Answer the six questions below with 5-6 pages: The link below should work for book! Let me know if you're not interested.
(Note: Refer to Review Question 8 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 1-3. Select two (2) editorials / essays / columns (by staff or freelance writers) on a current issue of public policy from two (2) different publications (large metropolitan or national newspaper such as Washington Post or the New York Times or national magazines such as Newsweek, Time, and The New Republic.) .
Public Policy Analysis book link is : https://strayer.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781317344834/cfi/6/2!/4/2/2/2@0:25.0
1. Apply the procedures for argumentation analysis (located in Chapter 8) to display contending positions and underlying assumptions for the content of Review Question 8.
2. Rate the assumptions and plot them according to their plausibility and importance. (Refer to Figure 3.16, "Distribution of warrant by plausibility and importance.")
3. Determine which arguments are the most plausible. Provide a rationale for your views.
(Note: Refer to Demonstration Exercise 1 located at the end of Chapter 3 for criteria 4-6. Examine Box 3.0 - Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis. Choose one of the following policy issues in the U.S. gun control, illegal drugs, medical insurance fraud, and environmental protection of waterways, job creation, affordable health care, or Medicare.)
4. Apply the procedures for stakeholder analysis presented in Box 3.0 "Conducting a Stakeholder Analysis" to generate a list of at least five to ten (5-10) stakeholders who affect or are affected by problems in the issue area chosen for analysis. (Note: Refer to page 111 of the textbook for a step-by-step process on stakeholder analysis.)
5. After creating a cumulative frequency distribution from the list, discuss new ideas generated by each stakeholder. (Note: The ideas may be objectives, alternatives, outcomes causes, etc.; ideas should not be duplicates.)
6. Write an analysis of the results of the frequency distribution that answers the following questions: (a) Does the line graph flatten out? (b) If so, after how many stakeholders? (c) What conclusions can be drawn about the policy problems in the issue area? (Note: Compare your work with Case Study 3.1 at the end of the chapter.)
7. Include at least two (2) peer-reviewed references (no more than five  years old) from material outside the textbook to support your views. Note: Appropriate peer-reviewed references include scholarly articles and governmental Websites. Do not use open source Websites such as Wikipedia, Sparknotes.com, Ask.com, and similar Websites are not acceptable resources.
The response addressed the query is posted in 1458 words with APA References.
//This assessment is based on the editorials on the chosen current issue of public policy that is 'Environmental Protection of Waterways' in order to key out the arguments to display contending positions along with underlying assumptions. In particular to the chosen current public policy issue and relevant editorials, brief introduction of the key focus of the argument and the outline for the same is reflected as below.//
Water pollution is one of the critical current issues of public policy as pollutants in the water through industrial wastage and personal care products' wastage have largely increased. The pollution of waterways is the major issue for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to prevent high level of contamination in the purity of water on Earth. The current issue of public policy chosen from the New York Times and Newsweek is 'Environmental Protection of Waterways' in order to present argumentation analysis to state contending positions and underlying assumptions. In addition to this, after reading the chosen editorials on the current issue of waterways, plausibility and importance of the identified assumptions have been rated with respect to the four dimensions exhibited in figure 3.16. Lastly, the arguments that are the most plausible are mentioned.
//This argumentation analysis presents various arguments generalised from the reading of editorials about the environmental protection of waterways. Each argument presented under is inferred from a specific article. For each argument, position and underlying assumptions have been specified.
1 Argumentation Analysis: Contending Position and Underlying Assumptions
First Argument: Contamination of drugs and other related pollutants in water is harming the environment and well-being of humans drastically.
Position: As per my own perspective, I favour this argument because contamination in the water is found at the extensive level due to off residues of pharmaceuticals (painkillers, antidepressants and insecticides) and other products like plastic bottles and polyethylene thrown in the waterways. Such leftovers in the waterways directly harm purity and inherent quality of water, and are harmful to the human (Dean, 2007).
Underlying Assumptions: On the basis of the editorial reading by Dean (2007) 'Durgs are in the water. Does it Matter?,' underlying assumptions in support of the position are exhibited as below:
1.1 Increased rate of emerging contaminants in the waterways are found in the substances of pharmaceutical and personal care products that ...
The expert examines public policy analysis and planning. The response addressed the query is posted in 1458 words with APA References.