Composite 6.7 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 684, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
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 | 7 | why?Seated January 2023, could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and was not in office for the 2021 certification, so no Criterion-8 process-subversion exposure on those events. No documented effort to defeat a constitutional purpose through legal-on-its-face power. Oath-fidelity record is clean but short-tenured (one full term plus), holding it at upper-middle rather than the apex tier reserved for demonstrated stands at real personal cost. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 8 | why?Ranked 51st of 435 House members and among the top-25 most bipartisan House Democrats on the 2023 Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index; second-most-bipartisan in the Michigan delegation. Documented pattern of introducing and co-sponsoring cross-party legislation (eight bipartisan bills in a year), placing problem-solving over denying the other side a win. Strong, measured. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or constituents as enemies who do not belong. Public posture toward religious and cross-party voters has been inclusion-oriented (explicit outreach to white Christian and Republican-leaning constituents). No Criterion-10 enemy-making instance on record; held at upper-middle absent a long enough record to push higher. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state or office power against rivals. No Criterion-8 conduct (not a Dec-2020 amicus signatory; not seated for the 2021 certification). Routine oversight activity (DOGE accountability, agency questioning) is ordinary legislative function, not abuse. Clean. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?Rhetorical record is restrained and constituent-service framed; criticism of border conditions and 'do-nothing votes' is policy heat, not anti-belonging or incitement. No documented slur, dehumanizing line, or sustained inflammatory pattern. Upper-middle on a short record. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?No ethics complaint, OCE referral, or sanction located. Modest net worth (~$600K) and routine campaign-finance filings present no documented appearance-of-impropriety. Held at solid-middle rather than higher because the affirmative-accountability evidence (owning a mistake at cost) that lifts a fiduciary score is simply not yet on a two-term record. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?M07's higher bar is calling out one's OWN side at documented cost. Scholten's bipartisan-index strength shows willingness to cross the aisle on legislation, but no clearly documented instance of publicly breaking with her own party leadership at personal political cost was located. Honest middle, independent legislative behavior present, costly intra-party dissent not demonstrated on the record. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?Discretion/diligence test: missed only 36 of 1,778 roll-call votes (2.0%), at the chamber median, consistent attention to the duties of the seat. No documented self-serving exercise of discretion. Solid; not higher absent a documented case of declining a personal benefit for the public good. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented gap between private conduct and public persona; no leaked contempt or two-faced-dealing instance on record. Solid-middle reflects absence of evidence either way on a short tenure rather than affirmatively demonstrated integrity under pressure. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Active constituent-service posture (federal-agency casework, shutdown-pay protection for Coast Guard, child-labor enforcement) indicates representing the district over donor capture; modest fundraising and net worth reduce donor-dependence concern. Solid-middle, genuine constituent orientation, not yet a long enough record to score higher. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 7 | why?M11 scores ONLY office-attributable enrichment, none documented: no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue on record. Estimated net worth (~$608K) is ordinary and not penalized as a breach (raw wealth is excluded by rule). Clean fiduciary score reflecting absence of office-driven enrichment. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Institutional-decorum record is clean, no censure, no documented floor or committee misconduct, no spectacle-over-institution episode. Proposing expulsion procedures over misconduct allegations is use of regular institutional process. Upper-middle on a short, orderly record. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern located; public communications (including scam-warning constituent alerts and policy statements) are fact-grounded. Solid-middle reflects clean record without the long verifiable track that would justify a higher mark. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Substantive depth grounded in professional command: Second Circuit clerkship, DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals attorney-adviser (2013-2017), Michigan Immigrant Rights Center staff attorney, J.D. Maryland. Committee work on small business and labor reflects substance over talking points. Real subject-matter command, 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.
| Where | Documented conduct | Mitigation weighed |
|---|---|---|
| M07 | No documented instance of publicly breaking with her own party leadership at personal political cost ↳ active-duty call-out of one's own side, not demonstrated | Strong cross-party legislative behavior present; the higher bar (costly intra-party dissent) simply not on a short record |
| M06 | Clean fiduciary record but no affirmative accountability-at-cost episode on a two-term tenure ↳ Fiduciary, absence of demonstrated self-accountability | No ethics finding, complaint, or sanction; modest finances present no appearance-concern |
| M01 | Short tenure (sworn Jan 2023) with no demonstrated oath-stand at personal cost ↳ oath-fidelity, clean but unproven at the apex | No Criterion-8 exposure: not a Dec-2020 Texas v. PA amicus signatory, not seated for the 2021 certification |
| M13 | No long verifiable truth-telling track yet established ↳ Truthfulness, record clean but short | No documented-falsehood pattern; communications are fact-grounded |
| M09 | No affirmative evidence of integrity-under-pressure on a short record ↳ private/public consistency, undemonstrated | No documented private/public contempt gap either |
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: Steadiness, Diligence, Loyalty to the institution, near-perfect attendance (2.0% missed) and cross-party reliability show dependable service. Held at 7 because the costly-courage evidence (a stand against one's own side or interest) that pushes this pillar higher is not yet on a short record; no drag toward Self-Interest or Collapse documented. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Authenticity, Conviction, consistent constituent-service identity and inclusion-oriented outreach. Held at 6 by the absence (not presence) of a demonstrated self-reflection-under-fire moment; no documented integrity break, but no proven test either. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, Accountability, used the office to protect constituents (Coast Guard shutdown pay, child-labor enforcement, agency casework) with no drag toward Exploitation. Modest finances and no office-enrichment keep Stewardship clean. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, clean institutional record with no censure or scandal. Held at 6 because a durable legacy is unestablished on two terms; drags are absence-of-evidence, not documented vice. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 26/40 |
Total 26/40, Adequate. The pillars cluster in the solid-middle: a clean, bipartisan, diligent record without the extraordinary costly-courage or long-track evidence that lifts a score into the high tier. The ceiling here is short-tenure uncertainty, not documented failure.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“Horrific conditions at the southern border are not helped by do-nothing votes.”
Statement on border policy and a failed bipartisan immigration measure · Michigan Advance · PRINCIPLED · cite
“West Michigan, be on the lookout for scam calls like this one. You deserve to keep your hard-earned money in your pockets.”
Constituent-protection alert · Rep. Scholten official X account · CIVIC · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Hillary Jane Scholten (b. 1982). U.S. Representative for Michigan's 3rd Congressional District (Grand Rapids area) since January 7, 2023; re-elected 2024, running for re-election in 2026. Attorney: B.A. Gordon College 2004; J.D. University of Maryland School of Law 2011; clerked for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals attorney-adviser 2013-2017; staff attorney, Michigan Immigrant Rights Center. First woman and first Democrat since 1977 to represent Grand Rapids in Congress.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar Center / McCourt School Bipartisan Index 2023: ranked 51st of 435 House members and among the top-25 most bipartisan House Democrats; second-most-bipartisan in the Michigan delegation. Roll-call attendance ~98% (36 of 1,778 missed, Jan 2023-May 2026). Legislative focus on small business (Main Street Competes Act, ordered reported May 2026), labor enforcement (child-labor penalties), and constituent protection (Coast Guard shutdown pay). Policy positions are not graded here in either direction, per the framework.
3. Constitutional Moments
No documented constitutional-stakes conduct of the Criterion-8 class. Scholten was sworn in January 7, 2023, after the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus and after the January 2021 electoral-vote certification, so she was neither a signatory nor a participant in those events. No fake-electors, no process-subversion, no appointment-blocking conduct on record. Oversight activity (DOGE accountability) is ordinary legislative function.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Restrained, constituent-service-oriented public communication. Criticism of border conditions and "do-nothing votes" is policy heat, not anti-belonging or incitement. No documented slur, dehumanizing language, or sustained enemy-making pattern. Inclusion-oriented outreach to religious and cross-party voters is on record. No Criterion-10 exposure.
5. Fiduciary Profile
Estimated net worth ~$608K (Quiver Quantitative, April 2026), ordinary and excluded from scoring as raw wealth. No documented office-attributable enrichment: no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue. No ethics complaint, OCE referral, or sanction located. Routine FEC campaign-finance filings. Clean fiduciary record on the conduct standard.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Not a Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory (seated after December 2020); no fake-electors or process-subversion conduct; no documented enemy-making or incitement pattern. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A clean, bipartisan, diligent two-term record with no documented conduct failures and no Severity-class flags. What is present is real: top-tier bipartisan legislating, near-perfect attendance, substantive professional command, and constituent protection without office-enrichment. What is absent is the long-track and costly-courage evidence that lifts a record into the high tier, she has not yet faced or been documented in a stand against her own side or interest at personal cost. The honest read is a solid-middle record whose ceiling is short-tenure uncertainty, not vice. Adequate, and clean.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Clerk member profile (119th)
Tier 2: Lugar Center / McCourt Bipartisan Index · GovTrack attendance/voting · Ballotpedia
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack · Lugar/McCourt Bipartisan Index 2023 (House) · Official House site · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.