Talk:Deficit Reduction Act of 2005

Various changes
I made a few changes which I hope does not change the meaning of the article for anyone. This is a somewhat interesting story but it needs to be updated if possible, and it needs more citations to sources. Yours, Famspear 23:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090203215630/http://abcnews.go.com:80/US/wireStory?id=2633701 to http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2633701

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 05:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061227214620/http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20060214170704-70767.pdf to http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20060214170704-70767.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:20, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Updated controversies section
I rewrote the section on the controversies over passage, cutting the word count, adding citations, and keeping as much of the information as seems still relevant. There was an internet furor at the time with overdramatic articles leading with demonstrably false claims like this had never happened before in the history of America. But time has passed. As far as the legal system is concerned, even if there was a mistake the law still stands based on clearly established precedent and there's nothing to see here. The section is still justified because so much virtual ink was spilled at the time.

The last paragraph is still missing citations for the claims about hand editing in the Senate, and one of the other links is so dead even archive.org only has a 404 page. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:32, 25 December 2019 (UTC)