“Co-sponsor and vote for the U.S. Term Limits constitutional amendment limiting members of the House to three terms and Senators to two terms (signed the U.S. Term Limits pledge).”
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 via the govinfo PRIMARY bill-status feed: Rep. Brian J. Mast (R-FL-21) is listed as an ORIGINAL cosponsor of H.J.Res.11 in the 118th Congress (isOriginalCosponsor=true, sponsorshipDate 2023-01-09; lead sponsor Rep. Ralph Norman, R-SC-5). The bill text limits Representatives to three terms and Senators to two terms — exactly the U.S. Term Limits pledge Mast signed. Becoming an original cosponsor of the specific amendment he pledged to cosponsor is an affirmative act well beyond a single supporting vote, supporting CHAMPIONED. The 'vote for' half of the promise had no genuine opportunity: the amendment never reached a floor vote. Applying the same neutral standard to any party, original cosponsorship of a constitutional amendment is a strong affirmative action, so CHAMPIONED is not partisan leniency. Tempering the score (hence not FULL and confidence held at 0.85): I confirmed that in the current 119th Congress Mast is NOT among the 102 cosponsors of the successor resolution H.J.Res.12 (again sponsored by Norman, introduced 2025-01-06), so this reflects the concrete 118th-Congress action rather than sustained, recurring compliance. The prior rating's sources and reasoning hold up; the one cited congress.gov cosponsor page now returns HTTP 403 to automated fetches (anti-bot block, not a dead link) but the same fact is confirmed by the authoritative govinfo bulk-data feed.
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.