Analysis · Speech on a bill · beta

Mark DeSaulnier

Democrat on Resolution Recommending That the House of Representatives Find Hector Roos in Contempt of Congress for Refusal to Comply with Subpoenas Duly Issued by the Committee on Ethics 2026-09-01

259 words · 11 sentences · 15 clauses

Statement grade

Average 94 / 100

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

Procedure 7%Claims 79%Promise 14%

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 Mr. Speaker, Claims · 205 wordsI rise in support of the resolution holding Hector Roos in contempt of Congress for his failure to comply with duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on Ethics.¹ The investigative subcommittee, in the matter of Sheila Cherfilus- McCormick, repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Roos, who was a key witness in the matter.² Yet Mr. Roos failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses.³ While other witnesses did not fully cooperate with the committee’s investigation, Mr. Roos’ conduct went further. He simply ignored multiple subpoenas without asserting any valid legal privilege or basis for noncompliance.⁴ Despite his later claims that he affirmatively reached out to the committee after he was contacted about his noncompliance, Mr. Roos never communicated to an email address belonging to any staff, ⁵and he failed to respond to numerous emails and phone calls at the points of contact where he claims to have been reachable.⁶ The bipartisan subcommittee unanimously found, ⁷and the full committee agreed, that his conduct unnecessarily and significantly delayed the committee’s investigation and was thus worthy of a referral for criminal contempt proceedings.⁸ Compliance with the Ethics Committee subpoenas is not optional, as I have said before. Promise · 37 wordsThis contempt resolution is meant to demonstrate to witnesses before the committee that obstructive conduct has consequences, and the committee will vigorously use all the tools at its disposal to thoroughly and swiftly investigate allegations of misconduct.Vague promise Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 8 wordsI yield back 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 · 93

2 of 3 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.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “I yield back the balance of my time.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 3 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 · 93

0 of 3 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 · 2

Conclusion“I rise in support of the resolution holding Hector Roos in contempt of Congress for his failure to comply with duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on Ethics.”

Because“The investigative subcommittee, in the matter of Sheila Cherfilus- McCormick, repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Roos, who was a key witness in the matter.”

“Yet Mr. Roos failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses.”

“He simply ignored multiple subpoenas without asserting any valid legal privilege or basis for noncompliance.”

“The bipartisan subcommittee unanimously found,”

“and the full committee agreed, that his conduct unnecessarily and significantly delayed the committee’s investigation and was thus worthy of a referral for criminal contempt proceedings.”

Reason given
Conclusion“as I have said before.”

Because“Compliance with the Ethics Committee subpoenas is not optional,”

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 · 91

1 of 3 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.

A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible.What the tags mean “vigorously use all the tools at its disposal”Commits the committee to action with no specific step, date, or measure of success.

Claims · 8

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“holding Hector Roos in contempt of Congress”The resolution under debate by the House recommends that Hector Roos be found in contempt of Congress for refusing to comply with subpoenas issued by the House Committee on Ethics.search
2“repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Roos”An investigative subcommittee in the House Ethics Committee’s Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick matter repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Hector Roos, who was a witness in that matter.search
3“failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses”Hector Roos did not comply with voluntary information requests and multiple subpoenas issued during the 118th and 119th Congresses in the Cherfilus-McCormick investigation.search
4“without asserting any valid legal privilege or basis for noncompliance”Hector Roos asserted no legal privilege or other basis for declining to comply with the Ethics Committee subpoenas.search
5“never communicated to an email address belonging to any staff”Hector Roos never sent any communication to a House Ethics Committee staff email address.search
6“failed to respond to numerous emails and phone calls”Hector Roos did not respond to numerous emails and phone calls sent to the contact points he said were reachable.search
7“The bipartisan subcommittee unanimously found”The investigative subcommittee in the Cherfilus-McCormick matter voted unanimously to find Hector Roos’s conduct warranted referral for criminal contempt proceedings.search
8“worthy of a referral for criminal contempt proceedings”The full House Committee on Ethics agreed that Hector Roos’s conduct in the Cherfilus-McCormick investigation was worthy of referral for criminal contempt proceedings.search

Analyzed on 2026-09-15