Analysis · Speech on a bill · beta

Maxwell Frost

Democrat on Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act 2026-07-14

290 words · 18 sentences · 20 clauses

Statement grade

A+

Average 95 / 100

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

Claims 34%Positioning 6%The ask 13%Anecdote 6%Reasoning 28%Promise 7%Procedure 2%The question 4%

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

Mr. Speaker, Claims · 19 wordsI strongly oppose the Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act. Sponsors claim this bill prevents the privacy of gun owners, Positioning · 17 wordsbut in reality, it protects mass shooters, terrorists, gun traffickers, Unearned certaintyand the profits of the firearms industry.Positioning Claims · 17 wordsFinancial institutions have already been using merchant codes to detect crimes like money laundering and human trafficking.¹ The ask · 15 wordsThey should be allowed to use that same responsible monitoring to help prevent gun violence. Anecdote · 6 wordsI know personally why this matters.Anecdote Claims · 59 wordsThe Pulse nightclub shooter opened up six new credit cards in 8 months.² He racked up more than $26,000 in credit card charges on guns and ammunition in the days before his killing spree in the middle of my district in my home of Orlando, Florida.³ Our system failed to turn those warning signs into an alert for police. Anecdote · 11 wordsHe murdered 49 angels in my community and wounded another 49.⁴Anecdote Reasoning · 44 wordsInstead of helping to prevent the next tragedy, this bill makes it easier for those warning signs to be missed yet again. It strips law enforcement of an essential tool to stop violence before it happens, making every community in our Nation less safe. Promise · 19 wordsFor this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee. Reasoning · 38 wordsIf the House rules permitted, I would have offered an important amendment to make clear that nothing in this bill should prevent law enforcement from using merchant category codes to assist in investigating and preventing acts of terrorism. Mr. Speaker, The ask · 24 wordsI ask unanimous consent to insert the text of this amendment into the Record immediately prior to the vote on the motion to recommit. Procedure · 6 wordsThe SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. DesJarlais).Procedure The question · 11 wordsIs there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida? Claims · 4 wordsThere was no objection.

At a glance

Lost points for
Reasons givenThis statement drew 3 conclusions and gave a reason for each one.

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 85

6 of 7 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.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “but in reality, it protects mass shooters, terrorists, gun traffickers,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “and the profits of the firearms industry.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I know personally why this matters.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “He murdered 49 angels in my community and wounded another 49.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.”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 “DesJarlais).”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · 100

0 of 7 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 · 100

0 of 7 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 · 3

Conclusion“I strongly oppose the Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act.”

Because“Financial institutions have already been using merchant codes to detect crimes like money laundering and human trafficking.”

“He racked up more than $26,000 in credit card charges on guns and ammunition in the days before his killing spree in the middle of my district in my home of Orlando, Florida.”

“It strips law enforcement of an essential tool to stop violence before it happens, making every community in our Nation less safe.”

Reason given
Conclusion“They should be allowed to use that same responsible monitoring to help prevent gun violence.”

Because“Financial institutions have already been using merchant codes to detect crimes like money laundering and human trafficking.”

Reason given
Conclusion“For this reason, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee.”

Because“Instead of helping to prevent the next tragedy, this bill makes it easier for those warning signs to be missed yet again.”

“It strips law enforcement of an essential tool to stop violence before it happens, making every community in our Nation less safe.”

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 · 96

1 of 7 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.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “in reality”The phrase asserts certainty in place of a source for the claim about what the bill protects.

Claims · 4

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“Financial institutions have already been using merchant codes to detect crimes like money laundering and human trafficking”Financial institutions already use merchant codes to detect crimes such as money laundering and human trafficking.search
2“The Pulse nightclub shooter opened up six new credit cards in 8 months”The Pulse nightclub shooter opened six new credit cards in the eight months before the 2016 Orlando attack.search
3“He racked up more than $26,000 in credit card charges on guns and ammunition in the days before his killing spree”The Pulse nightclub shooter charged more than $26,000 on credit cards for guns and ammunition in the days before the 2016 Orlando attack.search
4“He murdered 49 angels in my community and wounded another 49”The 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando killed 49 people and wounded 49 others.search

Analyzed on 2026-09-15