“Committed to pass the Experienced Pilots Save Lives Act to strengthen the quality of flight hours required under the 1,500-hour pilot-training rule for commercial passenger flights.”
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.
Independently verified. Duckworth is the SOLE SPONSOR (zero cosponsors) of S.2332, the Experienced Pilots Save Lives Act of 2023, which she authored and introduced July 18, 2023 specifically to strengthen the quality of flight hours required under the 1,500-hour rule. Her official press release contains the verbatim promise language. Beyond sponsorship, as Chair of the Senate Aviation Safety Subcommittee she drove the effort through hearings, floor speeches, and by securing commitments from FAA/DOT nominees (Phil Washington, Sean Duffy) to uphold the rule. However, the standalone bill died in committee (last action: read twice and referred to Commerce Committee; never marked up, voted, or enacted). The 1,500-hour rule was ultimately only MAINTAINED (not strengthened) via the Langworthy amendment in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (passed 387-26) — her affirmative 'strengthen the quality of flight hours' provisions never became law, so credit above CHAMPIONED (PARTIAL/FULL) is not warranted. Being lead/sole sponsor plus active subcommittee-chair advocacy is well beyond a single supporting vote, which distinguishes this from ATTEMPTED and squarely fits CHAMPIONED. Applying the same standard neutrally: any senator who is sole sponsor of a named bill and actively drives related hearings/advocacy, yet whose bill dies in committee, would earn CHAMPIONED regardless of party. Prior rating and sources verified as real and on point; verdict stands.
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.