Please recall that neither political candidates nor scholars can defend a mistaken position by claiming they did know about available research or ideas. Ignorance is a failure, not a defense.

1. What are the most important alternative ways to define the key issue, taking into account basic positions that are at odds, as represented by politicians, by advocacy groups, and in the media?
2. List the most important empirical assumptions and claims relevant to this issue;
• For each claim, indicate what supporting evidence you can find and what evidence against. This must go beyond the required readings; you should briefly indicate appropriate sources for the evidence(ie., cite).
3. List the most important moral assumptions and claims relevant to this issue;
• For each, indicate what evidence you can find about the distribution of support for these moral positions. This must go beyond the required readings; you should briefly indicate appropriate sources for the evidence(ie., cite).
4. Construct a table listing all the relevant empirical and moral claims (down the left hand side) and the competing positions on the issue (along the top), showing which positions accept, reject, or ignore each claim (in the cells).
5. List the categories of people, organizations, or the like whose positions on this issue matter. Indicate which position you expect them to support and a credible source of evidence for this expectation. (If some characteristic such as education or age or geographical region makes a difference, then your categories of people will include such distinctions, e.g. college educated vs. the less educated.)
6. Briefly state what causes the issue to be so divisive or so difficult to resolve.
7. Indicate briefly how the history of the issue or international comparisons show us something important about the roots of the issue and the possibilities for resolving it.