1. Debate: The Basics

2. What is debate?
a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a debate in the Senate on farm price supports.
a formal contest in which the affirmative and negative sides of a proposition are advocated by opposing speakers.
deliberation; consideration.

3. What is debated?
The topic used in debate is referred to as the proposition or resolution.
There are four types of resolutions that are debated.
Proposition of problem
This is used to explore a controversial issue and find solutions.
It is worded as a question.
What should be the federal role in education?
Proposition of fact
This resolution makes a statement about something that can be proven true or false.
Proposition of value
This proposition implies that one belief or value is better than another.
National security is more important than government honesty.
This is the basis of Lincoln-Douglas debate.
Proposition of policy
These resolutions are large scale, complex, and are related to current issue within our society.
It will call for a change in the way something is currently operating.
Policy debate gets its name from the type of resolution debated.

4. Practice
With your group, write four debate topics (one per type of proposition) on the topic of identity fraud. Be able to justify why it is that type of proposition.

5. National Topic
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance.

6. The Sides Affirmative Negative Supports the resolution
Rejects the status quo
Current system/state of things
Advocates change
Negative
Rejects the resolution
Supports the status quo
Rejects the change put forth by the Affirmative

7. The Format: Policy Debate
First Affirmative Constructive (1AC)
Cross Examination (1A questioned by 2N)
First Negative Constructive (1NC)
Cross Examination (1N questioned by 1A)
Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC)
Cross Examination (2A questioned by 1N)
Second Negative Constructive (2NC)
Cross Examination (2N questioned by 2A)
First Negative Rebuttal (1NR)
First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR)
Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR)
Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR)
8 minutes
3 minutes
5 minutes

8. The Format: Policy Debate cont.
2NC and 1NR are the Negative Block.
Both the affirmative and negative teams have 7 minutes of prep time during the round.
You are allowed to use the time when your team needs it.
It may NOT be used before cross examinations.
Every speech after 1AC should follow a roadmap.
Briefly explain your plan of attack to the judge.
Traditionally, the roadmap is not timed by the judge.

9. Stock Issues
These are the issues that must be won by the affirmative in order to win the round.
The negative can win IF they can effectively challenge the affirmative in any of these issues.
There are four traditional issues:
Inherency
Harms
Solvency
Topicality

10. Topicality
The affirmative team MUST support the resolution and use a “reasonable interpretation” of the resolution.
Topicality can also be called on an unfair grammatical interpretation.
Resolved: the United States federal government should significantly increase its economic engagement with Mexico, Cuba, or Venezuela.
If the team fails to follow the stipulations of the resolution, the negative team can argue that the affirmative team is “untopical” and should lose the round.
Only the negative team can introduce topicality arguments.

11. Extra-topicality This concept relates to the plan.
The affirmative plan must gain advantages through the adoption of the resolution.
Resolved: that the federal government should significantly increase social services to homeless individuals in the United States.
The affirmative plan must also solve the problems and/or gain the advantages without utilizing additional steps not outlined in the resolution.
Plan “spikes” are okay AS LONG AS they are not what is actually solving the problem or gaining the advantage.

12. Effects Topicality
Affirmative plans can be considered topical with the effects of their plan.
The affirmative plan makes a small change in policy that has large scale impacts that meet the requirements of the resolution.
“significantly change” or “substantially change”
The affirmative plan has elements that are not a part of the resolution, but the plan creates the results desired by the resolution.
The affirmative team must show a link between the plan and the policy change in the resolution.

13. The Final Word on Topicality
Always be ready to defend your interpretation of the resolution.
When calling topicality, you cannot just say the affirmative team in untopical, you must illustrate how it is untopical.

14. Harms
These explain the extent and severity of the problems with the status quo.
They explore the problems that are inherent in the status quo.
They are usually effects of poor policies or the counter-productive attitudes of those in power.
They are a REQUIRED part of the affirmative plan.
There are two types of harms:
Quantitative
Harms that can be counted
Qualitative
Harms that affect our quality of life

15. Inherency
This is the explanation of the cause or potential permanence of the problems/harms in the status quo.
This is a REQUIRED component of the affirmative plan.
There are three types of inherency:
Structural
Proof that the laws and policies of the status quo are causing problems
Attitudinal
Proof that the attitudes of people in power are causing problems
Existential
Proof that significant problems exist in the status quo and will not go away without the affirmative intervention

16. Solvency
This explains that the affirmative plan will effectively reduce or eliminate the harms in the status quo.
In order to “solve” the problems, the plan must have beneficial mandates and solid funding, enforcement, administration, etc.
The plan must address the inherent cause of harms and remove “inherent barriers” to solvency.
It is a REQUIRED part of the affirmative plan.

17. Burden of proof Almost always falls on the aff team
Can be shifted to the neg team
Prima facie case
1. at first appearance; at first view, before investigation.
2. plain or clear; self-evident; obvious.

18. Disadvantages/DAs These are arguments introduces by the negative team.
They urge the judge to reject change/the affirmative plan.
They suggest that if the affirmative plan were to go into effect, there would be disastrous consequences.
The negative team can argue that the disadvantages of the affirmative plan will outweigh the potential benefits/advantages.

19. Components of Disadvantages
Brink
Evidence that the status quo is on the verge of a major event
Uniqueness
Evidence that the disadvantages are not generic
The disadvantages will not occur if the affirmative plan in not put into effect
Links
Evidence that ties the affirmative plan to the impacts of the disadvantages
What the plan does “wrong”
Impacts
The horrific consequences if the affirmative plan is passed

20. Counter Plans
A plan advocated by the negative to avoid the disadvantages caused by the affirmative plan.
It must be:
Non-topical
Mutually exclusive
Net-beneficial

21. Critiques/”Krits”
A negative argument that attacks the value of the resolution or the quality of affirmative delivery/language.
It doesn’t relate to the merits of the affirmative case.