Building the Interstate Highway System

Evidence that the vice president presents that the state of America's highways is indeed a problem is that the highway net is inadequate locally, and obsolete as a national system. The roads were governed by terrain, existing Indian trails, cattle trails, arbitrary section lines. They were for local movement at low speeds. They were updated some for increased power, but they needed to look at what the future (10 years from then) would need.

The specific problems this plan is intended to solve is to properly articulate systems that solves problems of speedy, safe, transcontinental travel; intercity communication; access highways; and farm-to-market movement; metropolitan area congestion; bottlenecks; and parking. With making the interstate highway system he feels (with cooperation and maximum of state and local initiative and control) they can make a program which will deal with the problems effectively.

Building the Interstate Highway System

Richard Nixon reveals information that it was originally built and used for terrain, Indian trails, cattle trails, and land division lines. Now, the highway system has been transformed to meet metropolitan needs for traffic, transcontinental movement, and increased horsepower. However the highway system has never really transformed physically to meet those demands. He cites statistics of how the horsepower and mileage of transportation vehicles have increased dramatically, yet the roads are not increasing in structure at the same rate. He also discusses the death tolls and casualties, the wasted hours in traffic, and the civil suits that clog up the courts. The plan specifically aims to solve the problems of speedy, safe, transcontinental tavel, intercity communication, access highways, congestion, parking, bottlenecks, and farm-to-market-movement.

Building the interstate highway system

The vice president uses information about the structure of the country's roads to convince his audience that it is a big problem. He discusses how the highway system was originally built with different intentions and for different purposes than what it is used for now, and that these original structure plan is now insufficient. He cites facts about the total number of miles of highway in relation to the number of vehicles that owned, deaths and injuries that occur on the roads, and the waste of time caused by roadways that are insufficient to meet the needs of the people. His plan intends to solve the problems of slow transcontinental traffic, intercity travel, access highways, farm-to-market travel, congestion, bottlenecks, and parking.

Response: Nixon article

1. What evidence does the vice president present that the state of America's highways is indeed a problem? What are the specific problems this plan is intended to solve?

--ejfleitz

Arguing for a Change

There are similarities and differences in arguing for a position vs. arguing for a change. In both of these types of essays, the author is attempting to convince his or her readers of a certain view on a topic. The main differences are in what the writer calls for the reader to do in response, and in the types of ideas suggested in the argument. In an essay that argues for a position, the author simply wants the reader to be persuaded to his or her point of view and to come to believe the same ideas about a topic as the author. However, in an essay that argues for change, the author is calling for the reader to become so dedicated a certain viewpoint that they are committed to reforming that subject. For example, Jefferson wants to stir his readers up so that they are ready to take a stand and take action to reform the situation. Also, Jefferson suggests specific steps that should be taken to change the situation and right the wrongs that have been committed against the people. Whereas in an argument for a position, the author's purpose in writing is just to convince the audience to believe a certain way, not necessarily to take action. An example of this is the article by Meredith Clark, who is trying to convince her readers that young adults without medical insurance is a big problem.

Position vs. Change

Arguing for a position and aruging a change is a lot alike, but also are a lot different. When you argue a position, your goal is to try and convince the reader your point of view. When you argue a change, you first of all have to convince the reader of your point of view,you then have to convince them to go ahead and actually go out and act somehow upon it. Jefferson argues a change because he first of all, lists why he he believes the king treats people. Then he states ways you can go and overthrow him from his throne. Clark argues a position because she just gives real life examples on how bad life is without Health Insurance. She doesn't go on and list things you can do which will change the quality of life without health insurance. As you can see they are kinda alike because they use their own experiences, but one goes on even more which make them different.

Position vs. Change

Writing for a position argument and writing an argument for change have some similarities and differences. Both of the arguments are trying to persuade an audience, but the actions from the audience is different. Writing for a position is when all the author is asking for the audience to agree with them. For example, in Ted Koppel's, "Take My Privacy, Please!", he is trying to show his audience that we do not have as much privacy as we should and that it will only get worse. He makes us feel almost afraid of what is going on. He persuades us to believe that our privacy has been taken away from us. Whereas, writing an argument for change is asking the audience to do something about the problem. For example, in Thomas Jefferson's, "The Declaration of Independence", he shows the problems and ways to fix them. He shows the severity of the problem and that life is intolerable under the king. He shows complaints, and this proves that this problem needs to be changed.

Therefore, in writing for a position, the audience is basically persuaded to take that specific position on the issue. So, writing an argument for change, is basically the next step of this. The author persuades the audience to see their position, but to also take action to their solutions for this problem.