Reference no: EM131728477 , Length: 5
Please help me revise the document "Senate Report". My TA said that "you have multiple grammatical errors, please reread your write-up and have someone else also read for clarity???????????????? establishing the debate section should focus on a description of the rule and the comments you are presenting??????????????? please clearly state comments from the organizations and whether they are for or against the rule, state your logic and whether they are for or against the rule for a competitive advantage".
There is also a document called "TA's Comment" attached below which is my paper with my TA's notation. Please revise my report according to his comments.Assignment # 4: Senate Report
When a government agency proposes a rule, there is an opportunity for interest groups to comment on the rule-usually, these comments are either in favor of the rule or against it.
Sometimes, however, comments may be more about government intervention - for example, they may argue against a rule because it does not go far enough. You are a mid-level staffer for a politically neutral senator, who has been tasked to select three substantive comments for, and three comments against, your rule.
For this assignment, you will discuss and evaluate the arguments presented in three comments from different interest groups on both sides of the rule proposal.
This assignment will be organized as a report to a neutral senator who is familiar with the rule making process but not familiar with this rule (or its comments) in particular. The report will be divided into:
? Introduction/Establishing the Debate: A brief summary of the rule and a brief description of the groups whose comments you will be reviewing. If groups are similar to each other, note in what ways. If the groups appear totally different at the surface, but share the same opinion on the proposal, address some deeper social concerns they may arguably share. Keep the discussion in the introduction to the interest groups only.
? Discussion of Three Comments For Intervention, supported by the comments from the various groups. In this section, you'll be answering, but are not limited to, the following questions:
o What are the arguments that these interest groups are making?
o What evidence, logical or factual, supports their argument?
o Are there less obvious motivations for these groups to speak out, such as seeking to create a competitive advantage or avoiding the costs of finding a product that matches their preferences?
o Are the concerns registered in the comments logical, viable, and geared toward the public?
? Discussion of Three Comments Against Intervention: Addressing the same questions as mentioned above, but with interest groups who are against government intervention.
The questions need to be responded to, but are not the limits to the assignment. Dependent upon the interest groups, they may be responding to a number of concerns against the rule or the proposing agency.
The most important element of this assignment is to be incredibly selective about the comments you will be discussing. Only comments from authoritative interest groups or well-respected community members should be considered.
? Final Recommendation: Based on the comments of both sides of interest groups, provide a sizable recommendation for or against government intervention, justifying it through the evidence provided in the previous two sections. The recommendation may be different from previous assignments.
Formatting:
? 5 pages, single-spaced, double spacing between paragraphs, (including the senatorial heading)
? Following standard senatorial reporting procedures in APA format (CMS optional)