Welcome to Debatepedia!
|Revision as of 06:47, 12 November 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
← Previous diff
|Revision as of 07:01, 12 November 2008 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
Next diff →
|Line 76:||Line 76:|
|A steady supply of high quality debates to help you deliberate, take a stand, take action, vote, and back yourself up.||A steady supply of high quality debates to help you deliberate, take a stand, take action, vote, and back yourself up.|
|-||*'''[[Debate: Employee Free Choice Act| Employee Free Choice Act]]'''||+||*'''[[Debate: Employee Free Choice Act| Employee Free Choice Act]]''' - Is the US Employee Free Choice Act a good idea? - 12 Nov. 2008.|
|Line 82:||Line 82:|
|'''Featured arguments from today's Daily Debate:'''||'''Featured arguments from today's Daily Debate:'''|
|-||*'''PRO: [[Argument: Divided government places a necessary check on ambition| Divided government places a necessary check on ambition]]''' [http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2008/11/02/2008-11-02_heres_my_dream_ticket_why_divided_govern.html "Here's my dream ticket: Why divided government's good for America". Daily News. 2 Nov. 2008] - My strong preference for a check and balance on the accumulation of power leads me to hope Republicans salvage a sliver of power from this Democratic tide.||+||*'''PRO: [[Argument: EFCA strengthens workers' ability and right to unionize| EFCA strengthens workers' ability and right to unionize]]''' [http://www.freechoiceact.org/index.php/petition/pages/araw_learn_more Employer Free Choice Act. American Rights at Work] - "The Employee Free Choice Act would allow workers to form a union through “majority sign-up.” If workers know they want a union, we should have laws that let them have it. The Employee Free Choice Act would require an employer to recognize its employees’ union when a majority has signed union authorization cards. Under current law, management can refuse to recognize a union even when 100 percent of employees have signed authorization cards. After a majority of workers have signed cards, an employer can still call for a separate election. Under the current system, then, the employer gets to decide whether a separate election is necessary. The Employee Free Choice Act would give this choice to the workers. Read more about majority sign-up."|
|-||:James Madison wrote in Federalist paper 51, and later added - "Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."||+||*'''CON: [[Argument: Employee Free Choice Act eliminates workers' right to secret ballots| Employee Free Choice Act eliminates workers' right to secret ballots]]''' Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), an opponent of the bill, stated: "It is beyond me how one can possibly claim that a system whereby everyone – your employer, your union organizer, and your co-workers – knows exactly how you vote on the issue of unionization gives an employee 'free choice...It seems pretty clear to me that the only way to ensure that a worker is 'free to choose' is to ensure that there's a private ballot, so that no one knows how you voted. I cannot fathom how we were about to sit there today and debate a proposal to take away a worker's democratic right to vote in a secret-ballot election and call it 'Employee Free Choice.'" [http://republicans.edlabor.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=58]b|
|-||*'''CON: [[Argument: Compromise is still necessary under one-party rule| Compromise is still necessary under one-party rule]]''' [http://2008central.net/2008/07/08/the-case-that-divided-government-is-irrelevant/ "The Case That Divided Government is Irrelevant". 2008 Central. 8 Jul. 2008] - "This is also true when the same party is in control of Congress and the White House. I’ll take the Farm Bill and raise him every other bill I’ve mentioned: Tax Cuts, Energy Bill, Katrina Bills, No Child Left Behind, Medicare, etc. Even the poorly organized Democrats were able to negotiate somewhat with those. Moreover, even with undivided government, when negotiation failed, bills did not pass (Social Security)."||+|
|'''Recent Daily Debate Digest Topics:'''||'''Recent Daily Debate Digest Topics:'''|
Revision as of 07:01, 12 November 2008
Debatepedia is a wiki encyclopedia of pro and con arguments and quotations in important public debates from around the world. It is considered "the Wikipedia of debate", helping the world centralize arguments and quotations found in millions of different articles, essays, and books into a single encyclopedia, so that citizens can better understand important public debates and make informed choices. Join this cause and community and become an editor of the site. Your efforts will improve your own thinking and have a major impact on the way thousands of other citizens draw conclusions. Debatepedia is endorsed by the United States National Forensic League. Get started
Browse through Debatepedia's main categories to explore its contents and areas of interest to you. Go to Debatepedia's contents page to see all of its categories, portals, and other contents.
IDEA and Debatepedia have created a global climate change debate portal that includes 20 highly developed pro/con debate articles. We have done this in coordination with two prominent organizations and youth debate contests that are debating ways to solve global climate change:
Debatepedia's global climate change debate portal helps TPS and NPPF debaters (as well as the general public) compare the pros and cons of over 20 different approaches to alternative energy and global warming. This provides a basis for determining what approaches should or should not be incentivized and for creating "the ideal plan to solve global climate change".
A steady supply of high quality debates to help you deliberate, take a stand, take action, vote, and back yourself up.
Featured arguments from today's Daily Debate:
Recent Daily Debate Digest Topics:
Here's a list of debates with tasks you can help with. See the getting started tutorial to learn more about how to edit.
As a wiki like Wikipedia, Debatepedia's content is developed by you. We hope that you will join our active community of editors and help us in our mission to centralize debates and arguments from around the world into a single encyclopedia. Learn how to begin here.