Adversarial re-check upholds CHAMPIONED. (1) The promise text is confirmed verbatim against Braun's own campaign site (PRIMARY, live): 'Freeze future property tax increases by capping the increase in tax bills at 2% for seniors, low-income Hoosiers, and families with children under the age of 18; and 3% for all other.' (2) Braun clearly LED the effort rather than merely supporting it: it was the centerpiece of his Freedom and Opportunity Agenda, he drove it into the 2025 session as the priority vehicle SB 1, and WISH-TV confirms he publicly pressured the legislature and was 'likely' to veto the package and call a special session if relief was insufficient. That is championing well beyond a single supporting vote. (3) The specific promised mechanism was NOT enacted. WISH-TV confirms the original proposal capped 'yearly increases at 3% for homeowners and 2% for seniors' and that 'the Senate version narrowed these provisions significantly.' WFYI's account of the law Braun signed (SEA 1, April 2025) lists a 10% homestead credit capped at $300 plus senior/veteran credits, a phase-out of the business personal property tax, farmland assessment changes, and new local income tax tools - no cap on annual growth of an individual homeowner's bill. (4) No later enactment closes the gap: Braun's own 2026 Bill Watch (PRIMARY) lists only SEA 163, 'Various property tax matters' (signed 3/5/2026), as the session's property tax vehicle - not a 2%/3% bill-growth cap. CORRECTIONS to the prior rating: the earlier rationale cited '2026 HEA 1210, disabled-veteran deductions' as the 2026 vehicle; that specific bill could not be substantiated and the governor's own tracker shows SEA 163 instead, so it is removed. The prior Nexstar/tristatehomepage source returned HTTP 403 and could not be independently verified, so it is dropped; its substance (Senate committee stripping the caps) is independently carried by the WISH-TV source. Three-plus sources remain verified live. Fairness check: this is not partisan leniency - any governor of either party who made a specific promise the No. 1 bill of the session, threatened a veto and special session to strengthen it, and then signed a weakened substitute would score CHAMPIONED under the rubric's explicit 'even if not fully enacted' clause. FULL is wrong because the caps never became law; PARTIAL fits worse than CHAMPIONED because the enacted $300-capped credit is a different mechanism, not a scaled-down growth cap; MISALIGNED/ABSTAINED are wrong because he signed relief moving in the promised direction.