← Back to the statement
Statement grade
The average of Signal, Reasoning and Clarity. Average 88 / 100
Signal
90 / 100
View details Viewing ↓
Relevance
–
Not scored Viewing ↓
Reasoning
75 / 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.
Procedure 5% Claims 57% Promise 9% Positioning 3% Reasoning 10% The ask 16%
Structure · 9 steps
Claims · 3
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. President, Procedure · 5 words reserving the right to object. Procedure Claims · 104 words College sports are one of the last great institutions in America that still bring people together. Today, all across our country, fans see the institution falling apart. Rosters are being rebuilt every year through an unrestricted transfer market. Schools are locked in an arms race of ever-increasing NIL spending. Coaches spend as much time recruiting their own players as they are preparing for opponents. Eligibility rules are no longer determined by clear standards but by lawsuits, by court orders, and by last-minute injunctions. It is why the Senate has now overwhelmingly voted three times to advance the bill called the Protect College Sports Act.1 Logical leap Promise · 23 words We will finish that bill this week and send it to the House and then, hopefully, on to the President for his signature. Positioning · 9 words Senator Paul has identified one of the critical problems. Positioning Reasoning · 28 words The antitrust laws applied to the collegiate sports system are currently the reason why sports are governed by court order rather than by fair, enforceable rules for all. Logical leap Claims · 47 words The Protect College Sports Act provides the NCAA with the ability to govern, 2 but any antitrust protection is narrow, and it comes with guardrails. My understanding is that Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes, 3 and this is one of them. The ask · 43 words Let’s give them the opportunity to work through the process and see if we can get votes on Senator Paul’s amendment as well as other amendments. And as they work on it, let’s give them a little bit more time for that reason. Procedure · 8 words And for that reason, Mr. President, I object. Procedure
At a glance
Lost points for Procedure ×2 Logical leap ×2 Positioning
Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.
What the tags mean →
Signal · 90
3 of 5 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 → “reserving the right to object.” 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 → “Senator Paul has identified one of the critical problems.” Positioning: praise, blame or attack. 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 → “And for that reason, Mr. President, I object.” Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Relevance · no score
Not applicable: nothing to answer. Excluded from the average.
Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue.
Reasoning · 75
2 of 5 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 → “It is why the Senate has now overwhelmingly voted three times to advance the bill called the Protect College Sports Act.” The listed problems are a sequence offered as the reason the Senate voted, with no link showing the votes were caused by them.
Logical leap A conclusion that does not follow from the reasons given for it. What the tags mean → “The antitrust laws applied to the collegiate sports system are currently the reason why sports are governed by court order rather than by fair, enforceable rules for all.” Court-order governance is described, but the jump to antitrust laws being the cause is offered without a link.
Conclusions found · 4
Conclusion “It is why the Senate has now overwhelmingly voted three times to advance the bill called the Protect College Sports Act.”
Because “Rosters are being rebuilt every year through an unrestricted transfer market.”
“Schools are locked in an arms race of ever-increasing NIL spending.”
“Coaches spend as much time recruiting their own players as they are preparing for opponents.”
“Eligibility rules are no longer determined by clear standards but by lawsuits, by court orders,”
“and by last-minute injunctions.”
Reason flawed The listed problems are a sequence offered as the reason the Senate voted, with no link showing the votes were caused by them.
Conclusion “The antitrust laws applied to the collegiate sports system are currently the reason why sports are governed by court order rather than by fair, enforceable rules for all.”
Because “Eligibility rules are no longer determined by clear standards but by lawsuits, by court orders,”
“and by last-minute injunctions.”
Reason flawed Court-order governance is described, but the jump to antitrust laws being the cause is offered without a link.
Conclusion “Let’s give them the opportunity to work through the process and see if we can get votes on Senator Paul’s amendment as well as other amendments.”
Because “My understanding is that Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes,”
“and this is one of them.”
Conclusion “And as they work on it, let’s give them a little bit more time for that reason.”
Because “My understanding is that Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes,”
“and this is one of them.”
“Let’s give them the opportunity to work through the process and see if we can get votes on Senator Paul’s amendment as well as other amendments.”
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 5 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 “the Senate has now overwhelmingly voted three times to advance the bill called the Protect College Sports Act” The Senate has voted three times to advance the Protect College Sports Act. search 2 “The Protect College Sports Act provides the NCAA with the ability to govern” The Protect College Sports Act provides the NCAA with the ability to govern college sports. search 3 “Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes” Senator Cruz and Senator Cantwell are discussing a package of possible amendment votes on the bill. search
