Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
AttemptedTaxes / Healthcare

Eliminate the state tax on prescription drugs.

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.

AttemptedFact-checker reviewConfidence: 70%

All three cited sources are reachable and each quoted string appears verbatim. (1) The Louisiana Department of Revenue page confirms 'The constitutional amendment maintains the current state sales tax exemptions for groceries, residential utilities, and prescription drugs' — establishing that the STATE exemption pre-existed and was only to be maintained, not newly eliminated. (2) The National Law Review confirms voters 'rejected that amendment by over 60% of the ballots cast,' documenting the failure of the ballot measure (it discusses the amendment broadly and does not itself detail the prescription-drug clause, but it squarely establishes the rejection outcome). (3) The Office of Governor Landry page confirms verbatim 'Let's agree to totally eliminate the sales tax on prescription drugs once and for all!', documenting that Landry actively proposed/championed the elimination. Collectively the sources document a genuine, championed effort that failed within the ordinary legislative/ballot process: the state exemption was merely kept, the broader elimination (local/parish tax + constitutional protection) did not happen, and the March 2025 amendment was defeated. ATTEMPTED accurately reflects effort-without-success and does not overstate leadership or achievement. The moderate confidence is warranted because the promise's literal wording ('state tax') was already at zero and stayed there, while the elimination Landry actually pursued was not achieved. The rating is upheld.

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 →