent line
↳ constituent-vs-party alignment
Documented district-level delivery (FY26 appropriations, ambulance station)

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?
5
why?
Attributes: Conviction and Steadiness are evident in a consistent, well-defined public posture, but there is no documented Courage-at-cost moment (no break with his own side) and no documented collapse either. Thin first-term record holds this at the honest middle.
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?
5
why?
Attributes: Authenticity and Conviction are clear; the record shows neither documented self-correction/Teachability nor documented hypocrisy. No disclosure or ethics breach found. Middle, confidence-adjusted for short tenure.
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?
4
why?
Attributes: real Stewardship via district appropriations delivery, dragged by the CECOT episode, power and platform used for a dehumanizing spectacle rather than protection of the vulnerable. Held just below the middle on that documented instance.
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?
5
why?
Attributes: Integrity intact on the available record (no findings), but too short a tenure to establish a durable Moral-Courage or Justice legacy. The CECOT photo is the one documented mark against the kind of influence one would want propagated. Middle.
TOTAL: Weak 19/40

Total 19/40, a thin, honest-middle profile. A single first term gives little to either lift or sink the pillars; the one documented character drag (CECOT) sits in Protection/Influence and Legacy.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“Our immigration system should exist for one reason: to benefit the American people.”

House office immigration issue page · rileymoore.house.gov · CONTESTED · cite

“The issue that we run into is really a conflict of interest, where we have financial institutions that are boycotting the fossil fuel industries... not based on some risk evaluation, but based on what I view as just political policies.”

As WV Treasurer, defending the anti-ESG bank restricted list · Bond Buyer / American Banker · CONTESTED · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Riley M. Moore (born 1980). U.S. Representative for West Virginia's 2nd congressional district since January 2025 (first term). Previously 25th West Virginia State Treasurer (2021-2025) and member of the West Virginia House of Delegates (2017-2019). Republican; endorsed by President Trump and filed for re-election January 2026. Member of the House Appropriations Committee. Grandson of former WV Governor Arch Moore and nephew of Senator Shelley Moore Capito (family relationships are noted for identity only and are not scored).

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

First-term House member; insufficient floor history for a confident Lugar Bipartisan Index or stable DW-NOMINATE placement. Early profile is largely party-line and closely aligned with the administration. Co-sponsored the Laken Riley Act; introduced the DEPORT Act (2026) and led a letter to DHS urging an end to the OPT program. Active on the Appropriations Committee, securing FY26 district line items. Policy positions themselves are NOT scored in either direction per the framework.

3. Constitutional Moments

Seated January 2025, not present for the January 6, 2021 certification and ineligible to have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus; no Criterion-8 process-subversion conduct attaches. No documented institutional-fidelity stand at personal cost during the first term, and no documented oath-breach event. The record on this axis is, so far, empty in both directions.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

Combative, movement-branded public communication that is mostly policy-framed (immigration, ESG, OPT), policy heat is not scored. The one documented instance that crosses into a conduct concern is the April 2025 CECOT visit, where Moore posed giving a two-thumbs-up in front of caged detainees. That gesture is weighed as a Persons-of-Equal-Worth dignity drag (M03/M05). It is a single documented instance, not a sustained pattern, so it lowers those measures without triggering a Criterion-10 enemy-making cap.

5. Fiduciary Profile

No documented office-driven enrichment, self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. No STOCK Act violation or ethics sanction found; estimated net worth (~$630K) is mid-pack for the House and not penalized as raw wealth. As Treasurer, the anti-ESG bank restricted list was criticized by opponents as a costly political maneuver, but that is a contested policy judgment, not a fiduciary breach finding.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No Criterion-8 process-subversion conduct (seated after December 2020; no amicus, no fake-electors, no election-overturn effort). The CECOT episode is a documented single-instance dignity concern weighed within M03/M05, not a documented sustained enemy-making/incitement pattern, so it does not rise to a Criterion-10 cap. No documented Severity-class conduct. Flag count: zero.

7. What The Framework Says

A thin, honest-middle first-term record. Riley Moore shows clear conviction and real district-level delivery, but as of mid-2026 there is no documented at-cost stand for the oath to lift the profile and no documented process-subversion to sink it. The single genuine character drag is the CECOT thumbs-up before caged detainees, weighed as a dignity concern rather than a sustained pattern. The standard records absence as absence: too short a tenure to earn a high mark, no documented breach to push it to the floor. Middle, pending a longer record.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Clerk financial disclosures

Tier 2: West Virginia Watch (CECOT visit) · Bond Buyer / American Banker (ESG record)

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House financial disclosures · GovTrack · Wikipedia

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

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: