Composite 6.34 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Adequate band at credit 655, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No military service record. Career attorney (Florida State University College of Law) and Florida state legislator (Florida House 2007-2012; Florida Senate 2012-2016) prior to U.S. House. Service context noted for completeness; not scored.
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 | 6 | why?No process-subversion conduct: a Democrat seated 2017, he did not and could not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (a Republican-only filing) and is not on any fake-elector or election-overturning record. No standout cost-bearing constitutional stand that would push above the middle, either. Upholds the oath in the ordinary course; honest middle-high. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?Member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus across all three terms; top-third Lugar Bipartisan Index in the 117th and top-half in the 118th. Institution-over-win cross-aisle work (infrastructure, PACT Act, COVID relief) is the documented pattern. Scored on cross-party conduct, not on party or policy. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 6 | why?No documented pattern of casting opponents or constituents as enemies who do not belong; no anti-belonging incident on record. Middle reflects an unremarkable but clean record on persons-of-equal-worth, not a high-mark anchor. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals or critics; no criterion-class conduct. Clean on abuse-of-office. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 6 | why?No documented incitement or sustained enemy-making rhetoric, no capping pattern. Generally measured public communication; held at the middle for absence of a distinguishing restraint-at-cost moment rather than for any drag. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?The 2019 Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust complaint naming Soto among 15 members (a quid-pro-quo allegation) is a partisan advocacy-group filing with no charge, no House Ethics finding, and no sanction, weighed as an appearance-concern, never a finding. Minor drag from the middle on that basis alone. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 5 | why?No documented instance of calling out his own side at real political cost (the higher active-duty bar). Bipartisan-caucus participation is collaboration, not own-side accountability. Honest middle for absence of evidence either way. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 5 | why?No documented standout discretion-test moment where private advantage was refused for the public good, and no documented failure of discretion. Neutral middle. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 6 | why?No documented gap between private conduct and public posture; off-camera reputation not contradicted by record. Clean but unremarkable. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Chose to run for reelection in a redrawn, GOP-leaning FL-9 rather than seek an easier seat, staying with constituents through an unfavorable map. Conduct-only read: no constituent-vs-donor abuse on record; positive note for not abandoning the district. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 8 | why?No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family-payment, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue on record. Scored only on office-driven enrichment per the contamination rule, not raw wealth. High by absence of any breach. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Sustained regular-order, committee-and-caucus institutional posture without spectacle-seeking conduct on record. Honors the institution over the show. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 7 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern on record. No election-denial or disinformation conduct. Positive-leaning for absence of a truthfulness breach. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 6 | why?Substantive committee engagement (Energy and Commerce; technology, telecom, and storm-recovery work) over talking-point posture. Solid working-legislator substance; middle-high. [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 | 2019 FACET (Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust) ethics complaint named Soto among 15 members in a quid-pro-quo allegation regarding a Nevada casino executive ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | Partisan advocacy-group complaint; no charge, no House Ethics finding, no sanction, weighed as appearance-concern only, not a finding |
| M07 | No documented instance of calling out his own side at real political cost ↳ active call-out duty, no evidence met | Absence of evidence, not evidence of a breach; held at honest middle |
| M08 | No documented standout discretion-test moment ↳ Discretion Test, neutral | No documented failure of discretion either; neutral middle |
| M14 | Substantive but not field-defining policy command on record ↳ substance over talking points, middling depth | Genuine committee engagement; no shallow-posture drag |
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
| 6 | why?Attributes: Steadiness, Loyalty to institution, Selfless Service, consistent bipartisan-caucus participation and a decision to stay with a redrawn, unfavorable district show institutional steadiness. No documented Courage-at-cost high mark and no Cowardice/Self-Interest drag; an honest middle. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 6 | why?Attributes: Authenticity, Conviction, no documented integrity breach and no documented self-correction event to raise it. The unresolved 2019 appearance-concern is a minor, mitigated drag. Middle. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Stewardship, Accountability, Protection, no documented exploitation of office; disaster-recovery and consumer-facing committee work plus staying with constituents through redistricting weigh modestly positive. No abuse-of-power drag. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 6 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Love of Truth, a clean but not distinguished institutional record; no falsehood pattern, no enrichment scandal. The mitigated 2019 complaint is the only asterisk. A record temperate rather than exceptional. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 25/40 |
Total 25/40, Adequate. The pillars track the conduct composite: a clean, bipartisan, institutionally steady record without a defining high-mark moment and without a documented severity-class breach.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“I'm running for reelection. We've won tough races before and we'll win this one too.”
On choosing to run in a redrawn, GOP-leaning FL-9 rather than seek an easier seat · Central Florida Public Media · CIVIC · cite
“The Problem Solvers Caucus is about finding common ground to actually get things done for the American people.”
On rejoining the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus for the 117th Congress · Office of Rep. Darren Soto · PRINCIPLED · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Darren Michael Soto (born February 25, 1978). U.S. Representative for Florida's 9th Congressional District since 2017 (D). Previously Florida House of Representatives 2007-2012 and Florida Senate 2012-2016. Attorney; Florida State University College of Law. First Floridian of Puerto Rican descent elected to Congress. Member, bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus across all three House terms; serves on the Energy and Commerce Committee.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Lugar Center / McCourt School Bipartisan Index: ranked ~38th in the 117th Congress (.694) and ~60th in the 118th, top-third to top-half cross-party output. DW-NOMINATE center-left. Member of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus throughout his House tenure; legislative footprint includes infrastructure, the PACT Act, and COVID-relief work plus storm-recovery and telecommunications matters via Energy and Commerce. Policy positions are not scored in either direction per the framework.
3. Constitutional Moments
As a Democrat seated in January 2017, Soto is not on the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory list (a Republican-only December 2020 filing) and has no fake-elector, election-overturning, or process-subversion conduct on record. No criterion-8 or criterion-10 conduct identified. Routine constitutional-process participation is not scored as a high mark or a drag.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
No documented incitement, sustained enemy-making, or anti-belonging rhetorical pattern. Public communication is generally measured. Held at the conduct middle for the absence of a distinguishing restraint-at-cost moment rather than for any documented drag.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue on the record. The one fiduciary appearance-concern is the August 2019 FACET (Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust) ethics complaint that named Soto among 15 members in a quid-pro-quo allegation; it produced no charge, no House Ethics finding, and no sanction, and is weighed as an appearance-concern only. Raw wealth is not scored per the contamination rule.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No process-subversion (criterion 8) and no sustained enemy-making/incitement (criterion 10). The 2019 FACET complaint is an unresolved, no-finding appearance-concern, not a severity event. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A clean, bipartisan, institutionally steady record without a defining high-mark moment and without a documented severity-class breach. The Problem Solvers Caucus participation and the choice to stay with a redrawn, unfavorable district weigh modestly positive; the only asterisk is a mitigated, no-finding 2019 ethics complaint. The composite lands in the Adequate band, temperate rather than exceptional, with the honest absence of both standout virtue and documented vice recorded faithfully.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Clerk financial disclosures
Tier 2: Lugar Center / McCourt 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.