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 KeptCongressional term limits

Pledged that, as a member of Congress, he will cosponsor and vote for a U.S. Term Limits constitutional amendment limiting members to three House terms and two Senate terms.

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: 88%

Both cited PRIMARY sources are reachable and support the outcome. The britt.senate.gov and cruz.senate.gov press releases each (1) describe a constitutional amendment (S.J.Res. 1, 119th Congress) that limits U.S. Senators to two six-year terms and U.S. House members to three two-year terms — an exact match to the pledged structure (three House terms, two Senate terms) — and (2) explicitly list "Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.)" among the cosponsors joining the introduction. The pledge's affirmative, within-his-control action (cosponsoring a matching amendment) is documented and precise. The "vote for" prong has not been triggered because no floor vote has occurred, so there has been no opportunity to break it; that does not detract from the completed pledged action. Schmitt is one of ~12 cosponsors rather than the lead sponsor, so FULL (not CHAMPIONED) is the correct level. The britt structure phrase and Schmitt's name are verbatim on the page; the cruz-source quote was lightly reformatted in the rating but its substance is fully supported and not fabricated. The same documentary standard (official cosponsorship records on the matching amendment) would apply to a member of either party.

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 →