In two sentences, explain what problem you're working on and explain the policy you're advocating.

Then, describe the toughest thing you think you're going to have to face when arguing for your solution. Is there some really strong opposing argument you're worried about? Or is it going to be tough to convince people to take your proposal seriously for one reason or another? Describe the roadblocks you're running into or that you anticipate running into. Then, let's talk bias. We've spent a lot of time searching for bias in our sources. Now, its time to turn your search inward. What are your own biases (political, ethical, religious, and otherwise), how might they affect your AE (if at all), and what are you doing to make sure that you remain a credible source despite those biases?
To start, my problem is centered on the resurgence of crime in the city of Stockton, California which I contend, was brought on by the citys crumbling economy. To combat this problem, I am advocating the implementation of Operation Ceasefire, a program which seeks to actively reduce crime by unifying existing judicial, law enforcement, and correctional agencies to create an environment in which crime is morally and economically infeasible. The most difficult part about argument for my solution as well as many others I have stumbled across, is a contradiction to one of the primary determinants of the problem. Simply, this is a lack of money. The lack of money, results in desperation, resulting in proliferation of gang and crime activity while simultaneously the city frequently experiences budget cuts. And unfortunately every solution seems to require some extent of money, this of course includes my own advocated solution. So I must argue, which is perhaps the most difficult object of this paper, why Operation Ceasefire, or a major adaptation of it, is both an effective and feasible solution. To show that this is a rhetorically optimal solution, I reveal that the Operation provides a synergistic basis for an already ongoing program Operation Peacekeeper, utilizes infrastructure already established in the city and is now bolstered by federal intervention, and is an active attempt to renew public safety which is essential to reviving the will of the city. However, I expect that I will have some difficulties finding the various statistics and sources needed to fully support and conclude these aspects of integration within my respective city.
Being raised in a rather conservative setting and currently attending this university, may have brought many unknowing biases. As for biases in which I am aware of or can be vaguely explicated and may affect this subject, these may include: a sort of moral condescension brought on by my own luxury and religion, a lack of compassion or empathy for not understanding the woes of living in poverty, a strong sense of frugality with a consequent disdain for inefficacy, and perhaps some cruelness that comes from a strong belief, perhaps inspired by main characters, in self-responsibility. As for these biases consequences on my advocacy essay, I believe that they will skew my favor toward a solution which is unforgiving for frequent offenders and perhaps might operate on a "help those who help themselves" basis. As a result, this solution may lack compassion but I believe that it is because of this that my argument could be slightly more objective and less biased as well as it would result in detached but economically focused reasoning. To also remain credible, I hope to use the credibility of my sources to guide my paper and steady my biases.