Talk:Bell Trade Act

	Law portal 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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Deleted from the article

The following has been deleted from the article:

One U.S. State Department official described the law as "clearly inconsistent with the basic foreign economic policy of this country" and a betrayal of "our promise to grant the Philippines genuine independence."

Protests throughout the Philippines denounced the Bell Trade Act. Even the reliably pro-American Philippine President Sergio Osmena called it a "curtailment of Philippine sovereignty, virtual nullification of Philippine independence."

This amendment could be obtained only with the approval of three-quarters of the members of the House and Senate and a plebiscite.

The denial of seats in the House to six members of the leftist Democratic Alliance and three Nacionalistas on grounds of fraud and violent campaign tactics during the April 1946 election enabled Roxas to gain legislative approval on September 18.

The definition of three-quarters became an issue because three-quarters of the sitting members, not the full House and Senate, had approved the amendment, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the administration's interpretation .

In March 1947, a plebiscite on the amendment was held; only 40 percent of the electorate participated, but the majority of those approved the amendment.

The Bell Act, particularly the parity clause, was seen by critics as an inexcusable surrender of national sovereignty. The pressure of the sugar barons, particularly those of Roxas's home region of the western Visayan Islands, and other landowner interests, however, was irresistible.

Signed: Travb (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV Tag Removed

I took off the POV tag- No discussion here why it was put up, though the content that was deleted by Travb might have been the text under review. I definitely could imagine that this article was written/edited by someone with a negative POV, but I don't see it clearly reflected in the article. I'm not sure what really qualifies though, so someone could re-insert it with a comment here describing the rationale.

"Party rights (Philippines)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Party rights (Philippines). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 17#Party rights (Philippines) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Parity Amendment" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Parity Amendment. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 17#Parity Amendment until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:26, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Filipino

Na isusulong ang pagpapatibay ng parity rights 175.176.87.36 (talk) 12:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

5b5b

Hghlh bvv 175.176.81.80 (talk) 03:32, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]