Skip to main content

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

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
Fully KeptEducation / early literacy

Impose a new five-year rule requiring schools to improve literacy scores and preventing students who are not reading-proficient from advancing beyond third grade until they reach grade level.

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.

Fully KeptFact-checker reviewConfidence: 92%

Independently verified. Lombardo campaigned on restoring the third-grade reading-retention rule (created 2015, repealed 2019) and as governor made it the centerpiece of his 2023 omnibus education bill AB400. AB400 reinstated the requirement that non-proficient third graders be held back, built in a roughly five-year runway (retention effective the 2028-29 school year), and set aside $140 million for the Read by Grade 3 / Early Childhood Literacy and Readiness program. The bill passed near-unanimously (Assembly 41-0 with one excused; unanimous in both chambers after amendments) and Lombardo signed it, so the promised five-year rule was imposed/enacted into law. All three cited sources are real, live, and quoted accurately (I confirmed the Las Vegas Sun and both Nevada Independent quotes verbatim). Adversarial fairness check: a Democratic governor with this identical record (led signature bill, signed into law, five-year runway, $140M funding) would earn FULL under the same standard; FULL rather than CHAMPIONED is correct because the rule was fully enacted, not merely led. Actual literacy-score improvement and the retention itself are still pending (2028-29), but the promise verb is 'impose a rule,' which was fully accomplished.

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 →