“Committed to vote for and support the Women's Health Protection Act to codify the abortion protections of Roe v. Wade into federal law.”
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.
Verified each cited source. (1) The official Senate roll call for vote #170 (117th Cong., 2nd Sess., May 11, 2022) loads and confirms the question "On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed (Motion to Invoke Cloture Re: Motion to Proceed to S. 4132)," Kaine (D-VA) voting Yea, tally 49-51 — the promised vote. (2) Kaine's official statement page exists and documents that he voted for the motion to proceed and is a cosponsor of the WHPA (the cited quote is a close paraphrase of the page's wording; substance confirmed). (3) The NPR article direct-fetch timed out twice, but web search confirms the article exists at the exact cited URL, titled "Women's Health Protection Act to codify abortion protections fails in the Senate," reporting the 49-51 failure with Manchin the lone Democrat opposing — corroborating context the primary roll call already establishes. (4) The March 8, 2023 reintroduction press release loads and confirms Kaine joined colleagues reintroducing the WHPA with the "codify the protections that Roe v. Wade gave to American women" quote. The FULL outcome is properly supported: Kaine did exactly what he pledged — cast a Yea vote and cosponsored the bill; the bill's failure was caused by the Republican/Manchin filibuster, not any inaction by Kaine, and the promise was specifically to "vote for and support." FULL (not CHAMPIONED) is correct since he was a cosponsor/voter rather than lead sponsor or floor manager. No source is unreachable in a way that undermines the outcome, no quote is fabricated, and the outcome 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.