Talk:United States House Committee on Ways and Means

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	United States House Committee on Ways and Means is part of WikiProject U.S. Congress, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the United States Congress.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. The options are: "FA", "A", "GA", "B", "Start", "Stub", "List", "Disambiguation", "Template", or "Category."
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. The options are: "Top", "High", "Mid", and "Low."
???	This article has not yet been assigned a subject. The options are: "Person", "People", "Place", "Thing", and "Event."

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United States House Committee on Ways and Means article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

• Important Issues that have Come Through Ways and Means

"Major issues that have gone through this committee read like a laundry list of important bills, including welfare reform, a Medicare prescription drug benefit, Social Security reform, President George W. Bush's tax cuts, and all trade agreements, including NAFTA and CAFTA"

Is there a reason that President George W. Bush's tax cuts are mentioned specifically? In general, do tax cuts go through somewhere else? If not, a change should either be made to refer to major recent issues or the current president's name should be removed as unnecessary partisanship.

I agree with the comment on the Bush tax cuts. All tax reduction measures and increases pass through this committee. While the Bush cuts have historical relevance as the most recent ones considered by the committee, perhaps a different description focusing on the committees key jurisdictions would be more appropriate.

Also, the last sentence indicating that a seat on Ways and Means is a good way to earn campaign contributions implies a quid pro quo for committee members. Campaign contributions are an essential part of any congressman's reelection campaigns. Someone on Ways and Means may be considered particularly influential, and therefore interest groups may want to support those people through contributions, but I believe the current wording implies a certain POV that campaign contributions are a key reason people serve on the committee. Comments like this belong on the wiki page regarind campaign finance, but not on a committee summary. I recommend delection of that sentence.Dcmacnut 01:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)