Died in Committee Twice: Following a Safe Storage Bill From Drafting to the Governor's Desk, and Where Evidence Can and Cannot Carry It
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
DNP/725: Policy and Regulation in Health Care
Week 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The state, bill and hearings are composites written for a model paper.
Our state has considered a child access prevention bill twice in the past four years. Both times it was referred to the House Judiciary Committee and never received a hearing. A new version is being drafted for the next session. This paper traces the bill's path through our legislature, identifies where it failed and plans how evidence and advocacy can be used at each stage.
Drafting
A legislator, often working with advocates, asks the legislative service bureau to draft the bill. Drafting decisions shape everything that follows. For example, a negligence standard, holding an adult liable if a child could gain access to an unsecured gun, differs from a recklessness standard, requiring that the adult knew a child was likely to gain access. The sponsor, a representative who is also a family physician, has asked the state nurses association for input on the standard and on including safe storage education.
Introduction and Referral
After introduction, the bill receives a number and is referred to a committee by the Speaker. Referral is political: the same bill referred to the Health Committee might receive a hearing, while referral to Judiciary, whose chair opposed earlier versions, allowed it to die without a vote.
Committee
Committees hold hearings, amend bills and vote on whether to report them to the full chamber. Most bills die here, often without a hearing. The committee chair controls the agenda. Our advocacy must therefore focus on the chair and members of the committee to which the bill is referred.
The Evidence We Will Bring
Azad et al. (2020) studied child access prevention laws across states from 1991 to 2016 and found that negligence laws were associated with a 13% relative reduction in all firearm fatalities among children aged 0 to 14, with reductions in homicides, suicides and unintentional deaths, while recklessness laws were not associated with changes. The most stringent negligence laws were associated with a 59% reduction in unintentional firearm deaths. Webster et al. (2004) found that child access prevention laws were associated with an 8.3% decrease in suicide rates among 14- to 17-year-olds, driven by fewer firearm suicides.
The studies argued for a negligence standard; the committee would decide whether to hear the argument at all.
Using the Evidence in Drafting
The finding that negligence laws, not recklessness laws, were associated with lower fatalities (Azad et al., 2020) directly informs drafting. I will recommend a negligence standard to the sponsor, citing this study, because a weaker law may pass more easily but deliver little benefit.
Fiscal Notes
Many bills receive a fiscal note estimating their cost to the state. A child access prevention law has minimal fiscal impact, mainly court costs for rare prosecutions. Emphasizing the low cost removes one reason for delay and distinguishes the bill from proposals that require appropriations.
Anticipating Opposition Arguments
Opponents in earlier sessions argued that the law would criminalize grieving parents and that locked guns cannot be used for self-defense. Preparing responses in advance helps: prosecutorial discretion and exemptions for guns carried on the person address the first concern, and quick-access lock boxes address the second.
Floor Action
If reported out of committee, the bill goes to the floor for debate, possible amendment and a vote. Floor amendments can weaken bills, for example changing the standard from negligence to recklessness. Advocates must watch for such amendments and brief supportive legislators on their effects.
The Second Chamber
The bill then repeats the process in the Senate. Identical versions must pass both chambers; differences go to a conference committee.
If the Bill Stalls Again
If the bill is again denied a hearing, the coalition can ask the sponsor to attach its core provision to a broader child safety bill, request an interim study committee to examine child firearm injuries or pursue education funding through the budget. Having fallback strategies prevents a single committee decision from ending the effort.
The Governor
The governor may sign, veto or, in our state, allow the bill to become law without a signature. The governor's health policy advisor is a key contact.
Evidence Is Not Enough
Cairney and Oliver (2017) argue that evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine: policymakers use shortcuts based on beliefs, emotions and familiar information, and decisions are made across many venues. They recommend that those seeking to influence policy combine scientific evidence with persuasion that translates complexity into simple stories, learn where the action is and engage in long-term strategies.
Applying That Lesson
For the Judiciary chair, a gun owner and hunter, statistics alone may not persuade. A story from a rural father, a hunter who lost a son to an unsecured handgun, told in his own words, may resonate. Framing the bill as responsible gun ownership, which the chair values, rather than gun restriction, fits his beliefs. The evidence then supports a story he can accept.
Timing
Legislative sessions are short. Bills introduced early have more time to move. We will seek introduction in the first two weeks and request early referral to the Health Committee.
Relationships Before the Session
Legislators are far more receptive to constituents they already know. In the months before the session, I will attend town halls in the districts of two Health Committee members, introduce myself as a pediatric nurse practitioner in their communities and offer to be a resource on children's health. When the bill comes up, I will be a familiar face, not a stranger with a request.
Coalition
The state nurses association, the pediatric society chapter, a parents' group and a sportsmen's organization that supports safe storage will testify together. A coalition that includes gun owners changes the political meaning of the bill.
Testimony That Works
Written testimony should be short, specific and local: who I am, what I see in practice, what the evidence shows and what I ask the committee to do. Oral testimony is often limited to two or three minutes. I will practice with the state nurses association's policy director and prepare for questions about liability and rural gun owners.
Tracking the Bill
The legislature's website allows tracking of each bill's status, hearings and amendments. I will set alerts for the bill number and share updates with the coalition weekly so that supporters can act quickly when a hearing is scheduled or an amendment is offered.
My Role
I will draft written testimony, prepare a one-page evidence summary for committee members, meet with the sponsor's staff on the negligence standard and recruit nurses from members' districts to contact their legislators.
Conclusion
A child access prevention bill has died in committee twice in our state. Tracing its path shows that referral and committee chairs are the main barriers, and that drafting choices, particularly the negligence standard supported by evidence, determine whether a law would work. Evidence alone rarely moves legislators, so it must be joined with stories, framing that fits legislators' values and a coalition that includes gun owners.
References
Azad, H. A., Monuteaux, M. C., Rees, C. A., Siegel, M., Mannix, R., Lee, L. K., Sheehan, K. M., & Fleegler, E. W. (2020). Child access prevention firearm laws and firearm fatalities among children aged 0 to 14 years, 1991-2016. JAMA Pediatrics, 174(5), 463-469. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.6227
Cairney, P., & Oliver, K. (2017). Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health Research Policy and Systems, 15, Article 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0192-x
Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., Zeoli, A. M., & Manganello, J. A. (2004). Association between youth-focused firearm laws and youth suicides. JAMA, 292(5), 594-601. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.5.594
How this DNP 725 Week 2 example is structured
The DNP/725 Week 2 work usually examines legislative processes and how bills become law. This paper follows one bill step by step, explains who holds power at each step and matches evidence and advocacy to the points where the bill is most vulnerable. Students search this week as DNP 725 Week 2, DNP725 Wk 2 or DNP/725 Wk 2; all three are the same assignment.
DNP/725 Week 2 questions, answered
What does DNP/725 Week 2 usually ask for?
Many sections ask students to trace how a bill becomes law, identify key decision points and actors and explain how nurses can influence the process.
Where do most bills fail?
In committee; many bills are never scheduled for a hearing or vote, which makes committee chairs and members key targets for advocacy.
Is evidence enough to pass a bill?
Rarely; policymakers weigh evidence alongside values, beliefs and politics, so effective advocates combine evidence with clear stories and knowledge of where decisions are actually made.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.