“Committed to continue working to unite Republicans to repeal the Affordable Care Act ('Obamacare') and enact healthcare reforms he says can lower premiums and costs.”
Sources (click to view full provenance)
Propose an edit to this promise's details
Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.
Sign in and complete the Contributor Agreement to propose an edit.
Assessments
evidence-backed verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
Independently verified all three cited sources against the ATTEMPTED outcome. (1) Senate Roll Call Vote 179 (senate.gov, PRIMARY) confirms July 28, 2017; McConnell Amendment 667 to H.R. 1628 (the 'skinny repeal'/Health Care Freedom Act); Amendment Rejected 49-51; and 'Cruz (R-TX), Yea' appears verbatim. (2) Senate Roll Call Vote 168 (senate.gov, PRIMARY) confirms July 25, 2017; motion to waive the budget point of order against S.Amdt. 270 (the Better Care Reconciliation Act) to H.R. 1628; failed 43-57 (three-fifths required); Cruz voted Yea. (3) The US News/AP article persistently timed out on direct fetch (slow host), but WebSearch independently confirms its exact headline 'Ted Cruz Amendment Added to Senate Obamacare Repeal Legislation' and its substance: Cruz's amendment, added to the revised BCRA on July 13, 2017, would let insurers offer cheaper stripped-down plans — i.e., pitched as lowering costs. The ATTEMPTED rating is well-calibrated and does not overstate: it documents genuine, active effort (authoring an amendment folded into BCRA plus Yea votes on both repeal vehicles) that all failed, correctly declining to credit a kept promise since repeal never happened and no premium-lowering reform was enacted. The roll-call 'quotes' are accurate summaries of verbatim page facts, not fabrications, and the secondary quote is the verified exact headline. Applying the same bar for either party, the evidence supports upholding.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.
Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.
Debate
sourced community argumentsThese are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.
No arguments yet
Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.
Add a sourced argument
Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.
Sign in or create an account to add an argument.