Read the opposing arguments. 1
Making Voting Mandatory
One doesn't need to listen to politicians long before hearing that age-old phrase, "I want your vote." Of course, no politician, at least at the
state and national level, gets everyone's vote. In fact, most elections are won by the candidate that gets more votes than anyone else. However,
this usually turns out to be considerably fewer than a majority of the people the candidate actually represents.
This happens because, as a general rule, only about half the citizens eligible to vote actually get around to voting. Despite efforts by
officials to allow early voting and absentee voting, most of the no-shows can be attributed to voter apathy, laziness, or ignorance of the issues.
Making voting mandatory would, over time, diminish the effect of these bad excuses and ensure us all of a more representative
government. To make the voting process easier, provide a greater window, say ten days, for voting, and the inconvenience is reduced to nearly
nothing. Provide a box on the ballot labeled "No acceptable candidate" in order to avoid forcing someone to vote for the lesser of two-or three
or four-evils. The winner, of course, would be what we have now, the top vote getter from among those receiving votes. Over time, however,
people would tire of selecting the default, and would make themselves better acquainted with the candidates and their issues.
Some would argue against this proposal on the grounds that forcing everyone to the polls would not work. Well, filing income tax is
mandatory, and nearly everyone complies. Further, I would point to the many instances around the globe where mandatory voting is established
and working
On which issue do the authors most disagree?
O 1. the importance of voting
2. the value of high voter turnout
03. the appeal of politicians to the voters
Ο Ο
4. the inconvenience of the voting process
Mishty Guinta.
Growth: Reading 6+ PA 2013 Core Standards and Eligible Question #

Hat do the words partial, palatial, and potential have in common? they have the same prefix. they have the same suffix. they have similar meanings. they have the same word root.

What was the major sacrifice the members of the continental congress dealt with? how did they overcome this obstacle?

Hurry 50pts read the excerpt from justice curtis’s dissenting opinion, then answer the question that follows. slavery, being contrary to natural right, is created only by municipal law. this is not only plain in itself, and agreed by all writers on the subject, but is inferable from the constitution, and has been explicitly declared by this court. the constitution refers to slaves as “persons held to service in one state, under the laws thereof.” . . . . it was certainly understood by the convention which framed the constitution, and has been so understood ever since, that, under the power to regulate commerce, congress could prohibit the importation of slaves; and the exercise of the power was restrained till 1808. a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba, and brings them to the united states, where they are set free by the legislation of congress. does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? if so, what becomes of the laws prohibiting the slave trade? if not, how can a similar regulation respecting a territory violate the fifth amendment of the constitution? . . for these reasons, i am of opinion that so much of the several acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws. –dissenting opinion on dred scott v. sandford, justice benjamin curtis which evidence best supports curtis’s opinion that dred scott should be free because he lived in a free territory? check all that apply. “the constitution refers to slaves as ‘persons held to service in one state’” “the convention which framed the constitution . . has . . the power to regulate commerce.” “a citizen of the united states owns slaves in cuba.” “does this legislation deprive him of his property without due process of law? ” “acts of congress as prohibited slavery and involuntary servitude within that part of the territory of wisconsin . . were constitutional and valid laws.”