Debate Club and Paralegal Club Debate Mandatory Voting
- Gabriella Valentin
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
On April 10 the Debate Club hosted a debate against the Paralegal Club. The event was debating on if voting should be mandatory in the United States. The Debate club argued for the side that voting should not be mandatory and the Paralegal club argued that it should be mandatory. The sides were chosen by a coin flip. The debate club had 3 debaters and the Paralegal club had 2 debaters. The debate was broken down into 4 stages: Opening Statements, Topic Presentation, Rebuttal Round, and Closing Statements.
The debate club argued that mandatory voting would be unconstitutional, disorderly, and cost too much. The Paralegal Club argued that it would be more accurate and progressive with everyone expressing their opinion.
“We fought for decades for people of color to vote, and women to vote, and now we have all those rights and people aren’t taking full advantage of it,” said Victor Cuevas Jr, who participated for the Paralegal Club. Cuevas expressed that voting is a very important topic that Americans in general should be discussing, not just in school, but across the country. He shared that he was not sure what he expected when he came but he had fun and it made him actively think about the topic..
Cuevas said he knows people that when elections come around they simply don’t vote because “they don’t care and whatnot.” He explains that people should make their voice and opinions heard regardless because they have a right to. Cuevas said, “We have to make our voices heard as a whole.”
Alexandra Blancas, a viewer at the debate, shared that she felt like both sides had very valid points. She liked that the Paralegal Club discussed better education and funding to inform students on voting. However, she also agreed with the Debate Club on how mandatory voting would take a long time. Blancas added, “I feel like we should be voting because every voice needs to be heard and counted.”
One member of the Debate Club, Brianee “Bri” Calderon, spoke of her appreciation for debate. Calderon said, “It leaves room for people to have discussions–debate is kind of a way to connect with people, not through arguing but through honest conversation.”
Calderon feels debate is commonly misunderstood. “I feel like people only think of debate club as like, ‘oh it’s for attorneys, it's just to argue or whatever,’ but no, we bring community, we provide a safe space for you to improve your own debating skills and your public speaking skills,” Calderon said.
Calderon expressed her fondness for debate’s way of connecting people through civil discussions.
President and Founder of the Debate Club, Karyna Griese-Maganzini, spoke highly of the members of the Debate Club, praising their eloquence and opinionated nature. “I don't want us to keep our voices in that room. The point of debate is to get our voices out,” said Griese-Maganzini.
Griese-Maganzini states that she reached out to the Paralegal Club because she felt that they would be a good contender in the debate as they are practicing to argue law in the courtroom. This topic is important to her because she explains how people’s lives are in the hands of elected officials. “These are the people that dictate what happens in our country, our lives, and our families. It’s very important to make informed decisions about who should be in that position of power,” Griese-Maganzini said.
Katherine Wolske contributed this article.
