Sponsorship· AbortionCosponsor
Loading figure…
Loading figure…
Jim Jordan supports strict immigration policies, including ending birthright citizenship and banning certain immigrant groups from military service. He has a strong anti-amnesty stance and advocates for declaring English as the official language of the U.S.
Jim Jordan supports strict immigration policies, including ending birthright citizenship and banning certain immigrant groups from military service. He has a strong anti-amnesty stance and advocates for declaring English as the official language of the U.S.
Jim Jordan supports maintaining strong national defense and has voted in favor of increased military spending. He has opposed measures that would limit U.S. military actions abroad, including votes against withdrawing troops from conflict zones.
How do you perceive this figure's political lean?
Community votes: Left 0% · Center 0% · Right 0% (0 votes)
Sign in to cast a vote.
Jim Jordan supports maintaining strong national defense and has voted in favor of increased military spending. He has opposed measures that would limit U.S. military actions abroad, including votes against withdrawing troops from conflict zones.
Jim Jordan opposes legal access to abortion and supports banning federal funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood. He has consistently voted for anti-abortion legislation and has expressed a commitment to protecting what he describes as the sanctity of human life.
Jim Jordan opposes legal access to abortion and supports banning federal funding for organizations like Planned Parenthood. He has consistently voted for anti-abortion legislation and has expressed a commitment to protecting what he describes as the sanctity of human life.
Jim Jordan has consistently opposed federal action to cut emissions and has voted against regulations aimed at limiting greenhouse gases. He signed the "No Climate Tax" pledge and has supported policies that promote oil drilling and oppose renewable energy incentives.
Jim Jordan has consistently opposed federal action to cut emissions and has voted against regulations aimed at limiting greenhouse gases. He signed the "No Climate Tax" pledge and has supported policies that promote oil drilling and oppose renewable energy incentives.
Jim Jordan supports the right to gun ownership and has voted against measures for stricter firearms regulation, including background checks for private transfers. He advocates for national standards for concealed carry and loosening restrictions on interstate gun purchases.
Jim Jordan supports the right to gun ownership and has voted against measures for stricter firearms regulation, including background checks for private transfers. He advocates for national standards for concealed carry and loosening restrictions on interstate gun purchases.
Jim Jordan opposes a larger government role in health coverage and has consistently voted against the Affordable Care Act. He advocates for repealing Obamacare and has opposed vaccine mandates, calling them 'un-American.'
Jim Jordan opposes a larger government role in health coverage and has consistently voted against the Affordable Care Act. He advocates for repealing Obamacare and has opposed vaccine mandates, calling them 'un-American.'
Jim Jordan opposes higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for tax cuts and a balanced budget amendment. He has consistently voted against tax increases and supports the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.
Jim Jordan opposes higher taxes on corporations and top earners, advocating for tax cuts and a balanced budget amendment. He has consistently voted against tax increases and supports the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.
Jim Jordan has a mixed record on criminal justice, supporting some measures aimed at reducing recidivism and expanding services for offenders' re-entry into society, while also opposing stricter penalties for drug offenses.
Jim Jordan has a mixed record on criminal justice, supporting some measures aimed at reducing recidivism and expanding services for offenders' re-entry into society, while also opposing stricter penalties for drug offenses.
Jim Jordan has a mixed record on civil rights, having voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act and prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. He has also supported constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Jim Jordan has a mixed record on civil rights, having voted against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act and prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. He has also supported constitutional amendments to define marriage as between one man and one woman.
Jim Jordan opposes the legalization of marijuana at the federal level and has voted against measures to liberalize federal marijuana policy. He supports strict penalties for drug offenses, including fentanyl-related substances being classified as Schedule I drugs.
Jim Jordan opposes the legalization of marijuana at the federal level and has voted against measures to liberalize federal marijuana policy. He supports strict penalties for drug offenses, including fentanyl-related substances being classified as Schedule I drugs.
Position extraction pending on 11 issues: Foreign Policy, Economy & Jobs, Education, School Curriculum, Voting Rights, Trade, Tech Regulation, Elections & Campaigns, Public Health, Religion & Public Life, Disaster Response.
May 21, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Cosponsoring the Life at Conception Act directly supports the stated position of opposing abortion and aligns with efforts to ban federal funding for abortion services.
Feb 13, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring the Death Tax Repeal Act directly aligns with the stated opposition to higher taxes, as it seeks to eliminate an existing tax.
View source →Jan 18, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring the Death Tax Repeal Act directly aligns with the stated opposition to higher taxes, as it seeks to eliminate an existing tax.
View source →Dec 11, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: Cosponsoring the SAVE Moms and Babies Act, which aims to restrict abortion access and funding, directly aligns with the stated opposition to abortion and commitment to protecting life.
View source →Oct 25, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill aimed at banning taxpayer funding for abortion directly supports the stated opposition to abortion and aligns with the commitment to protect the sanctity of human life.
View source →Oct 2, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Cosponsoring the Ending Chemical Abortions Act directly supports the stated position of opposing abortion and aligns with efforts to restrict access to abortion services.
View source →May 24, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
Why: Cosponsoring a bill to prohibit federal funding for abortion services directly advances the stated opposition to abortion and aligns with the commitment to protect the sanctity of human life.
View source →Mar 26, 2015 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Sponsoring the Second Amendment Enforcement Act directly supports the stated position of advocating for gun ownership rights and reducing restrictions.
View source →Dec 10, 2013 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Sponsoring a bill to restore Second Amendment rights directly supports the stated position of advocating for gun ownership rights and loosening restrictions.
View source →Mar 12, 2013 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution And Civil Justice.
Why: Sponsoring the Life at Conception Act directly advances the stated position of opposing abortion by seeking to establish legal rights for the unborn.
View source →Jan 23, 2012 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Sponsoring the Ultrasound Informed Consent Act directly advances the stated position against abortion by promoting additional restrictions on abortion access.
View source →Jan 22, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: Sponsoring the Ultrasound Informed Consent Act directly supports the stated opposition to abortion by promoting additional restrictions on abortion access.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: The vote on the Homeowner Energy Freedom Act supports energy independence and deregulation, which aligns with the opposition to climate regulations and tax credits for renewables.
View source →Jun 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring the Main Street Tax Certainty Act suggests support for tax stability and predictability, which aligns with the opposition to higher taxes, even if the specifics of the bill are not detailed.
View source →Jul 20, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Cosponsoring the Main Street Tax Certainty Act suggests support for tax stability and predictability, which aligns with the opposition to higher taxes, even if the specifics of the bill are not detailed.
View source →May 2, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Social Security.
Why: Cosponsoring the Secure the Border Act aligns with the stated support for strict immigration policies, as it focuses on border security, which is a key aspect of his position.
View source →Feb 27, 2013 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Appropriations, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Sponsoring the Taxpayers' COP Act aligns with the opposition to higher taxes, as it reflects a commitment to taxpayer protections and fiscal responsibility.
View source →Jan 24, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Why: Sponsoring the Spending Reduction Act suggests a commitment to reducing government spending, which aligns with the opposition to higher taxes by aiming to limit the need for tax increases.
View source →Feb 25, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Voting Nay on the Homeowner Energy Freedom Act, which likely promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy, directly contradicts the stated opposition to climate regulation.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Voting against the appropriations act, which likely includes funding for immigration enforcement, contradicts the stated support for strict immigration policies.
View source →Most are procedural sponsorships or actions on issues where this figure hasn't publicly stated a position. Highest-signal entries shown first.
Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: The vote on the Emergency Conservation Program Improvement Act could support conservation efforts, but it does not clearly align with the stated opposition to climate regulation and renewable energy initiatives.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: The appropriations act may include funding for immigration enforcement, but it does not directly align with the specific strict policies outlined in the stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: The vote on the Home Appliance Protection and Affordability Act does not clearly align with or contradict the stated opposition to climate regulation, as it does not directly address greenhouse gas emissions or renewable energy.
View source →Jul 16, 2026 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 23 - 18.
Why: The action involves reviewing taxing authority, which could imply both support for and opposition to tax increases, creating ambiguity in alignment with the stated position.
View source →Mar 8, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: The action relates to budget reconciliation, which can impact healthcare funding, but it does not directly align with a clear stance on opposing the Affordable Care Act or expanding healthcare access.
View source →Dec 19, 2012 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Why: The action of sponsoring a bill related to health could align with the position of opposing the ACA, but without specific details on how the bill affects healthcare policy, the relationship remains unclear.
View source →Apr 16, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Apr 15, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Recorded Vote — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 14, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 5, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 4, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
Yea-and-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Failed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2026 · Congress.gov (House roll-call)
2/3 Yea-And-Nay — Result: Passed
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 3, 2025 · Congress.gov
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 26 - 25.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 14, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 27, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Rules.
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Sep 25, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Sep 6, 2024 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 600.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 17, 2024 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 624.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 8, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Dec 4, 2023 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 248.
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 11, 2023 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 10, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 6, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Why: Tagged to Foreign Aid, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 25, 2023 · Congress.gov
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 479.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 20, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jun 15, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
Why: Tagged to Trade, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jun 11, 2021 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Oct 2, 2020 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Why: Tagged to Tech Regulation, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jul 29, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations.
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →May 22, 2014 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training.
Why: Tagged to Education, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Mar 31, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Why: Tagged to Criminal Justice, but no stated position has been extracted for that issue yet — judgement deferred until more news coverage is available.
View source →Jun 2, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 15, 2026 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 24, 2026 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Sep 15, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Aug 29, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 10, 2025 · Congress.gov
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 916 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, H.R. 1069, H.R. 2965 and H.R. 4305. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 4312, H.R. 1005, H.R. 1049, H.R. 1069, H.R. 2965, and H.R. 4305 under a closed rule with one hour of general debate and one motion to recommit on each bill.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 14, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 31, 2025 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 24, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and in addition to the Committees on Appropriations, and Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 12, 2024 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 7, 2024 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 439.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 23, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 22, 2024 · Congress.gov
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 20, 2024 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 14, 2024 · Congress.gov
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 386.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 20, 2023 · Congress.gov
Became Public Law No: 118-10.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 17, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 11, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Feb 24, 2023 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 9, 2023 · Congress.gov
UNANIMOUS CONSENT - Mr. Franklin, C. Scott asked unanimous consent that, notwithstanding section 1(a)(2)(A) of House Resolution 12 (as amended by section 1(c) of House Resolution 78), and the order of the House of today, the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government be composed of not more than 21 Members, Delegates, or the Resident Commissioner appointed by the Speaker, of whom not more than 9 shall be appointed in consultation with the Minority Leader. Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jun 8, 2017 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 26, 2016 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 2, 2014 · Congress.gov
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 17, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture .
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Mar 16, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Horticulture .
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 25, 2011 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Insurance, Housing and Community Opportunity.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 26, 2010 · Congress.gov
Referred to the House Committee on the Budget.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Apr 15, 2010 · Congress.gov
Referred to House Appropriations
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 22, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to House Rules
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →May 21, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Post Office, and the District of Columbia.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 13, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jan 13, 2009 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →Jul 29, 2008 · Congress.gov
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Organization, and Procurement.
Why: Couldn't tag this action to any of the tracked issues, so it can't be compared against a stated position.
View source →
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion.
Sign in to join the discussion.