This article discusses the possible outcomes of the removal of the Route 1 bridge. The central claim to this magnificent editorial is that if the town of Yarmouth votes to take down the Route 1 bridge, that the neighborhood sense of community would be destroyed. The writer believes this, because it will take away from the cultural  aspect of the community.

The author discusses how the bridge is used for community hangings of signs for events such as the clam festival. That if it were to be removed, it would take away from the healthy residential neighborhoods nestled around the town center.

I believe that the writer hit a lot of good points. That the the evidence he brought up helps to enhance the arguments, and therefore he convinced me of his point. I too believe that the town of Yarmouth should not take down the Route 1 bridge. I say this because it would destroy many of the community’s cultural aspects.

Editorial 

The New York Times: Ukraine's Slow Collapse

The New York Times: Ukraine's Slow Collapse

Campbell Dorsett, 5W

1. What is the editorial's central claim?  The editorial expressed the poor shape that Ukraine is in currently.  Although there was a cease-fire signed between Russia and Ukraine in September, Russian tanks are still entering into Eastern Ukraine.  There is much violence, and many Ukrainians living in the east are being cut off by the government. The editorial's main claim is that the International Money Fund has provided some aid to Ukraine; however, the United States and European Union do not want to commit anymore money until the country shows a clear reform plan.

2. What us a significant piece of evidence used to support the claim?  The editorial shares that the US and EU believe that officials in Ukraine, like President Poroshenko and Prime Minister Yatsenyuk, need to take more responsibility for their country.  Ever since Ukraine became independent, it has been plagued by corrupt leaders; these leaders have the responsibility to stop this cycle.  The evidence that the author uses to show the bad state that Ukraine is in are from its economy and industry.  First, Ukraine's currency has lost half its value against the dollar.  Also, Ukraine's coal mines and industrial centers have been shut down by separatists.

3. What is your opinion of the claim?  I believe its a smart choice to hold out on overloading the country with aid until they have a proper plan for reform. However, leaving the country feeling possible neglected and abandoned feels unethical.

Liane 5W

Source

1. The article focuses on three men who were cited as a result of feeding homeless people. Their main point is that people who are starving cannot be ignored and left to starve.
2. The article quotes the man who was arrested, Arnold Abbot, "One of the police officers said, 'Drop that plate right now,' as if I were carrying a weapon." A 90-year-old man carrying a plate of food, trying to help people who are in desperate need, is possibly detained for "up to 60 days in jail."
3. People in need cannot be ignored and left to die. Passing laws and regulations will not keep people off the streets, instead it will drive people into desperation; leading to dumpster diving, stealing and the like. 

Morgan 5B

Climate as a Moral Issue

1) The main point of this article is that global warming and other environmental problems are a moral issue. Politicians, in particular, make it about money and politics and forget the issues at hand. The author says that whether or not scientists are correct in their beliefs about global warming, the world is a stake and people need to take action

2) One example the author uses to show that politicians make it about money and politics is Senator McConnell. McConnell said “Action to protect the environment will hurt ‘my state’ ”, as he is someone who is fighting any sort of action taken by the government to help stop global warming. The author is arguing that it should not be about politics, but the morality of saving the planet. 

3) I agree that the environment is a moral issue and there should be more actions taken to help. Many people think that small steps are not enough, and therefore don’t do anything, but I think that anything and everything helps. One person alone may not have any impact, but if every single person did one thing, it would make a huge impact on the environment.  

CJ Cawley - 4W

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-the-coming-of-age-ritual-of-spend-now-save-later/2014/11/13/5fd9314e-6b73-11e4-a31c-77759fc1eacc_story.html

What is the editorial's central claim?

The central claim of my editorial is that the young generation of today is saving more than their parents, yet are still given a bad name for ‘not saving enough’. Although they are only doing the same as what their parents before had done, todays generations between zero and 34 are actually saving more than currently believed.

2. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

In the beginning of the editorial a graph is given showing Moody’s data showing varying savings over the years in different age groups. The data shows that no matter what decade you’re in, young people always have a negative savings, a ‘dissavings’. But, the early generations have a worse savings rate than those today. The generation of now is seen as foolhardy and irresponsible with money, yet we save more than those who call us these names when they were young. 

3. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

In my opinion I see frugal spending as something unimportant. In order for an economy to expand, people must be willing to spend money. I’v learned in history class and in economics class that a little bit of debt is a good thing. It empowers the individual to work harder so they can afford and pay off their debts. On the opposite side, too much debt will damage our economy. I see that the spending of our young generation stays too high with little savings, we may be hurt in the future. But, for now, I see it as something that will help us. 

The Problems with Sweden's Prostitution Law

1. Name: Libby King

Class: 2W

Citation: 

Bennachie, Calum. "The Problems with Sweden's Prostitution Law." National Post. Mar 29 2014.           ProQuest. Web. 19 Nov. 2014.

Link: 

http://search.proquest.com.ursus-proxy-10.ursus.maine.edu/newsstand/docview/1511370973/fulltext/26FFEDAC09A74CD2PQ/13?accountid=17222

2. What is the editorial's central claim?

This editorial’s central claim, as stated in the first sentence of The problems with Sweden's prostitution law, involves the following: “There are so many things wrong with the MP Joy Smith's arguments regarding prostitution ('Prostitution must not be legalized,' March 25)” (Bennachie). Thereby, although this aspect of the claim is not blatantly stated, Calum Bennachie makes it clear that he is in favor of legalized prostitution. Particularly, he repeatedly slams opposer of legalized prostitution, Joy Smith; he states that Smith has a tendency to “continually claim things about the Swedish law that are not true” (Bennachie).

3. What is a significant piece of evidence used to support the argument?

Bennachie references many sources, countries, and policies to support his pro-prostitution, anti-Smith argument. For example, one significant piece of evidence involves New Zealand’s Prostitution Reform Act and Bennachie’s analysis of Smith’s editorial: "Ms. Smith claims that, 'under New Zealand law, brothels can easily exploit women by threatening to fire them if they do not provide the services demanded.' Yet, the PRA say that it is illegal to coerce someone into having commercial sex. This is the legal protection that Ms. Smith says is not there. Furthermore, she is obviously unaware of the laws against rape that New Zealand has. Or does she always make up fiction like this?" (Bennachie). In this passage, Bennachie cleverly presents his evidence through combining hard facts and subjective evaluation. Consequently, the reader is enticed by this crafty tactic, largely enhancing his argument as a whole. 

4. What is your opinion of the claim? Add your voice.

Although I think Bennachie presents a strong argument, I disagree with his pro-legalization perspective for many reasons. For starters, prostitution is simply immoral and, thus, should be considered a crime. Due to the fact that most prostitutes are female, the practice is degrading to women and likely enhances probability of rape and violence. Lastly, legalizing prostitution would plausibly increase the spread of disease and STDs, adding on yet another negative potential offshoot.

Ranked-choice petition first step towards reform: Nate Gallagher (5B)

Ranked-choice petition first step towards reform

http://www.pressherald.com/2014/10/31/view-ranked-choice/

1. The editorial’s central claim is that Mainers should should sign a petition to replace the state’s current electoral process with a Ranked-choice system which would guarantee that a winning candidate would have the approval of a majority of voters. The Ranked-choice system sounds more complicated than it actually is. Here’s how it works: in a race with more than two candidates, voters are given the option to rank as few or as many of the candidates in order of who they want elected. In the event that no candidate wins a majority, the last-place runner is immediately eliminated and his or her second place votes are assigned to those still in the race until someone reaches fifty percent. 

2. The argument made in this editorial mainly relies on soft facts. For example, the author claims that with the implementation of the Ranked-choice system, Maine would see a drastic decrease in the amount of attack ads during election season. The author reasons that these negative ads would alienate groups of voters, and it would be less likely that these voters would put the politician running the ad as their second choice. The system would require politicians to appeal to ALL Mainers and would encourage cleaner elections. 

3. I believe that Mainers should sign this petition because I believe that a Ranked-choice system would be the best for the state. The biggest problem with the current electoral process is that voters aren’t choosing who they think is the best candidate, instead they're conceding by picking their second choice candidate just so the “other guy” doesn’t end up in office. We let polls and negative ads have more an impact on our selection than the actual qualities of the candidates.  These are decisions made out of fear and they only perpetuate this extreme political polarization currently taking place. Ranked-choice voting is an immediate fix to this problem. Voters would be able to vote for who they think is the best candidate without fear that their vote would be wasted. Something’s clearly wrong with the system if no governor since 1998 has won a majority of votes in their respective elections. We need ranked-choice voting to ensure that at least a majority of Mainers approve of the winning candidate, otherwise splits in the vote caused by similar candidates could land someone in office with little popular support.