Talk:Representative accuses Bush of signing bill not passed by Congress

I think the name of the article should say "Representatives" instead of "Representative". I wanted some consensus before I changed it though. --Meanmeancoffeebean 00:23, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe Mrmiscellanious wanted something referring to this: from Waxman's letter to Card:

Detailed background about the legislation and its constitutional defects are contained in a letter I sent last month to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, which I have enclosed with this letter.[1] In summary, the House-passed version of the legislation required the Medicare program to lease "durable medical equipment," such as wheelchairs, for seniors and other beneficiaries for up to 36 months, while the version of the legislation signed by the President limited the duration of these leases to just 13 months. As the Congressional Budget Office reported, this seemingly small change from 36 months to 13 months has a disproportionately large budgetary impact, cutting Medicare outlays by $2 billion over the next five years.

--Meanmeancoffeebean 05:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

• Mmm. Most of that is sorted out, the only thing I'm concerned about is the notification to Bush, for which Waxman does not really state antyhing other than a purported telephone call that happened. I think attributing this back to the letter itself would be adequate and would lift any more objections I have. --MrMiscellanious (talk) – 05:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand that a call was made to the White House before the legislation was signed by the President advising the White House of the differences between the bills and seeking advice about how to proceed. My understanding is that the call was made either by the Speaker of the House to the President or by the senior staff of the Speaker to the senior staff of the President.

I believe this is the relevant information you were looking for, Mrmiscellanious. - Amgine | ^{talk en.WN} 06:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, in Pelosi's letter it references a Wall Street Journal: "Today the Wall Street Journal reported that the Speaker's chief of staff 'called a high-ranking White House official' and 'asked the administration to delay proceedings until the problem could be addressed by the House and Senate.'" but instead of referencing this in the article I was thinking it would be better to reference the original article so if anyone could find that (I couldn't) and cite it is would be useful I'm sure. --Meanmeancoffeebean 06:17, 25 March 2006 (UTC)