What do you disagree with in the article?

Your links undercut your point that only three bills passed is the full measure of Hillary's Senate effectiveness, and they support what is said in the article:

Quote:

---

"Effectiveness can be a behind-the-scenes role, adding a serious amendment, working inside to get the language exactly right. By any reasonable standard, including the private comments of her colleagues on both sides of the aisle when she was in the Senate, she was very effective."


Our ruling

Bush said that as a senator, Clinton had her name "on three laws in eight years."

Bush used vague language here, so it’s fair game to look at the three sponsored bills and the 74 co-sponsored ones that passed. Also, congressional experts warn that legislative influence goes beyond having your name as a sponsor or co-sponsor. Senators weigh in with amendments, debate and negotiations.

The statement is partially accurate, but leaves out important details so we rate this claim Half True.

---