A short three paragraphs about a current development.Overview: As stated already in the Course Overview “Especially this Quarter you will frequently see P Sc 104A themes mirrored in current developments and controversies ‘in the news.’ In to encourage you to ‘connect the dots’ between the course and the ‘real world out there’ – which can really boost your learning you are assigned over the Quarter to write TWO “CDCC” Memoranda. Instructions for Identifying Reports and Writing Memoranda: These CDCC memoranda are two short three-paragraph memoranda in which you will analyze how two different (a) current (published/originally posted any time from October 5 through December 5) (b) reports (articles/blogposts/op-eds/etc.) (c) about “current developments” (e.g. controversies proposals or other events happening during the Quarter in or among the federal or state legislative executive and judicial branches) (d) covered in general informational media (i.e. newspapers magazines newsletters online databases etc.) that (e) relate to course themes and issues. Here are the basic instructions: A. Summary of Development (No More than 200 Words): Briefly summarize what the current development is about basically. (In other words if you had to tell your friend or family member what the “gist” of the article/blogpost/op-ed/etc. was how would you summarize it in 200 words of fewer?) B. Explanation of Relationship of Report to Course Themes/Issues – and Questions Raised(No More than 250 Words): Briefly explain how the development you have summarized in the first paragraph relates to significant course themes and issues. Include one or more questions that the report raises in your mind. [EX: If you were using an op-ed column about the possibility that a new Democratic president and Senate majority would add justices to the Supreme Court you could identify how it raises questions about 1) whether the current fast confirmation of nominee Barrett after refusing to consider President Obama’s Garland nomination constitutes “Court packing” 2) whether adding two (or more) new justices would undermine the Court’s appearance as a less-political branch 3) whether new “Court packing” would be subject to meaningful constitutional objections etc.)] C. Brief Answer to One or More of the Questions You Raise (No More than 250 Words). Having raised questions in the previous paragraph use the available to space to provide short answers to one or more of what you regard as the most important questions. [EX: If one of the questions you raised was “whether the currentfast confirmation of nominee Barrett after refusing to consider President Obama’s Garland nomination constitutes ‘Court packing’” you could then briefly answer negatively (because among other things Court packing involves adding justices not filling existing positions) or affirmatively (because the substance of Court packing is manipulating justice positions to alter the ideological balance of the Court which you could argue is what the Senate Republicans are doing.)]