Debate: The
Basics
What is debate?
1.
a discussion, as of a public question in an
assembly, involving opposing viewpoints: a
debate in the Senate on farm price supports.
2.
a formal contest in which the affirmative and
negative sides of a proposition are advocated
by opposing speakers.
3.
deliberation; consideration.
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.


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.



What should be the federal role in education?
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.
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.
National Topic 2015-2016
Resolved: The United States federal government
should substantially curtail its domestic surveillance.
The Sides

Affirmative

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
The Format: Policy Debate

First Affirmative Constructive (1AC)

8 minutes

Cross Examination (1A questioned by 2N)

3 minutes

First Negative Constructive (1NC)

8 minutes

Cross Examination (1N questioned by 1A)

3 minutes

Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC)

8 minutes

Cross Examination (2A questioned by 1N)

3 minutes

Second Negative Constructive (2NC)

8 minutes

Cross Examination (2N questioned by 2A)

3 minutes

First Negative Rebuttal (1NR)

5 minutes

First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR)

5 minutes

Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR)

5 minutes

Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR)

5 minutes
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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


Attitudinal


Proof that the laws and policies of the status quo are causing
problems
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.