Talk:United States Senate Committee on Veterans' Affairs

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

U.S. Congress Low‑importance

	United States portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about one (or many) thing(s).

Military history: North America / United States

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

Untitled

There seems to be no category for either Vietnam veterans or US veterans in general. Common Man 08:05, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Category:Vietnam War veterans and Category:American people by war. Harro5 08:06, May 22, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you! For some reason, that group was not in Category:Military people by nation. I'll put it there. Common Man 08:35, 22 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Specter

Specter remains a Republican for purposes of committees until there is a reorganizing resolution. Ranking membership and sub-committee membership is undetermined and it is not clear that the Democratic Leadership will allow the Republicans to reclassify Specter as a Democrat for the purpose of committee assignments. [1][2]PantsB (talk) 22:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as being "a Republican for purposes of committee". He is a Democrat on those committees. The committee ratios are unofficial, and in any event, don't force Wikipedia to deny reality. For the moment, the actual numbers on Specter's committees are more favourable to to the Democrats than was originally intended. The articles mentioned don't talk about Republicans "reclassifying" Specter, they talk about rejiggering the committee membership. Since Specter is a Democrat, I'm putting him on that side of the ledger as has been done elsewhere. -Rrius (talk) 08:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Template talk:United States congressional committees#Memberships of previous Congresses

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:United States congressional committees#Memberships of previous Congresses. —GoldRingChip 18:07, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]