Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
ChampionedVoting rights / Senate filibuster rules

Have the Senate debate and vote on changing its filibuster/Senate rules on or before January 17, 2022 (MLK Day) if Republicans continued to block voting-rights legislation.

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 verdicts

These are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.

ChampionedFact-checker reviewConfidence: 85%

All three cited sources are genuine and their quotes/headlines are accurate, and together they document the rated outcome. CBS News (fetched directly, HTTP 200) confirms the load-bearing quote verbatim — Schumer "brought up a vote on a rules change to move the legislation forward with a one-time exemption, which was fiercely opposed by Republicans and two members of his own party, Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema" — and confirms the vote occurred January 19, 2022 and failed. The Washington Post and NBC News URLs returned HTTP 403 on direct WebFetch (bot/paywall blocking), but WebSearch confirmed both cited headlines exist verbatim at the exact cited URLs and are not fabricated. Search results also surfaced Schumer's Jan 3 letter language ("on or before January 17, Martin Luther King Jr. Day"), corroborating the promise's exact deadline. The evidence supports CHAMPIONED: Schumer personally drove the rules-change vote to the floor as Majority Leader, and it failed 52-48 with Manchin and Sinema joining all 50 Republicans. The one deviation from FULL — the vote landing January 19, two days past the January 17 (MLK Day) deadline — is accurately reflected and not overstated.

Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)

Sign in to vote.

Discussion

community opinions

Comments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.

Sign in to join the discussion.

Propose a correction

community accountability

See 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 arguments

These 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.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →