← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning and Clarity.
Average 86 / 100
Signal
92 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
76 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Reasoning
88 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
–
Not scored Viewing ↓
Clarity
89 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Procedure 1% Claims 89% Reasoning 2% Positioning 6% The ask 2%
Structure · 8 steps
Claims · 7
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 7 words I rise today in support of H.R. Procedure Claims · 425 words 2715, the Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act, which I introduced with my Louisiana colleague Representative Clay Higgins.1 This bill will protect American consumers and create a level playing field for American businesses by authorizing the Food and Drug Administration to order the destruction of imported products found to pose a significant public health concern. Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it. They can then try to enter through a different port where the shipment may not be caught, a practice known as port shopping. This loophole endangers our health and undermines our food and drug safety systems. This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense.2 This bill also prohibits the unauthorized movement of any article designated for destruction by the FDA.3 Some imported foods, especially seafood, have been found to be contaminated with carcinogenic drugs, pesticides, and other harmful impurities. Beyond food, there has been a rise in imports of dangerous vape devices and e-liquids containing banned substances and excessive nicotine, as well as counterfeit drugs like GLP-1s. This threat is real and documented. Exporters, especially Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting rejected shipments at different ports.4 This bill closes that loophole and creates a deterrent for bad actors. Congressman Higgins and I have worked hand in hand with our domestic fishing industry on this legislation, including the Southern Shrimp Alliance. American fishermen perform backbreaking work and operate under strict U.S. food safety, labor, and environmental rules that raise their costs significantly. Meanwhile, some foreign producers cut corners and still get multiple chances to dump noncompliant and often dangerous products into the American marketplace. Seafood imports continue to pour into the United States, increasing in volume each year, undercutting domestic fishermen. Last year, the U.S. imported 6.4 billion pounds of foreign seafood, a 10 percent increase from 2019.5 As imports have increased, American commercial seafood landings have declined. Logical leap In 2024, the U.S. commercial landings totaled 7.7 billion pounds, the first time landings have been below 8 billion pounds since 1988.6 Louisiana’s commercial fishing industry has particularly been hit hard by this flood of foreign imports. Since 2021, Louisiana shrimpers have seen the value of their catch drop by more than 50 percent, falling from $131 million in 2021 to just $61 million in 2024.7 Off point Reasoning · 11 words As you can see, this is, in fact, a real threat. Unearned certainty Claims · 39 words Passing this bill will deter bad actors from flooding the market with unsafe products and provide American fishermen with a fair playing field, allowing them to sustainably harvest millions of additional pounds of shrimp and other seafood each year. Vague promise Positioning · 30 words This is a real issue, and I am proud to be working in a bipartisan way to address an issue that will impact not just Louisiana but our entire country. Positioning Mr. Speaker, The ask · 8 words I urge the passage of this critical legislation.
At a glance
Lost points for Off point ×6 Positioning ×2 Procedure Logical leap Unearned certainty Vague promise
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 92
3 of 12 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.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “I rise today in support of H.R.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “This is a real issue,” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Positioning Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it. What the tags mean → “and I am proud to be working in a bipartisan way to address an issue that will impact not just Louisiana but our entire country.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 76
6 of 12 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.
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Seafood imports continue to pour into the United States, increasing in volume each year, undercutting domestic fishermen.” Discusses the volume of seafood imports undercutting fishermen, not the bill’s FDA destruction authority
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Last year, the U.S. imported 6.4 billion pounds of foreign seafood, a 10 percent increase from 2019.” Offers import volume statistics unrelated to the bill’s provisions
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “As imports have increased, American commercial seafood landings have declined.” Trends in domestic seafood landings do not address the bill
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “In 2024, the U.S. commercial landings totaled 7.7 billion pounds, the first time landings have been below 8 billion pounds since 1988.” Historical landing statistics are about industry conditions, not the legislation
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Louisiana’s commercial fishing industry has particularly been hit hard by this flood of foreign imports.” Focuses on harm to Louisiana’s fishing industry rather than the bill
Off point Talking about something other than the matter at hand: the question asked, or the bill, motion or speech under debate. What the tags mean → “Since 2021, Louisiana shrimpers have seen the value of their catch drop by more than 50 percent, falling from $131 million in 2021 to just $61 million in 2024.” Shrimper revenue figures concern economic conditions, not the bill’s contents
Reasoning · 88
1 of 12 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.
Logical leap A conclusion that does not follow from the reasons given for it. What the tags mean → “As imports have increased, American commercial seafood landings have declined.” Deterrence follows from the described mechanism, but the promise of millions of additional pounds rests on treating rising imports and falling landings as cause and effect.
Conclusions found · 4
Conclusion “This bill will protect American consumers and create a level playing field for American businesses by authorizing the Food and Drug Administration to order the destruction of imported products found to pose a significant public health concern.”
Because “Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it.”
“They can then try to enter through a different port where the shipment may not be caught, a practice known as port shopping.”
“This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense.”
“Some imported foods, especially seafood, have been found to be contaminated with carcinogenic drugs, pesticides,”
“Beyond food, there has been a rise in imports of dangerous vape devices and e-liquids containing banned substances and excessive nicotine,”
“as well as counterfeit drugs like GLP-1s.”
Conclusion “This bill closes that loophole and creates a deterrent for bad actors.”
Because “Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it.”
“They can then try to enter through a different port where the shipment may not be caught, a practice known as port shopping.”
“This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense.”
“This bill also prohibits the unauthorized movement of any article designated for destruction by the FDA.”
“Exporters, especially Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting rejected shipments at different ports.”
Conclusion “Passing this bill will deter bad actors from flooding the market with unsafe products and provide American fishermen with a fair playing field, allowing them to sustainably harvest millions of additional pounds of shrimp and other seafood each year.”
Because “Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it.”
“This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense.”
“Exporters, especially Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting rejected shipments at different ports.”
“and environmental rules that raise their costs significantly.”
“Meanwhile, some foreign producers cut corners and still get multiple chances to dump noncompliant and often dangerous products into the American marketplace.”
“As imports have increased, American commercial seafood landings have declined.”
Reason flawed Deterrence follows from the described mechanism, but the promise of millions of additional pounds rests on treating rising imports and falling landings as cause and effect.
Conclusion “I urge the passage of this critical legislation.”
Because “Under current law, foreign exporters can ship contaminated or counterfeit products to the U.S. knowing they can withdraw the shipment if FDA flags it.”
“This loophole endangers our health and undermines our food and drug safety systems.”
“This bill authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense.”
“This bill closes that loophole and creates a deterrent for bad actors.”
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 · 89
2 of 12 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.
Unearned certainty Something stated as certain with nothing to back it. What the tags mean → “in fact” The formula asserts the conclusion as settled rather than pointing to a source.
Vague promise A promise with no date, no measure and no one responsible. What the tags mean → “will deter bad actors” The claim predicts deterrence with no actor, date, or measure for success.
Claims · 7
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 “which I introduced with my Louisiana colleague Representative Clay Higgins” H.R. 2715, the Destruction of Hazardous Imports Act, was introduced by Troy Carter with Representative Clay Higgins of Louisiana as a co-sponsor. search
2 “authorizes the Food and Drug Administration to require an importer to destroy an FDA-regulated product that was refused entry into the U.S. because it poses a significant public health concern with the cost of the destruction at the importer’s expense” The bill authorizes the FDA to require importers to destroy, at the importer’s expense, FDA-regulated products refused entry into the U.S. because they pose a significant public health concern. search
3 “prohibits the unauthorized movement of any article designated for destruction by the FDA” The bill prohibits unauthorized movement of any article the FDA has designated for destruction. search
4 “Exporters, especially Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting rejected shipments at different ports” Exporters, including Chinese exporters, have been caught resubmitting FDA-rejected shipments at different U.S. ports. search
5 “Last year, the U.S. imported 6.4 billion pounds of foreign seafood, a 10 percent increase from 2019” In 2025, the U.S. imported 6.4 billion pounds of foreign seafood, a 10 percent increase from 2019. search
6 “In 2024, the U.S. commercial landings totaled 7.7 billion pounds, the first time landings have been below 8 billion pounds since 1988” In 2024, U.S. commercial seafood landings totaled 7.7 billion pounds, the first time landings fell below 8 billion pounds since 1988. search
7 “Louisiana shrimpers have seen the value of their catch drop by more than 50 percent, falling from $131 million in 2021 to just $61 million in 2024” The value of Louisiana shrimpers’ catch fell from $131 million in 2021 to $61 million in 2024, a drop of more than 50 percent. search