Policy Briefing Paper
It is very important that this paper is written on the level of a graduate student. Pay close attention to grammar and word choices.
For this paper, you will assume the role of a staff member for an elected policymaking body, such as a city council, a county commission, or a state legislative or Congressional committee. In that role, you have been asked to prepare an economic policy briefing paper for the group.
For the briefing paper, the policy topic is the Supreme Court decision from June that overthrew state bans on same-sex marriage.
Each of the policy areas mentioned above is very broad. When preparing your briefing paper, you should narrow your focus to a particular policy within the policy area. Your policy can be a specific law, ordinance, legislative proposal, regulation, or court decision. You should provide an authoritative source for the policy, for example, a city code, state statute, administrative regulation, or federal law.
Your briefing paper will include the following major sections related to your specific policy:
1. A detailed description of the policy on which your paper will focus, including primary source materials.
2. An explanation of the position that would follow from the classical liberal, radical, and modern liberal theoretical perspectives for your specific policy.
3. The position preferences related to one political party associated with one of the economic theoretical perspectives. For example, the Democratic Party is most closely linked to a modern liberal or to a radical theoretical perspective, while the Republican Party might be most closely linked to the classical liberal perspective. This section should include an explanation of your rationale for linking the particular party you selected with the theoretical perspective you have chosen. You should also note similarities and differences between the theoretical perspective and the party position related to your policy. Does the party follow a particular perspective, or does it combine elements of the perspectives?
The briefing paper should accurately describe the contesting views of appropriate economic policy. In this paper, you should not express a personal preference for a specific policy. We will leave the choice of policy outcomes to the elected officials for whom you are preparing this report. Your goal is to both provide the members with concise, accurate summaries of the key theoretical arguments related to a specific policy, and to demonstrate how one perspective gets translated into a political party’s policy position.
You are writing sections of the paper that explain how proponents of each theory would view the policy being analyzed. In describing the application of each theory to the policy, you should put yourself in the position of someone who supports the theory. So, for the classic liberal section, you should explain not only how the theory applies, but why proponents of the theory think their view is best. For example, classic liberals argue that their principles will produce the best economic outcomes. You should make that case, even if you disagree with it.
Your paper should have the following sections:
I. Introduction: Provide a preview of the contents of the paper.
II. Policy Description:
1. Public problem the policy addresses (don’t mention the policy yet)
2. Policy description
III. Classic Liberal Approach
1. Overview of classic liberalism
2. Classic liberal approach to the policy problem
3. Classic liberal view of the policy
IV. Radical Approach
1. Overview of radicalism
2. Radical approach to the policy problem
3. Classic liberal view of the policy
V. Modern Liberal Approach
1. Overview of modern liberalism
2. Modern liberal approach to the policy problem
3. Modern liberal view of the policy
VI. Policy Recommendation
Based on the above analyses, what would you recommend with respect to the policy? Continue, revise, or repeal?
VII. Conclusion: Provide a summary of the contents of the paper.
If you offer your opinion of the theories, make sure you do so based on evidence. Don’t praise or denigrate the theories using inflammatory language. Your assessment should be logical, not emotional. The sources used for each perspective need to be from scholars from that view.