Does the Public Have a Right to Know About the Health of Presidential Candidates?

Whoever wins the 2020 presidential election—whether it be incumbent Donald Trump or challenger Joe Biden—will be the oldest person ever elected to the office in our nation’s history. At a time that has shown a global pandemic like COVID-19 can reach anyone, questions have been raised about how much the American public is entitled to know about the health of presidential candidates.

Those who argue yes, that the public has a right to know about the health of presidential candidates, argue that voters should be able to have relevant health information concerning the candidates who they are electing. They contend that given the president’s powers as executive and commander-in-chief, the public should be able to directly hold candidates accountable by ensuring they are fit for duty. Those who argue this point may also point to times that past presidents at times withheld their ailments from the public, which they claim was a betrayal of their trust.

Those who argue that the public does not have a right to know about the health of presidential candidates contend that the president has privacy rights concerning health, just like any other citizen. They may agree that a basic health certificate should be released by a candidate’s doctor, but believe that further details on every sort of ailment will be a violation of the candidate’s personal life. Those who argue this point may also contend that presidential candidates need to appear strong, especially to foreign belligerents, and that releasing health information could undermine that.

So, what do you think? Does the public have a right to know about the health of presidential candidates? Students can argue Yes, it should; No, it should not; or a nuanced answer in-between!

Note: Ideal Think the Vote responses include the following:

-Address the question asked in a thoughtful and meaningful manner

-Use cited facts and constitutional arguments when appropriate to support their answers

-Are expressed in cohesive sentences and are free of distracting spelling, punctuation, and grammatical errors

-They address counter-arguments and opposing concerns in a respectful manner

-They organize their answer in a manner that flows logically and reads clearly

Current Standings:
Yes: 75%
No: 25%
  • Evelyn from Alaska

    Although health is a private matter for some people, I believe that the public has a right to know the health of presidential candidates. If a candidate is very sick, they probably wouldn’t be in the position to make big decisions. I think that the public has a right to know if the candidate is unfit to run the country.

    [read less]

    Although health is a private matter for some people, I believe that the public has a right to know the health of presidential candidates. If a candida…

    [read more]
    2
  • Caysen from Oklahoma

    Personally, I think people should be allowed to know so we know if the virus that the candidate has is super bad or how real or fake it is.

    0
  • Adam from Virginia

    It’s an important thing to know about the competency of the President

    0
  • Serenity from Montana

    I believe the public has a right to know the medical state of the president. I understand that health is confidential, but in this situation as a citizen I deserve to be told the facts about the health of the country’s leader. If his health were in critical condition, the country would be greatly affected and we the people should be provided with some true information. The public also has a right to know as many people are involved and he refuses to state the day that he tested positive or negative. Although he may feel great after COVID, not all who have preexisting issues would recover. This situation also differs from past presidents as their health condition wasn’t a communicable disease contracted by a pandemic. His nonchalant attitude also sets a bad example about the seriousness of the disease which leads to a negative affect of public health messaging and the media. If he knew that he contracted the disease and ignored it and continued to campaign and meet with others he could face a civil liability which is a possibility as to why he wont state his testing dates. He doesn’t need to share every aspect of his health, but he chose his role as president and in a pandemic such as we are now, information should be revealed to the people.

    [read less]

    I believe the public has a right to know the medical state of the president. I understand that health is confidential, but in this situation as a citi…

    [read more]
    0
  • Leah from Missouri

    If we are electing a person to govern our country we need to know every pro and con to that person. As a voter, we need to know whether or not they are capable upholding the constitution and protecting our American freedom. Americans need to know who we are electing into office and who is the best man for the job. Likewise, we as voters need to be sure we are electing someone with the mental and physical capacity to carry out the term.

    [read less]

    If we are electing a person to govern our country we need to know every pro and con to that person. As a voter, we need to know whether or not they ar…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lilli from Oklahoma

    If you don’t know the health of a presidential candidate you don’t know what they’re going to do when they’re president if they win. If they’re around a lot of people then they can get sick too and that’s their responsibility to make sure that they stay away from people so they don’t get sick as well.

    [read less]

    If you don’t know the health of a presidential candidate you don’t know what they’re going to do when they’re president if they win. If they’re around…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jett from Oklahoma

    I believe that it is very necessary to know our president’s health. My reasoning is one of which is that, we don’t know if the president is healthy enough to work due to stress. It also is disrespectful to not tell the people. Say, for example, that you’re a citizen, you haven’t seen your president in about a week. You look at your phone, you look at the news, and at the top, it says “PRESIDENT HAS DIED FROM A DEADLY SICKNESS.” You would be in awe and question, and so would everyone else be too.

    [read less]

    I believe that it is very necessary to know our president’s health. My reasoning is one of which is that, we don’t know if the president is healthy en…

    [read more]
    0
  • britt from Oklahoma

    I think it is important to know because we need to know that the president will be able to make the right decisions and be able to serve the full time.

    0
  • grayson from Oklahoma

    Yes, because if they get really sick it’s best for us to know. It’s best for us to know because if one of them is sick enough to die then and they won’t make it as president, then we have the right to know. They are also very old and if something happens it could affect us.

    [read less]

    Yes, because if they get really sick it’s best for us to know. It’s best for us to know because if one of them is sick enough to die then and they won…

    [read more]
    0
  • Blakely from Oklahoma

    We should know the health of the person we are voting for because for example if you find out that that canidate is not mentally stable that could severely contridict your choice of who you are voting for. When a canidate signs up to be a potential president the public has the right to know a lot about the person because they are the ones making the tough choice of who to vote for.

    [read less]

    We should know the health of the person we are voting for because for example if you find out that that canidate is not mentally stable that could sev…

    [read more]
    0
  • Arielle from California

    Yes, it was specifically stated in the 25th Amendment that if the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”, with ⅔ vote of both houses in Congress, the Vice President will assume his position as Acting President. The public is entitled to know if such a switch occurs in which the power is being transferred to the Vice President. Furthermore, it is not necessarily the specific illness that the public is entitled to know, but the capability and trust in their president to act with clarity and deliberation while leading the nation. As president, they take an oath of loyalty to the nation, and with that comes the responsibility of openness and honesty to the people. If they are unable to fulfill their duties with the utmost strength and energy, then the public should know, as the president’s decisions determine the everyday lives of the people. In a way, the president is closely connected to the people more than any other branch of government, relying on the public’s support to exercise control over the nation. Due to this, the president must support the people in return and be honest about his current health situations.

    [read less]

    Yes, it was specifically stated in the 25th Amendment that if the President is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”, with ⅔…

    [read more]
    0
  • Reagan from Oklahoma

    I think yes because I think we should know our candidate’s health before we vote because if they are sick or have a disease and have the possibility of dying, then it might change the outcome of who becomes president. I don’t think you have to know if the president has a cold or anything but if he or she has dementia, cancer, or covid, I think we should know.x

    [read less]

    I think yes because I think we should know our candidate’s health before we vote because if they are sick or have a disease and have the possibility o…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lily from Connecticut

    Allthough some people may choose to keep their health private, I think that the presidential candidate stands in a different category. For example if the presidential candidates have pre-existing conditions that could affect their term in office, then I believe that we the people should be able to know. There could potentially be many ramifications some could include if the president had a terminal health condition, it could potentially affect their term in office giving the Vice President the role of president sonnet than anticipated. Another possibility is that if it affects their way of thinking it could have a huge effect in decisions that they make for the country. And their potential views on the health system could be affected.
    While I do believe in the right to privacy, the president/ presidential candidate is asking the country to trust them to be their leader. This is where the lines can get blurry about the Americans needing to know about their health. I can understand how somebody could believe that they have a right to privacy, but my belief tends to weigh on the side of us knowing everything that we can possibly know.

    [read less]

    Allthough some people may choose to keep their health private, I think that the presidential candidate stands in a different category. For example if …

    [read more]
    0
  • Artem from Illinois

    Undoubtedly, citizens of the US are entitled to some inalienable rights, which include privacy. However, aside from being citizens of the US, presidential candidates are also public servants. Being beacons of democracy, they have certain obligations to the people, such as letting them know details about their personal life that may impact the election results. There have been numerous examples of these “invasions of privacy” in the past. Bill Clinton’s personal life, for instance, was the cause of his impeachment, even though everyone’s love life is their personal matter. The infamous Hillary Clinton’s emails were, too, in a way, an invasion of her privacy, since she used a private server. However, I do not believe it would be fair to say that this invasion was unjustified, since a presidential candidate is expected to be transparent about such things. How a candidate behaves in their private business is of course reflective of who they are as a person, and how they might act once they become president. Health, in particular, while being a part of the candidate’s personal life, can be a total deal breaker when it comes to presidency. Poor health may severely impair one’s ability to control any country, let alone the most powerful, nuclear, and third most populous nation in the world. Of course, there is no need to share every single detail about a politician’s health – for one, it would indeed be a gross violation of their privacy, not to mention that it would really be useless. But an overall examination of a presidential candidate’s physical, and especially mental health should be made available to the public. The United States was built in the principles of popular sovereignty, freedom of speech, and government transparency. If someone suffers from a terminal illness that could impact their decisions during the presidency, or one that would be reasonably sufficient to impeach them under the 25th amendment, the American people deserve to know about it.

    [read less]

    Undoubtedly, citizens of the US are entitled to some inalienable rights, which include privacy. However, aside from being citizens of the US, presiden…

    [read more]
    0
  • Danny from Oklahoma

    My opinion is actually in the middle because as the president it is his to lead us so if the leader of our state is in a mental health kind of diseases that it would affect how s/he leads the country and if it is a health kind of disease like COVID-19 we don’t have to be in his face asking him questions on why hasn’t he told us before and asking if s/he knew and how they are going to rule over the United States. So if there is a mental problem like ADHD that would be confused about what problems are going on in the US and if they have a health problem like cancer or Covid they have no reason to tell anyone anything when s/he can spend the rest of their lives with their loved ones.

    [read less]

    My opinion is actually in the middle because as the president it is his to lead us so if the leader of our state is in a mental health kind of disease…

    [read more]
    0
  • Charlie from Minnesota

    We should be allowed to know if our leader is in imminent danger of death due to disease or age. Especially in an election year when said ,elder could be elected to 4 more years in office

    [read less]

    We should be allowed to know if our leader is in imminent danger of death due to disease or age. Especially in an election year when said ,elder could…

    [read more]
    0
  • Mack from Georgia

    I want to be included in a candidates mind when it comes to why they make decisions. Otherwise I feel excluded from the democracy

    0
  • Kara from Alaska

    Yes, the public has a right to know the quality of a candidates health. Although every candidate is a person, when you run for a presidency you are no longer just a person-you are a prominent figure in the course of that country. A normal American citizen has privacy rights and the potential president does as well to an extent. However, if that candidate has a life threatening disease, the voters have a right to be aware of all the factors.

    [read less]

    Yes, the public has a right to know the quality of a candidates health. Although every candidate is a person, when you run for a presidency you are no…

    [read more]
    0
  • Max from Alaska

    by withholding health information, depending on the condition, this could betray us as a nation

    0
  • sabreana from Missouri

    I say yes because what if a disess was deadly like
    e caner and one of the nominees got it and told no one then we could not help them got ride of that disess and keep they spot in the presidential election

    by Sabreana Reading

    [read less]

    I say yes because what if a disess was deadly like
    e caner and one of the nominees got it and told no one then we could not help them got ride of th…

    [read more]
    0
  • madison from Missouri

    I feel like we should know about our presidents sicknesses because, we as citizens, should have a warning on their chance of death. We need to know about our president’s life and death situations because from what I learned 4 presidents have died from assassination and 4 from natural causes. I feel like all of us would want to know if, and why, they died.

    [read less]

    I feel like we should know about our presidents sicknesses because, we as citizens, should have a warning on their chance of death. We need to know ab…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ellie from Missouri

    Should we have the right to know about our president’s health?

    Yes, I think we should be able to know about our president’s health because we should be able to know what to watch out for and know what is going on with our constitution. I feel that we have the right to know because the president gets to know about our health so we deserve to know about our president and our president’s health. We should have the right to know if our president is ok or not and if we should be worried. Especially at a time that has shown a global pandemic like COVID-19 that can reach anyone.

    [read less]

    Should we have the right to know about our president’s health?

    Yes, I think we should be able to know about our president’s health because we shoul…

    [read more]
    0
  • Elladee from Missouri

    I think that everyone should know if the president is sick or not, because when the candidates go to states to poll and they have a serious illness then everyone could get sick as well. If someone ran for president and had a very bad cancer problem and no one knew that they were sick and they just died in their sleep then no one would be prepared for this and the vice president would have to take over quickly.

    If we knew that the candidate was sick then the people would be ready for an online speech or the death of the president.

    [read less]

    I think that everyone should know if the president is sick or not, because when the candidates go to states to poll and they have a serious illness th…

    [read more]
    0
  • Patrck from Massachusetts

    Privacy is and always has been a right cherished by the American people, and in many respects that quality is unique to our nation. Our founders believed so much in the right to privacy that they issued the fourth amendment, which resolutely states that all citizens have the right to be secure in their ‘persons, houses, papers, and effects’ unless they have or as suspected to have committed a crime. Politicians have committed no crime, nor are they neglected under the fourth amendment. They share the same rights as any other citizen, and that does not change when they announce a campaign for public office.

    Additionally, from a more philosophical standpoint, people only have a right to what is theirs. Every person in this world has the right to life, liberty, and property, but not one person has the right to anyone else’s life, liberty, or property. The same is true in elections. People have the right to their own medical information, but not to the medical information of the candidates. In much the same way, political candidates have the right to their medical information, but not to the medical information of the voters.

    This all does not mean, of course, that politicians should all hide their medical information as long as possible. As is natural under democratic processes, the politicians that disclose less information to the public will fare worse; no one wants to vote for a candidate that they know nothing about. Therefore, candidates are greatly incentivized by the electoral system to release their medical information. I most certainly do not believe, however, that they should be compelled to do so. That would be an infringement of their liberties.

    [read less]

    Privacy is and always has been a right cherished by the American people, and in many respects that quality is unique to our nation. Our founders belie…

    [read more]
    2
  • Kate from Missouri

    I don’t think we should know all the details of President Trump’s condition because we are asking the doctors questions while they need to be with President Trump. Also there is a law against knowing the personal health of the President. This law should still apply to any future President. Every president we have we will keep America amazing and strong!

    [read less]

    I don’t think we should know all the details of President Trump’s condition because we are asking the doctors questions while they need to be with Pr…

    [read more]
    1
  • Vincent from North Carolina

    The Public does not have a right to access the knowledge of the Presidential candidate’s health. Although people may argue that it is necessary for the vitality of our national security and international relations, anything pertaining to a person’s health that is not directly threatening toward life or security of the country should be kept private due to many reasons, including the response of the press and potential response from less stable countries, as well as the document of Patient’s Bills of Rights.

    When the President or the candidate has a health condition and problem, it shouldn’t be allowed to be broadcast to the public because of serious consequences that will result from the actions of society and how other nations will react to this.

    A potential effect of revealing the health condition of a candidate can result in mass hysteria, disinformation, and fear. This is because the media will broadcast these information in the hope of generating new viewers and earn more profits. Since media corporations are a business and businesses can act unscrupulously in order to generate income and popularity, they are willing to misinterpret or interpret such information in a method of gaining such incomes. Because of their right to broadcast information that is protected by the 1st Amendment, they can avoid censorship through stressing certain facts in a certain viewpoint that seems plausible. Efforts to address this will be difficult, especially if it’s a popular news channel (such as CNN, MSNBC, and FOX) or a celebrity that attracted a lot of followers. Political opponents can use this as a disinformation campaign to slander the other candidates and “convince” the public to vote for them as they prove to be more “fit” to lead the nation.

    Another potential occurrence that can happen in the absence of a President, aggressive nations such as North Korea and Iran can launch preemptive attacks on nearby nations. This didn’t happen in this situation because of the high infectivity of Covid-19 and how it can impact the mobility and logistics of their military, they will avoid such movement, because of the addition to the already expensive costs resulting from a mass invasion. The attacks will bog down, making it a costly and ineffective failure. When a condition strikes the president during a non-pandemic time, the foreign nations can use this time to launch an attack because the response from the United States will be too slow and the invaders do not have to be concerned about the condition, since it wasn’t contagious and hamper their movements. Keeping the condition of the President in confidentiality is vital in this situation because it would act as a deterrent to the aggressive nation planning to invade and if the condition of the affected proved to be lethal, the Vice President would be given a certain amount of time to prepare for potential actions from hostile nations and to respond to the public. Another factor to determine this is foreign relations, as other nations can take advantage of this to coerce the United States into a certain deal that mainly benefits them as they will be negotiating with clueless leaders or those without any strong will. Keeping the condition a secret will prevent the US being taken advantage of by other nations.

    Another factor that should be considered when determining to announce the health and conditions of the President or candidates is the legality and other bureaucratic red tapes involved. Since many lawsuits are filed against medical practitioners for violating their rights of secrecy and privacy. Breaking this vital rule can lead many people to doubt their rights as a patient as is guaranteed in the Patient’s Bills Of Right-with one of the most essential components being privacy and secrecy. They may fear that since the information of a person of position can be revealed, their information may be revealed at the whim of a large gathering of people, who can sign an electronic petition demanding information in order to blackmail the person. This can lead to lack of confidentiality in the already low-approved US health care system.

    The Patients Bills of Right is a contract and guarantees of the part of the health care provider to provide the best care possible for patients. It is essentially a contract.

    [read less]

    The Public does not have a right to access the knowledge of the Presidential candidate’s health. Although people may argue that it is necessary for …

    [read more]
    0
  • Grace from Tennessee

    Health is a major concern in our society today. Of course, most people are concerned with their health and with the health of others, as they should be. Although, there is a fine line between concern and the invasion of privacy. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) is a federal law that required the “creation of national standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient’s consent or knowledge,” according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). With this law, citizens are protected and have rights to disclose, or to keep private, their medical health records.

    According to the CDC:
    protected health information or individually identifiable health information includes demographic information collected from an individual and 1) is created or received by a healthcare provider, health plan, employer, or healthcare clearinghouse and 2) relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual; the provision of healthcare to an individual; or the past, present, or future payment for the provision of healthcare to an individual; and That identifies the individual, or With respect to which there is a reasonable basis to believe the information can be used to identify the individual.

    With this protection in place, citizens are also protected from discrimination based on disabilities. Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a law that makes it illegal to discriminate against a qualified person with a disability in the federal government, as a result, citizens are not entitled to know the health of a President for the risk of changing their vote based upon the potential disability of a person and not the content of their policy.

    Some might argue that the President of the United States is not a normal citizen, thus, he is not entitled to privacy protection under HIPAA, or because citizens need to know the fate of their nation. Although, if this reasoning were accepted, it would threaten our democracy. Equality and fair treatment are necessary in order to support our way of life as Americans. The “Consumer Data Privacy in A Networked World A Framework for Protecting Privacy and Promoting Innovation in the Global Digital Economy,” written by Barak Obama and released by the White House in 2012, says this:
    The United States is committed to protecting privacy. It is an element of individual dignity and an aspect of participation in democratic society. To an increasing extent, privacy protections have become critical to the information-based economy (p. 45).

    Disclosing the medical information of a President or a Presidential candidate without consent is prohibited by HIPAA and if these privacy rights are violated, it becomes a threat to our democracy and our safety.

    Joy Pritts, a consultant in Washington, D.C., and a former privacy official in the Obama administration, said that “the default rule under HIPAA is that health care providers may not disclose a patient’s health information. Period,” according to “Physicians Weekly.”

    A President (and any politician) is a public servant, which means that it is his or her duty is to protect the people of the United States and to uphold the Constitution; however, it does not mean that these people are public property. Presidents are entitled to their human rights, just as all U.S. citizens are. To say that one citizen is less, or more, entitled to protection under the law than another citizen would be denying the fact that we are all equal under the laws. Of course, the Declaration of Independence states that “that all men are created equal.” If all citizens are not treated as equal in the United States, then we have denied the rights and democracy foundation of our Nation. Thus, the President, nor any public official, should be required to release any of their medical information. However, they may do so in good faith as they have not attained their position by being incompetent. No matter what side of the political spectrum you are on, it is evident that there is some level of competency and knowledge possessed by anyone who is in the position to be elected as President of the United States of America. We live in a great country. We should all be proud of what we stand for as Americans: Freedom.

    Works Cited:
    https://www.physiciansweekly.com/does-the-federal-health-information-privacy-law-protect-president-trump/amp/
    https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/laws-enforced-eeoc
    https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript
    https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/publications/topic/healthinformationprivacy.html
    https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/publications/topic/hipaa.html

    [read less]

    Health is a major concern in our society today. Of course, most people are concerned with their health and with the health of others, as they should b…

    [read more]
    0
  • Mary Catherine from North Carolina

    I believe that the public should not have the right to the health condition of any presidential candidate. Health concerns are a private matter and should remain confidential because if other countries know the conditions of our president, it becomes a sign of vulnerability to our country.

    Since the average human is able to enjoy the privilege of classified health records, then so should the president. In 1996 the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act was signed to ensure that your right of privacy over health information limits who is able to have access. According to the U.S. Department of Human and Human Services, “the privacy rule applies to all forms of individuals’ protected health information”. Before becoming president, the candidate is first a human being; they should also be entitled to that privacy. Though it would be helpful to know the potential president’s health conditions before you vote for them, it is their privacy that the public should not be able to take from them.

    Without the presidential candidate’s health staying confidential to themselves and selected individuals, other countries would also have access to this information and have the ability to use it against the president and our country. This could put us in potential danger because it can make America seem vulnerable, as well as an easy target. The president needs to be able to defend the country and they would not be able to complete that task if there was any sign of vulnerability. If we were allowed access to their health, we would know if they had any possible major concerns. Even though that could be helpful, if you decide to vote for someone you are also deciding to put your trust in them to lead the country properly. By putting your trust in them to lead the country, this includes your trust that they are in the proper conditions to be able to fulfill that role.

    Although it would be helpful and informative to know the presidential candidate’s health, it is cutting too far into their privacy and could result in danger to our country. As Americans, we should respect the privacy of the president to a certain degree to not take the confidentiality of their health information as well as everything else we have already taken from them.

    [read less]

    I believe that the public should not have the right to the health condition of any presidential candidate. Health concerns are a private matter and sh…

    [read more]
    0
  • Carson from North Carolina

    I believe the public is not entitled to know the health of the president. This is a matter of privacy just like any other. The president shouldn’t have to disclose information about his health because the president is also a citizen, who is afforded the same rights as the public, and privacy is already scarce for government officials.

    Government officials are some of the most heavily scrutinized members of our society. Reporters and members of the opposing party ransack politician’s pasts to find mistakes they have made or potentially career ending information. The arena, known as politics, is cruel; As the old adage goes, “All is fair in love and war.” Politicians, especially the president are constantly under the microscope of the media and the public. They have very little privacy as it is. Forcing the president to reveal his medical information is another step towards complete lack of privacy, which is even rapidly becoming a problem for the average person. Some people may argue that because he is the leader of our country he needs to be held to a different standard. Since he is so important, his rights need to be treated differently. The public has the right to know, so they can properly inform themselves and make the most of their vote. While he is not your average Joe, he is still human. It is unethical and selfish to claim to be entitled to his health information.

    Whether the president should have to disclose private medical information is not a question of opinion, it’s not a question at all. According to Exploring Constitutional Conflicts, the right to privacy was and continues to be established since 1923. In 1923 the Supreme Court the supreme court used the implied powers of the federal government to protect the privacy of one’s medical treatment. Furthermore the government has continued to protect privacy through the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. As stated by the CDC, “A major goal of the Privacy Rule is to ensure that individuals’ health information is properly protected”. The president has the right to give or withhold his own medical information. It’s his information and he gets to decide what to do with it. Nobody is allowed, or should be allowed, to force him to disclose personal information.

    Forcing the president to give up his rights and disclose personal information is unethical and illegal. No matter who the president is, they have a right to privacy. While some people would argue they are entitled to the information, so they can inform themselves and accurately make their vote count. It is simply not right to ask a government official to give up what little privacy they have left.

    [read less]

    I believe the public is not entitled to know the health of the president. This is a matter of privacy just like any other. The president shouldn’t h…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ashton from Missouri

    I think that it is not right to share information about the presidents health. It is a law that you don’t have to share private information. We are not following rules, regulations and laws. We are bothering any president that has been in or will be in. The countries needs to calm down and go back to normal for a while. It will help are countries stay calm. By: Ashton Sawyer

    [read less]

    I think that it is not right to share information about the presidents health. It is a law that you don’t have to share private information. We are no…

    [read more]
    0