Jump to content
jhirsch

Education vDebate: jhirsch [aff] v. AnthonySGHS [neg]

Recommended Posts

Cross Ex:

What ensures that all Supreme Court members will pass the plan?

 

When you say "Desegregation and Finance Reform both approach education opportunity but only deseg has been embraced" does that mean you are also trying Finance Reform?

 

What is the point of Fiat in this debate?

 

Who are the actors (ones who will do it) of your plan?

 

(Will do more follow up questions butbhere are the first few I'll do max 3 more)

Edited by AnthonySGHS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross Ex:

What ensures that all Supreme Court members will pass the plan?

     Fiat says that the plan will pass

When you say "Desegregation and Finance Reform both approach education opportunity but only deseg has been embraced" does that mean you are also trying Finance Reform?

     Yeah, that's the reform of funding formulas for public schools detailed in the plan text - the plan has two parts: overturn Milliken and require equitable distribution of resources

What is the point of Fiat in this debate?

     Could you clarify? The point of fiat in this debate, as in all others, is to ensure that we can debate whether the plan is desirable rather than whether the current, oppressive structures of the USFG want to solve the problem.

Who are the actors (ones who will do it) of your plan?

     We use all three branches to pass the plan: SCOTUS overturns Milliken, Congress passes the legislation, POTUS signs the bill

(Will do more follow up questions but here are the first few I'll do max 3 more)

     cool, sounds good

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify on my Fourth question I am asking why would FIAT be fair if you are trying to fiat for the 3 branches of Goverment

 

Is FIAT realistic in this situation that ALL 3 BRANCHES will pass the plan , and if so do you have any evidence to back up that claim such as past literature?

 

Do you have any evidence that a plan similar to this has passed, if so what results did it yield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify on my Fourth question I am asking why would FIAT be fair if you are trying to fiat for the 3 branches of Goverment

     The resolution states that the USFG should - that means I get to fiat any and all federal actors I want for topical government action - it's fair because I can't fiat any other actors, so you can claim state/local circumvention, any backlash you want. And my use of the USFG generates ground because there are a ton of groups that hate federal control, and there's a ton of literature that says that federal reforms are a failure. Let's try and engage my actual plan rather than having another fiat good/fiat bad debate please

 

Is FIAT realistic in this situation that ALL 3 BRANCHES will pass the plan , and if so do you have any evidence to back up that claim such as past literature?

     The whole point of fiat is that it isn't realistic - fiat is a Latin word meaning "let it be done". If the plan could be done in the status quo or was realistic, it wouldn't be inherent. That's policy 101

 

Do you have any evidence that a plan similar to this has passed, if so what results did it yield?

     No, nothing on this scale or to this magnitude has ever been tried, that's our Baugh and Liu evidence. But our solvency advocates state how well this plan would work to resolve the issues we have brought up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final question before i start 1NC

 

Do you think that you determine whether a plan is or goal is good should ALSO take into account how realistic it is and if it has a high PROBABILITY of passing, if not why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final question before i start 1NC

 

Do you think that you determine whether a plan is or goal is good should ALSO take into account how realistic it is and if it has a high PROBABILITY of passing, if not why?

     I might have a misunderstanding of what you're asking, feel free to clarify, but I think that the purpose of the round is to determine whether topical government action is desirable. I think the word "should" in the resolution is used to imply correctness or obligation. The plan isn't possible currently for a few structural and attitudinal reasons, but if I prove that it would be desirable for the USFG to do the plan, I prove the resolution true, so the ballot goes aff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Final question before i start 1NC

Do you think that you determine whether a plan is or goal is good should ALSO take into account how realistic it is and if it has a high PROBABILITY of passing, if not why?

     I might have a misunderstanding of what you're asking, feel free to clarify, but I think that the purpose of the round is to determine whether topical government action is desirable. I think the word "should" in the resolution is used to imply correctness or obligation. The plan isn't possible currently for a few structural and attitudinal reasons, but if I prove that it would be desirable for the USFG to do the plan, I prove the resolution true, so the ballot goes aff

 

You interpreted it right. Ok setting up 1NC

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

paradigm:

aff: do what you want for aff just make sure I understand why it is topical if its a k aff but besides that no prefs on aff

K: Try to clarify any theory k's I have read a few but not a lot if I don't understand it I don't vote for it 

T/ theory: I love good T debates but I also hate bad T debate just trying to express why your interpretation is better also ( I will honestly vote for the fairest interpretation )

da/cp: they are alright you do you just explain the net benefit if there is no good net benefit then I have no reason to vote for the cp

overall: be nice, have fun, and learn from this and a discussion after would be great :)

edit: I used the wrong "your"

Edited by jmeza111401

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

paradigm:[/size]

aff: do what you want for aff just make sure I understand why it is topical if its a k aff but besides that no prefs on aff

K: Try to clarify any theory k's I have read a few but not a lot if I don't understand it I don't vote for it 

T: I love good T debates but I also hate bad T debate just trying to express why you interpretation is better also ( I will honestly vote for the most fair interpretation )

Is that all?

 

Also sorry I have to ask, do you feel you can be impartial since you’ve faced this aff before?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that all?

Yeah im just your average debater

Also sorry I have to ask, do you feel you can be impartial since you’ve faced this aff before?

Yeah i havr no partial hate towards the aff i actually did a bit of research and I understand the aff better and overall if both teams can explain to me why you win in your rebbutals that would be great honestly makes things fair. And worst comes to worst we can get two more judges. I just want more judging experience

Edited by jmeza111401
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so sorry judges and my wonderful opponent but i had an emergency pop up. U am gonna be in a situation where i won't have my laptop and cant do my NC or NRs so i ask that if I may forfeit. I am sorry for all of the inconvenience but this situation is a handful and i am sorry

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PM me if you need clarification for what happened ill try to answer it the best I can and again i have to say sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye if you want I’ll pop in

 

EDIT: If not that's totally fine, just don't want to waste a debate

Edited by TheTrashDebater
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye if you want I’ll pop in

 

EDIT: If not that's totally fine, just don't want to waste a debate

sure thing, post the 1NC whenever or feel free to ask a couple cross questions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross of the 1NC:

 

1. TVA for both T violations?

 

2. Is this linear court stripping/legitimacy turn triggered by any act of precedent?

 

3. What is "SOP"?

 

4. Your link to federalism is federal involvement in education, correct?

 

5. Also, where is the uniqueness on the 3rd and 4th off?

 

6. So to clarify, DeVos has no credibility right now?

 

7. Could you give me 2-3 examples of the 1 in, 2 out rule actually being used?

 

8. How is Milliken 'political' in the context of the aff?

 

9. Does the CP create a right to education or do the plan?

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...