What compromise on the policy proposal might exist between the individualistic/traditionalistic and moralistic positions?

Step One: Ability to engage effectively in regional, national, and global communities: Locate and describe the current Texas policy on your chosen topic. Compare and contrast the current Texas policy to those in other states. Research the role, if any, that the federal government plays in this policy. What sort of federal preemption exists? For these elements (status quo, comparative policy among states and preemption), fnd authoritative sources that describe them succinctly and accurately, and cite your source(s) appropriately (see links below). Example: “The speed limit in Texas is ____, and this places it near the highest among the states, as limits range from ____ in the state of ____, to ____ in ____. The federal government has not placed restrictions on states’ ability to determine speed limits since ____ was passed in ___.”Step Two: Knowledge of civic responsibility: What is your personal viewpoint on whetherthis proposed policy change is a good idea? Does your viewpoint place you more in thetraditionalist/individualist or moralist political culture, and why is your position consistent with this political culture? Describe two reasons why you feel the way you do, and what activities you can do to help pass or defeat the policy proposal. Example: “As an individualist, I am against the proposal, as individualism values ___, and the proposed change would reduce this by ___… To try to infuence the political process onthis issue, I would…, as that would be the most effective use of my time and skills.”Step Three: Intercultural competence: Research the arguments that the opposing political culture would make about the policy proposal. Identify an argument that you believe to be weak, and explain why you disagree with it and why it is misguided. Next, fnd the argument posited by the opposing political culture that you believe to be the most persuasive and explain why you believe it to be more convincing than the point you criticized above. What compromise on the policy proposal might exist between the individualistic/traditionalistic and moralistic positions?