Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
AttemptedCampaign Finance / Federal Spending

Committed to pass the ELECT Act to eliminate the taxpayer-funded Presidential Election Campaign Fund and redirect its remaining balance toward paying down the national debt.

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 verdicts

These are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.

AttemptedFact-checker reviewConfidence: 85%

The ATTEMPTED rating is upheld. Ernst genuinely pursued the promise through the normal legislative process by sponsoring the ELECT Act (S.3225, 116th Congress, "Eliminating Leftover Expenses for Campaigns from Taxpayers Act of 2020"), which terminates the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, and by repeatedly reintroducing it — including again in February 2025 — but the bill never passed or was enacted, so the fund was never eliminated and no balance was ever redirected to the national debt. The KCRG source (Feb 17, 2025) was fully reachable and the cited quote appears verbatim: it documents Ernst introducing the ELECT Act to eliminate the fund, that ~$400 million remains in the fund, and that the remaining money would pay down the national debt — and it makes clear the bill was only introduced (not passed). The continued existence of the fund with ~$400M as of Feb 2025, plus the need to reintroduce the bill, is concrete proof the objective was not achieved. The outcome (within-process legislative failure) is not overstated and matches ATTEMPTED rather than FULL/CHAMPIONED (never enacted) or IGNORED/ABSTAINED (she was the active lead sponsor).

Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)

Sign in to vote.

Discussion

community opinions

Comments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.

Sign in to join the discussion.

Propose a correction

community accountability

See 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 arguments

These 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.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →