Scores by kind of claim
Each kind of claim is scored on its own, out of 100: the share that held up, with the range it likely falls in. Fewer resolved claims give a wider range.
-
Factual claims
Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
67 61 73 -
Predictions
Statements about events outside the person's control, checked once they fell due: did they come true?
60 44 76 -
Promises
Commitments to the person's or organisation's own future action, with something to deliver: was it delivered?
Insufficient record: 0 promises resolved, 5 needed for a score.
All types combined: 66 (likely 61 to 72, high confidence), from 105 claims: 94 factual claims, 11 predictions. It mixes kinds of claim in different proportions for different people, so compare people kind by kind.
Marc Andreessen's claims
50 claims
“The constitution requires Congress to authorize money to be spent by the executive branch.”
Marc Andreessen, interviewee 26 January 2025 Transcript for Marc Andreessen: Trump, Power, Tech, AI, Immigration & Future of America (Lex Fridman)
The US Constitution requires Congress to authorize money to be spent by the executive branch.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
The second judge said resolved true; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
What would count as true or false
Judge as of 2025-01-26. True: the US Constitution requires congressional appropriation for executive spending; Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 says 'No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law'. Mostly true: the substance is right but the wording is slightly off (for example 'appropriate' rather than 'authorize'). Mixed: the Constitution partly supports the claim but with significant exceptions that it ignores. Mostly false: the requirement exists only in statute (for example the Antideficiency Act), not in the Constitution. False: there is no such requirement at all.
Evidence
- Congress' Power of the Purse Yale Law Journal (author: Kate Stith)
“The Executive may not raise or spend funds not appropriated by explicit legislative action, and Congress has a constitutional duty to limit the amount and duration of each grant of spending authority.”
- Congress' Power of the Purse Yale Law Journal (author: Kate Stith)
“The Constitution places the power of the purse in Congress: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appro-”
- Congress' Power of the Purse Yale Law Journal (author: Kate Stith)
“However, all activity of the executive branch-all actions undertaken by and in the name of the United States government-must be authorized and paid for pursuant to the Constitution.”
- Congress' Power of the Purse Yale Law Journal (author: Kate Stith)
“The appropriations requirement mandates that government expenditure be authorized by legislative action.”
Reasoning
Kate Stith's Yale Law Journal article quotes the Constitution's Appropriations Clause: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appro[priations]" (E2). It also says the executive may not spend money that Congress has not appropriated by explicit legislative action (E1, E3, E4). That confirms the substance of the claim: the Constitution itself requires Congress to approve executive spending. The criteria treat "authorize" in place of "appropriate" as slightly off wording, since the Constitution's term is "appropriations made by law," so the verdict is mostly true rather than true.
Cite this claim
Marc Andreessen, “The US Constitution requires Congress to authorize money to be spent by the executive branch.” (said 26 January 2025). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_7603e7eaffb9, method 0.1.0+c876030c. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_7603e7eaffb9
Claims without a verdict
Is a verdict here wrong, or do you speak for Marc Andreessen? Reply on the claim's own page, with the form at its foot (how replies work). Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts and scores are made.