Tag Archives: voting

Do Now #48: Romney vs. Obama

November 2, 2012, 6:52 pm • Posted by Maxine Einhorn
Comments (2)

Pool/Getty Images

To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with @KQEDEdspace and end it with #KQEDDoNow

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.

Do Now

The number one issue in this election is the economy, and it can greatly affect your future. Which candidate for president (President Obama or Governor Romney) offers you and the country a stronger economic policy, and thus perhaps, a brighter future? Why? Which candidate would you vote for president?

Introduction

On October 16th, a college student asked this question during the second presidential debate between President Obama and Governor Romney:

"Mr. President, Governor Romney, as a 20-year-old college student, all I hear from professors, neighbors and others is that when I graduate, I will have little chance to get employment. Can — what can you say to reassure me, but more importantly my parents, that I will be able to sufficiently support myself after I graduate?"

Governor Romney pins his strategy for job growth on his tax plan. He claims more than half of those jobs, 7 million, would be generated by this plan to cut tax rates by 20 percent for all taxpayers. Growth in the economy, the Romney campaign argues, stems from cutting taxes for high-income people and companies.How would this be paid for? The almost $5 trillion in lost tax revenue over 10 years would be paid for by ending deductions and closing loopholes. Governor Romney argues, "First, my energy independence policy means more than 3 million new jobs, many of them in manufacturing. My tax reform plan to lower rates for the middle class and for small business creates 7 million more. And expanding trade, cracking down on China, and improving job training takes us to over 12 million new jobs."

President Obama’s strategy is totally different. The focus is on investment – federal investment - and is spelled out in the American Jobs Act. This means spending on infrastructure and job training programs, a tax cut for firms that hire new workers, aid to state and local governments, and a program to rebuild schools. He would end the tax cut for wealthy Americans (enacted by President Bush) and use the money to pay for investment. The $450 billion program was enacted by Congress: a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday and an extension of unemployment benefits. Congress refused to pass other provisions that the American Jobs Act called for. President Obama argues (at an event in Virgina)
"We need to cut our oil imports in half, create thousands more jobs in clean energy … We need to use the savings from ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to help pay down our deficit and put people back to work doing some nation-building right here at home."

Which strategy makes sense to you?

Continue reading »

Filed under: Do Now
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

7 Great Election 2012 Resources

September 17, 2012, 9:57 am • Posted by Almetria Vaba
Add your comment

2012 Political Map Center

Here are 7 great resources to engage students in Election 2012, including mutimedia election content produced by the PBS Newshour team. Get right to the heart of complex issues with a rage of great interactive maps, video clips and lesssons found in PBS LearningMedia.

2012 Political Map Center

This interactive map from PBS NewsHour features an electoral college calculator which includes historical data going back to the 1964 election, live election results for presidential primaries, evangelical Protestant adherents by state, ethnic data by county from the 2010 census, 2012 primary winners, unemployment data from February 2012, and 2008 general election results for president.

Dollars & Votes: 2012 Election

"the.News" Correspondent Thai da Silva investigates the fundraising landscape during the 2012 Presidential election in light of the most recent Supreme Court actions. Using the supporting language arts lesson plan, students will study campaign fundraising, analyze the development and influence of Super PACs and explain how Super PACS use rhetorical devices and persuasive appeals to persuade American citizens to vote for the candidates that the Super PACs are supporting. In the social studies lesson plan, students will complete activities to help understand the significance and impact of the 2012 Supreme Court Decision Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Analyzing the Candidates in the 2012 Presidential Election

This lesson from PBS NewsHour examines the political process, the candidates and their platforms, and the ultimate outcome of the 2012 election. Students will: 1. Work as a class to create a flow chart documenting the steps a candidate must take to be elected to the presidency. 2. Participate in a class discussion about the number of candidates, the reasons people seek to be president, and the election process. 3. Utilize research skills to create a profile of a specific candidate and his/her qualifications, point of view on various topics, and presidential campaign. 4. Present their candidate profile projects to classmates. 5. Monitor the progress of the presidential candidates and participate in classroom discussions about the success of the various campaigns.

Eight States That Will Shape 2012 Election

In this video from PBS NewsHour, Judy Woodruff talks with Stuart Rothenberg of the Rothenberg Political Report and NewsHour political editor Christina Bellantoni about the importance of "battleground states", or "swing states" and the significance of eight of those states in the 2012 election.

"Silent Generation" May Get Loud in 2012 Election

In retirement, the "silent generation" is becoming increasingly conservative and angry. It's also more engaged in politics than are other generations. NPR's series on generational politics, in collaboration with the Pew Research Center, examines the politics of those 66 to 83 years old.

Rich vs. Poor: How Wealth is Impacting the 2012 Elections

In this PBS NewsHour lesson plan, students will: 1. Participate in a survey about social class in the U.S. and work as a group to calculate class results. 2. View a video clip and review articles and data related to socioeconomics and politics. 3. Record, analyze and discuss socioeconomic data and small groups and draw conclusions about how this might affect the outcome of elections in their area. 4. Participate in class discussions related to social class and the effects is has on the election process. 5. Create and share a prioritized list of ideas related to addressing issues of social class.

Who's Spending More: Candidates or Super PACs?

As presidential candidates raise and spend increasingly larger amounts of money each election season, new financial reports show what role Super PACs are playing. PBS NewsHour's Gwen Ifill discusses how campaign finance is shaping up in the 2012 election year with John Dunbar of the Center for Public Integrity and Roll Call's Eliza Newlin Carney.

Filed under: PBS LearningMedia, PBS LM Social Studies/Lang. Arts
Tagged: , , , , , ,

Do Now #38: Should We Change the Way We Elect Our President?

September 14, 2012, 5:55 pm • Posted by Matthew Green
Comments (26)

photo by kristin_a/flickr

To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with @KQEDEdspace and end it with #KQEDDoNow

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.

Do Now

When we vote for president in the U.S., we're not actually voting directly for the candidate we select on the ballot. Instead, we're voting for a group of "electors" who are part of something called the Electoral College, and they are the one's who actually cast the final votes that decide who the next president and vice president will be. So, in the presidential election it's not a one-person-one-vote system. Should we change that system so it's more direct democracy, or should we leave it the way it is? Is there a better system, perhaps?

Introduction

Here’s a little factoid that I’m sure we’ve probably all learned at some point, but that never fails to confuse the crap out of a lot voters. As Americans, we actually DO NOT directly elect our presidents and vice presidents. I repeat, the U.S. president is not chosen through a one-person-one-vote system!

So, then how does a presidential candidate win a state's electoral votes?

The presidential election is decided state by state. And for each state, it's a winner-take-all system. So ... that means that the candidate who receives the most popular (aka direct) votes in each state gets all of the electors from his/her party. The other candidates in the race, even if they lose the popular vote by a single vote, get no electors from that state at all. Nada. Squat.

Simply put, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a state, wins all the electors in that state.

Why did our founders come up with this system (it's in the Constitution, after all)? 

Two reasons:

a) They wanted to steer clear of the British parliamentary model, where the chief executive (prime minister) is chosen by the majority party of elected representatives.  The founders thought that it seemed a whole lot more democratic to appoint electors from each state than to have a system in which the president was elected by Congress.

b) It was as issue of old-school logistical problems: back in the day (like way, way back, before phones and trains and wheels - ok, they had wheels), long distance communication and travel was challenging to say the least. Voting for delegates at a local level was just easier and less vulnerable to corruption than was counting every person's vote throughout the whole nation.

A candidate can win the presidency without winning the popular vote and it has happened three times in American history. The most recent occurrence was in the 2000 election, in which Al Gore won more popular votes but still lost the election to George W. Bush.

A more complete overview of the Electoral College can be viewed on KQED's The Lowdown.

Resource

CGP Grey presents How the Electoral College Works - Nov. 11, 2012
How the Electoral College works in the modern world.
 

To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with@KQEDedspace and end it with #KQEDDoNow

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.

We encourage students to tweet their personal opinions as well as support their ideas with links to interesting/credible articles online (adding a nice research component) or retweet other people's ideas that they agree/disagree/find amusing. We also value student-produced media linked to their tweets like memes or more extensive blog posts to represent their ideas. Of course, do as you can…and any contribution is most welcomed.

More Resources

Current segment AL Gore Calls for Popular Vote - Aug. 30, 2012
Former Vice President Al Gore and Current TV hosts Eliot Spitzer, Cenk Uygur, Jennifer Granholm and John Fugelsang talk about the disenfranchisement of American voters and the pros and cons of going to a popular vote as part of Current TV's coverage of the 2012 Republican National Convention.

RT America segment Electoral College Dropout - Nov. 3, 2011
Is the Electoral College still relevant? As a recent poll shows 62% of Americans think it's not, RT Producer Adriana Usero hits the streets of DC to see what exactly people have to say.

Do Now

When we vote for president in the U.S., we're not actually voting directly for the candidate we select on the ballot. Instead, we're voting for a group of "electors" who are part of something called the Electoral College, and they are the one's who actually cast the final votes that decide who the next president and vice president will be. So, in the presidential election it's not a one-person-one-vote system. Should we change that system so it's more direct democracy, or should we leave it the way it is? Is there a better system, perhaps?

Filed under: Do Now
Tagged: , , , ,

Do Now #37: Should the Voting Age be Younger than 18?

September 7, 2012, 6:52 pm • Posted by Matthew Green
Comments (7)

Flickr/Liz the Librarian

To respond to the Do Now, you can comment below or tweet your response. Be sure to begin your tweet with @KQEDEdspace and end it with #KQEDDoNow

For more info on how to use Twitter, click here.

Do Now

Should the legal voting age in America be lowered to under 18 years of age? How low should it go? What are some arguments for or against this, and how might it impact the outcome of political elections in our country?

Introduction

American youth under 18 years old live under the same laws as adults. They pay sales taxes (every time they buy something). And some can even work jobs and get drivers licenses.

But ... they can’t vote.

And that’s just not fair, say a growing number of student rights groups across the country that are lobbying to have the voting age lowered to at least 16.

"Young people participate in this society in many other ways," Alex Korokney-Palicz, president of the National Youth Rights Association told Fox News. "They pay taxes, they follow our laws, they can be charged as adults for crimes. They have so much reason to vote, and It's simply unjust to deny them."

Being able to vote, he added, would add real meaning and relevance to high school social studies and civics classes, which most students take before they turn 18.

But, say opponents, too many youth simply lack the necessary level of maturity and complexity to make informed decisions at the voting booth.

"I think it's a dumb idea," said Curtis Gans, director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. "The voting age was set at 18 because that's the age at which people could be drafted and die for their country. They (youth under 18) don't have enough life experience or history and don't know the issues in enough detail."

Throughout the course of American history, the right to vote has very gradually grown more inclusive. And it's almost always resulted from hard-fought political battles waged by disenfranchised populations demanding representation in the political process. Remember that when the Constitution was first drafted in 1789, the right to vote was reserved for white male property owners 21 and up.

By the mid-Nineteenth Century, property requirements were dropped. Over the next two decades, the right to vote was granted to black men and shortly thereafter to all naturalized male citizens over 21. It was more than 50 years later - in 1920 - that women were granted universal suffrage after the ratification of the 19th Amendment.

But it wasn't until 1971 that the voting age in America was finally lowered from 21 to 18. The 26th Amendment, which prohibited states from setting the voting age any higher than 18, was ratified largely as a result of heated student activism in opposition to the Vietnam War, and the compelling notion that if 18-year-olds were old enough to be drafted, it was only fair that they be considered old enough to vote too.

Continue reading »

Filed under: Do Now
Tagged: , , , , ,