Convincing the Public

Living in the 21st century means living with basic health care facilities. Dying of preventable diseases is unacceptable, and yet an inmate in one of California’s prisons died every six to seven days (Saunders). All people should have access to basic hygiene and decent health care. But when it has to do with an inmate it becomes a fight on how much is too much. On one side J. Clark Kelso argues in his article “California Must Spend More on Prison Health Care,” that health conditions in prisons need to be dramatically improved. On the other hand, in her article “California Should Not Spend Excessively on Prison Health Care,” Debra Saunders debates that California should not spend too much on already improved prison health care. They both use a variety of effective argumentative strategies but their different methods also set them apart.

In his article “California Must Spend More on Prison Health Care,” J. Clark Kelso disputes that the lack of health care in the California prisons is inhumane. The simple fact of denying these inmates the right to proper care is a form of cruel and unusual punishment. He then argues that in order to improve those conditions to minimum requirements, so the public will not be in any harm, it will cost $8 billion dollars. He claims he too realizes it is a costly fix but it is necessary.

Debra Saunders contradicts Kelso in her article titled “California Should Not Spend Excessively on Prison Health Care.” She argues that California’s prison health conditions have improved in the past years therefore there is no need to fulfill Kelso’s high demand of money especially with the budget crisis impacting the state. She is sure that Kelso’s solution is not realistic.

It is always important to check your ...

... middle of paper ...

...t have been any clearer. That simple sentence can sum up her whole entire article. That is how you carry on a clear stance.

Overall, the best way to write an effective argument is to use the strategies that both Kelso and Saunders used. One used some better than the other, but neither failed to present their argument. Kelso’s credibility and use of facts overpowered Saunders, whereas Saunders use of opposing viewpoints and ongoing clear stance managed to surpass most of Kelso’s methods. In the end they were both engaging articles, who have points worth reading.

Works Cited

Kelso, J. Clark. "California Must Spend More on Prison Health Care." Gale Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press, 2010. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.

Saunders, Debra. "California Should Not Spend Excessively on Prison Health Care." Gale Opposing Viewpoints. Greenhaven Press, 2010. Web. 11 Sept. 2011.