All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Teaching American Political Institutions Using Role-playing Simulations
Unformatted Document Text:  31 APPENDIX 1: CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE SIMULATION SUPPORTING MATERIAL Simulation Instructions Group 1: Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science and Space Instructions: Your subcommittee is considering a bill that would ban embryonic stem cell research (see attached). You will receive testimony today from 5 interest groups (see witness list below). Following the conclusion of their testimony, you will deliberate for 5-10 minutes in open session about the bill and either vote the bill up or down or decide to set it aside for another day (i.e., ―table‖ the bill). During the initial phase of the simulation, the interest groups will have 20 minutes to discuss the issues raised in the testimony that they have been given and to develop their own statement. During this time, you should decide which senator you want to play and read the attached profile. You may also want to familiarize yourself with the issue of stem cell research more generally. I have attached a policy paper prepared by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan congressional office that prepares policy and research briefs for members of Congress and their staff. Finally, you may want to ―caucus‖ with the other members of your party prior to the start of the hearing to decide if you want to take a unified stance on one bill or the other. At the end of the 20 minutes, the ―witnesses‖ from each interest group will have up to 3 minutes to deliver their statements to your committee. After we have heard from all of the groups, you will have an opportunity to ask up to two questions of each group. At the end of the questioning period, you will immediately turn to your deliberation and conclude with a vote on the legislation. Depending on how much interest there is in this topic, we may continue the simulation in two weeks in greater detail when we discuss Congress. (Note: you should run this as a ―real‖ Senate hearing, with the chairwoman in charge of the day’s session. Angelo will act as parliamentarian to help with the formalities of Senate procedure.) Roles: Majority Minority Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Chair Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), Ranking Member Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV) Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT) Senator Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND) Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) Senator John Ensign (R-NV) Issues to consider: (1) As you listen to the testimony, think about your own constituents and whether or not the arguments that are raised pertain to them. (2) How much should ideology influence your decision? (3) How much should your partisan affiliation influence your decision? (4) Are you up for reelection? Does it matter? (5) Is there anything in your senator’s own personal background that would make him or her more receptive to one interest or another? (6) Think critically about the arguments that are being made by each interest group. How do they frame the issue? What interests do they represent? What aren’t they saying in their testimony?

Authors: Gonzales, Angelo.
first   previous   Page 31 of 49   next   last



background image
31
APPENDIX 1: CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE SIMULATION SUPPORTING
MATERIAL

Simulation Instructions
Group 1: Senate Commerce Subcommittee on Science and Space
Instructions: Your subcommittee is considering a bill that would ban embryonic stem cell research (see
attached). You will receive testimony today from 5 interest groups (see witness list below). Following
the conclusion of their testimony, you will deliberate for 5-10 minutes in open session about the bill and
either vote the bill up or down or decide to set it aside for another day (i.e., ―table‖ the bill).

During the initial phase of the simulation, the interest groups will have 20 minutes to discuss the issues
raised in the testimony that they have been given and to develop their own statement. During this time,
you should decide which senator you want to play and read the attached profile. You may also want to
familiarize yourself with the issue of stem cell research more generally. I have attached a policy paper
prepared by the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan congressional office that prepares policy
and research briefs for members of Congress and their staff. Finally, you may want to ―caucus‖ with the
other members of your party prior to the start of the hearing to decide if you want to take a unified stance
on one bill or the other.

At the end of the 20 minutes, the ―witnesses‖ from each interest group will have up to 3 minutes to
deliver their statements to your committee. After we have heard from all of the groups, you will have an
opportunity to ask up to two questions of each group. At the end of the questioning period, you will
immediately turn to your deliberation and conclude with a vote on the legislation. Depending on how
much interest there is in this topic, we may continue the simulation in two weeks in greater detail when
we discuss Congress. (Note: you should run this as a ―real‖ Senate hearing, with the chairwoman in
charge of the day’s session. Angelo will act as parliamentarian to help with the formalities of Senate
procedure.)

Roles:
Majority
Minority
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Chair
Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), Ranking Member
Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK)
Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (D-WV)
Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT)
Senator Byron L. Dorgan (D-ND)
Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
Senator John Ensign (R-NV)

Issues to consider:
(1) As you listen to the testimony, think about your own constituents and whether or not the arguments
that are raised pertain to them.
(2) How much should ideology influence your decision?
(3) How much should your partisan affiliation influence your decision?
(4) Are you up for reelection? Does it matter?
(5) Is there anything in your senator’s own personal background that would make him or her more
receptive to one interest or another?
(6) Think critically about the arguments that are being made by each interest group. How do they frame
the issue? What interests do they represent? What aren’t they saying in their testimony?


Convention
All Academic Convention makes running your annual conference simple and cost effective. It is your online solution for abstract management, peer review, and scheduling for your annual meeting or convention.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 31 of 49   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.