Skip to main content

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

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
Fully KeptFiscal Policy

During her 2014 Senate campaign, committed to support a federal balanced budget amendment as a first step toward fiscal responsibility.

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.

Fully KeptFact-checker reviewConfidence: 90%

The promise was to "support" a federal balanced budget amendment (BBA) as a first step toward fiscal responsibility. The evidence documents that outcome. The PRIMARY source — Ernst's own office press release dated February 5, 2015 — is fully reachable and confirms she "co-sponsored a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, introduced by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)," and it contains the cited quote verbatim: "A balanced budget amendment is a commonsense way of reining in Washington's out of control spending." That is precisely the act of support she promised, taken within weeks of taking office. The Congress.gov citation for S.J.Res.6 (114th Congress) blocked the automated fetcher (HTTP 403 — a bot-blocking artifact, not a dead link) but was independently confirmed via web search: the URL is live, the cited quote is the resolution's actual title, Hatch is the sponsor, it was introduced in February 2015, and it drew every Senate Republican as a cosponsor. FULL (not CHAMPIONED) is correct because the same press release shows Ernst as one co-sponsor supporting Hatch's amendment, not the lead sponsor/author/driver of the effort — the task requires distinct leadership evidence for CHAMPIONED, which is absent. No floor vote occurred during the relevant period, so cosponsorship plus a public advocacy statement is the concrete act of support; the outcome does not overstate the evidence.

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 →