Composite 6.85 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.
Lands in the Sound band at credit 694, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)
No military or uniformed service on record. Marc Veasey's pre-congressional record is in journalism/mass communications and Texas state legislative service (Texas House District 95, 2005-2013). Included here for completeness; absence of service is 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 | 7 | why?No documented subversion of constitutional process. As a House Democrat he had no occasion or opportunity to sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus (a Republican-only filing), and no fake-elector or count-overturning conduct appears on the record. Standard upholding of oath-tied process; held at upper-middle because the record is one of routine institutional participation rather than a documented stand at personal cost. No criterion-8 conduct found. [source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?GovTrack records him joining bipartisan bills the 3rd-most-often in the Texas delegation in 2024; member of the New Democrat Coalition (a cross-ideological caucus). Consistent record of cross-party cosponsorship over a long tenure. Solid but not exceptional bipartisan engagement. [source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?Voting-rights and constituent-service orientation (founded the Congressional Voting Rights Caucus to address ballot-access barriers). No documented anti-belonging rhetoric or denial of opponents' personhood. Treats constituents and opponents as persons of equal worth on the available record. [source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against political rivals; his oversight requests (e.g., ICE-facility conditions, detainee-death investigations) are addressed at agencies and policy, not at personal enemies. No criterion-class conduct. [source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?Rhetoric is policy-directed and largely measured across a long tenure. Criticism of administrations is framed at decisions and programs, not at casting opponents as illegitimate enemies. No documented pattern of dehumanizing or inciting language. Upper-middle. [source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 7 | why?No House Ethics Committee or Office of Congressional Ethics referral, no sanction, and no financial-disclosure scandal located across his House tenure. Clean fiduciary appearance record; held at 7 rather than higher absent affirmative, documented stewardship beyond baseline compliance. [source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 6 | why?Reliable critic of the opposing administration; the higher bar, publicly calling out one's OWN side at cost, is not strongly documented. No record of conspicuous breaks from his caucus on conduct or principle. Middle: present and engaged, but the costly self-side accountability that earns the top tier is not on record. [source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 7 | why?Missed only 1.3% of roll-call votes Jan 2013-May 2026, better than the median for sitting representatives. Sustained attention to the duties of the seat, the discretion/diligence test met steadily, if not at the singular-sacrifice apex. [source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 7 | why?No documented gap between a private contempt and a public face; no leaked-vs-stated double standard on record. Consistent public posture over a long career. Upper-middle on available evidence. [source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Solid constituent-service record (voting-rights caucus, district casework, low absenteeism) in a safe-Democratic district. No documented donor-over-constituent capture, but also no standout instance of defying organized interests for constituents. Honest middle. [source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 7 | why?No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family-payment scheme, office-information trading, or foreign-government revenue located. Scored only on office-attributable enrichment per the standard; raw wealth and party are excluded. Clean on the available disclosure record. [source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Conventional institutional decorum across a 13-year House tenure; no censure, no documented breaches of House decorum rules. Honors the office over spectacle in routine practice. [source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 7 | why?No sustained documented-falsehood pattern located; public claims track to policy positions and oversight findings rather than fabrication. Upper-middle on truthfulness. [source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Substantive committee engagement, co-chair of the Congressional Black Caucus Task Force on Foreign Affairs and National Security, and authorship of substantive legislation (e.g., the Tim Cole exoneration measure in the Texas House). Command of his portfolios over talking points; solid. [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 calling out his own party/caucus at personal cost; criticism is directed at the opposing administration ↳ active-duty call-out of one's own side | No conduct breach, this is an absence of an affirmative high-bar act, not misconduct |
| M10 | Safe-Democratic district; no standout instance of defying organized/donor interests for constituents on record ↳ constituent-vs-donor alignment | Strong baseline constituent service and low absenteeism |
| M06 | No affirmative stewardship beyond baseline disclosure compliance documented ↳ fiduciary baseline only | No ethics referral, sanction, or disclosure scandal, clean record |
| M02 | Bipartisan engagement is solid (3rd in TX delegation 2024) but not top-tier across the full House ↳ bipartisan reach | Consistent cross-party cosponsorship over a long tenure |
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: Reliability, Steadiness, Diligence, the 1.3% missed-vote rate over 13 years and consistent district service evidence steady fidelity to the duties of the seat. Held at 7 by the absence of a documented courage-at-cost moment, not by any drag toward self-interest or collapse. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 7 | why?Attributes: Authenticity, Consistency, a consistent public posture over a long career with no documented integrity break. Below the top tier because the record shows steady conviction rather than documented self-reflection or teachability under fire. |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Stewardship, Protection, voting-rights and oversight work aimed at constituent and institutional protection, with no documented exploitation of power. The constituent-vs-donor and own-side-accountability gaps keep it at solid rather than high. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 7 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Justice, a clean, low-drama institutional record (voting-rights caucus, exoneration legislation, no ethics findings). A record most would be comfortable seeing reflected, tempered by the absence of a defining high-cost stand. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 28/40 |
Total 28/40, Solid. A consistent, clean institutional record with no documented severity-class conduct and no standout sacrifice; the pillars sit evenly at the upper-middle.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“Eliminating the barriers and discrimination too many Americans face at the polls is an immediate need.”
On founding the Congressional Voting Rights Caucus · House biography / press kit · CIVIC · cite
“The public deserves transparency and accountability from its institutions.”
Paraphrase of repeated oversight/disclosure positions (Ethics report and case-file disclosure resolutions) · House press releases · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Marc Allison Veasey (born January 3, 1971, Fort Worth, Texas). U.S. Representative for Texas's 33rd Congressional District since January 3, 2013, the first African American congressman elected from Tarrant County. Previously served in the Texas House of Representatives (District 95, 2005-2013). B.S. in Mass Communications, Texas Wesleyan University (1995). Member of the Congressional Black Caucus and the New Democrat Coalition; co-chair of the CBC Task Force on Foreign Affairs and National Security. Announced he would not seek another House term after his district was eliminated in redistricting; briefly filed for and then withdrew from the 2026 Tarrant County judge race, completing his House term through January 2027.
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Thirteen-year House tenure (113th-119th Congresses). DW-NOMINATE places him in the mainstream of the House Democratic caucus. Notable record markers: founded the Congressional Voting Rights Caucus; co-chairs the CBC Task Force on Foreign Affairs and National Security; GovTrack rates him 3rd in the Texas delegation for joining bipartisan bills in 2024. Strong attendance (1.3% missed roll-call votes lifetime). In the Texas House he authored the measure honoring Tim Cole, a wrongly convicted man posthumously exonerated. Policy positions are not scored here in either direction per the framework.
3. Constitutional Moments
No documented process-subversion conduct. As a House Democrat he was not a party to the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus or any fake-elector effort. His institutional interventions have run toward transparency and oversight (resolutions for public disclosure of investigative files; calls for release of an Ethics Committee report; requests for investigation into a detention-center death). Routine participation in constitutional process without a documented high-cost stand for or against it.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Measured, policy-directed public rhetoric across a long tenure. Criticism of administrations is framed at decisions and programs rather than at casting opponents as illegitimate enemies. No documented pattern of dehumanizing or inciting language, and no single heated line rises to a criterion-10 concern. Upper-middle: steady restraint without a singular high-mark anchor.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No House Ethics Committee or Office of Congressional Ethics referral, no sanction, and no financial-disclosure scandal located across his tenure. No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trading, or foreign-government revenue. A clean fiduciary appearance record; scored on baseline compliance, with no affirmative stewardship beyond it documented.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. No process-subversion (criterion 8), he could not and did not sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and no fake-elector or count-overturning conduct appears. No sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (criterion 10). Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
A clean, steady, low-drama institutional record. Veasey clears the conduct standard on the unglamorous virtues, diligence (a 1.3% missed-vote rate over 13 years), consistent constituent and voting-rights work, cross-party cosponsorship, and an unblemished ethics and disclosure record. What holds him in the solid-but- not-exceptional band is the absence rather than the presence of anything: no documented high-cost stand for the oath, no conspicuous call-out of his own side, no defining sacrifice. The standard counts that honestly, this is a record of reliable institutional fidelity, not of rare courage. Adequate, earned, and clean.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member record · House Office of the Clerk, Financial Disclosures
Tier 2: GovTrack member profile + report cards · Lugar-McCourt Bipartisan Index · Ballotpedia
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · GovTrack profile · House financial disclosures · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.