Skip to main content

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

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
ChampionedEducation / school choice

Submit legislation to create an Office of School Choice within the Nevada Department of Education.

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.

ChampionedFact-checker reviewConfidence: 86%

Both cited sources are reachable and directly document that Governor Lombardo submitted and led legislation creating an Office of School Choice within the Nevada Department of Education, satisfying the CHAMPIONED leadership bar. Source 1 (News 3 Las Vegas) contains the cited quote verbatim and explicitly attributes the bill to Lombardo as "His bill, Assembly Bill 400," framing it as keeping his campaign promise — an authorship attribution, not a mere vote. Source 2 (Review-Journal) confirms both halves of the ellipsis-joined quote: Lombardo's chief of staff Ben Kieckhefer "presented two of Lombardo's bills, including one encompassing much of the governor's education goals," and "The bill would create the Office of School Choice within the Department of Education, which would 'serve as a clearinghouse of available options and information for families.'" Together these establish that AB400 was Lombardo's own authored administration bill — leadership beyond a vote or support. The promise concerned SUBMITTING the legislation, which he demonstrably did and led; the later amendment removing the provision occurs downstream of the promised act and does not undercut CHAMPIONED for submission. The ellipsis in the RJ quote is used legitimately to bridge two verified passages and is not fabricated.

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 →