Analysis · Speech on a bill · beta

Jamie Raskin

Democrat on Making Technical Amendments to Update Statutory References to Provisions Reclassified to Title 34, United States Code, and to Correct Related Technical Errors 2026-08-31

299 words · 17 sentences · 23 clauses

Statement grade

Average 91 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Procedure 5%Claims 75%Positioning 3%Thanks 13%The ask 3%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 9 wordsI yield myself such time as I may consume.Procedure Claims · 51 wordsToday, we are considering a series of bipartisan and, one hopes, noncontroversial bills to help ensure that the U.S. Code is up-to-date and accessible to all American citizens. We do this at least once every Congress. This is the first time we are doing it in the 119th Congress, I believe, Positioning · 9 wordsand I am very pleased to support this package.Positioning Claims · 148 wordsCurrently consisting of 54 different titles, the U.S. Code is a compilation of the vast array of Federal laws organized by coherent subject matter areas.¹ As new laws are passed, they get assimilated into the code, which is a painstaking process undertaken by the dedicated professionals who work in the Office of the Law Revision Counsel. As part of the office’s efforts to maintain the code, they work to make it more efficient and easier to navigate and understand. This includes correcting technical errors, removing ambiguities, updating statutory cross-references, and repealing provisions that have become obsolete. The bills we are considering today are a result of this exhaustive process. It is important to note that these bills make no change to the substantive meaning or effect of any existing laws.² They are purely technical in nature and will help ensure that the code is authoritative, accurate, and accessible. Thanks · 31 wordsI thank Chairman Jordan for continuing our Judiciary Committee’s long tradition of considering these bills in a bipartisan way. I thank the sponsors of each bill for bringing them forward today.Thanks Claims · 26 wordsThe first of them is H.R. 4499, which updates cross-references and corrects related technical errors throughout the code to accommodate previous reclassification efforts in title 34.³ Mr. Speaker, The ask · 9 wordsI urge all my colleagues to support the legislation, Thanks · 9 wordsand I thank my distinguished colleague for his leadership.Thanks Procedure · 7 wordsI reserve the balance of my time.Procedure

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 77

6 of 6 deductions are Signal

Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.

Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I yield myself such time as I may consume.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “and I am very pleased to support this package.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I thank Chairman Jordan for continuing our Judiciary Committee’s long tradition of considering these bills in a bipartisan way.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “I thank the sponsors of each bill for bringing them forward today.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Thanks and tributes.What the tags mean “and I thank my distinguished colleague for his leadership.”Thanks: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I reserve the balance of my time.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 6 deductions are Relevance

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue. Measured against the bill under debate.

Nothing lost points.

Reasoning · 87

0 of 6 deductions are Reasoning

Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.

Nothing lost points.

Conclusions found · 1

Conclusion“I urge all my colleagues to support the legislation,”

Because“It is important to note that these bills make no change to the substantive meaning or effect of any existing laws.”

“They are purely technical in nature and will help ensure that the code is authoritative, accurate,”

“and accessible.”

Reason given

Respect · no score

Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.

Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.

Clarity · 100

0 of 6 deductions are Clarity

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

Nothing lost points.

Claims · 3

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

1“consisting of 54 different titles”The United States Code currently consists of 54 titles.search
2“these bills make no change to the substantive meaning or effect of any existing laws”The technical-amendment bills under consideration make no change to the substantive meaning or effect of any existing laws.search
3“updates cross-references and corrects related technical errors throughout the code to accommodate previous reclassification efforts in title 34”H.R. 4499 updates cross-references and corrects related technical errors throughout the U.S. Code to accommodate previous reclassification efforts in title 34.search

Analyzed on 2026-09-15