“Enact the Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act to prohibit the distribution of materially deceptive AI-generated audio, images, and video about federal candidates in campaign ads.”
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.
All three cited sources were fetched and verified reachable, and each contains its cited quote verbatim. (1) The PRIMARY source (klobuchar.senate.gov) contains "advanced three bipartisan bills out of the Rules Committee today to take on the use of AI in our elections," discusses the Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act, and identifies Klobuchar as the lead author who introduced the bill and drove it through the Senate Rules Committee she chairs. (2) MeriTalk contains "Both bills passed through the committee on a vote of 9-2." and identifies Klobuchar as the primary sponsor who introduced the Act in September (with Hawley, Coons, Collins). (3) CyberScoop contains the cited opening-paragraph quote and identifies the Act as coming "from Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar," her committee moving it to the Senate floor. The CHAMPIONED bar for real leadership is met: Klobuchar authored/introduced the bill and, as Rules Committee Chair, drove it through markup and a 9-2 committee vote — this is genuine leadership (authored + led through committee), not merely a vote or expression of support. CHAMPIONED rather than FULL is correct because the promise's literal goal — to ENACT the Act — has not been achieved: the bill cleared committee but never received a Senate floor vote and is not law. It is not ATTEMPTED because that would understate her role as the bill's primary author and the committee chair who advanced it. Rating upheld as CHAMPIONED.
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.