Common Theme Project

Common Theme Sample Teaching Module

Public Watchdog IUPUI: Evaluating the 2009 Stimulus Plan

Developed by: David Craig, Religious Studies, IUPUI
Intended Audience: Courses in public policy, economics, political science, business

Learning Materials

Learning Objectives

  • Students will identify the principles and priorities articulated in Bill McKibben’s “Reversal of Fortune” (or Deep Economy) about where our economy should be heading, comparing those priorities with the priorities of students in the course.
  • Students will use and critically assess the transparency of federal and state data tracking stimulus spending.
  • Students will determine how to judge the priorities in the 2009 Recovery Act and its implementation in Indiana.
  • Students will analyze the discrepancies between these spending priorities and the priorities articulated by McKibben, students in the course, and President Obama.

Motivation and Rationale

In February 2009 President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In supporting passage of this stimulus bill, the administration listed several goals: preserving jobs, assisting states with health and education, and making a down payment on a 21st-century infrastructure, including investments in energy efficiency, public transportation, and other “green” goals. Bill McKibben’s challenge to the growth economy raises basic questions about the priorities in the stimulus bill. Can we “grow” and “green” the economy simultaneously? If so, how does the stimulus plan help or hurt the goal of green growth? If we cannot “grow” and “green” the economy at the same time, why not?

One of the commitments in the Recovery Act is to provide transparent data on federal and state spending, and this two-day module tests and uses the available data to ask if the stimulus bill is serving public interests, as articulated by McKibben, President Obama and members of the class.

First Class

Preparation
Assign students to read before class: McKibben’s “Reversal of Fortune” (or chapters 1 and 5 of Deep Economy) and the Obama administration’s stated priorities for the stimulus plan. Before class students should also familiarize themselves with the federal and Indiana websites tracking stimulus spending. Encourage students to seek out other sites with data on the stimulus plan and assess the reliability and potential biases of all of these information sources.

Structure

1. Opening 20 minutes: Public Policy, Economic Growth and Happiness

Definition: Open the class with a definition of economic growth as “an increase in the activity, or amounts of goods and services in an economy, often measured as rising Gross National Product.” Ask students for other definitions of “growth.” Someone will inevitably say increased use of natural resources or destruction of the environment. Note that it is possible to increase the value of goods and services without consuming more natural resources or generating greater waste. Ask students to keep this distinction in mind between increased value and environmental impact.

Discussion: Use McKibben’s opening sections in “Reversal of Fortune” to note the connections between economic growth and public policy: “We can do it if we believe it.” Ask students: what are ways that public policy in the U.S. promotes “growth”? In what sectors of the economy does public policy stimulate growth the most? What policy goals does this growth serve?

2. Middle 35 minutes: Is More Really Better?

Class Discussion or Small Group Discussions: Use an open discussion of McKibben’s question, Is more better?, to launch a conversation about the priorities that McKibben thinks should guide our economy and lives and the priorities that class members uphold.

Discussion Questions on McKibben:

Is more always better? When yes? When no?
What principles and priorities does McKibben articulate? How might we apply those priorities in redirecting our economy and society? What specific public policy changes does he propose?

Discussion Questions for the class:

Where do you agree and disagree with the priorities that McKibben articulates?
Where do you agree and disagree with one another as a class?
Do you see these disagreements as political, ideological or something else?

3. Closing 20 minutes: Getting Started Assessing the Recovery Act: Growth and/or Green?

Instructor projects breakdown of spending categories from Recovery.gov and reviews spending categories and amounts. Students are asked for their initial views about how well the priorities in the stimulus bill fit the Obama administration’s stated priorities and the priorities articulated by McKibben and members of the class.

Class concludes with instructor asking about the transparency of the stimulus data and asking students for suggested websites and research strategies for more detailed information on federal and state stimulus spending.

Second Class

Preparation
Assign students to read before class: Bill Ruthhart article on Indiana stimulus spending (note: contact Ruthhart at: bill.ruthhart@indystar.com to see if there’s an updated report). Students conduct their own web and newspaper research on stimulus spending, finding three sources (at least one article from a major newspaper).

Students write 2-3 page paper evaluating the balance between growth and green goals in 2009 stimulus spending, either across the U.S. or here in Indiana. Evaluation means both providing evidence to support one’s findings about the priorities in the stimulus spending and defending one’s judgment that the priorities are balanced or imbalanced between growth and green. The terms “growth” and “green” will have to be defined. This paper should be typed and double-spaced and ready to hand in at the start of the next class. It should give parenthetical citations and list all sources used in a “Works Cited” list.

An alternative assignment is to require students to type up 1-2 pages of debate notes. Students have to state clearly in their own words the two strongest arguments on each side—namely, that stimulus spending balances the goals of growth and green and that stimulus fails to strike a good balance. Under these four arguments (two on each side), students list and cite their supporting evidence.

Structure

1. Opening 20 minutes: Small Group Debates
Break class into groups of four and have them informally debate the following resolution: The spending of the (federal or Indiana) stimulus funds matches the Obama administration’s stated commitment to build a 21st-century economy on a more efficient and cleaner energy platform.

2. Middle 45 minutes: Reporting Back and Turning the Tables

Instead of asking students to report what they said in their debates, ask students to report what the other side said.

Debriefing Questions:

What were the most persuasive arguments you heard from the other side?
What key evidence could the other side provide to persuade you that their side is right?

Moving to Consensus Questions:

Are there win-win parts of stimulus spending that advance the goals of growth and green at the same time? Can you imagine other policies that would achieve that same balance?
Are there parts of the stimulus spending that fail both the growth and the green tests? If so, are these policies serving other worthy goals or not?

Is there any consensus emerging about public policy, growth and happiness? How closely does it match McKibben’s priorities?

3. Final 10 minutes: Assessing the Public Data

Ask students if they were satisfied with the transparency of the data on the stimulus spending. What further information would they need? Were they able to find information that deepened or changed their views on the stimulus package?

Conclude by asking if students have any ideas for how to lobby for the policies they would like to see to promote their own “green” priorities or the ones articulated by McKibben.

Green Map Follow Common Theme on Facebook