Adversarial re-check: all four sources cited by the prior rater were independently fetched and are REAL, LIVE, and quoted accurately — none were invented or misquoted. (1) hoeven.senate.gov/issues/energy returns verbatim 'comprehensive, states-first, all-of-the-above energy strategy' and 'restore America's energy dominance,' explicitly building on the 'EmPower North Dakota plan, a comprehensive energy strategy for our state.' (2) The July 15, 2026 press release 'Hoeven Introduces Legislation to Expand Geothermal Energy Development' is live and shows Hoeven as LEAD sponsor of the bicameral HEATS (Harnessing Energy At Thermal Sources) Act with Sen. Daines and a House companion from Rep. Young Kim — emerging-resource leadership plus permitting reform, in his own words removing 'burdensome, duplicative federal regulations [that] create roadblocks to developing the energy our nation needs.' (3) The July 1, 2026 release on DOE selecting the University of North Dakota for a $75M critical-minerals pilot is live and covers the traditional-resource half ('harness our state's abundant lignite reserves'). (4) appropriations.senate.gov independently lists 'John Hoeven (North Dakota)' on the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, and his own committee page confirms Energy and Natural Resources (Energy Subcommittee; Water and Power). Added independent corroboration beyond his own press office: Wikipedia notes that beginning in 2000 'he directed the development of a multi-resource energy program for the state with incentives in each energy sector,' confirming a sustained, self-driven energy agenda rather than a one-off. Cross-party fairness test applied: a senator of either party who is lead sponsor of energy legislation, sits on both the authorizing energy committee and the energy appropriations subcommittee, and has personally built a multi-resource energy program would clear the CHAMPIONED bar ('actively LED/sponsored/drove the effort... even if not fully enacted'). Not FULL, because no comprehensive national energy plan has been enacted or introduced as a single package; not PARTIAL/ATTEMPTED, because the record is lead sponsorship and agenda-setting, not a lone supporting vote. No counter-evidence of action against the promise's direction was found. Confidence held near the prior 0.6 (nudged to 0.62 for the added independent source) because the bulk of the record is self-published by his own office and Congress.gov/GovTrack sponsorship listings returned 403, so the full sponsored-bill record could not be enumerated.