Lecture Notes on Debate: Plan Text and Solvency

Introduction

• Discussing the third stock issue, Solvency.
• Importance of the Plan in debate.

The Plan

Definition

• Not a stock issue but crucial in debates.
• Bridge between inherency and solvency.
• Plan Text: The affirmative's legislative proposal for U.S. federal government action.
• Should be straightforward and not overly technical.

Presentation

• Use the phrase: "Thus, my partner and I propose the following plan."
• Must fall under the scope of the resolution.
• Balance between vagueness and complexity.

Key Considerations

• Affirmative team must answer questions:
  • Cost of the plan.
  • Overseeing agency.
  • Enforcement mechanisms.

Examples

• Too vague: "The U.S. federal government should reform policing."
• Too complex: Detailed convoluted text that loses clarity.

Good Plan Text Examples

• Refugee Policy: Clear and specific reduction in restrictions.
• Military Recruiters: Specific prevention methods and oversight.
• Weapon Sales: Straightforward end to specific sales.

Solvency

Importance

• Determines if the plan solves the problem.
• Requires a Solvency Advocate: A qualified expert supporting the policy.
• Look for detailed, long-form studies.

Evidence

• Support with high-quality evidence.
• Crucial for the debate's outcome.

Fiat

• Debate assumption: Plan is passed without political feasibility concerns.
• Focus on effects and merits, not political hurdles.

Tips for Negative Team

Strategy

• Undermine the plan's effectiveness.
• Use credible evidence.

Arguments

• Diversify reasons for plan failure.
• Raise questions about implementation.
• Use analytical arguments when evidence is lacking.

Key Points

• Solvency is hotly contested.
• Winning solvency can lead to debate victory.

Conclusion

• Solvency and plan text critical in debate.
• Negative teams should focus on detailed critique of the affirmative's solvency.