Lesson Report:
# **Lesson Report: U.S. Senate Simulation – Budget Amendment and Debate**
## **Synopsis**
In this session, students continued the U.S. Senate simulation focused on amending a federal budget bill. Building on their prior research into their assigned senators’ policy positions, students drafted amendments, presented their proposed changes, and engaged in structured committee-level statements. The session introduced the debate phase of the simulation, where senators defended their positions and prepared for formal negotiations. The activity reinforced legislative processes, strategic negotiation, and policy prioritization.
—
## **Attendance**
– **Absent:** Hamdam (briefly, but later joined)
—
## **Topics Covered**
### **1. Recap & Setup**
– The session resumed from the previous class where students had assumed the roles of U.S. senators.
– Reviewed the basics of the budget bill:
– Total budget set at $60.5 billion.
– Senators could reallocate funds but not increase the total budget.
– Students recalled their assigned senator identities and previous discussions.
### **2. Drafting Budget Amendments (Individual Work – 20 minutes)**
– Senators worked individually to:
– Draft amendment proposals regarding budget allocations.
– Justify the movement of funds between programs.
– Prioritize policy positions based on their assigned senator’s stance.
– Key criteria:
– Justifications required for increasing, removing, or reallocating funds.
– No need to justify every dollar, but broad reasoning had to align with the senator’s ideology.
### **3. Introduction to the Debate Format**
– Explained the legislative process:
– The bill had already passed the House of Representatives.
– The Senate’s role was to approve, reject, or amend before sending it to the President.
– Established structure for debate:
– **Opening Statement:** Each senator summarized their stance on the bill.
– **Committee-Level Review:** Specific amendments were proposed.
### **4. Senators’ Opening Statements and Amendments**
#### **Senator Kyrsten Sinema (Arizona)**
– Prioritized **border security**, increasing funds for enforcement and anti-cartel operations.
– Reduced military aid to Ukraine but **preserved humanitarian aid**.
– Emphasized balancing U.S. security needs while maintaining international commitments.
#### **Senator Mitch McConnell (Kentucky)**
– **Increased military aid to Ukraine**, shifting funds toward lethal aid.
– Reduced asylum-processing budgets.
– Supported democracy promotion abroad, particularly focusing on U.S. foreign influence.
– Proposed **cuts to energy development programs**, prioritizing defense and border security.
#### **Senator Josh Hawley (Missouri)**
– Proposed **major cuts to Ukraine aid**, reallocating $10 billion to Israel and $5 billion to border security initiatives.
– Aimed to *reduce* overall foreign assistance and instead focus on **American energy independence**.
– Reallocated Title VI funds toward Manhattan Project test victims.
– Preserved some **limited humanitarian assistance** for Ukraine.
#### **Senator Chris Murphy (Connecticut)**
– Suggested **increasing humanitarian aid to Ukraine by $3 billion**, cutting border security funds to compensate.
– Opposed physical border barriers, reallocating $2 billion to asylum processing improvements.
– Advocated for **sustained clean energy investments** and environmental policies.
– Proposed removing limitations on presidential discretion on aid shipments.
#### **Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont)**
– Strongly **supported humanitarian aid to Ukraine**, opposing military spending in favor of non-lethal assistance.
– Advocated **explicit restrictions on any military funding for Israel**, ensuring aid was directed solely to civilians.
– Suggested humanitarian funds be reallocated to **human rights organizations in Gaza** rather than state agencies.
### **5. Preparation for Next Class**
– Senators were given time to review their peers’ proposed changes.
– Instructor emphasized the importance of **argumentation and negotiation** in the next phase.
– Students were encouraged to anticipate counterarguments and be prepared for **alliances and opposition building** in debate.
—
## **Actionable Items**
### **For Next Class (Urgent – Debate Phase)**
– **Prepare Counterarguments:** Students should review amendments proposed by their peers and prepare rebuttals.
– **Strategize for Alliances:** Identify potential allies among other senators for negotiation and coalition-building.
– **Familiarize with Legislative Process:** Students should review Senate voting procedures to prepare for the final bill vote.
### **Follow-Ups (Course Progression)**
– **Upcoming Topic:** The role of the **U.S. military and intelligence community** in foreign policy (to be introduced in the next lesson).
– **Instructor Follow-Up:** Ensure all students (especially those absent or with incomplete amendments) have their amendments clarified before the debate.
– **Provide Debate Structure Reminder:** Include a written recap of rules for structured discussion to help students stay within Senate-style proceedings.
—
This report summarizes all pertinent details for reconstructing the lesson plan and tracking student engagement with the material.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK. No explicit homework was assigned during the lesson; students were only instructed to take a picture of the board, review the proposed amendments, and come prepared for the debate in the next class session.