Which of the following is a policy claim?
The death penalty does not deter crime.
Capital punishment is unjust.
The death penalty should be abolished in Illinois.
The death penalty is an example Mosaic Law.
The correct answer and explanation is:
The correct answer is: The death penalty should be abolished in Illinois.
A policy claim advocates for a specific course of action, typically addressing what should or should not be done. In this case, the claim “The death penalty should be abolished in Illinois” is a clear example of a policy claim because it suggests a specific action—abolishing the death penalty in a particular jurisdiction.
Here’s why this is a policy claim:
- Action-Oriented: It calls for a change in the law or a policy (abolition of the death penalty).
- Future-Oriented: Policy claims are often forward-looking and suggest what should happen in the future.
- Specific: It focuses on a particular location (Illinois), which makes it more focused and actionable.
On the other hand, the other options are not policy claims:
- The death penalty does not deter crime: This is a claim about cause and effect, which is more of an evaluative or factual claim. It’s trying to prove or disprove a specific relationship but does not suggest any specific action.
- Capital punishment is unjust: This is a value claim, as it involves a judgment about the morality of the death penalty, without suggesting what should be done about it.
- The death penalty is an example of Mosaic Law: This is a definition or historical claim, explaining what the death penalty represents within a certain context, but not advocating for any action.
Policy claims are central to debates around issues like legislation and reform, as they advocate for changes in the way society organizes its laws or policies. In this case, abolishing the death penalty in Illinois is a clear call for policy change, which distinguishes it from other types of claims.