“Codify the right to abortion nationwide by co-sponsoring and voting for the Women's Health Protection Act, creating a statutory federal right to provide and receive abortion care.”
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.
Independently verified against primary sources. (1) House Clerk roll call XML for Roll 295, 117th Congress, 1st session confirms H R 3755 'Women's Health Protection Act', question 'On Passage', 24-Sep-2021, Result Passed (Democratic yeas 218, Republican nays 210), with legislator name-id S000510 'Smith (WA)', party D, voting Yea -- S000510 is Rep. Adam Smith of Washington. (2) Congress.gov cosponsors page for H.R. 3755 lists 'Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9]' (bioguide S000510) as a cosponsor with cosponsor date 06/08/2021, the bill's introduction date, making him an ORIGINAL cosponsor -- action beyond a single supporting vote. (3) House Clerk roll call XML for Roll 360 (2022) confirms H R 8296 'Women's Health Protection Act', 15-Jul-2022, Passed, with Smith (WA) S000510 voting Yea. He personally fulfilled both pledged actions (original-cosponsoring and voting for the WHPA) in both Congresses. Rated CHAMPIONED (+0.75) rather than FULL because the promise's stated end -- a codified statutory federal right -- was not enacted (the Senate blocked the bill under the filibuster, an outcome outside his individual control); rated above ATTEMPTED because as an original cosponsor he actively led/drove the effort. This standard would apply identically to a member of either party with the same record.
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.