“Committed to pressing NOAA to revise its North Atlantic right whale rule and to defend Maine's lobster industry, blocking expedited confirmation of a NOAA nominee as leverage to make the agency follow its own data.”
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 four cited sources are reachable and each documents the outcome it is cited for, with every quoted passage appearing verbatim. Source 1 (collins.senate.gov) confirms Collins objected on the Senate floor to expedited unanimous-consent confirmation of NOAA nominee Jainey Kumar Bavishi (2022-05-26) as leverage over the right whale rule; the quote appears verbatim. Source 3 (Bangor Daily News) independently confirms she held up the nominee to defend Maine's lobster industry; the cited quote is verbatim (a clean truncation of a slightly longer sentence, not fabricated). Source 2 (collins.senate.gov) documents the December 2022 omnibus regulatory pause deeming current right whale rules sufficient through Dec 31, 2028, with the quote about no right whale death attributed to Maine lobster gear appearing verbatim twice. Source 4 (collins.senate.gov) confirms $17,252,551 from NOAA to improve the right whale data, with the quote verbatim. Together these establish all three promise elements (press NOAA on the rule, defend the lobster industry, block the nominee as leverage) and show Collins leading the effort rather than casting a passive vote, supporting CHAMPIONED. Two supplementary rationale claims (a June 2022 hold-lift and a later $30M FY2024 figure) are not covered by the cited sources, but they are non-load-bearing to the outcome and do not overstate it. Rating upheld.
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.