Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NEED Act
Generally agree with nominator. Major problems with article include |original research and extreme reliance on |primary sources. I did a web search and found little; there was an op-ed piece in the http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stephen-zarlenga/sequesters-shutdowns-and-_b_4086071.html Huffington Post. There was discussion in the http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/column/676075-dont-ban-the-banks-but-dont-let-them-issue-money-either/ Epoch Times which looks like a fringe publication; the Washington Post had a vote tally http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/house/2/votes/367/ here. Not much else, suggesting to me it does not meet the |general notability guideline, but I may change my vote if more sources can be found, and the article trimmed substantially
— User:Tomwsulcer, 13:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OR||WP:PRIMARY||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:No original research)