Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1: The states can regulate own elections, and Congress can add any additional changes.
Change: Congress chooses how the elections are held for the states.
I infer that the Founding Fathers passed this item because it gives the states a freedom and power. There are both negative and positive effects to this change. One positive effect is that the state would not have to worry about setting up the election, though they might have to come up with the money for it, which is a negative effect. Another, is that if Congress has all the states hold the elections the same way, it would prevent states feeling unfairness toward each other and their elections ways, if one state had a cheaper event. Also, Congress would feel on top of things if they knew what all was going on in each of the states. Some of the negative effects include: this change could cause tyranny in the states, because their freedom would be taken with Congress in control of the elections. And, as quoted before in the Declaration of Independence, the "power belongs to the people. There are some examples of this in today's life. In school, groups may be selected, and one person decides the actions of the others. Our parents; some are strict and guide us in the right direction, the power of the household. An example to show this new change is plausible, consider the advantages of Congress, where the government would know and be responsible for what was happening in the states. I, though, do not agree with this change, for it takes away the freedom of the states, and the government already has a lot of power over the country. Also, it could cause tyranny in the states, which could lead to problems, or yet another war among ourselves.
Change: Congress chooses how the elections are held for the states.
I infer that the Founding Fathers passed this item because it gives the states a freedom and power. There are both negative and positive effects to this change. One positive effect is that the state would not have to worry about setting up the election, though they might have to come up with the money for it, which is a negative effect. Another, is that if Congress has all the states hold the elections the same way, it would prevent states feeling unfairness toward each other and their elections ways, if one state had a cheaper event. Also, Congress would feel on top of things if they knew what all was going on in each of the states. Some of the negative effects include: this change could cause tyranny in the states, because their freedom would be taken with Congress in control of the elections. And, as quoted before in the Declaration of Independence, the "power belongs to the people. There are some examples of this in today's life. In school, groups may be selected, and one person decides the actions of the others. Our parents; some are strict and guide us in the right direction, the power of the household. An example to show this new change is plausible, consider the advantages of Congress, where the government would know and be responsible for what was happening in the states. I, though, do not agree with this change, for it takes away the freedom of the states, and the government already has a lot of power over the country. Also, it could cause tyranny in the states, which could lead to problems, or yet another war among ourselves.