This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Why are there quotation marks aroung War on Terror? No one would say "World War II," "Civil War," or "Vietnam War." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.90.143.2 ( talk) 23:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Should there be mention of specific or notable bills passed under Bush? Energy bills, for example.
Instead of violating the 3-revert rule (which is apparently not being enforced anyways), I brought the para's that VV obstinately excises to discussion:
..."According to a report (pdf) by the non-partisan U.S. Congressional Budget Office [1], fully one-third of President Bush's tax cuts from the year 2000 to 2003 have gone to people with the top one percent of income (who earn an average of US$1.2 million annually), and two-thirds went to the top twenty percent (who earn an average of US$203.7 thousand annually). According to the same report, the tax cuts have decreased the tax burden for higher income brackets and increased the burden for middle and lower income brackets. (NYT)"...
It is only relevant in a more expansive description which gives details of the full impact of the tax cuts on different income levels. The fact is that people at lower income levels got a larger percentage cut. — Mike 08:07, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
A President's tax policy is important, and examinations of it from authoritative sources are relevant to any authoritative survey of that president's domestic policy.
Saying tax cuts "have gone to" people misrepresents what a tax cut is and is therefore POV. If the government stops taking your money, nothing is "going to you". TimShell 23:20, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It would be less POV if the percentages of taxes paid by each percentile were mentioned. If the top 1% pays 33% of all taxes, it would hardly be surprising if they accounted for 33% of all tax relief. TimShell 23:20, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Not in its current form. — Mike 08:07, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
..."On February 7, 2003, ten Nobel laureates and over 450 economists from universities and tax policy institutes released this statement (pdf) regarding Bush's tax cuts. [2]"...
This looks like a simple argument from authority. TimShell 20:20, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
If the statement includes specific criticisms, these should be listed in the article. The link to the statement can be included in the external links section. TimShell 20:20, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
..."The non-partisian Committee on Economic Development [3] released this report (pdf) regarding the effects of Bush's economic policies on economic recovery and job creation."...
..."On August 31, 2004, World Trade Organization arbitrators authorized the European Union and other leading U.S. trade partners to impose sanctions against the United States for violation of global trade laws. The decision by the W.T.O. is the latest example of several recent cases where Washington has been found to be in breach of international trade rules. [4] [5]"...
Foreign trade policy does not belong in a page about domestic policy TimShell 20:13, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The non-partisan U.S. Congressional Budget Office [6] released this report (pdf) regarding the distribution of Bush's tax cuts. The non-partisian Committee on Economic Development [7] released this report (pdf) regarding the effects of Bush's economic policies on economic recovery and job creation. Ten Nobel laureates and over 450 economists from universities and tax policy institutes released this statement (pdf) regarding Bush's tax cuts. [8]
Until we come to agreement on how to present this information, we should put a minimal mention with purely neutral wording in the economy section, such as the above.
This page has been listed on WP:RFC Kevin Baas | talk 23:26, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC).
New environmental policy development: [9]
How can we present this in a NPOV manner? Kevin Baas | talk 18:33, 2004 Sep 14 (UTC)
Kevin, you changed the word prevented to the word banned in the sentence It would have effectively banned same-sex marriage. Your rationale was that people could still have same-sex marriages, so they wouldn't be "prevented". Surely, if they could still have same sex marriages then they wouldn't be banned either. Or did I misread you? Moriori 01:58, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
It seems a little odd to have a picture of Bush at a G8 conference shaking hands with a foreign leader at the top of an article on domestic policy. — Nathanlarson32767 (Talk) 06:47, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Since the other title is so bad, and this article has more structure, format and content, Domestic policy of George W. Bush should be merged in here. For a large article like this i suppose you guys have some kind of structure thing going on, so it shouldn't take too long even though it looks like it would. Jdcooper 11:47, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Domestic policy of George W. Bush covers the same idea as Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration. Merge. Samuel 22:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Ditto, merge. Fephisto 00:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps there could be a separate article for Bush's economic policy? Rather than throwing it under Domestic Policy? (after all, Social Security has its own article...) Fephisto 00:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The picture captions in this article are excessive in length and need to be trimmed down. Quadzilla99 23:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article2602261.ece
Some issues:
"The percent of the population below the poverty level increased in each of Bush's first four years, while it decreased for each of the prior seven years to an 11-year low. Although the poverty level increased the increase was still lower from 2000 to 2002 than it was from 1992 to 1997 (which reached a peak of 39.3% in 1993). In 2002 the poverty rate was 34.6% which was almost equal to the rate in 1998, which was 34.5%. Poverty was at 12.7% in 2004"
This is a confusing paragraph and inaccurate. The poverty rate was certainly never 34.6% in 2002. What does this number represent?
"Under the Bush administration, productivity has grown by an average of 3.76 percent per year, the highest such average in ten years."
Where does this number come from? It cites a primary source in the bls link. What years are being averaged and what column is being used? Also, what is this in comparison too? Gmb92 05:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
From the AP: [10] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.71.50.11 ( talk) 04:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Is there still nothing about the abstinence-only model in this section? Kpsfire ( talk) 06:48, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Was not the first president, as stated by Wikipedia to appoint openly gay men and lesbians. President Clinton, January 6, 1999 nominated James C. Hormel to be the U.S. Ambassador to Luxembourg. A hand full of conservative Senators blocked the nomination and on June 4, 1999 President Clinton announced the recess appointment of James Hormel, making Mr. Hormel the first openly gay U.S. Ambassador. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.106.250.6 ( talk) 17:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Why does the data usually stop at 2004-5. What happened from 2005-2008? John D. Croft ( talk) 14:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration. 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, 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:18, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:16, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Domestic policy of the George W. Bush administration. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hey there Fellow Wikipedians
For over two years, this article has desperately needed a new lead section, and it is finally here.
If you would be kind enough to look at it and provide feedback that would be amazing!
My talk page is simple but available if you want to give me more information and/or pointers!
Lindjosh ( talk) 02:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)