|
'Citizen Choice' Software for Evaluating Candidate Platforms
Description and Features
This application will enable
citizens to evaluate candidates for political offices. As with all of
these applications, it is structured according to our "Method for Analysis
and Evaluation." In Part I, citizens will evaluate the content and
sources of the candidate's public philosophy.
In Part II, they will evaluate how effectively the candidate's platform enhances
the well-being of individuals, social groups, and the environment. If the
candidate or the user espouses beliefs regarding the cosmos as a whole, and if
these beliefs shape their political views, users may also evaluate the impact of
the platform on this most inclusive level of organization. In Part III,
users will evaluate the degree to which the candidate recognizes relationships
between different policies within the party's platform. For example, they
will evaluate how effectively the candidate is able to weave different policies
into wider strategies that address some social issue or problem. They may
also evaluate how well the policies complement one another, that is, the degree
to which the goals of different policies are consistent and compatible. In
addition, they can assess the scope of the platform in this section. For
instance, they may determine whether or not the platform addresses all issues
that merit some response from the government. They may also determine
whether or not some of the policies overstep the legitimate role of government
in responding to issues and problems.
In Part IV, users will evaluate the influence of various factors that shape the
candidate's platform. For example, they will assess the degree to which
the platform reflects the views and values set forth in the candidate's public
philosophy. They will also determine whether or not these influences shape
the platform in ways that promote the public good. Some of these
influences may include the candidate's public philosophy, the views of members
of the candidate's political party, public opinion in general, as well as the
interests of donors that provide financial support to the candidate.
This section on evaluating influences is placed after the impact evaluation
because it is possible to evaluate the influences on a platform only after one
has evaluated the platform itself. For example, if one or more policies
within a platform are influenced by environmental organizations, then the
influence of these organizations on the policies (and on the platform as a
whole) can only be evaluated after one has evaluated the likely impact of
these policies on the common good.
In Part V, they will evaluate the competence and character of the candidate.
Because candidates must work closely with members of their
own party as they pursue their policy agendas, we have also included in this
section some questions that evaluate the leadership and character of their party
as well. This is the final section because a thorough evaluation of a
candidate's competence, leadership, and character can be conducted only after
citizens have analyzed their public philosophy, their platform, and the ways in
which they have managed the various influences that shape their platform.
For example, a candidate's leadership and character may be called into question
if they have allowed special interests to influence their platform in ways that
are harmful to the welfare of society as a whole.
As with the other applications, each part of this program contains
sections of our framework followed by sets of questions. For
example, in Part II of the application, we provide the sections of our framework
that explore the impact of a candidate's platform on individuals, social groups,
and the environment. One section addresses the impact of the platform on
social institutions. After that section, we list questions that ask the
user to evaluate the impact that the platform is likely to have on the effective
and ethical functioning of various types of institutions. Users will
respond to each question using numerical ratings. Thus, on a scale from
one to four, they will rate the impact of the candidate's platform on various
institutions, such as families, business firms, and government agencies.
As they use this application, users may find it helpful to review the 'Candidate
Profile' that a particular candidate has submitted to our web site (see Application
1) or the 'Candidate Web' that they themselves have created using our
application for understanding candidates (see Application 5).
When the user is finished responding to all of the questions, a simple
statistical program would calculate the average score or rating for each major
section of the application and report these average scores on a separate Decision
Summary Page. Users could then review the average score for each section as
they make their final evaluation of a candidate. A copy of this Summary Page --
or a copy of the entire evaluation -- could be printed or downloaded for future
reference.
The software would contain a simple database that would enable users to
compare their average ratings of different candidates. On the basis of
these comparisons users may decide which candidate to support.
A database on the PEAC web site could enable to users to compare
their evaluations of a particular candidate with evaluations of the
same candidate conducted by other PEAC members. They could
compare their scores with the average scores of groups of members who share any
characteristic or affiliation that they report in their member profiles.
For example, they could compare their average ratings with average ratings
submitted by others of the same gender or political party. They may also
compare their scores with the average scores of all others who have used the
software on our site.
CURRICULUM NOTE: In the 'Dialogue in the Public Square' Curriculum,
students may use this application to evaluate actual candidates as well as
students who are promoting their own mock candidacy for some office as part of a
class exercise. If students do not have access to computers, they may
complete this exercise using worksheets that we will include in our printed
resources.
Part I: Evaluating The Candidate's Public Philosophy
The text from the introduction to Part I of our "Method for
Political Analysis" will be presented here. It will be followed by
the questions below.
I. Composition of the Candidate's Public Philosophy
The text from the introduction to Part I, section I of our "Method for
Political Analysis" will be presented here. It will be followed by
the questions below.
A. Basic World View: Understanding of Human Nature, Society, the Environment,
and the Cosmos
The text from Part I, section I.A of our "Method for
Political Analysis" will be presented here. It will be followed by
the questions below.
| Click on
the box underneath the response that best represents your assessment of
the following statements: |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of human nature. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of society. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of relationships between
nations. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of relationships between
nations and international institutions. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of the environment. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of the cosmos as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate assumes a
clear, consistent, and accurate understanding of relationships between the
different levels of organization. |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Values and Principles for Promoting Individual Development, Social
Progress, Environmental Stewardship, and Cosmic Patterns of Change and
Development
The text from Part I, section I.B of our "Method for
Political Analysis" will be presented here. It will be followed by
the questions below.
| Click on
the box underneath the response that best represents your assessment of
the following statements: |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate expresses a
clear, consistent, and sound set of values and principles for promoting
individual development. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate expresses a
clear, consistent, and sound set of values and principles for promoting
social progress within your community, state, or nation. |
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate sets forth
some idea of an international order* in the global community of nations
which is based on shared values, interests, and principles.
* An 'international order' is a basic understanding of how
nations should relate to one another. These relationships should be
guided by a set of values, interests, and principles. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate clarifies the
values, interests, and principles that should govern this order.
These include principles for preventing international conflicts and for
dealing with conflicts that do arise. |
|
|
|
|
|
| These values, principles,
and interests will most likely promote the global common good. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate clarifies the
roles of your nation as well as other nations within this international
order. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate expresses a
clear, consistent, and sound set of values and principles for the role of
international institutions within this order. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate expresses a
clear, consistent, and sound set of values and principles for promoting
constructive patterns of cosmic change or development. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate expresses a
clear, consistent, and sound set of values and principles for promoting
constructive relationships between different levels of organization. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate espouses
constructive principles or images that represent the overall goal of
domestic policies. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate espouses
constructive principles or images that represent the overall goal of
foreign policies. |
|
|
|
|
|
C. More Specific Values and Principles that Apply to Particular Areas
of Public Policy
Does the candidate identify more specific values and principles that apply to
particular areas of domestic policy?
| Click on
the box underneath the response that best represents your assessment of
the following statements: |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate espouses a
sound set of values and principles that apply to the following specific
areas of domestic and foreign policy: |
|
|
|
|
|
| list policies in
Application 6, Part II |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Principles for Dealing with Trade-Offs Between the Costs and
Benefits of Public Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
| The candidate espouses a
clear and reasonable set of principles for evaluating trade-offs between
the costs and benefits of policies. |
|
|
|
|
E. Principles for Reviewing and
Revising Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
| The candidate espouses a
sound set of principles and methods for reviewing and revising public
policies. |
|
|
|
|
F. Historical Perspectives: Reading 'The Signs of the Times'
1. The Candidate's Interpretation of Historical Trends
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate accurately
identifies a comprehensive set of historical trends that are relevant to
contemporary public life. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. The Candidate's Visions for the Future
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate sets forth
compelling visions for the future development of various aspects of social
life (economics, politics, education, technology, etc.). |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate sets forth
compelling visions for the future of society as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. The Candidate's Understanding of their Personal Mission as Public
Servants
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate explains how
they, as public servants, will contribute to the realization of their
visions for the future. |
|
|
|
|
|
G. Ideals for Participation in Public Life
1. Ideals for Public Leaders
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate highlights key
areas of competence and personal qualities that public leaders should
possess. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Ideals for Groups and Individual Citizens
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
a) Ideals for Responsible Citizenship
The candidate describes key
values and principles for responsible citizenship. |
|
|
|
|
|
b) Ideals for Dialogue in the Public Square
The candidate proposes
strategies for encouraging citizen participation in public life. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The candidate offers
standards for effective and ethical communication in the public square. |
|
|
|
|
|
c) Ideals for Influencing Public Policy
The candidate articulates principles for influencing policies in an ethical
way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Ideals Related to the Character of Your Community or Nation as a
Whole
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate identifies traits and virtues that should represent the
character of your nation or community as a whole. |
|
|
|
|
|
II. Sources of the Candidate's Public Philosophy
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's public
philosophy draws from a variety of sources, including at least the
following: political theory, the human and natural sciences, historical
studies, and ethical theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
Part
II: Evaluating the Likely Impact of the Candidate's Platform
Domestic Focus
I.
Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Domestic Policy Platform on Individuals
The text from the introduction to this
section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here.
A. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Domestic Platform on the Different Dimensions
of an Individual's Personality and Lifestyle
The text from section I.A
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here, followed by the response box below.
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's domestic policy platform on the
following dimensions of individuals' personalities and lifestyles?
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3) |
Fair
(2) |
Poor
(1) |
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
Physical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relational |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intellectual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vocational/Economic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cultural |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Artistic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moral |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spiritual |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of the Developmental Nature of the
Human Person
The text from section I.B-C
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the response box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's domestic
platform recognizes the developmental nature of the human person.
More specifically, it understands that personal liberty and fulfillment
are developmental achievements. |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Analyzing the Impact
of the Candidate's Domestic Platform on the Exercise of Human Rights
The text from section I.D
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the response boxes below.
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's domestic platform on the ability
of individuals to exercise the following types of human rights?
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3) |
Fair
(2) |
Poor
(1) |
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
economic and physical rights
(rights to bodily safety and
fitness, to clean water, to affordable food, housing, and medical care; to adequate vocational
education and training; to a just wage for one's labor; to start a business; and to own
property; also include rights to food, shelter, and health
care if one is unable to work due to personal disability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
civil
rights
(freedom from discrimination on the basis of one's
creed,
race, ethnicity, or gender) |
|
|
|
|
|
political rights
(rights to civic education,
to peaceful public assembly, to form and participate in political associations,
to vote, and to petition the government)
|
|
|
|
|
|
juridical rights
(rights to fair and just treatment from law enforcement agencies and courts;
examples include the rights to due process of law, to trial by a
jury of one's peers, to representation in court, to protection from illegal
search and seizure, and to protection cruel and unusual punishment)
|
|
|
|
|
|
broader
social rights
(the freedom marry and establish a family and the right to form and participate in religious and civic institutions
of all kinds)
|
|
|
|
|
|
cultural rights
(the freedom to express the
customs and values of one's culture; also include the right to learn
about the historical and philosophical foundations of one's culture as well as
its modes of artistic expression) |
|
|
|
|
|
expressive rights
(the
ability of citizens to share their views in the public square;
include the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and the right to
artistic expression) |
|
|
|
|
|
rights
to education
(right to a level of education that enables individuals to form a coherent world
view; also include the
educational dimension of the economic, political, and cultural rights described
above) |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of Relationships between Rights
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's domestic
platform reflects an accurate understanding of the relationships between
human rights in the dynamics of human development. |
|
|
|
|
|
E. Evaluating the Platform's Integration of Rights and Responsibilities
The text from section I.E
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the response box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's domestic
platform empowers individuals to assume their responsibilities as
well as exercise their rights. |
|
|
|
|
|
F. Evaluating the Platform's Integration of Personal Initiative and
Social Support
The text from section I.F
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the response box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's domestic
platform acknowledges the roles played by both personal initiative
and social support in the process of personal growth. |
|
|
|
|
|
II. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Domestic Policy Platform on the Social Level
of Organization
The text from the introduction to section II
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here.
A.
The Impact of the Candidate's Domestic Platform on Social Institutions
The text from section II.A
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the question box below.
| How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
domestic platform on the effective and ethical functioning of the following
institutions: |
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
|
Families
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schools: primary, secondary, vocational, higher education
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Firms
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade associations that represent the interests of
business firms that produce similar goods and services |
|
|
|
|
|
Labor unions |
|
|
|
|
|
Churches
|
|
|
|
|
|
Civic Organizations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonprofit charitable organizations that serve those in need
such as the poor, the elderly, at-risk youth
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institutions that support the arts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonprofit social justice groups that promote economic justice, political
justice, ecological stewardship, and human rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advocacy Groups that represent the interests of groups such as the elderly, gun
rights supporters, minority groups, consumers, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Media organizations (TV networks, radio stations; newspaper and
magazine publishers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) Special Institutional Focus on Governments*
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1)
Rule of Law
The candidate's domestic
platform helps government institutions to establish and maintain the rule
of law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) Clarity of Mission
The candidate's domestic
platform helps government institutions to maintain a clear and consistent
understanding of their missions. |
|
|
|
|
|
3) Standards of
Excellence
The platform promotes standards of excellence in policymaking
and citizenship. |
|
|
|
|
|
4) Constructive Relationships
The platform promotes civil and constructive
relationships between government officials, between political parties,
between government organizations of all types, between citizens, and
between citizens and their leaders. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform
promotes constructive relationships between different national
governments |
|
|
|
|
|
5) Inclusiveness
The platform encourages governments to promote inclusiveness and
diversity regarding opportunities for all types of government service. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform encourages the use
of
inclusive decision-making processes that seek input from all groups
affected by specific decisions as well as the general public. In
other words, it promotes more democratic structures of government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform promotes policies that are
inclusive, i.e. that discourage all types of discrimination. |
|
|
|
|
|
6) Accountability
The platform supports codes of ethics for government officials. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform encourages governments to use transparent and inclusive decision-making
processes, thus allowing the public to hold governments accountable for their
decisions. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Overall, the platform discourages corruption in
government and makes governments more responsible to the needs and
interests of their citizens. |
|
|
|
|
|
7) Military Preparedness and National
Security
The platform enables national governments to
maintain a military force that is capable of defending the nation's security, interests, and
values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform enables your nation's government
to strike a balance between spending on military programs and those
programs that promote personal development, social progress, and
environmental protection. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform promotes a broad view of national
security that includes both military strength and social progress in your
nation and abroad. |
|
|
|
|
|
8)
Overall Promotion of the Common Good
In general, the domestic platform enhances the ability of governments to
enact and enforce legislation that promotes individual development, social
progress, and ecological stability. |
|
|
|
|
|
* If a candidate is running for local or state office, the focus is on
these levels of government. If the election is for a national office (i.e.
the U.S. Congress or the Presidency), then the focus includes all levels of
government, since all levels are affected by national policies.
B. The Impact of the Candidate's Domestic Platform on Social Sectors
The text from section II.B
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the question boxes below.
|
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
domestic platform on relationships
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
|
within
the market sector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
within
the state sector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
within
civil society?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the state and the market sectors?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the state sector and civil society?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the market sector and civil society?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the media and the three sectors?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between political parties and the state sector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
between government enterprises and the three
sectors?
|
|
|
|
|
C. The Impact of the Candidate's Domestic Platform on Different Levels of Social
Organization
The text from section II.C
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the questions below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's domestic platform recognizes the impact of public issues on all relevant
levels of social organization (i.e. local, state, national, international).
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform gives priority
to issues that affect higher levels of social
organization -- issues that impact many individuals and groups on lower levels. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform gives priority
to the impact of local issues on higher levels of social organization. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform encourages local initiative and responsibility in
responses to important social issues. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform encourages coordination on higher levels of administration
when this is necessary. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform encourages
constructive relationships between government leaders on different levels
of administration (local, state, national). |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform
applies the principle of subsidiarity to issues relating to family life. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform
applies the principle of subsidiarity to the market sector. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform
applies the principle of subsidiarity to civil society. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform preserves the integrity of
higher level social processes such as the market system and the
democratic process. That is, it prevents abuses of these
processes by
individuals and institutions on lower levels of organization. |
|
|
|
|
|
D. The Impact of the Candidate's Domestic
Platform on Socio-Cultural Collectivities
The text from section II.D
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the question box below.
The candidate's domestic platform
promotes equal opportunities for self-development* among persons of different:
* this includes discouraging discrimination against
individuals from different races, genders, etc. |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
Classes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Races
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ethnic Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nationalities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Religions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sexual orientations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Areas of residence (i.e. rural and urban)
|
|
|
|
|
|
III. Evaluating the Impact of
the Candidate's Domestic Platform on the Ecological Level of
Organization
The text from section III
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
A. Conservation
|
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
domestic platform on
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
endangered species?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
biodiversity?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wilderness areas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Sustainable Technologies and Lifestyles
|
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1. Sustainable Extraction of Raw Materials
The candidate's domestic platform
promotes ecologically sound practices of mining for metals, minerals, and
coal; and of
drilling for oil and gas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Sustainable Growth and Harvesting of Food and Forestry Products
The platform
promotes ecologically sound methods of farming, fishing, and forestry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Conservation of Natural Resources
The platform
promotes
the conservation of natural resources such as water, forest products, petroleum,
metals, and minerals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
Sustainable Manufacturing Technologies
The platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for manufacturing goods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.
Sustainable Energy Generation
The platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for generating energy. |
|
|
|
|
|
6.
Sustainable Design and Construction
The platform
promotes
the implementation of designs for construction and renovation that increase the
energy-efficiency of all types of buildings. |
|
|
|
|
|
7.
Energy-Efficiency of Electronic Devices
The platform
promotes
the development of appliances and other electronic devices that are more
energy-efficient. |
|
|
|
|
|
8. Sustainable Transportation Technology
The platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for transportation. |
|
|
|
|
|
9.
Population Control
The platform
encourages families to have fewer children so
that population growth may be reduced. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.
'Smart Growth' in Residential and Urban Development
The candidate's domestic platform promotes 'smart growth'
strategies for human communities. |
|
|
|
|
|
11.
Waste Management
The candidate's domestic platform promotes less polluting and more efficient methods of
waste management (strategies for recycling, toxic waste disposal). |
|
|
|
|
|
12.
Integration of Economic and Environmental Values
In general, the candidate strives to
integrate the goals of economic growth and ecological stewardship in his or her
domestic policy platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.
Addressing Global Environmental Issues on the Local, State, and
National Levels
The candidate's domestic platform addresses global environmental issues, such as climate change
and acid rain, through policies on the local, state,
and/or national levels. |
|
|
|
|
|
IV. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Domestic Platform on the Cosmic
Level of Organization
A. Evaluating the Candidate's Domestic Platform from the Perspective of
One's Own Cosmic
Views
The text from section IV.A
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the questions below.
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
domestic platform on the cosmic level of organization*?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
If you believe in a divine plan, your rating will indicate the degree to which
the platform furthers (or hinders) this plan. If you believe in a cosmic
system of divine justice, your rating will indicate how just the candidate's
domestic policies seem to be according to this system. If you espouse
universal laws or principles, your rating will indicate the degree to which the
candidate's domestic policies are consistent with these laws and principles.
|
B. Evaluating the Cosmic Views of Candidates
The text from section IV.B
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided
here, followed by the questions below.
Since many candidates maintain that cosmic beliefs should not influence one's
political views, you should only complete this section if the candidate attempts
to integrate cosmic beliefs into the policy goals of his or her platform.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
If the candidate espouses views about the cosmos as a whole,
and if these views influence their policy goals, these beliefs seem to influence
their domestic platform in ways that promote the common good. (Since these
beliefs are part of a candidate's public philosophy, see also the question in
Part IV that asks you to evaluate the ways in which a candidate's public
philosophy influences their platform.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cosmic views of the candidate influence their domestic
policy goals in ways that
are consistent with my nation's Constitution. In other words, the
candidate's domestic platform pursues cosmic religious goals that can be
'translated into' secular goals that are compatible with the government's mission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Evaluating a Candidate's Recognition of the Impact of
Their Domestic
Platform on All
Levels of Organization
The text from section V
of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate recognizes the effects of their domestic policies on all levels of organization
-- on individuals, social groups, the environment, and the
cosmos as a whole (if they espouse cosmic views that are relevant to their policy
goals).
|
|
|
|
|
VI. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of Relationships between Different
Levels of Organization
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate recognizes the impact of
their domestic
policies on relationships between different levels of organization.
|
|
|
|
|
VII. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of the Hierarchy of Value and Order
of Priority among the Different Levels of Organization
The text from section VI of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their domestic platform, the candidate
consistently recognizes a hierarchy of value or order or priority among the
different levels of organization. Policies that are relevant to higher,
more inclusive levels of organization are given a higher priority than policies
that are
relevant only to lower levels. Similarly, the candidate considers the impact of policies on higher
levels to be more important than their impact on lower levels.
|
|
|
|
|
VIII. Evaluating how the Candidate Balances Trade-Offs between the Costs and
Benefits of Domestic Policies
The text from section VII of
"The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
A. Trade-Offs between Short-Term Costs and Long-Term Benefits of
Domestic Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their domestic platform, the candidate is willing to
accept short-term costs for the sake of long-term benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
B. Recognizing that Those Who Bear the Short-Term Costs of Sound
Policies Often Realize Benefits in the Long-Term
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The policy illustrates how individuals and groups that bear the costs of sound
policies often
benefit from these policies in the long run, since these policies promote a
more stable, prosperous society and a healthier environment.
|
|
|
|
|
C. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Domestic Policies for Different Individuals
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The policy respects the principle that more privileged or powerful individuals may bear some costs
in order that less privileged or powerful individuals might be able to meet
their needs.
|
|
|
|
|
D. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Domestic Policies for Different Social Groups
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The policy supports the
principle that more privileged or powerful social groups may bear some costs in
order that less privileged or powerful social groups might be able to meet their
needs.
|
|
|
|
|
E. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Domestic Policies for Different Levels of Organization
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The policy's sponsors are willing to place
burdens on lower levels of organization for the benefit of higher levels of
organization if this is necessary in order to preserve the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The policy does not allow
social groups to exploit individuals and less powerful social groups in the
pursuit of their missions and interests.
|
|
|
|
|
F. Trade-Offs between Special Interests and the Common Good
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
If the desires of special interest groups are in conflict
with the needs of the common good, the policy supports
the needs of the common good over special interests.
|
|
|
|
|
G. Failures to Recognize the Trade-Offs
Associated with Domestic Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The sponsors recognize all of the trade-offs associated
with their policy.
|
|
|
|
|
IX. Evaluating the Candidate's Commitment to an 'Experimental Approach' to
Domestic Policy-Making
The text from section VIII of
"The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation" will be
provided here, followed by the question below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate expresses and demonstrates a commitment to
an ‘experimental approach’ to domestic policy-making.
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluating
the Impact of a Candidate's
Foreign Policy Platform
(as well as the Impact of a Candidate's Domestic Policies on Foreign Relations)
The text from Introduction
to the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here.
I. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Foreign Policy Platform on Individuals
The text from Introduction
to this section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be provided here.
A. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Foreign Policy Platform on the Different Dimensions
of the Human Person
The text from section I.A
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for
Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided here, followed by the
question box below.
|
In all nations affected by them, how do you rate the impact
of
the candidate's foreign
policies on the following dimensions of personal well-being and
development? |
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3) |
Fair
(2) |
Poor
(1) |
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
Physical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relational |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intellectual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vocational/Economic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cultural |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Artistic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moral |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spiritual |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of the Developmental Nature of the
Human Person
The text from section I.B-C
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for
Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided here, followed by the
question box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's foreign
policy platform recognizes the developmental nature of the human person.
More specifically, it understands that personal liberty and fulfillment
are developmental achievements. |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Evaluating the
Impact of Foreign Policies on the Exercise of Human Rights
The text from section I.D of
the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding
and Evaluation" will be provided here, followed by the question boxes
below.
In all nations affected by it, how do you rate the impact of the candidate's
foreign policy platform on the ability of individuals to exercise the following
types of human rights?
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3) |
Fair
(2) |
Poor
(1) |
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
economic and physical rights
(rights to bodily safety and
fitness, to clean water, to affordable food, housing, and medical care; to adequate vocational
education and training; to a just wage for one's labor; to start a business; and to own
property; also include rights to food, shelter, and health
care if one is unable to work due to personal disability)
|
|
|
|
|
|
civil
rights
(freedom from discrimination on the basis of one's creed,
race, ethnicity, or gender) |
|
|
|
|
|
political rights
(rights to civic education,
to peaceful public assembly, to form and participate in political associations,
to vote, and to petition the government)
|
|
|
|
|
|
juridical rights
(rights to fair and just treatment from law enforcement agencies and courts;
examples include the rights to due process of law, to trial by a
jury of one's peers, to representation in court, to protection from illegal
search and seizure, and to protection cruel and unusual punishment)
|
|
|
|
|
|
broader
social rights
(the freedom marry and establish a family and the right to form and participate in religious and civic institutions
of all kinds)
|
|
|
|
|
|
cultural rights
(the freedom to express the
customs and values of one's culture; also include the right to learn
about the historical and philosophical foundations of one's culture as well as
its modes of artistic expression) |
|
|
|
|
|
expressive rights
(the
ability of citizens to share their views in the public square;
include the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and the right to
artistic expression) |
|
|
|
|
|
rights
to education
(right to a level of education that enables individuals to form a coherent world
view; also include the
educational dimension of the economic, political, and cultural rights described
above) |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of Relationships between Rights
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| The candidate's foreign
policy platform reflects an accurate understanding of the relationships between
human rights in the dynamics of human development. |
|
|
|
|
|
E. Evaluating the Platform's Integration of Rights and Responsibilities
The text from section I.E
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for
Understanding and Evaluation" will be provided here, followed by the
question box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
| In all nations affected by
it, the candidate's foreign policy platform empowers individuals to assume their responsibilities as
well as exercise their rights. |
|
|
|
|
F. Evaluating the Platform's Integration of Personal Initiative and
Social Support
The text from section I.F of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
| In all nations affected by
it, the candidate's foreign policy platform acknowledges the roles played by both personal initiative
and social support in the process of personal growth. |
|
|
|
|
|
II. Evaluating the Impact of a Candidate's Foreign Policy Platform on the Social Level of Organization
The text from section II of the
"Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
A. The Impact on National and International Institutions
The text from section
II.A
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
1. Institutions within Nations
| How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
foreign policy platform on the effective and ethical functioning of the following
institutions within all nations affected by it: |
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
|
Families
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schools: primary, secondary, vocational, higher education
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Firms
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade associations that represent the interests of
business firms that produce similar goods and services |
|
|
|
|
|
Labor unions |
|
|
|
|
|
Churches
|
|
|
|
|
|
Civic Organizations
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonprofit charitable organizations that serve those in need
such as the poor, the elderly, at-risk youth
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institutions that support the arts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonprofit social justice groups that promote economic justice, political
justice, ecological stewardship, and human rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advocacy Groups that represent the interests of groups such as the elderly, gun
rights supporters, minority groups, consumers, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Media organizations (TV networks, radio stations; newspaper and
magazine publishers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a) Special Focus on Local and National Governments
| The following criteria apply to the government
institutions in all nations affected by the candidate's foreign
policy platform. |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1)
Rule of Law
The candidate's foreign policy platform helps government institutions to
establish and maintain the rule of law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) Clarity of Mission
The platform helps government institutions to maintain a clear and consistent
understanding of their missions. |
|
|
|
|
|
3) Standards of
Excellence
The platform promotes standards of excellence in policymaking
and citizenship. |
|
|
|
|
|
4) Constructive Relationships
The platform promotes civil and constructive
relationships between government officials, between political parties,
between government organizations of all types, between citizens, and
between citizens and their leaders. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform
promotes constructive relationships between different national
governments. |
|
|
|
|
|
5) Inclusiveness
The platform encourages governments to promote inclusiveness and
diversity regarding opportunities for all types of government service. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform encourages the use
of
inclusive decision-making processes that seek input from all groups
affected by specific decisions as well as the general public. In
other words, it promotes more democratic structures of government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform promotes policies that are
inclusive, i.e. that discourage all types of discrimination. |
|
|
|
|
|
6) Accountability
The platform supports codes of ethics for government officials. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform encourages governments to use transparent and inclusive decision-making
processes, thus allowing the public to hold governments accountable for their
decisions. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Overall, the platform discourages corruption in
government and makes governments more responsible to the needs and
interests of their citizens. |
|
|
|
|
|
7) National
Sovereignty or Self-Determination
The platform promotes national
sovereignty, that is, the ability of governments to
govern without undue interference from other nations. |
|
|
|
|
|
8) Foreign Aid
The platform calls for distributing foreign aid in ways that promote
the common good of recipient nations. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform distributes aid
in ways that ensure that it will be used in a wise and efficient manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
9) Military Preparedness and National
Security
The platform enables national governments to
maintain a military force that is capable of defending the nation's security, interests, and
values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform enables your nation's government
to strike a balance between spending on military programs and those
programs that promote personal development, social progress, and
environmental protection. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The platform promotes a broad view of national
security that includes both military strength and social progress in your
nation and abroad. |
|
|
|
|
|
10)
Overall Promotion of the Common Good
In general, the platform enhances the ability of governments to
enact and enforce legislation that promotes individual development, social
progress, and ecological stability. |
|
|
|
|
|
b) The Use of Force for the National Defense: A Special Issue for National
Governments
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate sets forth a variety of effective nonviolent strategies for
addressing current conflicts around the globe. |
|
|
|
|
| The candidate
clearly sets forth the conditions in which he or she would advocate the
use of military force in order to address current conflicts around the
globe. |
|
|
|
|
| The candidate's principles
regarding the use of military force are morally sound and realistic. |
|
|
|
|
| The candidate sets
forth realistic and comprehensive strategies for cultivating peace and
prosperity around the globe. |
|
|
|
|
2. International Institutions
| How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
foreign policy platform on the effective and ethical functioning of the following
international institutions: |
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
international governing organizations such as the United Nations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international alliances or blocs (such as NATO)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international religious bodies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international media organizations (TV and radio networks, magazine and newspaper
publishers, etc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
international financial institutions such as the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank |
|
|
|
|
|
|
other organizations that finance international development programs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
institutions that regulate international trade (such as the World Trade
Organization)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international groups that serve the needy or vulnerable --
the poor, the sick, the elderly, victims of disasters, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international nongovernmental organizations that advocate economic justice, political justice,
and environmental stewardship
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international labor unions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
international organizations that coordinate cultural projects,
including sporting events
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
corporations in your nation that export goods to different nations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
transnational corporations that maintain operations in more than one nation |
|
|
|
|
|
B. The Impact on National and International Social Sectors
The text from section II.B
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question box below.
1. Impact on Social Sectors within Nations
| How do you rate the impact
of the candidate's foreign policy platform on relationships
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
within the government sectors of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
within the market sectors of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
within the civil sector of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the government and market sectors of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the government and civil sectors of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the market and civil sectors of all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the media and the three sectors in all nations
affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between
political parties and governments in all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between government enterprises and the three
sectors in all nations affected by it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Impact on International Social Sectors
|
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's foreign policy platform on relationships
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
within the international government sector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
within the international market sector?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
within international civil society?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between international governing bodies and international markets?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between international governing bodies and international civil society?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between international civil society and international markets?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
between the international media and the three international
sectors?
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. The Impact on Socio-Cultural Collectivities
The text from section
II.D
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the questions below.
The candidate's
foreign policy platform
promotes equal opportunities for self-development* among persons of different:
* this includes discouraging discrimination against
individuals from different races, genders, etc. |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
Classes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Races
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ethnic Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nationalities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Religions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Age Groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sexual orientations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Areas of residence (i.e. rural and urban)
|
|
|
|
|
|
III. Evaluating the Impact of the Candidate's Foreign Policy Platform on the Ecological Level of
Organization
The text from section III
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question boxes below.
A. Conservation
|
In all nations affected by it, how do you rate the impact of the candidate's
foreign policy platform on
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
endangered species?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
biodiversity?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wilderness areas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Sustainable Technologies and Lifestyles
|
In all nations affected by it,
|
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1. Sustainable Extraction of Raw Materials
the candidate's foreign
policy platform
promotes ecologically sound practices of mining for metals, minerals, and
coal; and of
drilling for oil and gas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Sustainable Growth and Harvesting of Food and Forestry Products
the platform
promotes ecologically sound methods of farming, fishing, and forestry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Conservation of Natural Resources
the platform
promotes
the conservation of natural resources such as water, forest products, petroleum,
metals, and minerals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
Sustainable Manufacturing Technologies
the platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for manufacturing goods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.
Sustainable Energy Generation
the platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for generating energy. |
|
|
|
|
|
6.
Sustainable Design and Construction
the platform
promotes
the implementation of designs for construction and renovation that increase the
energy-efficiency of all types of buildings. |
|
|
|
|
|
7.
Energy-Efficiency of Electronic Devices
the platform
promotes
the development of appliances and other electronic devices that are more
energy-efficient. |
|
|
|
|
|
8. Sustainable Transportation Technology
the platform
promotes
the development of less polluting technologies for transportation. |
|
|
|
|
|
9.
Population Control
the platform
encourages families to have fewer children so
that population growth may be reduced. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.
'Smart Growth' in Residential and Urban Development
the platform promotes 'smart growth'
strategies for human communities. |
|
|
|
|
|
11.
Waste Management
the platform promotes less polluting and more efficient methods of
waste management (strategies for recycling, toxic waste disposal). |
|
|
|
|
|
12.
Integration of Economic and Environmental Values
In general, the candidate strives to
integrate the goals of economic growth and ecological stewardship in his or her
foreign policy platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
13. Global Environmental Challenges
The platform addresses global environmental issues, such as climate change
and acid rain. |
|
|
|
|
|
IV. Evaluating the Impact of the Candidate's Foreign Policy Platform on the Cosmic Level of Organization
A.
Evaluating the Candidate's Foreign
Policy Platform from the Perspective of
One's Own Cosmic
Views
The text from section IV.A
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question box below.
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
How do you rate the impact of the candidate's
foreign policy platform on the cosmic level of organization*?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
If you believe in a divine plan, your rating will indicate the degree to which
the platform furthers (or hinders) this plan. If you believe in a cosmic
system of divine justice, your rating will indicate how just the candidate's
foreign policies seem to be according to this system. If you espouse
universal laws or principles, your rating will indicate the degree to which the
candidate's foreign policies are consistent with these laws and principles.
|
B. Exploring the Cosmic Views of Candidates
The text from section IV.B
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question box below.
Since many candidates maintain that cosmic beliefs should not influence one's
political views, you should only complete this section if the candidate attempts
to integrate cosmic beliefs into the policy goals of his or her platform.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
If the candidate espouses views about the cosmos as a whole,
and if these views influence their policy goals, these beliefs seem to influence
their foreign policy platform in ways that promote the common good. (Since
these beliefs are part of a candidate's public philosophy, see also the question
in Part IV that asks you to evaluate the ways in which a candidate's public
philosophy influences their platform.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cosmic views of the candidate influence their foreign policy goals in ways that
are consistent with my nation's Constitution. In other
words, the candidate's foreign policy platform pursues cosmic religious goals
that can be 'translated into' secular goals that are compatible with the
government's mission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of
the Impact of Their Foreign Policies on All Levels of Organization
The text from section V
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the questions in sections V and VI below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate recognizes the effects of their foreign policies on all levels of organization
-- on individuals, social groups, the environment, and the
cosmos as a whole (if they espouse cosmic views that are relevant to their policy
goals).
|
|
|
|
|
VI. Evaluating the Candidate's Recognition of the Impact of Their Foreign Policies
on Relationships between Different Levels of Organization
The text from section V of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate recognizes the impact of their
foreign policies on relationships between different levels of organization.
|
|
|
|
|
VII. Evaluating a Candidate's Recognition of the Hierarchy of Value and Order
of Priority among the Different Levels of Organization
The text from section VI of the
"Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question box below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
In their foreign policy platform, the candidate
consistently recognizes a hierarchy of value or order or priority among the
different levels of organization. Policies that are relevant to higher,
more inclusive levels of organization are given a higher priority than policies
that are relevant only to lower levels. Similarly, the candidate considers
the impact of policies on higher
levels to be more important than their impact on lower levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIII. Evaluating How a Candidate Balances Trade-Offs between the Costs and
Benefits of Foreign Policies
The text from section VII of the
"Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question boxes below.
A. Trade-Offs between Short-Term Costs and Long-Term Benefits of
Foreign Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their domestic platform, the candidate is willing to
accept short-term costs for the sake of long-term benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
B. Recognizing that Those Who Bear the Short-Term Costs of Sound
Foreign Policies Often Realize Benefits in the Long-Term
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their foreign policy platform, the candidate is able to explain
how individuals and groups that bear the costs of sound policies often
benefit from these policies in the long run, since these policies promote a
more stable, prosperous society and a healthier environment in all nations
affected by them.
|
|
|
|
|
C. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Foreign Policies for Different Individuals
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their foreign policy platform, the candidate supports
the principle that more privileged or powerful individuals may bear some costs
in order that less privileged or powerful individuals might be able to meet
their needs.
|
|
|
|
|
D. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Foreign Policies for Different Social Groups
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their foreign policy platform, the candidate supports the
principle that more privileged or powerful social groups may bear some costs in
order that less privileged or powerful social groups might be able to meet their
needs.
|
|
|
|
|
E. Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits
of Foreign Policies for Different Levels of Organization
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
In their foreign policy platform, the candidate is willing to place
burdens on lower levels of organization for the benefit of higher levels of
organization when this is necessary in order to preserve the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate does not support policies that allow
social groups to exploit individuals and less powerful social groups in the
pursuit of their missions and interests.
|
|
|
|
|
F. Trade-Offs between Special Interests and the Common Good
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
If the desires of special interest groups are in conflict
with the needs of the common good, the candidate's foreign policy platform supports
the needs of the common good over special interests.
|
|
|
|
|
G. Failures to Recognize the Trade-Offs
Associated with Foreign Policies
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate recognizes all of the trade-offs associated
with their foreign policy platform.
|
|
|
|
|
IX. Evaluating the Candidate's Commitment to an 'Experimental Approach' to
Foreign Policy-Making
The text from section VIII
of the "Foreign Policy" section of "The Framework for Understanding and Evaluation"
will be
provided here, followed by the question below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
|
The candidate expresses and demonstrates a commitment to
an ‘experimental approach’ foreign policy-making.
|
|
|
|
|
Part III: Evaluating
Relationships between
Different Areas of Policy within the Candidate's Platform
Part V of our "Method for Political
Analysis" will be presented here, followed by the question boxes below.
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
I. The Scope of the Party's Platform
The candidate's platform includes all areas of policy that should be
addressed by the candidate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The platform does not address issues that are beyond the legitimate concern of
government.
|
|
|
|
|
II. Emphasis on Different Areas of Policy within the Platform
The priorities that the candidate identifies within their platform genuinely
reflect the most urgent needs and interests of the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
III. The Compatibility of Policies within the Platform
The policies within the candidate's domestic platform generally complement one
another. That is, the goals of different domestic policy areas are
compatible; the goals of some policies do not undermine the goals of other
policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The policies within the candidate's foreign policy platform
generally complement one another.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate's domestic and foreign policy platforms pursue compatible
goals. The goals of domestic policies do not undermine the goals of
foreign policies, and vica-versa.
|
|
|
|
|
IV. Integration of Different Areas of Policy into Broader Strategies
The candidate effectively integrates different areas of policies into broader
strategies that address complex and challenging problems.
|
|
|
|
|
policy app
info: How is the policy related to other policies that address the same
issue? Does the sponsor describe how this policy is related to other
policies within a broader strategy that addresses an issue or concern? If
so, how?
eval: the sponsor does/does not see relationships; the policy is
effectively integrated into broader strategies that address an issue or concern
Part
IV: Evaluating the Influences
that Shape the Candidate's Platform
Part III of our "Method for Political Analysis" will be presented
here. It will be followed by the question boxes below:
I. The Influence of Ideas
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
A. The Candidate's Public Philosophy
The candidate's platform clearly reflects the views, values, and principles
in the candidate's public philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate's public philosophy influences the candidate's platform in ways
that promote the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. The Public Philosophy of the Candidate's
Political Party
The candidate's platform
clearly reflects the views, values, and principles of the candidate's
political party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
public philosophy of the candidate's political party influences the candidate's
platform in ways that promote the
common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
C.
Scientific Research
Scientific research influences
the candidate's platform in ways that promote the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
D.
Analytical Studies
Analytical studies influence
the candidate's platform in ways that promote the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. The Media
News and commentary in the media influence the candidate's platform in ways that
promote the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
II. The Influence of Special Interests
How do you rate the influence of the following special interests on the
candidate's platform? A favorable rating indicates that you believe that a
special interest influences the platform in ways that promote the common
good. A negative rating indicates that you believe that a special interest
influences the platform in ways that do not promote the common good. You
may click on 'not applicable' if you do not believe that a particular special
interest has any influence on the platform.
|
|
Excellent
(4)
|
Good
(3)
|
Fair
(2)
|
Poor
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
members of the candidate's political party
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
demographic groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
constituents
|
|
|
|
|
|
groups that contribute money
to the candidate
|
|
|
|
|
|
groups with large numbers of
registered voters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wealthy and/or popular individuals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the national interests of your nation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the interests of foreign nations
|
|
|
|
|
|
III. The Influence of Public Opinion
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate's platform is influenced by public opinion that is well-informed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The influence of sound public opinion on the platform is not eclipsed by other
factors that influence the platform in negative ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
IV. Trade-Offs: Cost-Benefit Analyses
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
As they defend the policies within their platform, the candidate always cites
clear and accurate analyses of the costs and benefits associated with these
policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate cites clear and accurate cost-benefit analyses of the policies of
competing candidates in order to demonstrate how their proposals are superior to
these policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Risk and Uncertainty
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate is able to effectively and constructively manage political
risks associated with their platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate is able to effectively and constructively manage risks related
to the outcome of the policies within their platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VI. The Timing of Elections
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate's concerns about the timing of elections have a positive influence
on the platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VII. Political Deal-Making
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
Any political deals that the candidate may have struck in order to secure
support for their platform have had a positive influence on the platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part V: Focus on
Leadership: Evaluating
a Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership
The text from Part I of our "
Method for Political Analysis" will be
provided here, followed by the question boxes below.
I. Analyzing a Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership
Psychological Health
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate seems to be psychologically healthy. If they currently
suffer from any psychological disorder, or if they have been diagnosed with a
disorder in the past, the condition is being/has been treated, and they are fit
for public service.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Character and Leadership
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
Courage
The candidate has demonstrated a willingness to raise public awareness of issues
that are vital to the public welfare, even if they are not sure how the public
will respond to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate seems willing to support sound policies even if the outcome of
these policies is uncertain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate seems willing to take positions on issues that may be criticized
or at least questioned by fellow party members and supporters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Humility and Prudence
The candidate seems willing to revise his or her views in light of new
knowledge related to public issues and/or a new sensitivity to values that are
relevant to public issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honesty and Consistency
The candidate has been faithful to the views and values that they espouse in
their public philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the candidate has held an elected office before, they have followed through
on promises made during previous campaigns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall, the candidate has demonstrated other key virtues that public leaders
should possess, such as self-control, compassion, and perseverance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowledge Base
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate seems to have a clear grasp of key facts related to different
areas of domestic and foreign policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate possessed in-depth knowledge of the dynamics of human development,
social progress, and ecological cycles of growth and renewal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate seems to possess sufficient knowledge of the laws and customs that
govern the policymaking process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Skills
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate has demonstrated an ability to collaborate with a variety of
groups and individuals in order to craft compromises and achieve a consensus
regarding challenging public issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate promotes a civil, open, objective, and rigorous discussion of
public issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The candidate has expressed a commitment to an experimental approach to
policymaking. If the candidate has held public office before, they have
demonstrated a commitment to this approach.
|
|
|
|
|
|
II. Evaluating the Character and Leadership of a Candidate's Political
Party
The text from Part II, section II of our
"Method for Political Analysis" will be provided here, followed by the
question boxes below.
A. The Party's Membership and Administration
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The interests of party members and donors seem to be compatible
with the long-term well-being of individuals, social groups, and the
environment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Key Institutional Criteria for Assessing a Party's Character and
Leadership
1. Clarity of Mission
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The candidate's party expresses and demonstrates a clear understanding of its
mission in public life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Standards of Excellence
a) Standards of Excellence in the Formation of Its Public Philosophy and
Platform
| The following
statements will help the user to evaluate the party's standards of excellence
in the formation of its public philosophy and platform.
|
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1) The Party's Public Philosophy
The party's public philosophy draws from a variety of sources, including
political theory, the human sciences, the natural sciences, and philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The party expresses its public philosophy in terms that all citizens can
understand, regardless of their religion or personal philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The party demonstrate a willingness to revise its views, values, and principles in light of new insights into
important problems and issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Overall, the party's public philosophy espouses views,
values, and principles that promote the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) The Party's
Platform
The party's platform includes all of the areas of policy that, in your view,
should be included in the platform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The party emphasize those policies within its platform that address the
most urgent public needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The policies within the party's platform pursue compatible
goals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The party's platform effectively integrates different areas of policy into
broader strategies that address especially complex and challenging public
issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The party expresses and demonstrates a
commitment to an 'experimental approach' to policymaking. |
|
|
|
|
|
| The policies in the platform consistently
reflect the views, values, and principles that comprise the party's public
philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Furthermore, the party is
willing to take bold stands on public issues that are consistent with its philosophy
but that may not be popular with the general public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overall, the party's platform advocates policies that promote
the common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
b) Standards of Excellence in Political Organizing, Dialogue, Analysis,
and Advocacy
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
1) Organizing
The party helps its members to connect with each other and engage in political
dialogue, analysis, and advocacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) Dialogue and Analysis
The party helps its members to gain skills that are essential for constructive
dialogue on political topics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party promotes and contributes to a civil and rational atmosphere for public
discourse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party helps its members to gain a comprehensive
understanding of important public issues and the policy options that address
them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) Advocacy
The party leadership promotes the party's views to lawmakers and the general
public in an ethical and effective manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party is able to mobilize its members in order to urge
policymakers and the general public to support its core policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party helps its members to promote their personal views
in an ethical and effective manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party is willing to persuade its members and supporters to advocate sound policies even if
these policies do not further their personal or group interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3. Promoting Constructive Relationships within the Party and between the
Party and Other Parties
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The party promotes constructive relationships among its
members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party promotes constructive relationships with other
parties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party sets forth concrete plans for collaborating with
other parties in pursuit of common goals that are of great importance to the
common good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Inclusiveness
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
a) Inclusive Membership
The party demonstrates a commitment to inclusiveness in its membership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
b) Inclusive Decision-Making Processes
The party demonstrates inclusiveness in its decision-making processes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
c)
Inclusive Mission
The party's policies benefit all persons, regardless of their
economic class, race, ethnicity, national origin, age, gender, sexual
orientation, creed, and area of residence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Accountability
| |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
The party adheres to a code of ethics regarding political organizing,
dialogue, analysis, and advocacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The party's decision-making processes are generally transparent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. The Party's Fidelity to Key Qualities of Political Leadership
With the exception of the last statement, this section repeats several
statements taken from the sections above. The user's responses to these
statements will be automatically transferred into this section. Thus,
users will only have to respond to the final statement. This section is
thus placed here only to highlight statements that are especially relevant to
the leadership and integrity of the candidate's party.
| The party
demonstrates leadership and integrity by |
Strongly
Agree
(4)
|
Agree
(3)
|
Disagree
(2)
|
Strongly
Disagree
(1)
|
Not
Applicable
(0)
|
|
contributing to a civil and rational atmosphere for public discourse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
taking positions on public issues that are consistent with its public
philosophy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
revising its views, values, and principles in light of new insights into
important problems and issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
taking bold stands on public issues that are consistent with its philosophy
but that may not be popular with the general public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
persuading its members and supporters to advocate sound policies even if
these policies do not further their personal or group interests.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
following through on promises that it makes to voters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Decision Summary
Page
The Decision Summary Page
will provide
average scores of responses
in the
main sections of each of the five parts of the application. For some
parts, it will also calculate an overall average. Users may then use
these averages as they make an overall assessment of the candidate.
A sample format for the
Summary Page is provided below:
Part I: Evaluating
The Candidate's Public Philosophy
| I. Evaluation of the Use of
Sources in the Candidate's Public Philosophy |
x.x |
| II. Evaluation of the
Components of the Candidate's Public Philosophy |
x.x |
| Overall Evaluation of the
Candidate's Public Philosophy |
x.x |
Part II:
Evaluating the Likely Impact of the Candidate's Platform
Domestic Focus
| I. The Impact on Individuals |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Domestic Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Domestic Policies |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Domestic Policies |
x.x |
Focus on Foreign Relations
| I. The Impact on Individuals |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Foreign Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Foreign Policies |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Foreign Policies |
x.x |
Part III: Evaluating
Relationships between
Different Areas of Policy within the Candidate's Platform
| I. Scope of Platform |
x.x |
| II. Compatibility of Policies within the Platform |
x.x |
| III. Integration of Policies into Broader
Strategies |
x.x |
| |
x.x |
Part IV: Evaluating
the Influences
that Shape the Candidate's Platform
| Average Evaluation of All Influences |
x.x |
Part V: Focus on
Leadership: Evaluating
a Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership
|
Average Evaluation of the Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership |
x.x |
|
Average Evaluation of the Character
and Leadership of the Candidate's Political Party |
x.x |
| |
x.x |
Format for Comparisons of a User’s
Ratings of Competing Candidates
The following table presents a possible format for presenting one's users
ratings of different political candidates.
Part I: Evaluating
The Candidate's Public Philosophy
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
| I. Evaluation of the Use of
Sources in the Candidates' Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. Evaluation of the
Components of the Candidates' Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| Overall Evaluation of the
Candidate's Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part II:
Evaluating the Likely Impact of the Candidate's Platform
Domestic Focus
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
| I. The Impact on Individuals
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Domestic Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Domestic Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Domestic Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Focus on Foreign Relations
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
| I. The Impact on Individuals |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Foreign Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Foreign Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Foreign Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part III: Evaluating
Relationships between
Different Areas of Policy within the Candidate's Platform
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
|
I. Scope of Platform
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. Compatibility of Policies
within the Platform
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. Integration of Policies
into Broader Strategies
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part IV: Evaluating
the Influences
that Shape the Candidate's Platform
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
|
Average Evaluation of All Influences
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part V: Focus on
Leadership: Evaluating
a Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership
|
Section of the Method |
Avg. for
Candidate X |
Avg. for
Candidate Y |
Avg. for
Candidate Z |
|
Average Evaluation of the Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| Average Evaluation of the
Character and Leadership of the Candidate's Political Party |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Format for Comparison of One User’s
Ratings of
a Specific Candidate to
Other Users’ Ratings of the Same Candidate
The following table represents a possible format that would enable one user to
compare their rating of a candidate with average ratings of the same candidate
submitted by various groups of other users.
Part I: Evaluating
The Candidate's Public Philosophy
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
| I. Evaluation of the Use of
Sources in the Candidates' Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. Evaluation of the
Components of the Candidates' Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| Overall Evaluation of the
Candidate's Public Philosophy |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part II:
Evaluating the Likely Impact of the Candidate's Platform
Domestic Focus
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
| I. The Impact on Individuals
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Domestic Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Domestic Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Domestic Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Focus on Foreign Relations
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
| I. The Impact on Individuals |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. The Impact on the Social
Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. The Impact on the
Ecological Level of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| IV. The Impact on the Cosmic
Level of Organization (if applicable) |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| V. Recognizing the Impact of
Foreign Policies on All Levels of Organization and on Relationships
between Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VI. Recognizing the Hierarchy
of Value that Exists Among the Different Levels of Organization |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VII. Dealing
with Trade-Offs between the Costs and Benefits of Foreign Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| VIII. The Primacy of an
'Experimental Approach' to Creating and Refining Foreign Policies |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part III: Evaluating
Relationships between
Different Areas of Policy within the Candidate's Platform
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
|
I. Scope of Platform
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| II. Compatibility of Policies
within the Platform
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| III. Integration of Policies
into Broader Strategies
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part IV: Evaluating
the Influences
that Shape the Candidate's Platform
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
|
Average Evaluation of All Influences
|
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
Part V: Focus on
Leadership: Evaluating
a Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership
|
Section of the Method
|
Avg. Rating
of User |
Avg. for User's Party |
Avg. of All Users |
|
Average Evaluation of the Candidate's Competence, Character, and Leadership |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| Average Evaluation of the
Character and Leadership of the Candidate's Political Party |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
| |
x.x |
x.x |
x.x |
|