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 KeptTaxes

Committed to fight to keep taxes low so that families and businesses retain more of their earnings.

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: 87%

The promise is a general commitment to keep taxes low so families and businesses keep more of their earnings. The rated outcome — Hyde-Smith's Yea vote on H.R. 1 (the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act"), Senate Vote #372 on July 1, 2025, which passed 50-50 with the Vice President breaking the tie and made the 2017 individual and business tax cuts permanent — is directly and independently documented by two verified PRIMARY sources. The official Senate roll call confirms the question ("On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 1, as Amended)") and her Yea vote verbatim. Her own Senate statement, quoted verbatim, frames the law around a "permanent extension of the President's 2017 tax cuts" benefiting "families, small businesses, and hardworking Americans" and avoiding "a more than $4.0 trillion tax hike on everyone." This squarely delivers on the promise. FULL rather than CHAMPIONED is correct: she was one of 50 party-line Republican votes for a bill driven by leadership and the White House, with no evidence she authored, sponsored, or led its tax provisions, so the leadership bar for CHAMPIONED is not met. The cited Washington Post source could not be directly verified (403 bot-block), but its content was independently corroborated via web search and, critically, the outcome does not depend on it — the two PRIMARY sources fully establish it.

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 →