Jump to content
Keagan

PERMING PROCESS OR PIC COUNTER PLAN

Recommended Posts

Okay so i have been trying to learn as much as I can at policy debate and have run into this question after learning about counter plans. So if the neg is running a PIC counter plan or a process counter plan or even a actor counter plan, couldnt the AFF just perm it because they are almost all mutually exclusive to each other because they are nearly the same thing? Or what can the the NEG do to kind of prevent the aff from perming their CP?

 

thanks ahead of time for the help!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What AFF can do

- Perm: this all depends on the CP

- Solvency deficits: "X actor is key to solve", etc.

- Theory: PICs bad, etc

 

 

 

What NEG can do in response

- Perm fails: Still links to DA, or the two are mutually exclusive

- A2 Solvency Deficits: "Y actor soles better than X", etc.

- Theory: Severance perms bad, PICs good, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on the CP - I'll give some examples.

 

Scenario 1 - Actor CP: The Aff has Congress decrease surveillance. The Neg argues that this will embolden Congress to restrict presidential authority which is a bad thing. The Neg also reads a CP to do the plan through an executive order. If the Aff makes the argument that we could do both, the Neg would argue that if Congress has any involvement, it hurts presidential power, so doing the CP alone is the best option.

 

Scenario 2 - Plan-Plus PIC: The Aff reads Congress should curtail surveillance. The Neg reads a CP that says yeah Congress should do that but also let's fund green energy. The Aff could make a permutation to do the counterplan. Because it does the plan, it doesn't show why the plan is a bad idea or why green tech is mutually exclusive.

 

Scenario 3 - Plan-Minus PIC: Plan to have Congress curtail surveillance. The Neg reads a CP that says to curtail surveillance except when it's surveillance on white supremacist groups. The Aff might read a perm to do the CP, but the Neg would argue that severs out off part of the Aff thus showing that part is a bad idea.

 

Scenario 4 - Process CP: The Aff has Congress curtail surveillance. The Neg has Congress submit the plan to the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The Aff might make a permutation to do both, or to do the plan regardless of what the board says, but the Neg would argue that listening to the board is key to trust. Additionally, the Aff might make a permutation to do the CP because it proves that the effects of the plan are good. The Neg would argue that testing the process is good and proves that part of the Aff is bad.

 

There are a lot of other scenarios, but maybe that was helpful to get you thinking about it.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...