Good evening, everyone,

We are already halfway through class already; time is definitely flying by. From the article I read on The Women’s Suffrage Movement, I went with “The controversy surrounding funding state campaigns came to a head under Catt, who retook the NAWSA presidency in 1915 with the knowledge that Mrs. Frank Leslie had just left her entire estate valued at over $1.7 million to Catt for women’s suffrage. The size of the bequest and the fact that it had no restrictions on how it was spent freed Catt to pay for whatever strategy or tactics she wanted and was indispensable to the passage and ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment. “.

I think this section clearly illustrates the concept of historical causality, by proving that things run a lot smoother and easier when you have money backing your cause. Without any types of restrictions on the spending of the money it could have been used to travel to more states to push the movement of Women’s Suffrage.

The author’s thesis statement about the ERA was that they faced tough opposition & needed money. This can be supported with this passage from the text, The ERA's apparently smooth glide-path to ratification hit severe turbulence in the mid-1970s. In 1972 Phyllis Schlafly, a conservative activist and former Republican Congressional candidate from Illinois, founded the STOP ERA campaign, an effort by socially conservative women to derail the amendment. STOP was an acronym for "Stop Taking Our Privileges," “While Phyllis Schlafly's opposition was a major factor in the defeat of the ERA, there were larger forces at work, as well.”

Hopefully everyone has a good week, we are already nearly done with class.

Respond to your peers by comparing one of their selections to your own. Reflect on the similarities and differences between the conclusions you each made based on the evidence you selected.