YOU ARE HERE >
Main > Teacher Resources > JCC Survey Course
Denver
Miller
08
Project
Summary
1. General Overview of the Proposed
Project:
Creation of a web based virtual government.
Students will function in the role of US Senators, debating issues
and passing laws. Students will be given identities for which they
must present reasonably accurate positions. Debates will be held on
discussion forums. Voting will take place out on the website. Laws
passed will be put before the President for approval or veto. Laws
passed will impact the nation and will be viewable on the nation’s
home page. Decisions made will affect tax level, public support,
etc., as well as have a brief summary describing the impact of the
decision.
2. Clear Purpose and Objective:
Purpose- to allow students an active role in
government participation.
Objective- students will understand functions
of government, roles of Senate, President, and Supreme Court,
perspective of different historical groups, and impact of government
decisions.
3. Stakeholders: grade level, who will
benefit, who will participate in this project.
Focus is 11th grade, though 7th
and 8th are likely to benefit as well.
4. U.S. History Content Area
From Constitution to present, overview of
major topics facing the nation.
5. Outline Describing Content
Contact will focus on major issues at first.
The goal will be one issue a week that corresponds with topics soon
covered in class. Major issues: Hamilton’s financial plan,
Expansion of Slavery, Secession and Civil War, Industrialization,
Depression, World War and Wars, Cold War, inflation, etc.
6. Software to be used, internet
materials, contacts, etc.
Internet website, created with the GST BOCES
Technical Team, accessible from any internet connection and with a
password clearance. Teachers will have managing control.
7. Level of Student Involvement
All decisions made by students, but choices
and results are preset by teacher that authors the issue.
8. Evaluation process (include students
when possible)
The biggest pay off will come in comparing
virtual decisions made by the class to actual history. This could
be a journal or essay done by students, newspapers, or other
creative projects.
9. Timeline: how you envision the
project being carried out between start up and conclusion
Project will be introduced early in the year
and carried out weekly. Virtual government will only focus on major
issues. All other events will be considered the same as true
history to move along the timeline. It will be concluded in April
or May and with a final project evaluating their individual role in
the government.
Denver Miller
Self-Evaluation: online virtual government for
use in American History classes
Important Information:
Web Sites:
www.nationmaker.org – This is NationMaker,
the primary site for this project, though still under construction.
http://www.toolboxpro.org/classrooms/template.cfm?ID=1251
– This is my classroom web site. Follow the link on the left the
‘Virtual World’ and you will see the site update page. This is a
temporary home for the nations until the nationmaker is up and
running.
www.nationstates.org – This is the site
that inspired nationmaker. It is not a necessity to visit, but I’ve
included it incase it is found significant by others who may want to
use/see it.
Attachment:
I have attached the PowerPoint that served as
the basis for development the nationmaker website. It is more
complete than the current nationmaker site and may help others get a
clear view how the site will function.
NationMaker
PowerPoint
Vision:
Two years ago I discovered a virtual nation
simulation game called NationStates. I believe it still functions
and can be visited at
www.nationstates.org. At this site you
are able to create your nation and your home page gives a basic
description of your country. This description includes vital
statistics and several paragraphs that describe recent events in
your country. The basic idea is that each day you enter the site
you will be presented with an issue that needs your attention.
Based on what you choose to do, your nation’s home page is updated,
and you can see the results your decision had on your country,
popularity, people, etc.
I couldn’t help but think about how this could
be applied to my classes as a way to get students involved in the
political process. NationStates is open to all people, but do have
special accommodations for teachers and students. After using this
program for one year, I decided that it was moderately useful.
Students gained an understanding of politics (mostly modern issues)
and how the decisions made by governments can impact the nation.
The negative with the site was that I found
some of the issues less than significant and sometimes simply
silly. Also, there was no real cross-over between class and
NationStates, limiting the usefulness of the program. I began to
muse about the usefulness of a NationStates created specifically for
use in the classroom, though did not have any plans of creating it
myself.
That summer I attended the Teachers
Discovering History as Historians program. When I began to think
about the possible project ideas I returned to the idea of
NationStates. I submitted a proposal using NationStates as a model
for a more focused program, better suited to the needs of the
classroom. Instead of each student running their own nation, we
would create a single government and the students would play the
role of senators, voting on issues facing the nation. Topics would
be based on true historical issues and mirror any topics being
covered in class. Students would have the ability to stay true to
factual decisions or deviate from history.
Being that I did not have the technical
prowess necessary for this project on my own, I contacted the
technology team at the GSTBOCES campus. They were quite excited by
the prospect and we began to trade ideas back and forth and
development began. Knowing that the site would not be completed on
time for the school year, I decided to begin practicing with the
concept by utilizing my classroom web site and a program used by the
district called toolboxpro.
Goals:
To create an on-line platform for a virtual
government.
To allow students to fill the role of a
politician dealing with major historical issues and guiding their
virtual nation along a path that will parallel American history.
To create an understanding of the stresses
upon our nation and the perspectives different people had in the
government.
To create an understanding of the consequences
of the action for governmental decisions.
Method:
Students will take on the role of politicians,
mostly that of Senators. They will elect a president, who will have
veto power and direct the nation on major issues. Political issues
based on actual historical issues will be presented to the class for
them to discuss, propose action, debate, and vote upon. At times,
the class will be made to vote on a more restricted course of action
directed by the instructor. Results will be generated based upon
historical fact as well as reason (at the discretion of the
instructor) based on likely reactions of the nation to these
decisions. The role and power of the House of Representatives will
be in the hands of the instructor to insure that, if the class
deviates from reality in their voting too far, the House can act in
a more reasonable matter.
The teacher will create an issue, usually
based on an actual issue faced by our government in the past.
Usually one or two choices will be set forth, again created by the
teacher. Students will debate these issues and vote (either to pass
or reject a proposal, or between the two choices). Once the voting
is completed, students will be able to see how their decision
impacted the nation. Results will be pre-created by the instructor,
with two possible outcomes (or more depending on the number of
choices students could make). These results will be as long or as
short as desired, but should show the impact of their vote.
Once the actual site is up and running,
teachers will have the ability to create their own issues and
results as well as have access to those created by other teachers.
This will allow for individual and collective expansion of the
‘library’ of issues at a teacher’s disposal.
Web Site:
Needing technical assistance to create this
portion of the project, I turned to our BOCES technology experts
Andy Gillete and David Bates. These two have worked closely with me
on developing ideas for how the project should proceed, discussing
capabilities and limitations, and suggesting ideas for how best
construct not only the site, but the virtual government as well.
Mr. Bates has primarily been in charge of site design. Their
assistance on the site has been vital, yet due to obligations of
their work, this site has been a project for them to work on as time
allows. As such, the virtual government I ran this year had to
function under the most convenient means at my disposal and no
functioning, interactive site was used by my students.
Instead of actually working within the desired
format, I ran the government through a combination of my classroom
homepage and Toolboxpro, an online program developed by the same
gentlemen mentioned above. Toolboxpro has many features, among
which is a class discussion board, which is where governmental
discussions and voting took place this year. Included below are
several examples of discussion board conversations that took place
this year via toolboxpro. It was not ideal, but it worked as a
learning experience for the next step in the process.
(Included with this document is a PowerPoint
that outlines the basics on how the eventual website will function.
It was this PowerPoint that the BOCES developers based the structure
of the website upon.)
(Also, to view the website as it is currently
constructed, visit the following link.)
www.nationmaker.org
Use the player login – jdoe (login and
password)
There is not much to do here yet, but you can
see the concept is under development. I hope to run the simulator
from this site in the next school year and open it up to other
teachers by midyear or the following school year at the latest.
This website will be accessible to anyone in
the grant program, though this will need to be set up between TDHAH,
myself, and the BOCES gentlemen. At this point I’m not sure how
access will be granted but one of the following will have to happen
first: I will either provide all teachers the necessary access
information, or TDHAH will need to provide me with a list of
teachers for me to bring to BOCES.
Reflections:
I found this project to be a very useful tool,
albeit limited by some circumstances. Below I will reflect on the
strengths and weaknesses of the program as it stands and explain
future goals and ideas.
Primarily, I envisioned a program where
students could take an active role in governing America through some
of the most tumultuous issues in American history. I did not,
however, have a clear idea about how far to allow the students to
deviate from true American history. I fully expected students to
vote in ways not likely in 18th century America. Past
prejudices and true repercussions do not exist, and many students
didn’t willingly submit to the views of the past. For example, I
had to decide if I would allow students to take action against
slavery early on in their virtual world. And, if I did, would that
bring the Civil War to fruition earlier and would that then destroy
the fledgling nation. Keeping issues like this in mind, I had to
try to regulate how far from reality I would let the students go.
In two of the samples given below, students
were addressing Slavery (Missouri Compromise) and Indian Removal
(Worcester v. Georgia). In both cases, the overwhelming consensus
of the class was to take more modern action, abolishing slavery and
allowing the natives to remain in Georgia. In the first case,
slavery, I had to try to limit the freedom of students. They would
have desired to eliminate it flat out, the repercussions be damned.
This issue was resolved when the students accepted a Presidential
proposal to admit Missouri as a slave state and offer economic
incentives to all states to abolish slavery. The results created a
minor wave of dissatisfaction with southern states who opposed any
governmental attempts to regulate state issues with bribes.
In the second case, Indian Removal, I felt
that it was a scenario where I could allow the kids to deviate from
fact. In our world, the Supreme Court case was upheld by our
president and Georgia could not force removal. In the results of
this class decision I had Georgia threaten secession from the union,
and attempt to force removal of the natives. The president had to
take action with military force to protect the natives. The issue
was eventually resolved to a far enough degree that this deviation
did not change other historical events after the fact, but did make
Georgia more in favor of secession from then on.
Issues with the Students:
The major problem I was up against was the
modern views of the students. I should have foreseen this. Any
role-playing activity in a traditional in-class setting works best
when the teacher provides roles for students to play for the sake of
realism. As a result, next year students will be give roles such as
‘southern plantation owner,’ ‘northern abolitionist,’ ‘nativist,’
etcetera. These roles will be backed up with various
characteristics and interests. Students will still have freedom of
choice in voting, but they will have a perspective to help focus
their decisions. A southern plantation owner is not likely to
support outlawing slavery if it will hurt their economic standing.
Another problem that came up was the fact that
all students’ names appeared next to their comments. The role they
played was, essentially, their own. This led to some limited
personal attacks that had to be regulated, as well as good ideas
ignored or dismissed due to dislike of the person proposing them.
David Bates suggested for the web site, the creation of Avatars (or
virtual identities). Avatars are used in many on-line role playing
games to protect the identities of individuals, as well as to add
realism and variety to the ‘world’ they inhabit (among other
reasons). In correlation with the issue mentioned above, the
Avatars can come with descriptions of the person and areas of
interest for them to be concerned with. (Teachers would have access
to which students match which characters.)
Another issue that I anticipate the creation
of roles and Avatars to deal with comes in the realm of odd-ball
behavior. Some students posted silly or strange comments just for
the sake of being silly (single word comments such as “booger” and
“fart” among the more intellectually cunning). While this will
always be an issue in a free forum, I think the Avatars will help
focus students on the issue at hand. When questioned about lack of
participation or odd-ball behavior, many students commented to me
that they didn’t “really know what to think” or do on certain
topics. With a focused description, this problem would be
minimized.
Finally, as the examples below show, the way
students speak on the discussion board tends to be informal, slang
is used, and some instant messaging and text speech is used. I will
have to decide on how to deal with this. I do not want to turn
students off from debating the issues, yet the way they debate can
sometimes seem childish. The samples below have some examples of
this. In the end, this might also be solved with Avatars as well.
Issues with the process:
Some students do not have the world knowledge
necessary to understand how political debates take place. Nor do
many understand how to make a public statement, debate an issue
intellectually, or persuade others to accept their point of view. I
found that a minority of students ran this government and dominated
the responses, while others fell victim to the echo syndrome or
simply participated to a limited degree, and a few simply did not
comment much or at all.
Next year I will teach this process to the
students in a more formal method. I think, perhaps, a ‘training
session’ based around the ratification of the Constitution would be
a good way to achieved this.
Voting was also a bit of a nightmare for me.
There was no automated vote and students would vote in most cases
right within the forum where discussion had taken place.
Discussions sometimes continued after voting was closed. I spent
more time than desirable counting votes and chasing students down
that had yet to vote. This was more a problem resulting from the
format of toolboxpro discussion boards being used instead of the
planned web site. When established, voting will be counted
automatically through the web program giving instantaneous results.
A similar issue dealt with creating
believable, historically reasonable results for every issue.
Understandably, any deviations will need to be created by the
teacher, but I found it fatiguing to constantly be creating these
results. Under the website, these things would all be created ahead
of time by the instructor, or other instructors using the site.
While this still means the results have to be written, once done,
these would be re-useable from year to year. Also, as more teachers
begin to use the program, others could access issues created by
other educators to use as their own.
Successes:
Student Involvement:
While I already mentioned that some students
didn’t get involved, overall, most did, in some cases, to a great
degree. Many would talk about the issues outside of class or before
or after the period. The discussion boards also posted times and
dates of comments and many times I noticed students getting on at 10
o’clock at night.
Of major interest were elections. We held 4
elections this year and that is when many students paid the most
attention to what was happening. Being an actual election year,
this led into teachable moments aplenty.
Probably the most popular issue however, dealt
with war. Wanting to create an autonomous government, I allowed
students to consider and engage in war. (I had several nations
functioning: One for the juniors, one for the 8th grade,
and two for each of my global classes. This formed a virtual
world. The nations interacted with foreign policies and in one
case, war.
Some students repeatedly tried to turn this
into a war game, but as vital repercussions would impact their
nation and their ability to make war or even survive, I found that
this didn’t happen much. Once, just after mid-year, one of my
global classes held a rebellion against their king. Other nations
got involved with various sides of the conflict and it expanded to
include every nation except the 8th grade (who simply
didn’t get mobilized in time to join before one side was defeated).
The leaders of the nations had to discuss terms of the peace treaty
and sign it. That had to be accepted by US congress. It was
probably the highlight of the year for many students.
Content Coverage:
I was able to introduce events to students
through this program prior to coverage in class. This allowed
students to debate issues free of influence from me or history.
Some of the more motivated students researched topics on their own
and proposed either the actual historical solution, or an
alternative one to try to avoid failures of our government. Others
used their own sense of right and wrong, applying their views to the
given topics. This was both positive and negative, the latter of
which was discussed above. On the positive side, these people were
more passionate about their argument, though sometimes were ignorant
of some of the essential facts presented by the more thorough
students.
I was also able to present events after
coverage in class, to give the class the opportunity to avoid major
problems in American History. The biggest single issue was the
Civil War. The class tried valiantly to avoid the Civil War. What
was useful in presenting the information in this manner was that
students began to realize how many forces were at work in tearing
the nation apart, and how very different the perspectives of
different people were.
Functioning Government:
Despite any challenges, we did function as a
government. Student participation in NationStates (the program I
used the first year) started dropping off dramatically at mid-year
and by the end of the year there was only a third of the class still
active. This government never saw negative fluctuation with
participation. There were only a few students completely reluctant
to participate and the vast majority of students were active in
voting and checking in on results. Even students that did not lead
debates or comment often did vote and continue to check in. We
fought wars and conducted peace negotiations. We elected leaders
and made policies. We explored new lands and negotiated with
foreign leaders. We learned a bit about the functions of
government.
Self-Assessment:
I knew going in that this project was a large
undertaking. The development of the website seemed the more arduous
task but in practice, the demands of creating issues and results and
managing the government was highly time-consuming as well. The
decision to include all my classes (global included), increased the
work-load. As such, the program has not been developed as
completely as I would have wished over the past year, yet this was
not for lack of trying.
I believe I have created a useful tool for use
in the classroom. I believe it will be an addition some teachers
will find very useful and students will enjoy, if for nothing else,
then for the interaction with technology that is second nature to
them.
This provides an alternative to traditional
means of introducing and reviewing information. It enriches the
curriculum and provides students some first-hand experience in the
functioning of our government.
In the future I will lessen some of the
freedom of the responses, create rolls for students to fulfill, and
bring the entire program to the nationmaker website to begin the
process of creating and cataloging the library of issues and
results. These will be based off of what was started this year. As
this will be accessible by other teachers, attention will be paid to
factual history, particular wording, and realistic results. I will
also begin to troubleshoot problems with the site and bugs that need
to be dealt with. Once the website is tested to a reasonable degree
it will be opened up to other educators.
SAMPLES
|
Forum: 11th Grade
Virtual Government
Topic: Issue #1:
Foreign Policy -
created at
12:31:57 PM on
10/30/2007 by
Mr. Miller
Text: Foreign Policy
Protects the Interests of our nation.
This topic was last updated at
09:05:37 PM on
12/02/2007
|
|
Posted By |
Message |
Action |
|
Mr. Miller on
10/30/2007 at
12:37:23 PM |
Issue: What is at stake here is the security and strength of
our nation. We are a new nation and enforcing our will is a
challenge.
1. What should our stance be concerning European influence
in our Hemisphere?
2. What role, if any, should we take in Europe?
3. What should our role toward Latin America and the rest of
our hemisphere be?
Debate it, but the best arguments present a clear plan.
Look to history for guidance if you'd like (we have covered
this in class).
If a plan is presented, we will vote on it. If opposing
arguments are presented, we will take the most articulate
and vote between them.
While a plan of action can be developed by many people, one
person usually writes it up or presents it to the Senate.
It is more cohesive that way. (Like Jefferson writing the
Dec. of Indpendence, it represented it all, but he wrote
it.)
 -
 |
 |
|
Matthew
on
10/31/2007 at
07:26:00 AM |
as a new nation we should really pay attention to our european
influence and our immmigration policies bc even today in our
govt. cacuasions are almost the minority at 51% what would
we do as the minority and spanish bein the major language in
a english spoken country?
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
10/31/2007 at
07:26:40 AM |
i think that europe should have a limited influence in our
nation,and that we should for the most part stay out of
europes buisness,to avoid any potential international
conflicts.
-
|
|
|
Giorgio
on
10/31/2007 at
07:33:13 AM |
i think we should let there be some influence but not so
much that people covert there ways to it. we should alow
some but not let it get over powering. if people want more
influence than others its there choice not the govts.
-
|
|
|
Kathleen
on
10/31/2007 at
07:35:41 AM |
I think we should keep in mind everything that would change
with decisions we make for our new government. We should
keep in mind what kind of life we'd all have if our
Hemisphere took on more European influence.
-
|
|
|
Thomas
on
10/31/2007 at
07:37:38 AM |
I think we should pay close attention to all the foreign
people coming to the U.S. More people keep coming into the
united states. Mexicans could be the most found race in the
United states before long. I think border control should be
stronger also. No mexicans sneaking over. hah
-
|
|
|
Stephen
on
10/31/2007 at
07:46:28 AM |
I think that we should start limiting the rights for
immigrants to come over here.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
10/31/2007 at
07:51:30 AM |
i think all the religious differences will cause trouble.
the irish mainly. we need to some how limit their
population.
-
|
|
|
Marshall
on
10/31/2007 at
11:10:15 AM |
I think that we should stay out of european affairs unless
it affects us.
-
|
|
|
Cassandra
on
10/31/2007 at
11:16:56 AM |
Being a new country, we need to be careful about what we
allow to influence us. On the topic of European influences,
I think it would have to depend on what exactly is being
influenced. There will always be some cultural diffusion
between The US and Europe, but things such as political
views, and traditions not common to the US should be
carefully voted on. Also I believe certain policies should
be voted on to protect the views that we want in our new
country.
I do not believe we need to take any action in Europe. We
wanted them to leave us alone and to break free of them, why
should we go back to that country to take actions?
I don't think we need to take any actions in any other
countries unless foreigners are on our soil threatening our
freedoms or if there is something intolerable being done to
our country. I do not feel that we need to go around taking
action against others without a very good reason. I also
think that the decision to take action in another country
should be voted on.
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
10/31/2007 at
11:18:41 AM |
I thnk that we should make more of an efort to keep the
illegal aliens out of the U.S.it is sad when we have to
listen about illegal aliens being able to get New York tate
driver licences
-
|
|
|
Justin
on
10/31/2007 at
01:43:21 PM |
I belive that we should stay out of foriegn affairs until
our country and government is more established
-
|
|
|
Kelly
on
10/31/2007 at
01:44:05 PM |
we should do what is the best interest for our country and
for our people and that we should pass laws that will end up
benefiting our people and we should try to keep all foregin
policies out of our government..
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/06/2007 at
04:45:59 PM |
I would like to make a point about current events and our
virtual government are separate.
For current event concerns like illegal aliens, go to
current events. For discussions on government issues, we
should stay in the era being discussed.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/06/2007 at
04:50:19 PM |
I would like someone to take the incentive here to write up
a policy. When possible look to class for ideas. We have
covered this issue and would be very easy for one of you to
take the policy and present it to class. Or, if you'd like,
present the opposite policy to take a different course for
our country.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/06/2007 at
04:54:07 PM |
I would like a proposal today to vote on next time.
-
|
|
|
Kody
on
11/07/2007 at
08:33:36 AM |
i think we should stay out of foreign affairs. so we as a
country can get stronger.
-
|
|
|
Connie
on
11/07/2007 at
08:35:56 AM |
For right now we should stay out of forigen issues since our
nation is still to young...the wrong choice can ruin ouor
country.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/07/2007 at
08:36:30 AM |
i see it like a future revolt. if we limit their populations
we could limit a future revolt.
-
|
|
|
Adam
on
11/07/2007 at
12:15:58 PM |
I propose that we limit how much Europe interacts with us on
an economic stance, for if they interfere too much, it may
eventually lead to messy alliances and such in the event of
foreign wars. Therefore, Europe may trade with us and
purchase our goods for manufacturing, but they will be
limited as to how much money is allowed to be exchanged.
As to their general influence in our hemisphere, our nation
cannot viably control the politics of all the other
countries here, but I believe we should host an
annual conference of Western Hemisphere Nations where
European influences will be discussed.
Finally, we ought to develop as good of relationships as
possible with our Latin American neighbors, seeing as they
can benefit us in many ways. Trade that would have been with
Europe should instead go through Latin America, and we would
have a summit every 3 years between our nation and the Latin
American nations to help ensure relations are still stable.
-
|
|
|
Lisa
on
11/07/2007 at
12:20:12 PM |
in the interest of what would be the best course of action
for a foreign policy i think would be to look at all aspects
of what the other contries and continents of the world could
shed light on for our newly formed government. our
government may have a great start but we are still very
flawed. there are things that have yet to be delt with. our
nation could learn a great deal of information from europe
and its influence there are some parts of that nation that
work and others that dont. we could use there mistakes and
advancedments to further our own government. as for our
bordering nations i think that is would be a grave mistake
to already create enimies w/ them so we should just be there
when needed and help out where needed and dont just ignore
them
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/07/2007 at
12:24:20 PM |
first of all pat stop being stupid.
now first we need to keep trading with europe, half of our
economy depends on trade with europe and the product
produced in europe.
concerning latin america, whenever there is a revolt we need
to help the rebelling group so that we have influence in
that nation.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/08/2007 at
09:07:26 PM |
thats real mature nick. i regret voting for you. i dont know
if you know this but i have rights. i can voice my opinion,
'i' want this government to stand. its not my fault you dont
take it seriously!!!
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/09/2007 at
11:48:26 AM |
I don't take it seriously????
what are you talkin about? At least I can come up with ideas
to help support our government. I also care about the native
americans and their treaties 'We' did not 'let' the indians
stay on the land they were made to go there and given rights
to that land.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/09/2007 at
11:52:54 AM |
and you can't just say you want to limit their population.
you have to give a way to limit their population, like
limiting the ammount of immigrants allowed into the country.
but you can't say you just want to limit their population it
could be considered genoside.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/09/2007 at
11:53:12 AM |
---- Original Quoted
Message ----
i think all the
religious differences will cause trouble. the irish mainly.
we need to limit their population.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/12/2007 at
11:50:31 PM |
Some of you swayed a bit off topic (getting on to
immigration and such is sort of a different issue). We're
talking about other govenrments influencing America here.
Immigration could be a separate issue, and will.
As for today we have three basic plans to vote for. The
differences are sutble in some cases so read well, and pay
attention. Vote for one by writing in the proposal's name.
Vote wil close at the end of the day Wednesday.
The Zimmerman Doctrine:
I
propose that we limit how much Europe interacts with us on
an economic stance, for if they interfere too much, it may
eventually lead to messy alliances and such in the event of
foreign wars. Therefore, Europe may trade with us and
purchase our goods for manufacturing, but they will be
limited as to how much money is allowed to be exchanged.
As
to their general influence in our hemisphere, our nation
cannot viably control the politics of all the other
countries here, but I believe we should host an
annual conference of Western Hemisphere Nations where
European influences will be discussed.
Finally, we ought to develop as good of relationships as
possible with our Latin American neighbors, seeing as they
can benefit us in many ways. Trade that would have been with
Europe should instead go through Latin America, and we would
have a summit every 3 years between our nation and the Latin
American nations to help ensure relations are still stable.
The Fitch-Stillman Proposal
Being a new country, we need to be careful about what we
allow to influence us.
I do not believe we need to take any action in Europe. We
wanted them to leave us alone and to break free of them, why
should we go back to that country to take actions?
I don't think we need to take any actions in
any other countries unless foreigners are on our soil
threatening our freedoms or if there is something
intolerable being done to our country. I do not feel that we
need to go around taking action against others without a
very good reason. I also think that the decision to take
action in another country should be voted on.
I belive that we should stay out of foriegn
affairs until our country and government is more
established.
The Curren Proposal
now first we need to keep trading with europe, half of our
economy depends on trade with europe and the product
produced in europe.
concerning latin america, whenever there is a
revolt we need to help the rebelling group so that we have
influence in that nation.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/14/2007 12:08:38 PM |
i vote for The Curren Proposal
-
|
|
|
Emily
on
11/14/2007 at
12:15:48 PM |
i vote fitch-stillman proposal
-
|
|
|
Clark
on
11/14/2007 at
12:23:10 PM |
I think that we need other countries in order to survive as
a new country. they could have resources and technologies
that would benefit our country. think about. good relations
are almost essential to new countries
-
|
|
|
Alyssa
on
11/14/2007 at
12:25:47 PM |
Zimmerman Doctrine
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/15/2007 at
08:29:07 AM |
fitch-stillman
-
|
|
|
Cassandra
on
11/15/2007 at
12:05:50 PM |
I vote
Fitch-Stillman, um because it was part of my ideas, duh.
-
|
|
|
Samantha
on
11/15/2007 at
12:06:12 PM |
I think that we should take precautions in what we allow to
infulence our new country. I think that we shouldnt take
actions in Europe, we are our own country now and should
worry about that. I also think that we should try to avoid
taking actions with any other countries unless we
are feeling threatened by them. I vote for the Fitch-Stillman
proposal.
-
|
|
|
Brendan
on
11/15/2007 at
02:21:23 PM |
i think we should deff be aware of this subject and whatch
closely who comes in the U.S. because these illegal
immigrants are overpopulating
-
|
|
|
Makenzi
on
11/15/2007 at
02:37:30 PM |
Fitch-Stillman
-
|
|
|
Telissa
on
11/16/2007 at
08:54:06 AM |
fitch-stillman i vote for them
-
|
|
|
Connie
on
11/16/2007 at
08:56:10 AM |
Fitch-Stillman we shouldnt get involved with anything
unless it concerns us or if it is neccessary.
-
|
|
|
Brittany
on
11/25/2007 at
01:46:05 PM |
Zimmerman Doctorine
-
|
|
|
Steven
on
11/27/2007 at
08:42:34 AM |
zimmerman doctrine
-
|
|
|
Ryan
on
11/27/2007 at
08:51:07 AM |
I vote for the Fitch-Stillman Proposal
-
|
|
|
Katelyn
on
11/27/2007 at
12:10:25 PM |
I vote for the fitch-Stillman proposal
-
|
|
|
Zackery
on
11/28/2007 at
08:56:30 AM |
i vote for The Fitch-Stillman Proposal it sounds the best
out of them
-
|
|
|
Jessica
on
11/28/2007 at
07:32:23 PM |
i vote for
The Fitch-Stillman Proposal
because i believe they (?) have the basic ideas for starting
a new nation. we ,as a new nation ,shouldnt get involved
with other countries till we have settled in and have a
strong government
-
|
|
|
Jessica
on
11/30/2007 at
09:49:28 PM |
I vote for Fitch-Stillman........I Think it would be most
effective and beneficial (idk if i spelled that right)
-
|
|
|
Ryan
on
12/02/2007 at
05:08:37 PM |
I vote Fitch-Stillman.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
12/02/2007 at
09:05:37 PM |
And the foreign policy of choice, in a 14 - 3- 1 vote is...
The Fitch-Stillman Proposal
Being a new country, we need to be careful about what we
allow to influence us.
I do not believe we need to take any action in Europe. We
wanted them to leave us alone and to break free of them, why
should we go back to that country to take actions?
I don't think we need to take any actions in
any other countries unless foreigners are on our soil
threatening our freedoms or if there is something
intolerable being done to our country. I do not feel that we
need to go around taking action against others without a
very good reason. I also think that the decision to take
action in another country should be voted on.
I belive that we should stay out of foriegn
affairs until our country and government is more
established.
-
|
|
|
 Add A
Message to this Topic
<< Back to Viewing All Topics in This Forum |
In response to this decision, students could
then visit their “Virtual World” home page where the description of
their nation would be updated. Here is an excerpt:
“The Fitch-Stillman Proposal was passed
through congress and signed by the president setting an official
foreign policy of neutrality for the nation. This bill has set the
fledgling nation on a course to develop independent from foreign
influence.”
Along with this fictional update was an
historical aside.
“The Proclamation of Neutrality supported by
George Washington concerning the French Revolution as well as the
message of his farewell address, essentially set America on the same
course you have chosen. To be immediately embroiled in European
affairs could have threatened the newly won independence and
autonomy of the new nation. In this response, you have not deviated
from American History.”
|
Forum: 11th Grade
Virtual Government
Topic: Issue #3: Indian
Removal -
created at
12:53:01 PM on
10/30/2007 by
Mr. Miller
Text: Native Rights vs.
State and Government Needs
This topic was last updated at
12:01:19 AM on
11/13/2007
|
|
Posted By |
Message |
Action |
|
Mr. Miller on
10/30/2007 at
12:58:23 PM |
Position 1
Georgia:
The economic success of our nation depends on the proper and
profitable use of our greatest resource, land. The American
Indian has no tradition of owning land, why should we accept
claims to the contrary now. We would like to remove these
Indians to lands west of the Mississippi, where they can
flourish or flounder as God sees fit. This will allow the
fertile Georgia soil to be turned into economic strength for
the state and the nation.
Position 2
Natives have a valid claim to remain on Georgia soil. They,
through treaties with this government have been awarded this
land. We must honor our past agreements, even if it will
impact the economy in a negative way.
Discuss the issue. Present additional arguments. Vote for
Position 1 or Position 2. Only vote one time. Vote before
next week Tuesday.
-
|
|
|
Tiffany
on
10/31/2007 at
07:26:19 AM |
Position 1 because then they can live and be free on the
west.....and we can be free on the east...but what about
rivals?? I think we should then split it between south and
north where they get along with eachother.
-
|
|
|
Jennifer
on
10/31/2007 at
07:26:48 AM |
Indians should of been able to keep their land because they
were here first they set a sorta way of life knowing how to
find their own food and the government should not have
forced them out of their homes
-
|
|
|
Kathleen
on
10/31/2007 at
07:27:34 AM |
I think both positions have a good base, with facts to
support each claim. But, personally i'd have to go with
Position #2. Who are we to move one HUGE group of people,
who were infact there in the first place to move elsewhere?
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
10/31/2007 at
07:28:50 AM |
position 2, the natives were there far before us so they
have an inherent right to keep theyre land regardless of how
much the government decides it would be best for the gov. to
take the land.
-
|
|
|
Connie
on
10/31/2007 at
07:29:27 AM |
Position 2 the Indians were here first and we should honor
that...would you really want some strange people taking your
land?? If we do honor them thier skills can be benificial to
us in the future.
-
|
|
|
Kody
on
10/31/2007 at
07:29:30 AM |
I would go with position 2 because they where there first
before us. so we dont have a claim in own that land. and
plus i think it would get us better relations with the
indians and we might be able to for and alliance with them.
-
|
|
|
Giorgio
on
10/31/2007 at
07:29:33 AM |
i think the indians should be able to live where they want.
we get to live where ever we want and they were here before
us. the indians are what made the land what we have today in
some ways. the indians should not be told that they have to
live in one area b/c thats whats our gov. said.
-
|
|
|
Thomas
on
10/31/2007 at
07:30:28 AM |
Im not sure which one to vote for. Kathy has a good point,
who are we to remove a group of people? But i think that we
should remove them because more and more americans will get
upset if we dont move them. And then if they go west they
can have their own little territory. But in a way i think
they should stay where they are. Thats were everything is
set up, why move it? But Im gonna have to vote for position
1, just because i believe it could cause chaos between the
americans and indians.
-
|
|
|
Zackery
on
10/31/2007 at
07:32:11 AM |
the immorgrants had more say to where they lived then the
indians who lived here first
-
|
|
|
Telissa
on
10/31/2007 at
07:34:03 AM |
i agree with position 2 that our past treaties have to be
with held no mattter what !!!! and i also agree with some of
the ideas in position1 but i think that our word is all you
have so if you break that then i think we will have rits
from theses indians and it shoulded happen so lets keep with
our words!!!!
-
|
|
|
Brittany
on
10/31/2007 at
07:37:34 AM |
I vote for Position 2.
If we decided to take back the land that we gave to the
Indians, what would people begin to think of us? That we
can't do things that we said were going to. I think if we
made a treaty stating that the Indians can have this land
then we need to stick to it.
-
|
|
|
Maty
on
10/31/2007 at
07:39:55 AM |
Position 2 because the indians were there before so they should
be able to keep their land and live wherever they want.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
10/31/2007 at
07:40:03 AM |
I feel the indians are just in the way. we didnt have to
agree to let them stay on the land. they're just rogues that
think they are fighting for 'their land'. we took it fairly.
-
|
|
|
Jessica
on
10/31/2007 at
07:43:06 AM |
Im going with position 2......WE made agreements in the past
with them. Why would we go back on them??? That would only
probably lead to fighting thats not necessary.
-
|
|
|
Jesse
on
10/31/2007 at
07:45:08 AM |
we took the lands from the indians in the first place so y
should we be kicking them out. the land is rightfully thiers
after all. we just came in and settled it and screwed
everything up
-
|
|
|
Connie
on
10/31/2007 at
07:46:49 AM |
"thier land"?? im sorry even though they dont put the claim
on thier land its still thiers the live there raise families
there and hunt and farm. for all intents and purpouses it
is THIER land. them fighitng back for it... well if someone
told you you are dirty and worthless and put you on terrible
land taking away your home giving you land that is not
fertile enough the breaking promises they made to you
wouldnt you fight back too??? the white man didint take it
"fairly"
---- Original Quoted
Message ----
I feel the indians are
just in the way. we didnt have to agree to let them stay on
the land. they're just rogues that think they are fighting
for 'their land'. we took it fairly.
-
|
|
|
Joshua
on
10/31/2007 at
10:58:33 AM |
i would vote for position 2 because it means we are sticking
to are word and not taking what we said back... i think it
would be more important to stick to are word then to have
them removed so it is better for economy right now
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
10/31/2007 at
10:59:55 AM |
position 2
the indians have previous treaties stating that they have a
claim to the land from us. this means we must either buy the
land from them or leave the land to them.
-
|
|
|
Alyssa
on
10/31/2007 at
11:05:55 AM |
Our reasons for moving them should not get in the way of
what we promised them in the past. They were there first and
we gave them the right to stay there. Our economy is
important but going back on our word is just as important. I
vote for position 2..
-
|
|
|
Jessica
on
10/31/2007 at
11:10:45 AM |
I agree with Position 2 because the natives have been in
Georgia/ America long before the English colonies were
established. Therefore I think that we need to respect the
natives because First Come First Serve:). I don't think that
they are really bringing our economy down that much.
-
|
|
|
Lisa
on
10/31/2007 at
11:13:17 AM |
if i had the choose to pick other ways to get a better
result i would but i have to choose from the 2 provided. so
i choose #2. i think that if our government should keep all
treaties made. we try to be fair to all citizens well that
what we are sopossed to do but if we go back on tresties
made we will be no better then other contries. if u are goin
to make promises "treaties" then u must keep them! no matter
what. that is what our government is based on.
-
|
|
|
Adam
on
10/31/2007 at
11:14:29 AM |
Pat has a valid point, but I vote for position 2. Even
though our country is expanding, there is enough room right
now for European immigrants and the Indians to coexist.
Besides, the Indians could prove a valuable ally and we
should establish good terms with them while we still can.
-
|
|
|
Marshall
on
10/31/2007 at
11:17:17 AM |
I believe that the indains should be able to keep their
land.
-
|
|
|
Kelly
on
10/31/2007 at
01:16:50 PM |
i feel that the indians should be allowed to keep the land
that they are living on because they have been longer and
they are not hurting anyone by claming the land that they
are living on they only want to keep what is rightfully
theirs.
-
|
|
|
Jesse
on
11/07/2007 at
08:26:42 AM |
i vot for position 2
-
|
|
|
Thomas
on
11/07/2007 at
08:29:10 AM |
i vote for position 2 because indians were here before we
got here and they have the right to live on the land without
being forced to move to new land.
-
|
|
|
Steven
on
11/07/2007 at
08:35:01 AM |
i vote for prop. 2
-
|
|
|
Telissa
on
11/07/2007 at
08:37:09 AM |
i think that we should figure out away to let the indians
live with us but not force them to march!!!! i think that we
should offer them land and make compermices by asking them
what we could do to keep things equal between us
-
|
|
|
Katelyn
on
11/07/2007 at
12:04:06 PM |
I vote position 2 because the indians are people too. We
created this country to be "the land of the free" and when
our ancestors came over here, we accepted everyone. This
country is truely the melting pot and that's our character.
That's how it should be. everyone should have their rights
here no matter what color or nationality. As for the Native
Americans, let them stay in Georgie, they were there first.
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
11/07/2007 at
12:04:09 PM |
i think that proisition 2 is the better propisition because
of the fact that indians do have a valid claim on the
georia land and i believe that the indians should have been
able to keep more of thier land
-
|
|
|
Clark
on
11/07/2007 at
12:06:13 PM |
Any of us could have been born an Indian or native american.
you have to understand how they would feel if they were
forced away from their own homes and have to start all over.
They just don't deserve to be treated that way. i vote for
proposition 2.
-
|
|
|
Samantha
on
11/07/2007 at
12:10:03 PM |
I side with position 2. I think that the Indians have has
much right to live where they want as we do. Even if our
economy is effected my letting them stay, we shouldnt go
back on our word.
-
|
|
|
Katy
on
11/07/2007 at
02:14:36 PM |
I vote for position 2. Indians sould be able to stay on the land
that has been awarded to them. It is where they live and it
is where they have made thier home and we shouldnt send tem
off land that they had first because it is rightfully theres.
instead we should teach them to use the soil and how to grow
crops out of it.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/13/2007 at
12:01:19 AM |
The Senate has voted.
25-3 (our of 62 senators, many people did not vote) in
favor of proposition 2.
Position 2
Natives have a valid claim to remain on Georgia soil. They,
through treaties with this government have been awarded this
land. We must honor our past agreements, even if it will
impact the economy in a negative way.
The president supports this measure so it passes.
-
|
|
|
Add A
Message to this Topic
<< Back to Viewing All Topics in This Forum |
The results of this case updated the
description of the nation as follows:
“In a shocking move, congress and the
president imposed their will on what many consider a state issue.
The national government has acted in defense of Indians over that of
their own citizens. The state of Georgia teeters on the brink of
rebellion and many in the state threaten secession. The Governor of
Georgia has activated the state militia and claims he will remove
the natives himself.”
(This is followed up by a second issue.
Presidential action was needed to enforce the decision above. The
president ended up using the military to protect the rights of the
natives. Georgia will simmer on the verge of rebellion, but the
issue will subside over time. Georgia, from then on, is much more
in favor of secession as a state right and is first to secede
instead of South Carolina after Lincoln’s election.)
A true historical aside was included after
this description:
“The class has chosen to deviate from American
History. When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Native American
land claims in the case Worcester v. Georgia, President Jackson
ignored the ruling. This created an imbalance in power between the
three branches of government, making Jackson our first imperial
president. His actions ultimately led to Indian Removal and the
Trail of Tears. Your actions better preserved the balance of power
in the government but threatened the survival of the union. In
reality, Georgia very well may have rebelled and other southern
states likely would have followed. This was still the age of
States’ Rights.”
|
Forum: 11th Grade
Virtual Government
Topic: Issue #4
- created at
12:58:52 PM on
10/30/2007 by
Mr. Miller
Text: The Expansion of
Slavery and the Balance of Power
This topic was last updated at
09:32:04 PM on
12/02/2007
|
|
Posted By |
Message |
Action |
|
Mr. Miller on
10/30/2007 at
01:02:05 PM |
We are a growing nation. Missouri has applied for
statehood. They are a slave holding territory. We, as a
nation, has struggled to maintain a balance in the Senate
between slave and free states. Now, the current balance is
threatened. If Missouri enters the union, an imbalance will
occur. How can we deal with this situation? Does it matter
if the south gains influence?
Discuss options. Remember, the best argument is a good
plan. Look ahead for ideas if you want help. We have not
yet covered this in class.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
10/31/2007 at
11:06:01 AM |
we cannot let this happen!
the use of slavery is cruel and uncalled for we need to pass
a law saying that no new states can be allowed in the
nation if they use slaves. we also need to outlaw slavery in
all states.
-
|
|
|
Ryan
on
10/31/2007 at
11:08:13 AM |
I think that we should not allow missouri to join as a state
due to the fact that they support slavery. And if they want
to join the states they will have to make slavery illegal in
their state. This may influence many of the other states to
become slavery free states. This way it should help prevent
the south from gaining to much influence.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/02/2007 at
06:18:55 PM |
it will still be an imbalance if the north has a higher
persentage. maybe the south knows something we northerners
dont. just because we are in the north, doesnt mean we cant
listen to the south.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/06/2007 at
04:59:36 PM |
Position from a southern senator.
What you must understand, is that we are a nation of states,
who are willing to participate in this government. If our
views, our laws, our way of life will not be protected by
this government...well then, maybe this government is not
for us. Why does the north fear an imbalance of power in
the senate, the south already faces one in the House of
Representatives. It seems to me of little threat to any of
you in the north.
-
|
|
|
Giorgio
on
11/07/2007 at
08:34:21 AM |
i dont think they should be able to join as a slave state.
slavery is something wrong and not fair to people. why
should they have to be used for work because they are black.
if they are used why arnt some whit people. if u are for
slavery u should have to work life a slave
-
|
|
|
Thomas
on
11/07/2007 at
08:37:33 AM |
We should not allow this for Missouri. I think slavery
should not be allowed in any state. And if one state becomes
a slave state, possibly others want to change in to the same
thing.
-
|
|
|
Stephen
on
11/07/2007 at
08:38:06 AM |
i would have to agree with benway because if we did do that
with blacks for slaves alot of people now will revolt
against it and the slave owners would get punished for it
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
11/07/2007 at
12:08:33 PM |
i believe that in order for a new state to be admitted into
statehood it should not be connected with slavery
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/07/2007 at
12:10:56 PM |
Missouri will be able to join the union but we will
partition Massachusetts into two states, calling the new
state Maine
also in the western territories we will hold free elections
on the issue of slavery in each territory.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/08/2007 at
09:09:35 PM |
---- Original Quoted
Message ----
Position from a southern senator.
What you must understand, is that we are a nation of states,
who are willing to participate in this government. If our
views, our laws, our way of life will not be protected by
this government...well then, maybe this government is not
for us. Why does the north fear an imbalance of power in
the senate, the south already faces one in the House of
Representatives. It seems to me of little threat to any of
you in the north.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/08/2007 at
09:13:30 PM |
if there isnt always balance, should we really change a
state. maybe this will decide who is really right,
north/south!
-
|
|
|
Eric
on
11/09/2007 at
08:47:43 AM |
if we are a slave free state we should not allow them
to join with us if they want to join with us they should
banned slavery in their states
-
|
|
|
Makenzi
on
11/09/2007 at
02:08:10 PM |
Of course it will matter if the south gains influence. The
South will now have the edge on deciding rather or not slave
ownership should be llegal. Why would you want a new
"growing nation" to start out with something as awful as
slavery? Missouri should have to get rid of Slavery to be
able and join.
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
11/13/2007 at
12:15:24 PM |
Vote Time: Senators vote for one proposition. Vote with
proposition number only. Improper votes will be ignored.
Vote by the end of the week.
Northern Senators' Proposition (Proposition 1)
The idea of the expansion of slavery is simply not
acceptable. Missouri should enter the union as a free
state, abolishing slavery within it's borders, or remain a
territory.
Curren's Missouri Compromise (Proposal 2)
Missouri
should enter as a slave state. Mass. could be divided,
creating a new free state in the north. This situation
satisfies the issue of balance and poses no threat to the
north or the south.
Southern Senators Proposal (Proposal 3)
Allow Missouri to enter as slave state. Slavery is a state
issue. Slavery is legal in this nation. It makes no sense
to differentiate between new states and old.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/14/2007 at
12:10:43 PM |
Proposal 2
-
|
|
|
Alyssa
on
11/14/2007 at
12:16:51 PM |
Slavery is one thing that the north has been against for
many years. If Missouri were to become apart of the the
north than they should first have to become a free state. I
dont agree with letting them have anything to do with free
nations if they are not willing to free their state.
-
|
|
|
Alyssa
on
11/14/2007 at
12:19:25 PM |
Ops that last one wasnt a vote.. Proposition 1 is my vote
-
|
|
|
Adam
on
11/14/2007 at
12:30:21 PM |
I would like to propose a new law that will hopefully solve
this issue once and for all. I propose that Missouri should
be allowed to enter the Union as it wishes, but there is an
incentive for it to ban slavery. My proposal is for all
southern slave-states (and all potential slave-states) to
recieve extra economic help if they agree to ban slavery.
This keeps slavery as a state issue, but it encourages
states to willingly give up a degrading practice. I
understand how vital slavery is to the economy of the South,
so therefore we, as a nation, would agree to give aid in the
form of money or diplomatic help with potential foreign
buyers of the raw goods the South produces. This applies to
territories wishing to enter the Union as well. Please vote
either for or against this issue as soon as possible.
-
|
|
|
Patrick
on
11/15/2007 at
08:39:05 AM |
if miller allows it, it sounds fair to me
-
|
|
|
Connie
on
11/15/2007 at
08:58:19 AM |
I agree with what Adam proposes... the choice is the states
but if they have the right incentive there is always the
choice... otherwise while it is not a good thing right now
there is no law so a compromise should be made at the very
least...dont outright ban it right away or the ban wouldnt
take.
-
|
|
|
Nicholas
on
11/15/2007 at
12:06:31 PM |
i think adam has a good idea going but we also have to
extend this offer to the western territories.
-
|
|
|
Joshua
on
11/15/2007 at
12:16:35 PM |
i vote for adams proposel cause i think is a reasonable
solution for the slave states
-
|
|
|
Clark
on
11/16/2007 at
12:20:36 PM |
missouri should have the right to decide themselves, at
least, until our country is ready to abolish slavery for
good. until then it should be missouri's choice.
-
|
|
|
Katelyn
on
11/19/2007 at
05:14:33 PM |
Missouri Should be able to decide for themselves if they
want slavery or not so the government isn't given the burden
of choosing for them. Missouri can choose which side they'd
like to join on this fight over slavery and they'll get the
reprocussions of their actions either way they decide to go
so we might as well let them take the hit instead of the
nation as a whole because what happens in Missouri effects
the people there but at least it won't effect our national
government and cause problems. So good luck with that
Missouri and welcome to America. ;]
-
|
|
|
Brittany
on
11/25/2007 at
01:43:40 PM |
I agree with proposal 1. I think that if Missouri enters as
a slave state it is going to cause problems with our growing
nation and that is not what we need.
-
|
|
|
Steven
on
11/27/2007 at
08:45:42 AM |
i would have to agree with adams proposal
-
|
|
|
Ryan
on
11/27/2007 at
09:00:37 AM |
I think that Missouri should enter as both a free and slave
state to make sides happy. I think that the southern half
should be slave and the northern half should be free. If
this makes two different states then that should be the way
it is.
-
|
|
|
Cassandra
on
11/27/2007 at
12:26:44 PM |
My views lean towards Proposal three.
I think that the needs of the US as a whole is more
important than the individual needs of one state. Meaning
that if Missouri applies as a slave state, and that is not
favoring the needs of the country and will cause
controversy, than Missouri can not become a part of this new
country. I think that keeping the balance at this time is
most important, and that if Missouri is broken into two
states, with each one favoring each side, that would be most
beneficial to the country.
-
|
|
|
Matthew
on
11/28/2007 at
08:46:47 AM |
proposition 3 it is a state issue by making it a national
issue we compromise the strength of our federal government.
-
|
|
|
Emily
on
11/28/2007 at
12:29:09 PM |
Curren's proposal because it makes more sense to me. Like
yeah we need to make things even and curren's will do that.
-
|
|
|
Brandon
on
11/28/2007 at
02:38:03 PM |
i agree with Curren's proposal because it keeps the balance
in the senate and it also keeps the southern states happy
-
|
|
|
Mr. Miller on
12/02/2007 at
09:32:04 PM |
In a remarkably close vote, The Proposal added by President
Zimmer has been approved.
I would like to propose a new law that will hopefully solve
this issue once and for all. I propose that Missouri should
be allowed to enter the Union as it wishes, but there is an
incentive for it to ban slavery. My proposal is for all
southern slave-states (and all potential slave-states) to
recieve extra economic help if they agree to ban slavery.
This keeps slavery as a state issue, but it encourages
states to willingly give up a degrading practice. I
understand how vital slavery is to the economy of the South,
so therefore we, as a nation, would agree to give aid in the
form of money or diplomatic help with potential foreign
buyers of the raw goods the South produces. This applies to
territories wishing to enter the Union as well. Please vote
either for or against this issue as soon as possible.
Not enough people are voting!!!
-
|
|
|
Add A
Message to this Topic
<< Back to Viewing All Topics in This Forum |
Results updated to the national description:
“The United States expanded with the addition
of Missouri, the newest state to be admitted to the Union. After
much debate over the impact adding another slave state would have in
the Senate, congress admitted the state with the creation of a new
proposal. The government has offered an economic incentive package
to any state that will willingly abolish slavery. Southern states
have scoffed at the notion but celebrate their new found dominance
in the Senate.”
Historical aside:
“To deal with the issue of admitting Missouri
as a slave state, the Missouri Compromise created Maine as a free
state out of Massachusetts. Included in this compromise was the
agreement that slavery would never exist in any future state above
the 36° 30’ line of latitude. You have deviated from history by
allowing an imbalance of power between slave states and free states
in the Senate. Later, when we reach the Compromise of 1850, you
will see a similar scenario, but in this case it is the north that
gains the advantage.”
Miller Project in Word
|