Answer one question only
1. Is outside lobbying inherently less successful than inside lobbying? Discuss with reference to at least two case studies.
2. Access to EU institutions is biased in favour of business groups. Discuss.
3. Business actors are more successful than NGOs in influencing EU policy- making. Do you agree?
4. Why and under what conditions do interest groups lobby in coalition?
5. How effective have EU actions and measures been in alleviating existing biases in the system of interest intermediation?
6. How does salience affect lobbying in the EU?
Category: Political science
My topic is Did pan-arabism influence diplomatic outcomes in Egypt-Syria ?”
Is that Pan Arabism has not shown itelf all that powerful, judging by the divisions and ineffectivness in Egypt-Syria ?
to start by talking about the arab league, then develop abour egypt, then syria and then develop the relationship between Nassar and Syria.
In a discussion about the distribution and use of Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19 during the Democracy Now segment, Amy Goodman asks Achal Prabhala, “who profits, who gets access, and how important is this drug? How does Prabhala respond? What are the parallels between access to Remdesivir and access to COVID-19 vaccines?
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapter 11 (Provided)
Week 7 Lesson (Provided)
Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)
Initial Post Instructions
Agenda setting can be a difficult task in government. Why? Who do you consider an important agenda-setter in government? How does this participant help set the agenda? Give an example of an attempt at agenda-setting in government. Was it successful? Why or why not? Consider how factors such as culture, political positions, etc., might impact your own or the agenda-setters’ priorities.
Use evidence (cite sources) to support your response from assigned readings or online lessons and at least one outside scholarly source.
Instructions
You are a lobbyist for an issue that you find important. For example, you would like to see the banning of smoking in federal buildings (Note: This policy has already been enacted.) You are going to make an informational pamphlet to highlight your points to prominent members of Congress. Research members of Congress that you will target in your lobbying. Explain why these members are critical to your goal. Make a plan of action and produce a pamphlet supporting your cause. Who will you be reaching out to? Why? Write a cover letter to a Congressional member and include your reasoning for reaching out to them in particular in the letter. Remember a lobbyist is only as good as the information they provide. A lobbyist who provides incomplete or unreliable information will soon be unemployed, or lose access to officials.
Cover letter should:
Follow a standard business format
Correctly address your Congressperson
Use the correct postal address
Explain your choice to write to this representative in particular, and provide your pamphlet. For example, maybe your research showed that this representative sponsored legislation on this issue in the past. Pamphlet should:
Define the problem. Tells us exactly what the problem is. Detail its urgency and provide data. Be objective.
Analyze the problem. Provide relevant data. Tell us how to make sense of the data. Provide any findings
Offer a recommendation. Do not generalize. Be specific.
Must be persuasive.
Cite four scholarly sources (Minimum of 4 scholarly sources in addition to the textbook)
Imagine you are a political writer with your own blog. You write about current events and what they mean for the U.S. government and its citizens. For this blog post you will choose an event from the last three months involving U.S. political issues or policies related to one of the following:
The U.S. President.
Congress.
Administrative departments.
Political activists.
Judicial rulings.
A campaign.
An election.
Next, choose one reputable news source that has reported on your chosen event. Be sure it is a news source that offers well-written and well-researched news. It is recommended that you choose from one of the following news sources:
Liberal leaning news: The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, Vox, HuffPost, Politico, CNN, Time Magazine.
Conservative leaning news: National Review, The Washington Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Federalist, Fox Online News, Washington Examiner.
Centrist News: NPR Online News (National Public Radio), Reuters, BBC, CNBC News, USA Today, Christian Science Monitor, Pew Research Center.
To see ratings of news sources, visit Media Bias Ratings.
For the first part of your blog post, provide a brief summary of your chosen current event. You should be conscious of your own bias and make every effort to avoid biased, opinionated, emotional, or judgmental language in this summary. That means avoiding words such as always, obviously, clearly, etc.
This PDF contains helpful tips for avoiding judgment statements: Objective Language [PDF].
In addition to providing a brief summary of your chosen current event, your blog post should answer each of the following questions:
What specific branch of the U.S. government is involved in this current event?
Who or which groups are affected by this event?
What biases or leanings exist in the media source you chose? Give examples. Were these counterbalanced in any way?
What are your opinions on the issue?
Your blog post should be typed in a Word document and meet the following requirements:
A one- to two-paragraph summary of your chosen current event.
One to two paragraphs for each of the four questions provided (see above), for a total of at least four paragraphs.
Content of the blog is based on information from your selected news source or other reputable sources.
Two pages in length.
At least one quality reference (your selected news article) cited using the Strayer Writing Standard
Activity: A Policy You Would Change
This brief activity will serve as preparation for your last assignment, which is due next week.
If you could change any U.S. domestic policy today, what would it be? For this activity, choose a policy you would like to change, submit a brief explanation of the policy you would like to change, and identify three references to support this policy change. This is the same policy you will use to write your Final Reflection assignment (due next week).
Your policy choice will need to be approved by your instructor before you begin your Final Reflection assignment. Approval will be provided through your rubric score for this activity, after it has been submitted. If your policy and/or references are not approved you will need to read the instructor feedback and provide an updated policy and/or references to be approved before submitting your final assignment.
Here are just a few examples of domestic public policies to choose from:
Energy.
The environment.
Health care.
Social welfare.
Civil rights.
Death penalty.
Gun control.
Taxation.
Assisted suicide.
Affirmative action.
Minimum wage.
Drug legalization.
Immigration.
Hate crimes.
Capital punishment.
After selecting a policy you would change, identify references to support the policy change. Using skills you have learned previously in the course, search for articles from reputable sources that support your views, illustrate the severity or urgency of the need for change, discuss current events that make you think about the seriousness of the issue, etc. Remember to review the news sources provided earlier in the course and ensure any references selected outside of that list are reliable.
For your submission, create a Word document with your chosen policy and provide one short paragraph explaining why that is a policy you would like to change. Also include three references to support your policy change. This does not need to be formatted in SWS but will need to be formatted that way for the final assignment.
The structure of power in the international system is almost always too ambiguous or uncertain to explain why war starts, how it proceeds, and why it ends. We gain more leverage over understanding state behavior and international outcomes by looking exclusively within states themselves, at their leaders and/or institutional structure. Do you agree? Why or why not? Discuss with extensive reference to course material.
PETERSON’S POLITICAL ECONOMIC STRUCTURALISM AND STONE’S URBAN REGIME ANALYSIS
Summarize the main features of both theories. What does each look at (independent variables) to explain urban policy decisionmaking (dependent variables)? What else does each theory say is important for understanding urban politics?
Features and flaws in both theories. What does the theory illustrate about urban life well? What does it miss? You may wish to think of this as what do you think of the utility of each theory: how useful is it for understanding, explaining, and predicting real world events?
For your critique you should review the authors readings where they have presenting their ideas (of course). But also review the readings from Week 3 which provide additional perspectives on these theories from other sources. You shouldn’t need any outside resources for this paper – just the 7 readings assigned thus far, so you won’t need a Works Cited page for this paper, but you should still use APA or MLA citations in the paper when you are quoting, paraphrasing, or drawing on a reading and presenting ideas which are not your own.
ONLY USE THE SOURCES LISTED BELOW
Paul E. Peterson, 1981. “The interests of the limited city.” excerpt from City Limits. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
(Optional: Charles Tiebout, 1956. “A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures.” The Journal of Political Economy, Vol 64. No. 5, pp. 416-424.)
Regime theory approach
Clarence Stone, 2006. “Power and Governance in American Cities.” chapter from City, Politics and Policy, edited by John Pelissaro.
John Mollenkopf, 1994. “How to Study Urban Power.” from A Phoenix in the Ashes. This excerpt taken from The Urban Politics Reader.
Browning, Marshall, and Tabb, 2003. “Introduction – Can people of color achieve equality in city government?” from Racial Politics in American Cities, 3rd Edition, edited by Browning Marshall and Tabb. Longman: New York.
Mollenkopf, 2003. “New York: Still the Great Anomaly.” chapter from Racial Politics in American Cities, 3rd Edition.
Please Read the Attached Reading ( Second Treatise, Ch. 1-11; 14; 18-19) then do the following:
Please make a post offering at least two thoughtful and substantive questions, reflections, or comments (QRCs) inspired by the material below.
– At least one QRC must explicitly identify a passage( quote a passage and then respond to it) from the reading attached that you found intriguing, confusing, enlightening, etc. to lift up for consideration. You should quote the passage in full in your post along with a clear citation so others can easily find it in the text, and briefly explain your reasons for highlighting this passage this can come in the form of substantive questions about, interpretations of, or challenges to the ideas expressed in the passage.
For the second QRC, you may choose to lift up another passage, but you are not required to do so. Instead you may choose to offer a more general question about the ideas under consideration, a reaction to the podcast lecture, an argument you are trying to work out, or a connection you have made, or events in the world. In other words, each paper should have two clearly distinct QRCs, at least one of which lifts up a passage from the text.