Talk:Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Douglas Holtz-Eakin[edit]

The following segment at the end of the article anonymously quotes Bush Administration economist and John McCain financial policy adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin. If partisans are to be included, they should be identified as such. Partisans representing contrasting views should be given equal footing. Obviously the wording 'the former CBO chief wrote an op-ed' is awkward. The wording suggests serious bias in claiming that the op-ed piece shows "that the true deficit impact would see the deficit increase by more than $500 billion". It also makes no sense in its context, followed by the statement 'This is a result of several new taxes, fees, etc...)

However, the former CBO chief wrote an op-ed for the New York times showing that the true deficit impact would see the deficit increase by more than $500 billion over the years 2010-2019.[5] This is a result of several new taxes, fees on health-related industries, and cuts in future spending growth on healthcare programs.[6][7]

My proposed change would remove the first sentence entirely. If someone wants to add segments quoting Mr. Holtz-Eakin and perhaps Paul Krugman or Joseph Stiglitz. Thanks much --Norbal14 (talk) 00:46, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold. --kurykh 00:54, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just create a "criticism" section, like most other bills have (see Medicare Part D or similar.) --TheCynic (talk) 23:46, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NOCRIT. We shouldn't create one here just because others have one; rather, others should have theirs integrated into the rest of the article. --kurykh 00:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation form[edit]

Now that the Act covered by this article has been signed into law, the Public Law number for this Act should become available in a few days. Once the Public Law number is assigned to an Act of Congress, it is customary to drop the references to the "bill" number (the "H.R." number, in this case) and instead to use the Public Law number, as in "Pub. L. No. 111-xxx". At some point the citation to the U.S. Statutes at Large (as in "xxx Stat. xxxxx") will also become available. The formal citation will then be something like: Health Care and Education Reconcilation Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-xxx, xxx Stat. xxxx (March 30, 2010). Stay tuned. Famspear (talk) 19:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The public law number for this Act has been assigned. I have added it to the article. Famspear (talk) 04:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References 1 and 2 are broken links[edit]

The first two references in the References section are broken links (the page they point to has a title of "GPO FDsys - Error Detected"). I'd fix them, but I'm not sure where they're supposed to point.

Agthorr (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History section does not clearly distinguish between PPACA and this law[edit]

The history section does not clearly distinguish between the legislative history of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Pub.L. 111-148) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (Pub.L. 111-152). Superm401 - Talk 22:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

==== this is an extremely partisan article and contains a great many inaccuracies. What the Act says it does and what it does are two different things. Even the President is delaying implementation. Evilpassion (talk) 05:45, 29 July 2013 (UTC)evilpassion - Talk01:44, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Map Errors[edit]

Totally incomprehensible as to why party affiliation with regard to Tennessee's 7th Congressional District (as of 2010) is totally erroneous; this district had been in Republican hands for many years prior to the date of the vote on this Act, which makes the validity/reliability of the map as a whole questionable, at least to me. 72.105.5.39 (talk) 22:08, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but[edit]

But there's still going to be a problem for anyone who gets too sick to work & can't pay for health coverage for a long time, or forever, isn't that right? Hillmon7500 (talk) 19:05, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's the huge problem that most people still can't afford the insurance they're being forced to buy, through no fault of their own, right? Then there's the problem of the homeless & illegal immigrants & others who can't afford to buy it. So insurance is like putting a bandaid on cancer. Hillmon7500 (talk) 03:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 19:16, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Health_Care_and_Education_Reconciliation_Act_of_2010&oldid=1207601056"