“Committed to pass the Pre-Registration of Voters Everywhere (PROVE) Act to help register young Americans to vote and expand voter registration nationwide.”
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.
Verification upholds CHAMPIONED. Source 1 (duckworth.senate.gov press release, June 4, 2024) was fetched successfully and contains the cited quote verbatim: "U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) and U.S. Representative Don Beyer (D-VA-08) re-introduced the Pre-Registration of Voters Everywhere (PROVE) Act" — confirming Duckworth as lead reintroducer. Sources 2 and 3 (congress.gov S.4085 and S.4461) returned HTTP 403 to automated fetch, a standard congress.gov bot block, NOT dead/fabricated links; their substantive content was independently corroborated via WebSearch, which returned the actual congress.gov text: S.4085 is the "PROVE Act," sponsored by "Ms. Duckworth (for herself...)" (lead sponsor), latest action "read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration," never passed; S.4461 is confirmed as "S.4461 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): PROVE Act," the voter-preregistration bill, with Duckworth's reintroduction sponsorship corroborated by the press release. The cited S.4461 "quote" is an ellipsis paraphrase rather than a claimed verbatim string, and its elements are consistent with the verified record. The evidence documents a lead author who repeatedly introduced/reintroduced the bill across Congresses without ever securing passage — which is precisely CHAMPIONED, not FULL (never enacted) and not merely ATTEMPTED (she authored and drove the legislation, not just voted for it). The outcome does not overstate the evidence; the rating also correctly declined to credit unrelated hearing testimony.
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.