storage.googleapis.com · Web viewCitizens seeking clemency have already served whatever sentence, probation, and parole has been deemed appropriate by a court of law, and are back

Revolutionary War UnitBig Idea #3: Represent

Representto act or speak officially for (someone or something)

Vocabulary Memes:

What does it mean? What does it mean?

What does it mean? What does it mean?

1


Build-a-WordAffix New Word Meaning

-ation

-ative

-ed

-able

Un- and -ed

In the word Represent, why isn’t “re” a prefix?

Challenge Take Apart:

2


Prerepresentability

Question: Wyoming has about 500,000 people. California has about 40,000,000 people. Each state gets two senators. Is this fair? Give 2 reasons for your answer.

1.

2.

3


1. Vocabulary:a. Represent: to officially control and lead (a group of people), or

to make decisions about laws, taxes, social programs, etc., for (a country, state, etc.)

b. Opposition: action that is done to stop or defeat someone or something

c. Influential: having the power to cause changes: having influence

d. Precedent: something done that can be used as an example to be followed in the future

e. Virtual Representation: The idea that elected officials represent your interests. It doesn’t matter whether you voted for them.

4


1)The woman got used her connections with the Mayor to get a stop light put in.

2)Even though he didn’t vote, he was confident the congressman would listen to his viewpoint because of .

3)Even though the congressman lived in Somerville, he all people in Middlesex county.

4)The teacher didn’t allow anyone to eat in her class because she didn’t want to set up a bad .

5)People were protesting in the streets in to the unfair law.

No Taxation Without RepresentationThe Reaction to the Stamp Act

5

Reading #1


The colonists greeted the Stamp Act with widespread hostility. Unfortunately for Parliament, the people in colonial society that suffered the most under The Stamp Act—newspaper printers, students, attorneys, and judges—were also the most politically active. Their opposition to the law frequently took the form of street protests that sometimes turned violent.

While townspeople rioted, colonial assemblies debated. Samuel Adams and Benjamin Franklin were among the most influential voices arguing that since the American colonies were not represented in the British Parliament, that body had no right to tax them. The slogan “No taxation without representation!” arose from colonial opposition to the Stamp Act and proved enduring. The colonists felt that allowing this tax would open the door to many more English taxes. They had never before paid these taxes and they felt that paying them now would set up a dangerous precedent. The British countered with the theory of virtual representation, which held that members of Parliament were obligated to defend the interests of British subjects and colonists alike. This theory made sense in England where many people also could not vote.

6

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/road-to-revolution/benjamin-franklin/v/franklin-overview


In October 1765, delegates from the colonies convened in New York City at the Stamp Act Congress, where they drew up formal petitions to the British Parliament and to King George III to repeal the act. It was the first unified colonial response to British policy and it provided the British a taste of what would come soon thereafter.

In March 1766, the Stamp Act was repealed. But the stage for the American Revolution had already been set.

No Taxation Without Representation

7

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/road-to-revolution/the-american-revolution/a/lexington-and-concord

https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/road-to-revolution/the-american-revolution/a/lexington-and-concord


The Reaction to the Stamp Act

2. Main IdeaIs this reading arguing about an opinion, or is just explaining factual information? Explain your answer. What is the main idea of this reading? (What is it trying to say about colonies?)

The main idea of the reading is that colonies and England

Based on this idea, what do you predict will happen next? What will each side do?

The Colonists will

The British will

8


The Declaration

Of Rights Of The Stamp Act Congress

The members of this congress, sincerely devoted, with the warmest sentiments of affection and duty to His Majesty's person and government…esteem it our indispensable duty to make the following declarations, of our humble opinions, respecting the most essential rights and liberties of the colonists, and of the grievances under which they labor, by reason of several late acts of Parliament.

1st. That His Majesty's subjects in these colonies owe the same allegiance to the crown of Great Britain that is owing from his subjects born within the realm, and all due subordination to … the Parliament of Great Britain.

2d. That His Majesty's … subjects in these colonies are entitled to all the inherent rights and privileges of his natural born subjects within the kingdom of Great Britain.

3d. That it is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people, and the undoubted rights of Englishmen, that no taxes should be imposed on them, but with their own consent, given personally, or by their representatives.

9

Reading #2


4th. That the people of these colonies are not, and from their local circumstances cannot be, represented in the House of Commons in Great Britain.

5th. That the only representatives of the people of these colonies are persons chosen therein, by themselves; and that no taxes ever have been or can be constitutionally imposed on them but by their respective legislatures.

3. Building Their CaseWalls are built brick by brick, with each brick laid on top of the one that came before it. Convincing arguments are built the same way, one idea at a time, which each idea laid across the previous idea. Use the arguments from the Declaration of Rights and Sentiments to build the case for “No Taxation Without Representation” by summarizing each of the points the Stamp Act Congress made into the brick wall.

10


11


12


4. Group Write: Were the Colonists right in opposing the Stamp Act, or was it reasonable? Use the chart about the British and Colonial arguments to get examples. We will be using a point-counterpoint format, where you state your thesis and evidence. Then you talk about the other side (the counterpoint) and explain why they are wrong. Use all of your vocabulary words in your paragraph.

13


5. Think, Pair, Share:1. By yourself, fill in this Perspectives Chart for both the

British Parliament and the Stamp Act Congress.

14


British Parliament Stamp Act Congress

Identity

Beliefs

Values

Interests

2. Share your chart with a partner. Talk about the differences between your charts. Combine information so you can present it to the class.

3. Present your chart to the class.

A merica steals votes from felons. Until it stops, our democracy will be weakened

Russ Feingold, The Guardian 15

Reading #2


Tuesday 18 July 2017 06.00 EDT

The right to vote is the most fundamental right of any democracy, granting it legitimacy as a means of government by instilling power in the people and not in politicians. It ensures “consent of the governed” and holds government accountable to the people: not law-abiding people, or moral people, or any other qualifier, but the people.

This most fundamental right is not and never has been about rewarding good citizens or even law-abiding citizens. It is not a luxury or a reward, handed out by the government as it sees fit. It is a right, and should not be conditioned on anything more than citizenship, and being of voting age.

And yet since the civil war, states have intentionally denied the right to vote to a certain category of citizens – those with a felony conviction. Today, felony disenfranchisement bars roughly 6.1 million citizens from the ballot box – one in 13 African Americans nationally.

16


This denial of a right so central to democracy – and to citizenship – is not based on respect for the law, but is rather a historic and deliberate effort to prevent black people from voting.

Proponents of felony disenfranchisement argue that as a felon or former felon, an individual has shown a disregard for the law, and therefore must demonstrate respect for the law before being able to vote on issues related to law. Yet felony disenfranchisement did not originate, nor is it being maintained, out of any high reverence for the law: quite the opposite.

It was invented after slavery, when white elites sought to diminish the power of newly freed slaves. White politicians tied disenfranchisement only to those crimes believed to be disproportionately committed by black people. The sole objective was to prevent black citizens from threatening the power of the white elite – an act fundamentally at odds with the very purpose of voting rights.

The discriminatory intent and impact of felony disenfranchisement is alive and well today. Those affected by disenfranchisement are disproportionately minorities and low-income citizens, voting groups that trend Democratic.

Moreover, the discriminatory politics and impact of today’s mass incarceration cannot be separated from those of felony disenfranchisement. By doubling down on mass incarceration under President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and perpetuating felony disenfranchisement, the Republican party effectively blocks a determinative number of voters from voting, including in key battleground states.

Take Florida, for instance, where felony disenfranchisement bars nearly one in four black Floridians from voting. In tight races, that disenfranchisement can make or break an election. In 2000, an estimated 600,000 ex-felons

17


were prevented from voting – President George W Bush won Florida by just 537 votes.

Disenfranchisement is fundamentally undemocratic. And yet only two states in the country fully protect the right to vote and enable people who are incarcerated to vote (Maine and Vermont).

The rest of the 48 states disenfranchise voters, with some states restoring voting rights at certain stages after completion of one’s sentence, parole or probation. Disenfranchisement is most illegitimate in Florida, Iowa and Kentucky, where a felony conviction costs a citizen his or her right to vote for life.

The only way to regain the right to vote in Florida, for instance, is to seek clemency from a court or the governor. This process is incredibly time intensive and has a low rate of success. Moreover, in clemency hearings, applicants are granted mere minutes to plead their cases, and can be asked any array of questions unrelated to their original conviction, including about acts of “good citizenship” and any traffic violations.

Citizens seeking clemency have already served whatever sentence, probation, and parole has been deemed appropriate by a court of law, and are back in society trying to successfully reintegrate. And yet a mere speeding ticket can be used to “justify” the permanent denial of their right to vote, forever making them a second-class citizen. Imagine if the right to free speech or religion were so conditioned.

There are 23 states that have expanded voting rights for former felons, and ending felony disenfranchisement is actually a bipartisan issue. Just recently, Alabama dramatically reduced the number of felonies that result in disenfranchisement. Florida could be next.

18


Supporters of felony disenfranchisement argue that the current system is about preserving respect for the law. But they know better. Felony disenfranchisement has nothing to do with the law and everything to do with politics. It is an excuse to deny voting rights, just like voter ID laws and the literacy tests and poll taxes of old.

When a person is incarcerated, they do not lose their citizenship. We do not disown them and cast them from our borders. As citizens, they have a right to vote, and that right must be protected.

The alternative is to weaken our foundation as a democracy, at the expense of all of us. As citizens, we should seize the momentum building across the country and reject the Trump-Pence voter suppression commission, and instead champion the restoration of voting rights and our democratic legitimacy.

Circle Feingold’s main point in the reading.

Underline any evidence he gives that supports this opinion.

6. Making Connections Read the following editorial. What is the main idea the editorial has about the idea of representation? How would the colonists and the British feel about policies that take away their right to vote? Is this an example of “virtual representation?” Write your response as a point/counterpoint paragraph.

19


20


21

Documents

storage.googleapis.com · Web viewCitizens seeking clemency have already served whatever sentence, probation, and parole has been deemed appropriate by a court of law, and are back