← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Relevance, Reasoning and Clarity. Reasoning rests on one conclusion, too few to hold the grade down. Average 88 / 100
Signal
88 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
75 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Reasoning
87 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Respect
–
Not scored Viewing ↓
Clarity
100 / 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.
Greeting 4% Procedure 8% Claims 74% Reasoning 10% The ask 4%
Structure · 8 steps
Claims · 3
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Greeting · 8 words I thank the chairman for yielding me time. Greeting Mr. Speaker, Procedure · 18 words I rise in strong support of S. 283, the Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act, as amended. Procedure Claims · 120 words This bill directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to develop a standard methodology using chemical analysis to identify the country of origin of seafood.1 Both commercial and recreational fishing contribute significantly to the Texas economy. Red snapper, in particular, is highly sought after by the recreational fishing sector. This effort is especially important in the Gulf of America, where red snapper is a valuable resource for American fishermen and coastal communities. Off point Illegally harvested seafood can make its way into U.S. markets, undercutting the fishermen and seafood producers who play by the rules. NIST scientists have developed chemical methods to identify the geographic origin of foods like beef, honey, fruits, 2 and rice. Reasoning · 23 words This bill would build on that expertise to give law enforcement another tool to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing and seafood fraud. Claims · 44 words Today’s bill also incorporates edits made by the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee during our bipartisan markup earlier this year as part of H.R.3 3706, the Standards for Understanding Source and Habitat Identification Act, also known as the SUSHI Act, which I sponsored. The ask · 9 words I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
At a glance
Lost points for Off point ×4 Procedure ×3 Greeting
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 88
4 of 8 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.
Greeting Greetings and pleasantries. What the tags mean → “I thank the chairman for yielding me time.” A greeting: no claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “I rise in strong support of S.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “283, the Illegal Red Snapper and Tuna Enforcement Act,” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Procedure Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business. What the tags mean → “as amended.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · 75
4 of 8 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 → “Both commercial and recreational fishing contribute significantly to the Texas economy.” Turns to the general importance of fishing to the Texas economy rather than the bill’s provisions or purpose.
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 → “Red snapper, in particular, is highly sought after by the recreational fishing sector.” Discusses recreational demand for red snapper generally, not the bill or the problem it addresses.
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 → “This effort is especially important in the Gulf of America,” A general remark about the Gulf, not about the bill’s contents or case.
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 → “where red snapper is a valuable resource for American fishermen and coastal communities.” A general point about red snapper’s value to coastal communities, not the bill itself.
Reasoning · 87
0 of 8 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 my colleagues to support this important legislation.”
Because “NIST scientists have developed chemical methods to identify the geographic origin of foods like beef, honey, fruits,”
“and rice.”
“This bill would build on that expertise to give law enforcement another tool to combat illegal, unreported,”
“and unregulated fishing and seafood fraud.”
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 8 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 “directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to develop a standard methodology using chemical analysis to identify the country of origin of seafood” S. 283 directs NIST and NOAA to develop a standard methodology using chemical analysis to identify the country of origin of seafood. search 2 “NIST scientists have developed chemical methods to identify the geographic origin of foods like beef, honey, fruits” NIST scientists have developed chemical methods to identify the geographic origin of foods such as beef, honey, and fruits. search 3 “and Technology Committee during our bipartisan markup earlier this year as part of H.R.” The House Science, Space, and Technology Committee made edits during a bipartisan markup of H.R. 3706 earlier in 2026, and S. 283 incorporates those edits. search
