Composite 6.99 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.
✓ Clears the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: supported.
Clears the 700 support line at credit 704 (Sound band) with no severity flag, Author's Verdict: supported on the documented conduct.
- Platoon leader through regimental commander across a 30-year Guard career
- Commanded 2nd Bn, 153rd Infantry Regiment, 39th Infantry Brigade; activated post-9/11
- Deployed to Sinai, Egypt 2002 with the Multinational Force and Observers
- Legion of Merit; Harry S. Truman Award (National Guard Bureau, 2015)
Service to country is honored here as context, not as a score. Character demonstrated in office, the January-6 process defense (M01) and the Steering Committee resignation over accountability (M07), is where conduct is scored. The badge contextualizes the record; it does not move the composite.
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 | 8 | why?Affirmative oath fidelity at intra-party cost. Womack declined to sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania
amicus brief (verified against the 126-signatory list, he is NOT on it, unlike Arkansas colleagues
Crawford and Westerman), and voted to count both Arizona's and Pennsylvania's certified electoral
votes on January 6, 2021, issuing a public "it's our duty to uphold the Constitution" statement
against his own party's pressure. The constitutional process honored, not subverted. Held below the
apex tier reserved for a career-defining sacrifice purely for the oath.
[source] |
| M02 | Party Over Country | 7 | why?A career appropriator who works the regular-order bill process across the aisle as a subcommittee
chairman (THUD, FSGG), where bipartisan dealmaking is structurally required. Tempered by a generally
party-aligned floor voting record; institution-minded in process, conventional in partisan posture.
[source] |
| M03 | Persons of Equal Worth | 7 | why?No documented pattern of anti-belonging rhetoric or casting constituents/opponents as illegitimate.
Upper-middle on absence of documented breach rather than an affirmative high-mark anchor.
[source] |
| M04 | Weaponization of Justice | 7 | why?No documented weaponization of state power against rivals. The record runs the other direction, he
defended the certified-count process against pressure to overturn it. No criterion-class conduct.
[source] |
| M05 | Incitement / Anti-Belonging | 7 | why?Measured public rhetoric over a long career; no documented incitement or sustained enemy-making
pattern. A retired-colonel, regular-order temperament. Upper-middle.
[source] |
| M06 | Fiduciary Conduct | 6 | why?Active individual securities trading parsed from STOCK Act filings is a genuine appearance-concern
under the fiduciary standard, the optics of a sitting appropriator trading individual equities. No
ethics finding, sanction, or insider-trade allegation on record; weighed as appearance only, not a
breach. Middle.
[source] |
| M07 | Duty to Call Out | 8 | why?Met the active-duty standard, calling out his own side at cost. After January 6, Womack played the
tape of fellow Republican Mo Brooks's Capitol-rally speech to the GOP Steering Committee, led the
push to discipline him, and when leadership (McCarthy) declined, resigned his Steering Committee seat
in protest. Surrendering an influential post to hold his own party accountable is the call-out duty
met at real cost.
[source] |
| M08 | The Discretion Test | 6 | why?No purely-discretionary integrity test in the documented record at the McCain-tier; the Steering
Committee resignation already credited under M07 carries the strongest discretion signal. Solid
middle absent a defining documented anchor.
[source] |
| M09 | The No-Camera Test | 7 | why?No documented gap between private conduct and public posture; the off-camera Steering Committee
account (anger at the failure to punish Brooks) tracks his on-record institutional posture.
[source] |
| M10 | Constituent-vs-Donor Vote | 6 | why?Represents a solidly conservative northwest-Arkansas district in line with its preferences; no
documented sustained divergence between voting and constituent interest. Conventional middle.
[source] |
| M11 | Net-Worth Trajectory | 7 | why?No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family-payment scheme, office-info
trade finding, or foreign-government revenue on record. Per the contamination rule, raw trading
volume / personal wealth is NOT scored here (the trading appearance-concern is captured under M06);
M11 measures only enrichment driven by the office, of which none is documented.
[source] |
| M12 | Floor Decorum | 7 | why?Sustained regular-order, institution-respecting posture as a senior appropriator and former Budget
Committee chair, the work-the-process-not-the-spectacle disposition. Honors the institution.
[source] |
| M13 | Lying & Misleading | 6 | why?No documented pattern of sustained falsehood; his post-January-6 public framing emphasized
constitutional duty rather than fraud claims. Solid middle absent a strong affirmative truth-telling
anchor.
[source] |
| M14 | Knowledge Depth | 7 | why?Deep substantive command of federal budget and appropriations policy, former House Budget Committee
chair, multiple Appropriations subcommittee chairmanships (THUD, FSGG). Substance over talking points.
[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 | Active individual-securities trading parsed from STOCK Act filings while serving as a senior appropriator ↳ Fiduciary appearance-of-impropriety | No ethics finding, sanction, or insider-trade allegation; weighed as appearance only, not a breach |
| M02 | Generally party-aligned floor voting record alongside the cross-aisle appropriations work ↳ Institution-over-party, partial | Regular-order bill process is structurally bipartisan; posture is conventional, not obstructive |
| M10 | No affirmative anchor of constituent fidelity beyond ordinary district representation ↳ Constituent-fidelity, absence of high-mark evidence | - |
| M13 | No strong affirmative truth-telling anchor on record ↳ Honesty, absence of high-mark evidence | No documented falsehood pattern either; the score reflects an honest middle |
| Pillar III | The individual-trading appearance-concern (Stewardship) tempers an otherwise clean protection-of-the-public record ↳ Stewardship drag | No exploitation finding; the January-6 process defense is genuine Protection |
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
| 8 | why?Attributes: Courage, Steadiness Under Pressure, Loyalty to oath over party, declining the Texas v. PA brief, certifying both contested states, and resigning a leadership post over January-6 accountability all evidence loyalty to the institution above faction. Minimal drag toward Self-Interest. |
| II | Aspiration & Integrity
| 7 | why?Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, a consistent regular-order institutionalist posture. Held below the top tier by the absence of a self-correction or reform anchor and by the individual-trading appearance-concern (a Stewardship/Consistency drag). |
| III | Protection & Influence
| 7 | why?Attributes: Protection, Accountability, used his standing to defend the certified-count process and to press intra-party accountability after January 6. Tempered by the trading-appearance drag toward Stewardship's opposite; no exploitation finding. |
| IV | Legacy & Virtue
| 7 | why?Attributes: Integrity, Moral Courage, the January-6 record is a durable institutional-fidelity mark in an era abandoning it. Drags toward Favoritism are minor; the trading optics are the asterisk. |
| TOTAL: Moderate | 29/40 |
Total 29/40, Strong. The pillars hold modestly above the conduct composite because the January-6 process defense and the Steering Committee resignation are genuine character marks, even where several measures sit at honest middles for want of affirmative high-mark anchors.
What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →
In their own words
“It's our duty to uphold the Constitution. Prior to the vote, in accordance with my oath to the Constitution and the processes outlined by our founding document, I will not oppose the counting of certified electoral votes.”
Statement explaining his vote to count the certified 2020 electoral votes, against intra-party pressure to object · Womack House office, 'It's Our Duty to Uphold the Constitution' · PRINCIPLED · cite
“I cannot tell you how angry I was. [McCarthy] demonstrated a lack of leadership.”
On resigning the GOP Steering Committee after leadership declined to discipline Mo Brooks for his January-6 rally speech · Arkansas Democrat-Gazette · ACCOUNTABILITY · cite
Full personnel file
1. Identity
Stephen Allen Womack (born February 18, 1957, Russellville, Arkansas). U.S. Representative for Arkansas's 3rd congressional district since 2011. Mayor of Rogers, Arkansas 1998-2010. Arkansas Army National Guard 1979-2009, retiring as Colonel (Legion of Merit; Truman Award). BA in communications, Arkansas Tech University, 1979. Former Chairman, House Budget Committee (2018-19); senior House Appropriations Committee member with multiple subcommittee chairmanships (THUD, FSGG).
2. Voting / Legislative Profile
Career appropriator, House Appropriations Committee since 2011, chairing the Transportation-Housing-Urban Development (THUD) and Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) subcommittees at various points, and the full House Budget Committee 2018-19. Generally party-aligned floor record paired with cross-aisle regular-order bill work that the appropriations process structurally requires. Policy positions are not scored in either direction per the framework's refusal to grade contested policy.
3. Constitutional Moments
January 6, 2021: declined to sign the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus brief (confirmed absent from the 126-signatory list), voted to count both Arizona's and Pennsylvania's certified electoral votes, and issued a public "duty to uphold the Constitution" statement against intra-party pressure to object. Subsequently played Mo Brooks's January-6 rally speech to the GOP Steering Committee, pressed for discipline, and resigned his Steering Committee seat when leadership declined, surrendering an influential post over institutional accountability.
4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile
Measured, regular-order public posture over a long career; no documented pattern of incitement or enemy-making. The defining rhetorical moments are institutional, the constitutional-duty statement on the electoral count and the on-record anger at his own leadership's failure to hold a colleague accountable after January 6.
5. Fiduciary Profile
No documented office-attributable enrichment, no self-dealing, family-payment scheme, office-information trade finding, or foreign-government revenue on record. The genuine appearance-concern is active individual-securities trading parsed from STOCK Act filings while serving as a senior appropriator; weighed as optics under the fiduciary standard, with no ethics finding, sanction, or insider-trade allegation attached.
6. Severity-Class Conduct
No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Critically, Womack is NOT a Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus signatory and voted to count the certified electoral votes, the opposite of Criterion-8 process subversion. No sustained enemy-making or incitement pattern (Criterion 10). The individual-trading optics are an M06 appearance-concern, not a severity flag. Flag count: zero.
7. What The Framework Says
Womack reads as a regular-order institutionalist whose strongest marks are conduct under pressure: he refused to join his party's effort to overturn the 2020 result, voted to count the certified electoral votes on a duty-to-the-Constitution rationale, and gave up a leadership post to hold a colleague accountable when his own leadership would not. The standard records the honest middles, conventional partisan posture, the absence of affirmative anchors on some measures, and the individual-trading appearance-concern, because the high marks only mean something when the asterisks are counted too. A sound institutional record with real January-6 conduct credit.
8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper
Tier 1 (primary): Texas v. Pennsylvania Amicus Brief of 126 Representatives (signatory list) · 2021 United States Electoral College vote count
Tier 2: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Steering Committee resignation · Quiver Quantitative, Womack congressional trading
Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House biography · GovTrack · Wikipedia
Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.