This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject U.S. Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United States Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.U.S. CongressWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. CongressTemplate:WikiProject U.S. CongressU.S. Congress articles
One editor briefly tagged this article as potentially failing to meet Wikipedia's notability requirement. I added six more links, including some to secondary news sources. I also updated the article. It originally just included the info that the bill had passed the House. Last week it passed the Senate, which means it is currently waiting to be signed or vetoed by the President. I think this meets the notability requirements, especially if it does become law. I'd be happy to discuss this further if need be. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there! Currently the debate and discussion section only has positive quotes in favor of the bill. That is not due to my personal bias, but rather because I was unable to find any quotes or articles against it. The bill passed 404-0 in the House and by unanimous consent in the Senate, indicating that it was not very controversial, at least on a national level. If you can find examples of opponents, I'd love to see them added. Thanks. HistoricMN44 (talk) 21:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
