text: still more,congress omission of statutory language specifically directing courts to ignore those elements can not tip the scales in luna favor.we have little doubt that congress could have drafted a with more precision than it did.graham county soil water conservation dist.united states ex rel.wilson.but the same could be said of many even most statutes as to that feature,a can join a club.and we have long been mindful of that fact when interpreting laws.rather than expecting let alone demanding perfection in drafting,we have routinely construed statutes to have a particular meaning even as we acknowledged that congress could have expressed itself more clearly.see,florida of revenue piccadilly cafeterias,scarborough united states.the question,then,is not could congress have indicated or even did congress elsewhere indicate in more crystalline fashion that comparisons of federal and state offenses should disregard elements that merely establish legislative jurisdiction the question is instead,and more simply is that the right and fair reading of the statute before us and the answer to that question,given the import of a penultimate sentence and the background rule distinguishing between jurisdictional and substantive elements,is yes.