“Budd committed to strengthening Second Amendment rights by sponsoring the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which would let concealed-carry permit holders exercise that right across state lines.”
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.
The promise was to strengthen Second Amendment rights BY sponsoring the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, which lets concealed-carry permit holders carry across state lines. Budd performed exactly that action and it is verified by primary sources. His own Senate office release, titled "Budd Sponsors Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act" (Feb 1, 2023), documents his sponsorship, and its cited quote appears verbatim on the page. Cornyn's Senate office release lists "Ted Budd (R-NC)" among the cosponsors, and that cited text appears verbatim (this release is the Jan 2025 reintroduction, correctly characterized as sustained support). The bill (S.214, 118th Cong.) is confirmed to allow a permit holder to carry a concealed handgun across state lines. FULL rather than CHAMPIONED is correct because Budd was one of roughly 45 Republican cosponsors under lead sponsor John Cornyn — the promise was to sponsor the bill, which he fully did, but there is no evidence he authored, led, or drove the effort, so CHAMPIONED would overstate his role. The bill never received a vote and died with the 118th Congress, but the promise concerned the act of sponsoring (fully completed), not enactment, so non-passage does not downgrade it. Confidence 0.9: minor "sponsor" vs. "cosponsor" wording wrinkle, satisfied by original cosponsorship and Budd's own office framing it as sponsoring.
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.