Policy Proposal & Contentions Example & Review

Random Good Example: What & Why Policy Proposal (Recommendation): The Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2005 should be reintroduced and passed in Congress. Contentions and Sub-contentions (Supporting Arguments): The federal government has constitutional authority to abolish the death penalty. Many groups are opposed to capital punishment. –Capital punishment has been banned in other countries. –There is an alternative in life imprisonment. –Support for the death penalty has dropped in recent years. Capital punishment is inefficient and unnecessary Capital punishment does not deter criminals or reduce crime. Capital punishment is cruel –Many states have outdated machinery. Many innocents have been put to death, and many more may be. –Capital punishment is far more frequent in some states than in others. –Not all states require DNA evidence.

Keep policy proposals conceptually simple and specific. Bad Congress should provide greater incentives for states to preserve lands from development. Welfare reform should emphasize child care. Campaign spending should be restricted. An educational initiative should be conducted. Good Congress should prohibit any taxation by states of Indian casinos on reservation lands. Congress should abolish the death penalty for federal crimes. The United States should pay the back dues it owes the United Nations.

Keep your language direct and concise. Bad Congress should enact legislation to make it a crime against federal law to discriminate on account of race in who you rent hotel and motel rooms to. Good Congress should prohibit racial discrimination in the rental of hotel and motel rooms.

Make sure your contentions are contentions. Is each a complete sentence? Does each assert that something is true? Does the truth asserted strengthen the case for your policy recommendation? Good The plan would reduce the rate of illegitimate births. The policy would be easily enforced. My policy is consistent with the First Amendment. The spotted owls will all die anyway. There is no record of wolves eating children in the United States. 43% of the benefits will go to the wealthiest 1% of the population. Opponents are wrong to argue that the benefits of Head Start can't be measured past second grade.

Convert your list of contentions into a hierarchical outline. Group your contentions into logical categories. For example: economic efficiency — the economic benefits of my policy outweigh the economic costs; social efficiency — the social benefits of my policy outweigh the social costs; equity or justice — my policy treats people equally; my policy gives people what they've got coming; my policy is fair to all concerned; legality — my policy is consistent with the constitution and laws of the United States; political culture — my policy is consistent with values which are widely shared in the United States; my critics – their arguments are incorrect, unpersuasive, or outweighed by my own.

Remember... A contention is a statement of fact for or against a proposal. Your contentions are statements of fact for (on behalf of) your policy recommendation. Since a sentence is the smallest grammatical unit that is capable of making a statement, it follows that your contentions must be sentences. Without supporting evidence your contention is just an assertion. The passion with which you believe something to be true is not evidence for its truth. Show me the evidence, and document the source!

Kinds of Evidence: Empirical & Expert

Recommendation / Contention / Evidence Recommendation: “The Eastern Gray Wolf should remain on the Endangered Species List.” –Contention: “Population size is critical to survival.” Empirical study: a nice scientific experiment or analysis that makes the point beyond question Expert testimony: the opinion of someone whose opinion ought to carry weight

Make Evidence Work for You Demonstrate Its Connection to Your Contention. Demonstrate Its Credibility. –How you do it depends to a degree on whether you are using empirical studies or expert testimony. –Demonstration of credibility is doubly important with respect to expert testimony because there are likely to be differences of opinion among experts.

Empirical Study: a primary source Contention: “Population size is critical to survival.” Evidence: “The small and isolated population of wolves on Isle Royale suffers from diseases associated with inbreeding.” –How is this particular evidence relevant to your contention? [on point, but only one case] –What gives this source credibility? Who are the researchers? What evidence was collected? How was it analyzed?

Expert Testimony: a secondary source Contention: “Population size is critical to survival.” Evidence: “A population of 50 or more is adequate for the short term only, and one of 500 is needed to keep the species alive and healthy into the distant future.” –How is this particular evidence relevant to your contention? [on point and not case specific] –What gives this source credibility? Says who? Your roommate?

Expert Testimony “A population of 50 or more is adequate for the short term only, and one of 500 is needed to keep the species alive and healthy into the distant future.” – E. O. Wilson Is this a credible expert?

Expert Testimony “A population of 50 or more is adequate for the short term only, and one of 500 is needed to keep the species alive and healthy into the distant future.” – E. O. Wilson Ph.D. in biology from Harvard (1955) Author (with R.H. MacArthur), The Theory of Island Biogeography, (1967), which makes him a world-class expert on this very subject. Honorary Curator in Entomology of the Museum of Comparative Zoology and Pellegrino University Research Professor Emeritus, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology at Harvard. Internationally regarded as the “dean of biodiversity.” Author of two Pulitzer Prize winning books.