According to ward, what barriers might have kept romans from voting?

The answer to the question: According to Ward, what barriers mights have kept Romans from voting, there was one clear barrier: voting had to take place within the tribunes of the plebs and in the popular assemblies, but these took place in Rome itself, not outside of the city, and most plebeyans did not have the means to travel to Rome, which meant that they were unable to cast a vote.

Explanation:

This explanation is given, along with others, on the article written by Allen M. Ward, and which was published in the New England Classical Journal, in 2004. The article, titled: "How Democratic Was the Roman Republic" has the purpose of showing that the beliefs that have been historically held about Rome as an example of pure democracy, and a model for others to have formed themselves on, is misguided and not real. In fact, Ward, in his article shows that, although in essence the Republic system in Rome was based on democratic ideals from Greece, in reality, most, if not all of these principles, were linked to lineage, birth, wealth, and position. There was an image given that the people had power, and a say, through their voting in popular assemblies, and that there was a system of check and balances, but the reality was different. One barrier mentioned by Ward in his article, to this marvelous Roman system of voting, which represented democracy, was that the assemblies were people were allowed to vote, had to take place within the city of Rome, and plebeyans tended to live outside of it, so that meant that they could not afford to travel always to the assemblies. This meant that many plebeyans were not able to vote, and thus did not actually have a say in the decision-making process.

panem is a communist totalitarian dictatorship where all the resources and how they are allocated belongs to the capitol. the districts exist only to provide goods and services for the capital and most of the citizens live in poverty. it is a police state where the "peacekeepers" use force and threats to keep the people under control. dissent is outlawed and those who disobey the law are executed, flogged, or turned into avoxes. the games are another means in which the ruling elite in the capitol exert their power over the districts. when reading the books i drew parallels between panem and the soviet union and north korea. in no way is panem capitalist. the people in the capitol are wealthy but the majority of them are involved in the government somehow. it was the same way in the former soviet union where bigwigs in the communist party and high ranking government officials were given access to goods, services, medical treatments not available to the general public. if you think panem has a capitalist economy you need to brush up on your economics.  

whitch constitution would be inadequate as a basis for government today?

the answer would be a) it only allowed catholics to be in government.