WASHINGTON In 2004, Desmond Meade, while serving a 15-year prison sentence for a drug offense in Florida, got a break. An appeals court returned his conviction to the original trial bench, allowing him to plead guilty to a lesser charge and get out of prison in three years, most of which he had already served. But his freedom came with a price, something that didn't quite register with him at the time: as part of his plea agreement with prosecutors, Meade agreed to give up his civil rights: the right to vote, to serve on a jury and to run for office. "At the time, when I first accepted the plea deal, I didn't understand the consequences," Meade says. Fourteen years and a pair of college and law degrees later, Meade, now 50, still can't vote; his application to regain his civil rights was rejected in 2011. The reason: a new Florida law that requires felons like him to wait for seven years before they could apply for rights restoration. Home to nearly a quarter of the nation's disenfranchised felons, Florida has become a battleground in a national debate over felony disenfranchisement laws. With lawmakers deeply divided over the issue, Meade says he wants the state's voters to change the system when they head to the polls on Nov. 6. He's promoting a ballot initiative that would amend the state's constitution, restoring the voting rights of all felons in Florida (except those convicted of murder and sexual assault) after they've completed the terms of their sentence. The measure enjoys broad voter support. A Quinnipiac University poll conducted in February showed that 67 percent of Floridians were in favor of restoring the voting rights of felons other than those convicted of murder and sexual assault. Another poll showed support at 71 percent. "We're going to change the system," Meade says confidently. "What we're doing is taking the power out of the hands of politicians and we're allowing the citizens of the state of Florida to decide whether or not folks should have a second chance, to be able to vote." How long will it take to vote on the ballot: - about 15 minutes - under a month. - over three days - not enough information
about 15 minutes

We had a light bulb that stopped working and when a new bulb was placed it wouldn't light up. We eventually had a technician from John Moore come out to fix this problem. He was nice enough and took the time to explain to me why it had stopped working and how he would fix this. After about 30 minutes he had completed this and then offered as a free service to inspect the electrical parts of the house. He went out back to the fuse box to look and then after inspection offered to show me what he had found. It was mid to late afternoon in the back yard and that's when the sun is aiming straight to my back yard. I should mention we live in Texas. He went over ever single fuse and wire that we had and explained about the piping and all the other things that go with it and that what we have isn't what is recommended anymore. Our house was about 9 years old at the time. We were back there for more than 90 minutes. I started getting very restless because I wanted to work on dinner, the sun was blazing hot and I needed to do many other things. It was coming up on 5 o'clock. He then went to his truck to write up an estimate. After 20 minutes or so he comes back and tells me it will be about $10,000 to fix our fuse box system. So what started out for changing a light bulb was going to end up costing 10K. We did later get it looked at by someone else that is qualified in this field,m who was there working on some other project and he said there was nothing wrong with what we had. The worker probably believes: - not enough information - the writer is pushover - his tools are in the truck - he can fix this bulb quickly
the writer is pushover

(Question)
QUEBEC CITY Emotions were on display when U.S. President Donald Trump met other G-7 leaders at their annual summit in Canada on Friday, but the discussions were civilized and diplomatic, according to sources. Trump held firm on asserting the United States is disadvantaged when it comes to trade with its European allies. "The other leaders presented their numbers and Trump presented his," a G-7 official who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Reuters news agency. "As expected he did not budge. This is probably not because he does not understand, but because of domestic reasons." At a bilateral meeting later with the summit's host, Justin Trudeau, the U.S. president joked that the Canadian prime minister had agreed to "cut all tariffs." Despite the two leaders exchanging criticism of each other's trade policies the previous day, Trump described the cross-border relationship as very good, stating "we're actually working on cutting tariffs and making it all very fair for both countries. And we've made a lot of progress today. We'll see how it all works out." In a subsequent sit-down meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, Trump said "the United States has had a very big trade deficit for many years with the European Union and we are working it out. And Emmanuel's been very helpful in that regard." Macron responded that he had a "very direct and open discussion" with Trump and "there is a critical path that is a way to progress all together." Canada's foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, confirms she met on Friday with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer to discuss the tariffs and the fate of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). She said Canada, however, will not change its mind about the U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs which she termed "illegal." Trump imposed the tariffs on the grounds that weak domestic industries could affect U.S. national security. America's closest allies, Canada, Mexico and the European Union, are introducing retaliatory tariffs. Why did the President meet with Trudeau? - regarding tariffs - not enough information - regarding President Macron - regarding the drug problem
(Answer)
regarding tariffs