“Committed to keep working with colleagues to pass full-year government funding legislation for Fiscal Year 2025 as soon as possible.”
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.
Kaine promised (2024-12-18) to keep working to pass full-year FY2025 government funding "as soon as possible." The cited sources document genuine, engaged effort toward a full-year appropriations outcome combined with opposition to the defective vehicle that ultimately passed. VERIFIED: (1) Senate roll-call vote #133 (PRIMARY, cited) confirms H.R. 1968 — "A bill making further continuing appropriations and other extensions for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2025" — passed On Passage 54-46 on March 14, 2025 with Kaine (D-VA) voting Nay. (2) WTOP (REPUTABLE_SECONDARY, cited) confirms verbatim Kaine's "I am a no, guys" and his preferred alternative to "extend existing funding for 30 days, very simple, and then work out an actual appropriations bill for the remainder of the year, like we always do," reasoning that the House CR harmed national defense and handed excessive discretion to the executive. (3) The cited GovTrack page for cloture vote #128 was unreachable (HTTP 403 bot-block), but its exact fact — Motion to Invoke Cloture on H.R. 1968, March 14, 2025, Kaine Nay — is independently CONFIRMED via the primary Senate.gov roll-call for vote #128 (cloture succeeded 62-38; Kaine Nay), so the underlying claim stands on a primary source. The rating is ATTEMPTED: the regular full-year appropriations Kaine committed to never passed; the full-year funding that did pass was a full-year CR he considered an inferior substitute and voted against. This is not FULL/CHAMPIONED (objective not achieved through his effort; he opposed the enacted vehicle and showed no leadership on it) and not MISALIGNED (his opposition targeted a defective vehicle, not full-year funding as an objective — his stated preference remained a real appropriations bill). Genuine tension with both FULL and MISALIGNED keeps confidence moderate, but ATTEMPTED is the fairest, best-supported call and does not overstate the evidence.
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.