“Co-introduced a constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment, committing to support requiring the federal government to balance its budget.”
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.
Rating upheld as FULL. The promise was to co-introduce a constitutional Balanced Budget Amendment and commit to supporting a federal balanced-budget requirement. All three cited sources support this outcome, and the load-bearing quotes verify. Source 1 (crapo.senate.gov, PRIMARY, Feb 3, 2021): Verified directly via WebFetch. The cited quote appears verbatim — Crapo and Risch joined Hyde-Smith and 12 additional co-sponsors in introducing a balanced budget amendment requiring annual balanced budgets. This documents the exact co-introduction action promised. Source 2 (hydesmith.senate.gov, PRIMARY): Verified directly via WebFetch. This is the Feb 10, 2023 reintroduction (S.J.Res.13, 118th Congress). The cited quote appears and Risch is named as an original cosponsor — corroborating that he sustained the position across Congresses. Source 3 (congress.gov S.J.Res.6 cosponsors, PRIMARY): Direct WebFetch returned HTTP 403 (congress.gov blocks automated fetches), so I corroborated independently via WebSearch. The bill title is confirmed verbatim ("A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to balancing the budget") and the introduced-by list explicitly includes "Mr. Risch." The cited quote's substance is confirmed accurate. FULL is not overstated: co-sponsoring the amendment was an action within Risch's control that he completed on 2021-02-03 and repeated in 2023. FULL rather than CHAMPIONED is correct because Hyde-Smith was the lead sponsor, not Risch. The rationale correctly acknowledges the resolution never received a floor vote while noting the promise concerned the co-introduction itself. No fabrication, no unreachable-source failure of substance (the one 403 was independently confirmed).
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.