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

Enact the Protecting Student Athletes from Concussions Act to condition states' receipt of federal education funds on schools adopting and enforcing minimum concussion prevention and management plans for student athletics.

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: 88%

Independently verified via direct fetch of both cited sources. Congress.gov confirms H.R.5704 (118th Congress, 2023-2024): 'Protecting Student Athletes From Concussions Act', sponsored by Rep. Mark DeSaulnier [D-CA10], introduced Sept. 26, 2023, and 'Referred to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce' -- it did not become law. GovTrack corroborates the same sponsor, introduction date, and 'Introduced' status. DeSaulnier is the lead/primary sponsor of the bill that matches the promise directly (it promotes state requirements for schools on concussion prevention and treatment, the mechanism being conditioning federal education funding on states adopting concussion-safety laws). Because he actively led and sponsored the measure -- well beyond a single supporting vote -- but it was not enacted, CHAMPIONED (+0.75) is correct rather than FULL. Fairness check: a lead sponsor of either party whose named bill is referred to committee and dies without enactment earns CHAMPIONED under the same standard. (Trimmed two unverified specifics from the prior rationale -- a named R-MN cosponsor and a 119th-Congress reintroduction bill number -- as neither was independently confirmed and neither is load-bearing for the outcome.)

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 →