The Curia grade
How the grade works.
One letter for each member, built from public records. Here is exactly what goes into it, and what it cannot see.
Every member of Congress gets a letter, A through F. It answers one question: do they serve the people who elected them, and do they conduct themselves cleanly? It is built entirely from public records, rebuilt daily, and it is a curve. A letter means where a member sits relative to the rest of Congress, not against a perfect score no one reaches.
Most of the grade is about conduct both parties are measured on identically, with a smaller share about whether a member votes for what their own voters want. That balance is on purpose. It keeps the letter from becoming a party score.
What goes into it
How they are funded
Their small-donor share and how little they lean on PAC money, each measured against their own chamber. Money that comes in small checks from many people points a different direction than money that comes from political action committees.
Whether they trade stocks
Members who do not trade individual stocks score highest. Trading also caps the grade: fifty or more disclosed trades cannot earn above a C, and any late filing under the STOCK Act cannot earn above a B, no matter how clean the rest of the record.
Voting for what their voters want
Of the policies a majority of both parties' voters support, how many has the member backed. The full list is below. Because both parties' voters want these, a member of either party who will not back one is out of step with the people who elected them, and no one can say they were judged by the other side's priorities. Backing a policy counts in full; voting against one on the floor counts as nothing. Simply never signing on is treated as neither, worth partial credit, because no position is not opposition, and most of these bills are carried by one party, so silence is common and does not by itself mean a member is against the idea.
Showing up to vote
Whether the member is present for the floor votes we track. A plain measure of doing the job, and one both parties earn evenly.
The policies the vote score is built on.
These are the 13policies where a majority of both Democratic and Republican voters want the same thing. A member is scored only on these, so the benchmark is never one party's wish list. Policies where the two parties' voters disagree are left out entirely.
- Ban Congressional Stock Tradingreform87%+
- Require Dark Money Disclosuresreform85%+
- Universal Background Checksissue81%+
- Red-Flag Protection Ordersissue77%+
- Overturn Citizens Unitedreform75%+
- Stop Lobbying for Foreign Governmentsreform71%+
- Open Primaries to Independentsreform65%+
- Extend the Lobbying Cool-Off Periodreform65%+
- Extend ACA Subsidies Three Yearsissue59%+
- Raise the Purchase Age to 21issue59%+
- Reauthorize the Addiction Grant Programsissue58%+
- End Gerrymanderingreform57%+
- Charge Polluting Imports a Carbon Priceissue54%+
The percentage is the lower of the two parties, so “87%+” means at least that share of each party's voters want it. Voter figures come from the surveys cited on each reform and issue page.
What the grade cannot see.
A cosponsorship is a partial stand-in for representing your voters. A member can agree with a goal and decline to sign a particular bill, or write their own. We count backing the bill, which is the record that exists, not the private view.
The voter benchmark is national polling by party, not the member's own district or state. A member from a competitive seat and one from a safe seat face different electorates, and the grade does not adjust for that.
The money figures are disclosed money only. Spending by outside groups that do not name their donors, the dark money that set a record in 2024, never appears in any of these numbers. A low PAC share is not proof a member runs clean, only that their committee reported little direct PAC money.
Where we have little data on a member, a brand-new member with no voting record, or one with no FEC filing yet, that part of the grade sits at the middle rather than punishing them for a gap in the record.