The Instigator
annaliese
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points

Scott Walker

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/17/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,015 times Debate No: 77622
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (2)

 

annaliese

Con

Hello, hello. I decided to create this debate after the "lovely" Wisconsin governor Scott Walker has announced his run for president of the United States in 2016. This debate, however, has nothing do with his presidential bid.
As a Wisconsinite myself, I have gotten a taste of what happens under Walker's "leadership", and I am very excited to begin this debate.
I would like this debate to be about the new budget in Wisconsin that has been approved.
Things like the new Bucks arena, traffic projects, cuts to the UW system, and new speed limits are some of many new things the Wisconsin budget has addressed.
I'm taking the "Con" side, which means I think that this new budget is not good for the Wisconsin people (as proved by arguments about the budget).

First round is acceptance.
Second round is your main argument for any topics within the budget (as seen above).
Third round is rebuttals.
Fourth round is conclusion.

It would be wonderful if someone actually from Wisconsin would debate me on this, although that is not a requirement.
Also, remember that I'm a newbie. If I'm doing anything wrong, feel free to let me know in the comments.
Sources will be simply website URLs, I don't require anything fancy. I will be doing the same, so there is no reason for voters to deduct points when I have clearly laid out how sources will be handled.

Good luck!
lannan13

Pro

I accept. I look forward to my opponent's opening arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
annaliese

Con

Thank you, lannan13 for accepting this debate, and good luck.

The 2015-17 spends $4.4 billion more overall than the 2013-15 budget did. This is a 6.4% increase.


General Purpose Revenue (GPR) spending has increased the last 12 years, as shown by this chart.


Property taxes will be frozen once again.

What are property taxes used to help?

Local school districts, technical college districts, and all local cities, towns, villages, etc. benefit from property taxes. Property tax is the largest source of tax revenue in Wisconsin.

Technically, locals should be the ones levying property taxes, but the state has put in many strict limits on how much they can levy.

School districts can only raise a certain amount of money from state aid and property taxes.

Oh, but wait! Scott Walker put in a state property tax relief measure!

This law raised state aid $60 million in 2014-15.


But school districts are still under revenue limits.

The $60 million in aid triggered a $60 million property tax reduction to taxpayers.


“State schools Superintendent Tony Evers pointed out that while the new law ‘provides property tax relief for some school districts, it does not increase spending for public schools.’”


Now that property taxes are frozen once again, schools will not get any more increased funding than previous years.


Speaking of schools, let’s talk about the UW system.


The state helps fund the UW system, and the more state funding that the school receives, the more the school can lower costs for tuition. In the 1993-94 academic year, nearly 34% of the system’s budget came from tax dollars. In the 2014-2015 year, this percentage has shrunk to 20%. This lack of funding has caused the UW system to raise tuition in order to make up for funding not provided by the state anymore. In 2012-13, 73% of undergraduates had loans at graduation. The average debt was $29,129, compared with $17,250 in 2003-04.


Now, the state has frozen the UW tuition cost, which means that the schools can not raise tuition costs on students. YAY! Not so fast. With state funding dropping 13% (Walker argues that it is only 2.5%, but his own workers published the fact that it is 13%), and tuition being frozen, how will the UW system be able to survive?

UW-Madison Chancellor, Rebecca Blank, says that this cut will mean layoffs and harm to the school’s mission.


I want to address what Walker believes is only “2.5%”.

If you do take the $6.1 billion system budget, and take away $150 million per year, that does represent 2.5%.

However, the remaining $3.7 billion is not all available to the UW system. Some of it is federal research grants, some of it is for athletic purposes, and there are certain special gifts that have been given that cannot be used by the UW system. If you go to a University book store and buy a keychain, that cash cannot be used to pay the salary of a science professor. Therefore, the system will have to cut professors, which limits the amount of classes that students can take, which could possibly mean students need to stay for more than 4 years of college (because of the lack of classes available), which keeps them in debt longer. It’s a vicious cycle, and Walker’s cuts to the UW system will not help anything.

Two days ago, the UW-Rock County announced it will be losing its dean and six or seven other administrative positions by the end of the year. Soon, around 83 full-time positions will be cut.


Other UW schools are expecting layoffs as well. The student government at Madison (the Associated Students of Madison--or ASM) is being cut, so students do not have a voice. Walker has also limited the amount of decisions that the school itself can make.


Continuing on with education:

School Ratings

All public schools will be given a five star rating. This is based on standardized testing. Not the quality of teaching, or the “green rating” of the school, or the new types of learning being integrated, but standardized testing. Standardized testing has promoted cheating, and kids with high test anxiety can find standardized testing a nightmare.

Just look at the Atlanta cheating scandal! 11 administrators and teachers were convicted for participating in a cheating scandal. There were kids that were worried they weren’t “smart” enough to pass these tests, and under extreme pressure, chose to cheat.

And we are using these tests to rate schools? Each child is a different test taker, and these tests cannot assess critical thinking that well.


Traffic Projects

The state is going to borrow $850 million for road projects. This means delays in major highway projects and resurfacing and reconstruction work.


Minimum Wage

Walker’s budget has repealed a law giving construction workers (working on public projects) a minimum salary in local governments. Now towns, cities, etc., can pay construction workers whatever they want for building schools and making changes to other properties.


Natural Resources

The state will no longer offer tax support to state parks. Because of this, the price to get into these parks has increased. +$3 for annual admission, +$1 for daily admission. Camping fees will increase from $3-$5 per night. People not from Wisconsin will be paying an extra $5-$8 per night. The cost of an annual trail pass will go up $5. This may not seem like a lot, but state parks are often attended by families. If each person is charged the fee, the total price to stay overnight at a park will become quite costly.


The budget also cut 17.5 researcher positions from the Department of Natural Resources’ Sciences Services Bureau. This service bureau works on pollution and mining. They will have 12.5 positions left.


About 6 non-profit organizations will not get about $1 million in grants after the governor simply took the money out of the budget.


Prisons

Prison towers will now not be guarded at night, as 60 third-shift tower guard positions have been eliminated across 10 prisons. Those employees will be moved into other vacancies “promised” to them. Now I would like to ask why this is a good idea? For those that say prison breaks in Wisconsin “never happen”, just this past May, three inmates escaped from a prison near New Richmond. The prisoners escaped at 5 a.m., which happens to be during a third-shift guard position. Eliminating these positions will be deadly.


Pipeline

Canada-based Enbridge Energy will now be able to finish working on an expansion in Dane County. In July 2010, a pipeline by Enbridge Energy burst and spilled 1,000,000 gallons of diluted bitumen, a heavy, crude oil, into the Kalamazoo river. On March 14, 2013, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ordered Enbridge to return to dredge portions of the river because there was still submerged oil and contaminated sediment.

In May, Mackinac Island found that zebra mussels have corroded Enbridge Energy’s Line 5 pipeline. The pipeline was installed in 1953. No updates have been made since, and the “protective coating” on the pipeline has become outdated, and a new breeding ground for zebra mussels. However, Enbridge Energy has not closed down the pipeline yet, even though it is danger and could have another catastrophic spill.


And now, Scott Walker has allowed Enbridge Energy to expand a pipeline into our state where it could spill and ruin lakes and other natural reservoirs. This pipeline will go through Wisconsin with a potential risk for spills along many counties.




As you can see, this budget will not and does not help the people of Wisconsin.


Sources by "Category"
Overall State Budget Spending:

http://www.maciverinstitute.com...


Property Tax:

http://www.politifact.com...-/

http://www.politifact.com...


UW Budget

http://www.politifact.com...

http://www.jsonline.com...

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...

http://www.gazettextra.com...




Star Rating

http://edge.ascd.org...

http://fox11online.com...


http://www.usnews.com...

http://www.washingtonpost.com...


Traffic Project, Minimum Wage, Natural Resources

http://www.startribune.com...

http://www.jsonline.com...


Prison:

http://www.upi.com...

http://www.weau.com...


Pipeline:

http://www.mlive.com...

lannan13

Pro

School Funding

My opponent slams Scott Walker for cutting the state school funding, but there are several issues with that. First let me introduce you to Baseline budgetting.

Baseline Budgetting was introduced to the US by President Nixon. It's where each year the budget of all fields would increase by a certain percentage. (http://download.premiereradio.net...) When there are budget cuts it is not the base budget being cut it is the percentage of increase being cut. ( Statement of Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis Congressional Budget Office on Budget Projections and Baselines before the Task Force on Budget Process Committee on the Budget U.S. House of Representatives April 1, 1998) So we can actually see that Scott Walker actually didn't cut the budget at all, but rather the increase that wasn't really affecting anything as the increase would still be greater than the previous year, meaning that there would still be a net gain despite his budget cuts. This is explained in the chart bellow.



My opponent continues to slam schools, but another thing is actually Scott Walker is pushing for School Vouchers. What exactly is that you may ask. Why it's the gradual transition from public funding to private funding of schools. The public funding will transition to these school vouchers which allow parents to choose what school they want their children to go to. Hands down private schools are way better than public school and with this plan in place parents, even from poor neighborhoods can afford to send their children to private school.

Another thing that is highly ignored by many is that the schools reflect the neighborhood. Rand Paul has commenced a study which has found that generally children who come from a poor family go to the same poor school and have an increased chance to turn to crime and such as they are still in poverty and have no upward mobility in today's society. ( Paul, Rand. Taking a Stand: Moving beyond Partisan Politics to Unite America. N.p.: Center Street, 2015. Print.) Scott Walker has taken steps towards this issue by that of starting a program where 1,000 families in poverty will be placed on said vouchers. (http://www.jsonline.com...)

Traffic, parks, prisons, pipeline, and Minimum Wage

I've decided to group these together since they're closely related.

My opponent states that his traffic spending is a bad thing, but unfortunately it's sorely needed. The US Department of Transportation has reported that in the state of Wisconsin alone 14% of Bridges, 71% of roads are in unsatisfactory conditions, and that on average, these problems cost the average moterist $281 per year alone. (http://www.transportation.gov...) These are some terrible numbers and it is a good thing that this is being fixed, even if there are delays.

Now on to minimum wage, my opponent slams Walker for abolitishing the MW on construction workers, but she acts like that's a bad thing. Now that the MW here is gone cost of these problems would be cheeper and tolls will fall in prices. More businesses and other things can easily move into the state providing more overall revenue and prices in the state will drop. You can see that with the money saved here this extra funding can easily be re-allocated. The same can easily be said for the parks.


As for the prisons this is, once again a missing target. My opponent clammers that there are "issues," but she fails to realize that this is being replaced by survallance technology. There are still guards there, but with increased security we can see that things will be a whole lot better and safer now.


My opponent argues that the pipeline is out dated and needs repare, and though that it is true. That's not a reason to close it. It gives Wisconsin thousands of jobs and if anything it needs to be fixed by the company. NOT shut down.
Debate Round No. 2
annaliese

Con

Unfortunately, my opponent has not given me much to work with. His argument was quite short, and he did not include sources for his minimum wage, prison, and pipeline arguments.

Let’s begin with school funding.
My opponent states: “First let me introduce you to Baseline budgetting.”
Let us note the spelling error, but continue on.
“So we can actually see that Scott Walker actually didn't cut the budget at all, but rather the increase that wasn't really affecting anything as the increase would still be greater than the previous year, meaning that there would still be a net gain despite his budget cuts.”
This really confuses me. At first, my opponent said that Scott Walker actually “didn’t cut the budget at all”, and at the end of the sentence he says, “. . .meaning that there would still be a net gain despite his budget cuts.” My opponent seems to be having a difficult time deciding whether or not Scott Walker actually cut the budget. If Scott Walker only cut the increase, that is still cutting something. The idea that this increase “does not really affect anything” is a big lie. Yes, there will still be an increase due to this baseline budgeting, but it will be hardly enough for a school district to “live on”. The “other” increase (that Scott Walker just cut) is necessary for schools to use for a variety of reasons, like new education materials, and improvements to the school building itself.

Here is an excerpt from the article “Federal Baseline Budgeting: A Scam by Any Other Name” by Hal Gershowitz and Stephen Porter.

“Let’s say a government agency is spending $250 billion and, using baseline budgeting, is slated to have its budget increased to $275 billion. The Administration (or Congress) may, instead, call for an overall increase to $262 billion, or, an increase of $12 billion for the next fiscal year, and then promote the new budget as a $13 billion dollar cut in spending ($275bln – $262bln = -$13bln). This is like an obese individual who is expected to gain 100 pounds gaining only 75 pounds and then claiming he or she lost 25 pounds. Sounds absurd, doesn’t it?” - See more at: http://www.oftheeising1776.com...


My opponent then states, “This is explained in the chart bellow.”
Again, another spelling mistake.
The chart given does explain the idea of baseline budgeting; however, it’s a chart from the Department of Defense. Could my opponent not find a chart actually relevant to the debate? Perhaps a chart from the Department of Education? Or better yet, a chart from the UW system, or K-12?

Next, my opponent states: “My opponent continues to slam schools, but another thing is actually Scott Walker is pushing for School Vouchers.” He then goes into great detail about how great voucher schools are, and what they can do for the community.
Now, I am all about kids deserving the best education they can, but voucher schools are actually not a good idea.

According to a study done by Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, Milwaukee public school students outperformed those in voucher schools. While 48% of Milwaukee public school students performed at a level of proficiency in math, only 34% of voucher school students performed at a level of proficiency.

Now that vouchers have been extended, religious and private schools will gain the majority of tax dollars spent on education.
My opponent says: “Hands down private schools are way better than public school and with this plan in place parents, even from poor neighborhoods can afford to send their children to private school.” I would like to focus on the first part of this sentence. Obviously, as shown by data above, not all private schools are “better” than public schools.

According to an article on Wisconsin’s school voucher program, there were 2,069 eligible students for voucher schools. Of these students, 76% of them did not attend a public school the last school year. 67% of them had attended a private school last year, which means that their parents could already afford the private school in the first place!
My opponent says: “Hands down private schools are way better than public school and with this plan in place parents, even from poor neighborhoods can afford to send their children to private school.” Obviously, 67% of the children chosen to participate in this program could already afford private school (because they attended previous years).

Now that private schools have gained the majority of tax dollars spent on education, public schools will losing funding. Clearly, some of these private schools are scams, and are not truly making education better for those who can’t afford it. We must keep trust in our public schools.

Traffic spending is sorely needed, but with all of the delays, what are the effects? According to the Virginia Department of Transportation, delays cause increased job site costs, equipment stand-by costs, wage escalation, and financing costs. Do we really just want to set all of these projects aside, and watch the cost of this project being to grow and grow because we never finished it?

Also notice my opponent’s misspelling of “motorist” in his traffic spending argument.

My opponent states: “Now on to minimum wage, my opponent slams Walker for abolitishing the MW on construction workers, but she acts like that's a bad thing.”
Notice the misspelling of abolishing.
My opponent also states: “Now that the MW here is gone cost of these problems would be cheeper and tolls will fall in prices. More businesses and other things can easily move into the state providing more overall revenue and prices in the state will drop.”
Also notice the misspelling of cheaper.
Here is an excerpt from an article written by JM Ashby.
“Under current conditions, local governments are required to pay contractors the same wage whether they are brought in from out of state or down the street. If the Prevailing Wage law is repealed by Governor Walker, however, local governments will be allowed to pay outsourced labor less money than their local counterparts.”

Obviously, local governments will want to have projects done cheaper, and look to other workers, rather than to those in the local community.
My opponent states: “Now that the MW here is gone cost of these problems would be cheeper and tolls will fall in prices. More businesses and other things can easily move into the state providing more overall revenue and prices in the state will drop.”
If more businesses move into the area (yeah! We can get our building built for 2 cents because of the new law!) there is no safe bet that their sales will provide the state more revenue. And even if my opponent’s stated “plan” did work, and prices in the state did drop, it’s because construction workers don’t have a safe and reliable way to live because there is no more minimum wage for them. The fact that my opponent’s “plan” to improve the state means taking away safety of cash flow for construction workers is just sickening.

My opponent states: “The same can easily be stated for parks.”
This is literally no explanation. He did not even make an argument for the parks.
He said the same can easily be stated for parks. . . so looking back at the above paragraph. There’s a minimum wage for parks? And that when we take it away, more businesses and other things can easily move into the state providing more overall revenue and prices in the state will drop? My opponent obviously did not clear up this issue because nothing about the previous paragraph he wrote makes sense about the state parks.

My opponent states: “My opponent clammers that there are "issues," but she fails to realize that this is being replaced by survallance technology.”

Note: What does “clammers” mean? My opponent also misspelled surveillance.
The idea that technology can do better than a human has been toyed with over the last decade. Putting in technology instead of having a human guard is not a good idea. So many things could go wrong. The technology could malfunction, someone inside the building could shut it off before an escape, the technology could miss a fugitive trying to escape, the technology could be compromised. What could happen to a human guard? He could get shot by a fugitive trying to escape if the fugitive got his/her hands on a gun. Having an alert, alive, unable to be compromised/malfunction human would obviously be a better choice.

My opponent states: “My opponent argues that the pipeline is out dated and needs repare, and though that it is true. That's not a reason to close it. It gives Wisconsin thousands of jobs and if anything it needs to be fixed by the company. NOT shut down.”

Notice the misspelling of repair.
My opponent seems to have mixed up my arguments. The pipeline that is outdated is in Mackinac Island, not Wisconsin. The one being built in Wisconsin has no problems as of yet. Yes, it gives Wisconsin thousands of jobs, but the company’s history has shown many problems. The pipeline in Mackinac Island needs repairing, but has Enbridge Energy bothered to fix it yet? No. Three years after the spill in Kalamazoo, Enbridge Energy had to go back and clean up more oil that had still remained in the river and in the sediment by the river. Enbridge Energy is not reliable enough for Wisconsin, and if another “mistake” happens, many natural reservoirs will be ruined.

Obviously, my opponent has not had very many good arguments, and his argument was filled with spelling errors. His lack of an argument for Wisconsin state parks, and vagueness in his minimum wage argument was disappointing.


Sources By Category Found Below:
https://docs.google.com...
lannan13

Pro

My opponent wants to bash my arguments simply for spelling errors, but I could easily discredit her entire case by showing how she used machine gunning argumentation which is at least worth a conduct point loss, but let's not dwell on that my entire round.

My opponent seems to not understand baseline budgetting at all. Scott Walker cut the increase. I'll show an example below.

Year 1: $250
Year 2: $300
Year 3: $350

Scott Walker's Cuts.

Year 1: $250
Year 2: $290
Year 3: $330

As you can see above, Scott Walker cut the increase. Meaning that you can see that the increase was cut, but we are still seeing an increase in the budget. It's just not as high as it would've been with the $50 increase because the increase rate was cut back to $40. It's still increasing, but just at a smaller rate. My opponent even conceded in her last round that Walker's cuts are STILL an increase by provind the Stephen Porter sourcing. Ironically the sourcing she provided was from a right winged Republican Congressman who is arguing that cutting baseline budgetting is STILL an increase. This shows that my opponent is conceding this point.

My opponent then slams my sourcing chart, but once again, I stated that it was an example as stated below. meaning that it isn't suppose to be about Wisconsin, but it is to JUST show the process. Again a concession by Con. I find it hilarious that my opponent sites the WDPI, because not only are they highly leftist biased, but if you look at their sourcing you can actually see that none of their sources lead to an existing page. It is obvious that this source should be clearly taken as blasphomy. Here is the source my opponent is refuring to. (http://wasb.org...) In the graph bellow we can see that 68% of those on Vouchers chose private schools. Now remember that I stated that Vouchers permit those students to chose their schools. Meaning that it can also be for public schools as well already showing another flaw in my opponent's argument. We can still see that my argument must be held over that of my opponent's even on the grounds of sourcing to that of her machine gun argumentation. (http://www.schoolchoicewi.org...)



My opponent then goes off to attack that of those in voucher schools that they could already afford the private schools. First I would like to point out last time that the MPCP of the per-pupal student is half of that of the MPS aid (meaning that it's lower than most federal aid) at $6,442 per year. (http://www.schoolchoicewi.org...)

As for the test scores I would like to share a report from the University of Arkansas on MPS vs. MPCP students.

"

MPCP students demonstrated a level of achievement growth in reading that was significantly higher than the matched sample of MPS students on the WKCE tests in the final year of the SCDP study;

• Students in the MPCP have higher graduation rates than similar students in MPS:MPCP students were four percentage points more likely ever to have graduated from high school than their MPS counterparts; and MPCP students were seven percentage points more likely to have graduated in four years (on time) than their MPS counterparts.

• MPCP students were four percentage points more likely to have enrolled in a four-year college or university than similar MPS students; and

• MPCP students persisted in college through their first year at a rate of six percentage points higher than similar MPS students." (http://www.uaedreform.org...) [First, third, and last PDF on page]

Finially, we can see that Vouchers are clearly a good choice here.

Once again, I shall be grouping traffic and mw together.

Though it may increase costs we can still extend across the DOT's report on Wisconsin issues. One would be sure to perfer a few minutes of a delay verses having a bridge collapse on them or having to pay for car repairs due to the road damage. This impact is higher and should be weighed more and holds more water in this debate than my opponent's argumentation here.

My opponent slams the minimum wage drop, but if we look on a larger scale one can ask themselves, "Why are all the jobs moving over seas?" The answer is very simple. Lower wages and less regulations. We can see that a lowered wages and less regulation would bring jobs and profits back. This can be applied to Wisconsin and more locally produced goods provide more jobs via construction and for the business their. Not to mention what the business has to pay in taxes and Capital Gains. We can see that this, on ballance, is better than the status quo.

If my opponent can't find the connection between the two then I shall spell it out. Privitization means that less funding for the parks through public spending. This means that the federal government can reallocate the tax payers dollars elsewhere or they can lower taxes. We have seen in the past, with the example of roadways, that private roads are better than public roads. One has to pay a toll, but the roads have better quality. The same can be applied to the parks. Sure the price will increase, but the private companies will take better care of the parks since it's their business they're running and they wouldn't have to go through state government red tape to fix a problem.

Clammer means that wanting in an excess or an extreme fashion. Mainly used as an overstatement or an exageration. My opponent talks about malfunction and though this is true that these issues due happen, but one has to realize the issue of what happened with the escape from the Clinton Correctional falicialty (yes I know it's mispelled, but I'm running out of time) when the guards were brided with sexual favors. This is a key issue with the 'Human' factor that needs to be replaced. Plus machines don't get 'tired' thus there doesn't need to be a 'change of guard' with machinery.

Unfortuantely I'm out of time and will have to addresss the pipeline next round.



Debate Round No. 3
annaliese

Con

annaliese forfeited this round.
lannan13

Pro

All points extended.

Please vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Sooo many counter-plans.
Posted by TheOpinionist 1 year ago
TheOpinionist
Ooohhhh this will be interesting
Posted by TheDebater_101 1 year ago
TheDebater_101
I would take it except I know nothing on the topic
Posted by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
Are you arguing the Scott Walker shouldn't be the next president, or that his economic policies are harmful?
Posted by Rami 1 year ago
Rami
Isn't Scott Walker the black person who was shot by the policeman and was caught on camera.
Posted by Teaparty1 1 year ago
Teaparty1
Can you clarify what the debate is about? Are you taking the con side that Walker's budget is good for the state?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
annalieselannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited a round. This is bad conduct.
Vote Placed by Varrack 1 year ago
Varrack
annalieselannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff