Talk:America's Healthy Future Act

Crime cite

Removing speculation based on a handwritten note said by somebody to have been given to a Republican committed member, per WP:RS and WP:V#Reliable_sources

It's not speculation. It's not an unreliable source. And it's not a note "said by somebody to have been given to a Republican committed member". All of this is factually incorrect.

The Joint Committee on Taxation Chief of Staff, Tom Barthold, is the relevant expert in this field. He made a statement that was explicitly referred to by a reliable source- The Politico. It's no different than what this Wikipedia article does already numerous times, such as when this Wikipedia article quotes Barack Obama. The Squicks (talk) 03:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Having the exact quote seems like a fine compromise. The Squicks (talk) 05:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Gang of 6 is proposed to be merged with this article.

• Oppose While the information is relevant, the Gang of Six can and should be expanded to detail some of their undertakings, especially with the upcoming budget debates. Gang of Six might be better of renamed as Gang of Six (U.S. Congress) with disambiguation if used in other areas, but it certainly is comprehensive enough to warrant its own page. A link to the relevant Gang of 6 section should suffice. --Cstrosser (talk) 06:16, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
• Strongly support The information about the group is relevant history behind this proposal, and the topic should be discussed here in proper context rather than there. As well, the 'gang's' article is just a few sentences right now. Merger should be no problem. The Squicks (talk) 05:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
• Doesn't matter. One sentence and a simple wikilink to Gang of 6 will do quite adequately. As it turns out, many others have been influential in various ways in the substantive and procedural discussions, both among the 23 committee members as well as including others from outside the committee who've proposed amendments and offered notable public commentary about the bill. These six may be influential but they're not dispositive of the issues presently in front of the committee ---therefore, IMO, no good sense in implying to readers that they are the be-all-end-all of committee decisionmaking. .... Kenosis (talk) 12:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support C'mon, "Gang of X" is used just about every time a group of X legislators form an important block. There's usually no lasting historical notability there. If it becomes as important as, say, the Second Triumvirate or the Gang of Four, that would be something else. Ray^Talk 19:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
• Support per squicks Gang14 (talk) 20:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sections and Related articles on Current Debate in desperate need of overhaul

I have added this note to all major articles related to the current healthcare reform debate.

As the information in the articles such as this dealing with specific proposals are more up to date, the information should be added to the comprehensive articles, and in general all articles related to the current healthcare debate need to complement each other.

The comprehensive articles on the current healthcare debate desperately need to be overhauled and expanded. There is practically nothing in those articles about the ongoing major events around the current debate, a subject area that is absolutely required.

I recently created a WikiProject page to gather and discuss the overhaul effort: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Current Health Care Reform in the United States

Please discuss anything not pertaining specifically to this article on the WikiProject talk page.

NittyG (talk) 04:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Senate bill(s) superseded by Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Note

H.R. 3590 → (AS or Amendment Substitute) is expected to be the vehicle for the Senate health care bill - the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act . IGNORE all the previous Tax Code language since the substitute amendment will replace it anyway.

You can also see this draft amendment at the democrats.senate.gov site.

Maybe a merge is in order but that may raise more problems than just starting clean under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act would be. 68.237.235.127 (talk) 10:43, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Offhand I'd be inclined to support a partial or total merge into Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. While "Baucus bill" appears to be substantially relegated to an historical review at this stage, the newly introduced Senate bill appears to be mostly based upon it. I'd think it will require a fair amount of time and effort to properly integrate the two. For the moment, I'm holding off-- anyone else care to do the honors of starting it off? ... Kenosis (talk) 13:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on America's Healthy Future Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090925152010/http://online.wsj.com:80/article/BT-CO-20090922-712038.html to http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090922-712038.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100315185349/http://www.aul.org:80/PR_09-16-09 to http://www.aul.org/PR_09-16-09

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on America's Healthy Future Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091007042348/http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/leg/LEG%202009/091609%20Americas_Healthy_Future_Act.pdf to http://finance.senate.gov/sitepages/leg/LEG
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091018232920/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091017/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_care to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091017/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_care

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:41, 11 October 2016 (UTC)