“Preserve funding for the Wyoming Business Council, opposing legislative efforts to defund the state economic-development agency.”
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 verdictsThese are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.
Both cited WyoFile sources are reachable and both verbatim quotes are confirmed present. Source 1 (Jan 13, 2026) documents that when the Joint Appropriations Committee moved to wholesale-defund the Wyoming Business Council, Gordon authored a formal Jan 7, 2026 letter to the committee opposing it, with the exact quotes "A course correction may be warranted, but a wholesale defunding of the [Business Council] would be counterproductive" and "Defunding the state economic development agency is a flashing neon sign that Wyoming is 'closed.'" both appearing verbatim. Source 2 (Mar 6, 2026) confirms Gordon signed the two-year budget that preserved Council funding (~$15M), that the final budget reflected the Senate position aligned with his recommendations (rejecting the Freedom Caucus defunding push), and that he line-item vetoed the funding-split footnote, with the quote "it does lengthen the time to expend those funds for necessary projects while working to revamp the agency" appearing verbatim. This is genuine executive leadership on this exact promise — authored opposition letter plus veto action, not a mere vote — so CHAMPIONED is warranted rather than FULL. The defunding effort he promised to oppose was defeated and funding continued. Confidence held at 0.85 because Gordon himself reduced the Council's budget request substantially, so "preserve funding" was partial in level even as the wholesale-defunding effort was defeated.
Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)
Sign in to vote.
Discussion
community opinionsComments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.
Sign in to join the discussion.
Propose a correction
community accountabilitySee 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 argumentsThese 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.