Adversarial re-check: all four sources cited by the prior researcher were independently fetched, are live on official .senate.gov domains, and the quoted language appears verbatim on each page — none were invented, broken, or misquoted. I also independently corroborated the record from McCormick's own site search index and found two additional lead-sponsored items the prior pass missed. Verified record as a first-term senator (sworn in Jan 2025): (1) FENTANYL PRECURSORS PRONG — lead sponsor of the bipartisan, bicameral Joint Task Force to Counter Illicit Synthetic Narcotics Act of 2025 (Mar 11, 2025), whose press release expressly targets 'China's central role in producing fentanyl precursors and laundering drug money'; also lead on a nitazene-scheduling bill with Sen. Gallego (Oct 30, 2025). (2) INVESTMENT/TRADE PRONG — lead sponsor of the PRC Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisers Moratorium Act with Sen. Fetterman (Jul 31, 2025); co-lead of the Protecting the USMCA from Harmful Chinese Investment Act with Sen. Cortez Masto (Sept 19, 2025); co-lead of the China Exchange Rate Transparency (CERT) Act with Cortez Masto, which the Senate Foreign Relations Committee advanced (Oct 24, 2025) alongside his IDB bill aimed at reducing Chinese influence; and co-lead with Sen. Shaheen of the Fortifying United States Markets Against PRC Military Escalation Act (Dec 2025). This is sustained leadership across multiple bills, well beyond a single supporting vote. WHAT DOES NOT HOLD UP: the data-privacy/security prong rests only on a national-security rationale line inside the broker-dealer release — a site-wide search for 'data privacy' returned nothing substantive — and the 'ban CCP purchases of American land' prong produced no evidence at all (a farmland search on his own site returned only an electric-grid bill and a conservation-caucus item). No China bill of his has been enacted; two only cleared committee. FAIRNESS TEST: applying the same standard to a Democrat, a first-term senator who is lead or co-lead sponsor on five-plus bills squarely on the promise's subject, with two advanced out of committee, none enacted, and two of four prongs untouched, lands on CHAMPIONED (+0.75) — the rubric's label for actively leading an effort that has not fully landed. FULL is clearly wrong (nothing enacted, one prong unaddressed); PARTIAL (+0.5) is wrong because nothing was actually delivered, so 'kept some but not all' misdescribes the record — what exists is leadership, not partial fulfillment. No refuting evidence of Senate action against the promise's direction was found. Prior rating stands.