Part Three: Discussion

Describe the debate. What are the relevant parties (stakeholders, the public, the media, etc.) saying about the problem? What issues have dominated in the discussion of the issue? Identify the most prominent options that have been proposed for addressing the problem.

Narrow down your discussion to two of the proposals that are being talked about by relevant stakeholder groups in the media and describe them in more detail. If either proposal departs significantly from the status quo, discuss how it differs from the existing policy.
Which option is preferable to the majority of stakeholders?
Does that proposal hold government accountable for resolving the problem?
Does that proposal address the disparate impact of the problem on certain groups?
Can the proposed option be implemented? (Take into consideration cost, the likelihood of political opposition, and whether or not the proposed option would be effective at minimizing, if not eliminating the problem).
In your discussion:
Identify the challenges for decision makers attempting to address a policy shortcoming and improve outcomes. Your discussion should take into consideration the tension between politics, public pressure for change, fiscal realities, the rights of affected parties, as well as other factors you may identify.
Which solution is likely to prevail? This question is not about arguing in favor of Option A or Option B, but rather a consideration of how things are expected to play out, given the complexity of the situation, the stakeholders jockeying for influence over the outcome, and all of the other factors previously mentioned.

SAMPLE SOLUTION

Gun Control Discussion

Debate The Second Amendment enshrines the legal possession of firearms. One of the most divisive debates in the local politics relates to gun control. With each mass shooting, the antagonism grows between the two opposing sides of the argument. Those who advocate for stricter gun control raises the issue of safety particularly considering that about 88 out of 100 Americans have access to guns. They assert that the Second Amendment was meant for militias; that gun control regulations have always existed; that gun violence needs to stop; and that a good number of Americans support better gun restriction policies. The opponents of stricter gun control, on the other hand, argue that interfering with the right to possess firearms leave citizens at the mercies of heartless criminals and rogue police officers (Haider‐Markel & Joslyn, 2017). They insist that the Second Amendment safeguard citizen’s right…