Title – Prohibiting Sex Discrimination: Recognizing the E.R.A. as the 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
On June 21st, 1788, the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified and then put into effect less than a year later. This leading example of democracy has been operating for approximately 235 years, becoming the rule of law and protection of citizens’ rights. Since its operation, the document has been amended 27 times as is allowed under Article V of the Constitution. Most recently, the 27th Amendment was effective on May 5, 1992, nearly 34 years ago, regarding the salary of Congress members. Despite the number of times this living document has been altered, there is no instance on the prohibition of sex discrimination. Yes, the individual rights of American citizens are guaranteed under the Bill of Rights (the first 10 Amendments). But, evidently, the framers of the most important document in American government forgot to consider another variable to the equation.
The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA), written by Alice Paul and Crystal Eastman in 1923, states the following in Section 1: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” Gaining traction in the 1970s, this proposed amendment was a critical stepping stone towards equality between men and women. With bipartisan support, the ERA was sent to state legislatures for ratification in 1972 and has been declared dead since the last deadline extension in 1982.
The ERA poses a basic human right that should be bestowed upon the citizens of the United States of America, a country built upon its democratic values. In the modern era, Congress should extend the deadline of the ERA even further as three-fourths of states have ratified it into law. The ratification of the ERA to the Constitution will further the discussion and address the inequality and issues faced by women and other marginalized people throughout the nation. While America’s forefathers may have not given much thought to matters outlined in the ERA, now more than ever presents the opportunity to refine the law of the land for forward progress.
1). Comment on the title. How does it offer a way forward on the issue? Does it hint at or echo the paper’s thesis? Make suggestions.
I think this title sets up the paper and offers a way forward on the issue.
2). Does this piece’s title and introduction respond to an exigence?-Does it make the issue pressing or connect to other pressing needs and issues? Make suggestions.
Yes, the title explains the problem and a way forward to help fix this issue.
3). Comment on the thesis. Does it set up a clear argumentative claim? Is it advancing a specific policy or practice? Can you imagine how the rest of the argument will unfold?
Yes, it sets up a clear argument that this amendment should prohibit sex discrimination. I imagine that the argument with continue to explain what this amendment already achieved and then explain how it is possible/why it should already protect against sex discrimination.
4). From the thesis and introduction, identify the organizational pattern from the chart in the “Arranging Policy Arguments” Keyword? Also, identify the types of policy instruments that are suggested in the thesis (mandates, inducements, capacity builders, or system change). If you can’t do that, let the reader know.
I believe the organizational pattern is need/plan/advantage. The first paragraph explains the problem of there being no prohibition of sex discrimination. He then moves on to discuss the solution which is recognizing the ERA the 28th amendment. At the end he explains how ratifying it into a law will create the advantage of bringing further discussion of the inequality women face.