Talk:Budget Control Act of 2011

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

What does this part mean?[edit]

Senate vote of disapproval The senate did not pass the vote of disapproval by 45 votes to 52. So regardless of a House vote of disapproval the $500 billion increase in the debt ceiling will occur when the 50 days after the request to increase the ceiling expires.

I think it means the senate voted 45 in favor, and 52 against, the vote of disapproval, which would have limited Obama's certification of raising the deb limit either $400 billion, $500 billion, or $900 billion. [1] I'll try to figure out what this pdf means (i'm not a lawyer) so I will read carefully and make the changes this weeekend. 67.77.174.6 (talk) 16:39, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ http://www.kslaw.com/imageserver/KSPublic/library/publication/ca080411.pdf

Sequestration?[edit]

We need to add a seciton here on Sequestration... I will get around to generating content eventually but I thought I would float it first to see what the editorial community thinks about this idea. Here are some links about sequestration that might be used as sources: bipartisan policy center blog congressional budget office report on sequestration Peace, MPS (talk) 22:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

House vote[edit]

While the Fox News article did cite Roll Call 690, it looks like the correct vote is Roll Call 677 [1]. This changes the vote counts in the table and the text. Numerous other sources [2] cite these counts. As this is a significant change, I felt it was worth discussing before making the change.

SamRuby (talk) 00:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, somethings really weird here... this article [3] from a Representative says that it passed 218-210, and has a publishing date of July 29th, 2011... The roll call for 690 is dated to have taken place on August 1st... and the Fox News article claims that the vote took place on the 1st of August... which would be after the vote recorded by the Representative, and calls it Roll Call 690... I'm looking in deeper into what Roll Call 690 was specifically about, but something seems REALLY weird with some of the sources... --Puellanivis (talk) 13:00, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I figured stuff out. Roll call 677 was for Boehner's unamended version. That then went to the senate, where it was amended, and then sent back to the House for roll call 690, which is the version of the law that ultimately made it into law. Roll Call 677 is an irrelevant historical foot-note about a bill that contains language that did not become law. Roll call 690 is the one that truly matters. --Puellanivis (talk) 13:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sovereign default[edit]

I don't disbelieve that there was disagreement about whether reaching the debt limit would have caused a sovereign default. My recollection is that the majority opinion was that it would, but that there were dissenting voices. There is certainly room to discuss this disagreement in the article, but it must be mentioned in the article text backed up by reliable sources before it can be included in the lead. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 05:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Budget Control Act of 2011. 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) 21:07, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Budget_Control_Act_of_2011&oldid=1206469180"