Policy Paper Success Chapter #1 Formulate a Research Question & Prepare a Bibliography

Research Questions Are Complete Sentences not Merely Labels  Should the Yellowstone Wolves be protected by the Endangered Species Act when they leave the park?  Should American combat forces be withdrawn from Iraq?  Should the ANWR be open to oil and gas development?  Should the president comply with Congressional subpoenas for all documents related to firing the 8 US attorneys?  Should acceptable progress in the No Child Left Behind law be measured by the percentage of students making one year’s academic progress in one year rather by the percentage who are proficient at specific grade levels?

A Research Question Is Way Better than a Topic  A research question focuses the mind.  A research question tends to assure conceptual simplicity.  A research question tells you what information is relevant and what is not.  If you can state the research question, you should be able to articulate an answer, and  The answer you reach, as a result of your research, is your policy proposal.

The Answer You Reach, as a Result of Your Research, Is Your Policy Proposal  The Yellowstone Wolves should be protected by the Endangered Species Act when they leave the park.  American combat forces should not be withdrawn from Iraq.  ANWR should be opened to oil and gas development.  The president should not comply with Congressional subpoenas for all documents related to firing the 8 US attorneys.  Acceptable progress in the No Child Left Behind law should be measured by the percentage of students making one year’s academic progress in one year rather by the percentage who are proficient at specific grade levels.

Prepare a Bibliography  Use an approved style: APSA APA Chicago / Turabian MLA  Consult your Course Syllabus for links to on-line style guides.

Chapter #2 Policy Proposal & Contentions Example & Review

Random Good Example: What & Why WHAT = Policy Proposal (Recommendation): The Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act of 2005 should be reintroduced and passed in Congress. WHY = 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 polar bears 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.

Convert your list of contentions into a hierarchical outline. Group your contentions into logical categories. Among the logical categories that should be considered in an environmental policy paper are the five “E”s: Ecology/environment Economy/efficiency Equity/equality Ethics [A]esthetics

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!

Chapter #3 Kinds of Evidence: Empirical & Expert

Recommendation / Contention / Evidence RECOMMENDATION = “The Eastern Gray Wolf should remain on the Endangered Species List.” –CONTENTION supporting the recommendation = “Population size is critical to survival.” EVIDENCE supporting the contention = Empirical study: a nice scientific experiment or analysis that makes the point beyond question EVIDENCE supporting the contention = 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 from an empirical study: “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? Explaining these things gives your argument credibility.

Expert Testimony: a secondary source Contention: “Population size is critical to survival.” Evidence from 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.” –How is this particular evidence relevant to your contention? [on point and not case specific] –What gives this source credibility? The expertise of the “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 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.

Study carefully: “Getting from Research Question & Bibliography to Policy Proposal and Contentions” and “A Good Argument Is a Hierarchy of Contentions” In your course syllabus. Having difficulty? Consult Craig.

System Bias The organization of politics has consequences. The rules, and institutions, and procedures by which we organize our collective life as a nation are never neutral. Rather these rules, and institutions, and procedures allocate advantages and disadvantages to individuals and groups. The concept of system bias encourages us to explore who is advantaged and disadvantaged and whether those advantages and disadvantages are consistent with our values or with democratic theory or with the values of American political culture.

System Bias in Input Institutions Public Opinion & Public Opinion Polling Mass Media Interest Groups & PACs Voting & Citizen Participation Political Parties [tomorrow] Campaigns & Elections [tomorrow]

Source: Michael McDonald, George Mason University