While some people hold the view that political leaders should withhold information from the public in order to benefit from this act, others believe that the public has a right to be informed. With the consideration and comparison of both views, I generally espouse the view that citizens deserve full information because it is the best way to restrict the leaders' power and prevent the leaders from growing laziness and inefficiency.
On the one hand, with the limitation of information, the leaders would lose motivation to improve their work and easily grow laziness. It may also result in the centralization of political power by blocking out the adversaries' opinions. For instance, President Trump was blamed for blocking hundreds of negative comments in his Twitter account. The judge claimed that Trump has no rights to inhibit different views in a public account. In Trump's view, it is desirable to withhold opposing information, however, with consideration to the public welfare, this act would cultivate the president's laziness and thus lead to inefficiency.
On the other hand, with the elucidation of the information, public can exert their talents to supervise and restrict the government's power. The separation of the powers in America is the best instance. By dividing the political power into the court's, the president's, and the constitution's hands, the power would have a perfect balance. When the scrutinizing power of public involves owing to the transparency of the information, the political institutions would have to behave themselves and put efforts to enhance social well-beings. In conclusion, public has the rights to get full information so as to supervise the political power.
To sum up, as I have cogently discussed above, I can reach a conclusion that in order to promote social welfare, the information of the political leaders should be fully provided and publicized to the citizens. As a result, the public could better scrutinizing the political power and prevent the leaders from being lazy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 298, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to full'
Suggestion: to full
... espouse the view that citizens deserve full information because it is the best way ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 583, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'presidents'' or 'president's'?
Suggestion: presidents'; president's
...c welfare, this act would cultivate the presidents laziness and thus lead to inefficiency....
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 597, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
... has the rights to get full information so as to supervise the political power. To su...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, may, so, thus, well, while, as to, for instance, in conclusion, as a result, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.5258426966 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 2235.4752809 77% => OK
No of words: 324.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29012345679 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99961258485 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 215.323595506 74% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.490740740741 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 532.8 704.065955056 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.1322885571 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.428571429 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1428571429 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.85714285714 5.21951772744 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.350611830408 0.243740707755 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121850957373 0.0831039109588 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13419235763 0.0758088955206 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.229055785001 0.150359130593 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116531416097 0.0667264976115 175% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.1392134831 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 100.480337079 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.7820224719 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.