finished t file - fellows

8/14/2019 Finished T File - Fellows

1/69

KENTUCKY FELLOWS 2008 TOPICALITY FILEBECCA, CRAIG AND ROBIN PAGE____OF____

Index

Index........................................................................................................................................................................................................1

Index ........................................................................................................................................................................1

Random Violations .................................................................................................................................................5

1NC ASPEC .........................................................................................................................................................................................6

1NC ASPEC ........................................................................................................................................................6

1NC Incentives Must Be Given By the Government ...........................................................................................................................7

1NC Incentives Must Be Given By the Government ......................................................................................7

1NC Alternative Energy Must Be in the US.........................................................................................................................................8

1NC Alternative Energy Must Be in the US .....................................................................................................8

1NC Should Is the Past Tense of Shall.................................................................................................................................................9

1NC Should Is the Past Tense of Shall ..............................................................................................................9

1NC Substantially Is Without Material Qualifications.......................................................................................................................10

1NC Substantially Is Without Material Qualifications .................................................................................10

1NC Banning Substances Isn't T.........................................................................................................................................................11

1NC Banning Substances Isn't T .....................................................................................................................11

1NC Removing A Barrier Isn't T........................................................................................................................................................12

1NC Removing A Barrier Isn't T .....................................................................................................................12

1NC FX T...........................................................................................................................................................................................13

1NC FX T ...........................................................................................................................................................13

Alternative Energy Violations ............................................................................................................................14

1NC Cant Deplete Resources/Harm the Environment......................................................................................................................15

1NC Cant Deplete Resources/Harm the Environment .................................................................................15

1NC Alternative Energy Is Opposed to Fossil Fuels..........................................................................................................................16

1NC Alternative Energy Is Opposed to Fossil Fuels ......................................................................................16

1NC Cant Harm the Environment.....................................................................................................................................................17

1NC Cant Harm the Environment .................................................................................................................17

Can't Hurt The Environment At: Mixing Burdens.................................................................................................................................18

Can't Hurt The Environment At: Mixing Burdens ..........................................................................................18

Incentives Violations ...........................................................................................................................................19

1NC Incentives Must Be in the US.....................................................................................................................................................20

1NC Incentives Must Be in the US ..................................................................................................................20

1NC Incentives Must Be Throughout.................................................................................................................................................21

1NC Incentives Must Be Throughout ..............................................................................................................21

1NC Incentives Must Cause Action....................................................................................................................................................22

1


2/69


1NC Incentives Must Cause Action .................................................................................................................22

1NC Incentive Group SPEC...............................................................................................................................................................23

1NC Incentive Group SPEC ............................................................................................................................23

1NC Incentives Must Be Plural..........................................................................................................................................................24

1NC Incentives Must Be Plural .......................................................................................................................241NC Incentives Must Be Voluntary....................................................................................................................................................25

1NC Incentives Must Be Voluntary .................................................................................................................25

1NC Incentives Must Attract Industry Development .........................................................................................................................26

1NC Incentives Must Attract Industry Development ...................................................................................26

1NC Incentives Cant Be Disincentives.............................................................................................................................................27

1NC Incentives Cant Be Disincentives ...........................................................................................................27

1NC Incentives Must Be Financial.....................................................................................................................................................28

1NC Incentives Must Be Financial ..................................................................................................................282AC Counter Interp Modules ............................................................................................................................29

2AC Incentives Can Be Rewards or Punishment...............................................................................................................................30

2AC Incentives Can Be Rewards or Punishment ...........................................................................................30

2AC Alternative Energy Includes Nuclear.........................................................................................................................................31

2AC Alternative Energy Includes Nuclear .....................................................................................................31

2AC Alternative Energy is Renewable...............................................................................................................................................32

2AC Alternative Energy is Renewable ............................................................................................................32

Standards Blocks .................................................................................................................................................33FX T Bad................................................................................................................................................................................................34

FX T Bad ...............................................................................................................................................................34

FX T Good.............................................................................................................................................................................................35

FX T Good ............................................................................................................................................................35

Extra T Bad............................................................................................................................................................................................36

Extra T Bad ..........................................................................................................................................................36

Extra T Good..........................................................................................................................................................................................37

Extra T Good ........................................................................................................................................................37

THEORY O/W T....................................................................................................................................................................................38

THEORY O/W T ..................................................................................................................................................38

T O/W Theory........................................................................................................................................................................................39

T O/W Theory ......................................................................................................................................................39

Breadth Is Better Than Depth................................................................................................................................................................40

Breadth Is Better Than Depth ............................................................................................................................40

2


3/69


Depth O/W Breadth...............................................................................................................................................................................41

Depth O/W Breadth .............................................................................................................................................41

Education O/W Fairness........................................................................................................................................................................42

Education O/W Fairness .....................................................................................................................................42

Fairness O/W Education........................................................................................................................................................................43

Fairness O/W Education .....................................................................................................................................43

Reasonability Good................................................................................................................................................................................44

Reasonability Good ..............................................................................................................................................44

A2 Reasonability Is Vague.....................................................................................................................................................................45

A2 Reasonability Is Vague ...................................................................................................................................45

A2 Reasonability=Judge Intervention...................................................................................................................................................46

A2 Reasonability=Judge Intervention ...............................................................................................................46

Competing Interpretations Good............................................................................................................................................................47Competing Interpretations Good .......................................................................................................................47

A2 Race to The Bottom.........................................................................................................................................................................48

A2 Race to The Bottom ........................................................................................................................................48

A2 Competing Interpretations=Arbitrary Definitions...........................................................................................................................49

A2 Competing Interpretations=Arbitrary Definitions .....................................................................................49

A2 Clash Checks....................................................................................................................................................................................50

A2 Clash Checks ..................................................................................................................................................50

A2 Lit Checks........................................................................................................................................................................................51

A2 Lit Checks .......................................................................................................................................................51

A2 Reasonability Checks.......................................................................................................................................................................52

A2 Reasonability Checks .....................................................................................................................................52

A2 Competing Interpretations Bad........................................................................................................................................................53

A2 Competing Interpretations Bad ....................................................................................................................53

A2 Potential Abuse Not a Voter.............................................................................................................................................................54

A2 Potential Abuse Not a Voter ..........................................................................................................................54

A2 Our Aff Is the Only T Aff.................................................................................................................................................................55

A2 Our Aff Is the Only T Aff ..............................................................................................................................55

A2 Reverse Voting Issue........................................................................................................................................................................56

A2 Reverse Voting Issue ......................................................................................................................................56

A2 Kritik of Topicality...........................................................................................................................................................................57

A2 Kritik of Topicality .........................................................................................................................................57

Definitions .............................................................................................................................................................58

3


4/69


Resolved.................................................................................................................................................................................................59

Resolved ................................................................................................................................................................59

Federal Government...............................................................................................................................................................................60

Federal Government ............................................................................................................................................60

Federal....................................................................................................................................................................................................61

Federal ..................................................................................................................................................................61

Government............................................................................................................................................................................................62

Government ..........................................................................................................................................................62

Should....................................................................................................................................................................................................63

Should ...................................................................................................................................................................63

Substantially...........................................................................................................................................................................................64

Substantially .........................................................................................................................................................64

Substantially ..........................................................................................................................................................................................65Substantially ........................................................................................................................................................65

Increase..................................................................................................................................................................................................66

Increase .................................................................................................................................................................66

Increase..................................................................................................................................................................................................67

Increase .................................................................................................................................................................67

Alternative Energy.................................................................................................................................................................................68

Alternative Energy ...............................................................................................................................................68

Incentives...............................................................................................................................................................................................69

Incentives ..............................................................................................................................................................69

4


5/69


Random Violations

5


6/69


1NC ASPEC

A. Interpretation:Government includes all three branches of government.

Political Science Dictionary 73 1973 (Dryden Press, Illinois, p. 174)

Government is the political and administrative hierarchy of an organized state. Governments exercise legislative, executive, andjudicial functions; the nature of the governmental system is determined by the distribution of these powers. Government may take

many forms, but it must be sufficiently powerful and stable to command obedience and maintain order. A governments position also

depends on its acceptance by the community of nations through its diplomatic recognition by other states.

B. Violation the Affirmative doesn't specify which branch of the government they use to pass their plan

C. Standards

1. Limits: forcing the affirmative to specify narrows the focus of the debate and prevents aff

condtionality

2. Ground: the neg loses alternate actor cp's, specific agent d/a's, and specific politics links, which

outweighs predictability

3. CX not check: the damage was done pre-round, the 1nc is already set you pull the trigger on T.D. T is a voter for reasons above

6


7/69


1NC Incentives Must Be Given By the Government

a) interpretation:

1. the USFG is the legislative, judicial, and executive branches

USA.gov, last updated June 27, 2008

U.S. Federal Government

Official information and services from the U.S. government

The three branches of U.S. governmentlegislative, judicial, and executivecarry out governmental power and functions.

2. The USFG is the subject and "should increase" is a transitive verb of which "alternative energy

incentive" is the object; the subject of a sentence performs the action and thus the USFG is the one who

increases incentives.

b) violation: another actor gives the incentives, replacing the USFG as the subject.

c) standards:1. limits: our interpretation limits the actor to one entity, whereas the neg allows for an infinite

number of unpredictable actors not mandated by the resolution.

2. topic-specific education: we lose crucial education about politics and alternative energy and their

interactions when we only discuss other actors

3. ground: they spike out of politics links by choosing and non-governmental actor and rob the neg

of agent CPs.

d) T is a voter for our standards and jurisdiction.

e) Evaluate T in a framework of competing interpretations; if we win that our interpretation is best for

debate, you vote them down. Reasonability is arbitrary and mandates judge intervention.

7


8/69


1NC Alternative Energy Must Be in the US

a) interpretation:

1. The United States is 48 states in North America, Alaska, and Hawaii

Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2006

United States

a republic in the N Western Hemisphere comprising 48 conterminous states, the District of Columbia, and Alaska in North

America, and Hawaii in the N Pacific. 267,954,767; conterminous United States, 3,022,387 sq. mi. (7,827,982 sq. km); withAlaska and Hawaii, 3,615,122 sq. mi. (9,363,166 sq. km). Capital: Washington, D.C.Abbreviation: U.S., US

2. in means included within

Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2006

in

(used to indicate inclusion within space, a place, or limits): walking in the park

3. Increase means to progressively become greater-this means the incentives must progressively increase

in the United States for some period of time

Merriam Webster's Dictionary Online, 2007.

Increase: 1 : to become progressively greater (as in size, amount, number, or intensity)

b) violation: the affirmative increases alternative energy outside of the US

c) standards:1. Limits: limiting the affirmative to defending an increase of alternative energy within the United

States, prevents increasing alternative energies in foreign, countries, which isn't predictable or

germaine to the topic

2. Ground: international actor, world economy, and international arugments are clearly negative

ground, removing them kills the advantage counterplans and alternative solvency mechanism

which are key to check side bias

3. Resolutional field context: the framers of the resolution wanted this years topic to revolve around

alternative energy in the U.S. ignoring this is aresoltuoinal and kills predictability [insert better

standards if you value your t ]


e) Evaluate T in a framework of competing interpretations; if we win that our interpretation is best fordebate, you vote them down. Reasonability is arbitrary and mandates judge intervention

8


9/69


1NC Should Is the Past Tense of Shall

A. Interpretation should is the past tense of shall[Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition, 2006, http://www.thefreedictionary.com/should]

Should

Verb

the past tense of shall: used to indicate that an action is considered by the speaker to be obligatory (you should go) or to form thesubjunctive mood (I should like to see you; if I should die; should I be late, start without me) [Old English sceolde]

B. Violation the affirmative specifies a plan to be done in the future, not the past

C. Standards

1. Limits: there are an infinite number of possible future plans, limiting the affirmative to past action

ensures fair ground.

2. Predictability: it is impossible to predict what future plans the affirmative could propose, which

destroys debatability and education

3. Education: policy makers formulate policies based on past knowledge, the affirmative eschews thiswhich kills policy education which is the purpose of debate.

A. T is a voter for the reasons above

9


10/69


1NC Substantially Is Without Material Qualifications

A. Interpretation:Substantially is without material qualification

Blacks Law Dictionary 1991[p. 1024]

Substantially - means essentially; without material qualification.

B. Violation, the affirmative specifies the nature of their incentive,

C. Standards

1. Limits: decreases limits and forces debate about the type of alternative energy, which is what the

resolution is structured to educate about. This is education is at the core of the topic, and

unlimiting to incentives allows extremly broad uneductaional debates

2. Ground: constrains ground picing out of incentives should be negative ground, and reading

generic politics links.

3. Predictability: not predictable to research all different kinds of alternative energy and all different

kinds of incentives which kills in-depth debates and education.

D. Voter for reasons above

10


11/69


1NC Banning Substances Isn't T

a) Interpretation:

1. increase is to make larger

Random House Unabridged Dictionary, "Incentive," Random House Inc, 2006

Increase: verb

To make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment; add to

2. An incentive is a reward for desired behavior-our evidence is contextual

Shane Smith, graduate student in the Political Science Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and ResearchAssistant at the University's Conflict Research Consortium, published atBeyond Intractability, an academic research site,

"Incentives," 2004

What is an incentive?

In an incentive,A promises rewards toB in an attempt to getB to do or not doX. (In our discussion, we will refer toA as a

"sender," andB as a "target.") When punishments or sanctions are likely to be ineffective, providing rewards for preferred

behavior may produce a more desirable outcome. However, incentives have been frequently associated with weakness orindecisiveness. As a result, scholarship has tended to focus more on sanctions than incentives. This unequal attention has skewed

the perceived effectiveness of threats over promises. Incentives can be an effective alternative for managing conflicts. As with all

such devices, however, they must be carefully administered with attention to matching the right tool with the right problem.

b) violation: the aff increases punishments rather than rewards and therefore does not increase incentives

c) standards:

1. limits: the aff interpretation makes the topic bidirectional, allowing for an infinite number of steps

that don't necessarily result in concrete actions. i.e., if we ban coal, that's an incentive notto use

coal but not necessarily an incentive to use alternative energy

2. FX: they're mixing burdens and forcing you to look to solvency to determine the T debate-the

result of a ban may or may not be an increased incentive.

3. Fairness: they can always link out of disads by saying they're only an eventual increase or

claiming that a ban wouldn't necessarily lead to the use of alternative energies-this means none of

our alternative energy links apply

d) T is a voter for our standards and jurisdiction



11


12/69


1NC Removing A Barrier Isn't T

a) interpretation: increase is to make larger


Increase: verb


2. An incentive is a reward for desired behavior-our evidence is contextual

Shane Smith, graduate student in the Political Science Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Research

Assistant at the University's Conflict Research Consortium, published atBeyond Intractability, an academic research site,"Incentives," 2004


In an incentive,A promises rewards toB in an attempt to getB to do or not doX. (In our discussion, we will refer toA as a"sender," andB as a "target.") When punishments or sanctions are likely to be ineffective, providing rewards for preferred

behavior may produce a more desirable outcome. However, incentives have been frequently associated with weakness or

indecisiveness. As a result, scholarship has tended to focus more on sanctions than incentives. This unequal attention has skewed

the perceived effectiveness of threats over promises. Incentives can be an effective alternative for managing conflicts. As with all

such devices, however, they must be carefully administered with attention to matching the right tool with the right problem.

b) violation: the aff does not increase incentives directly but rather removes a barrier that allows for

future increases of incentives

c) standards:

1. limits: they're only effectually topical-they allow for an infinite number of steps that eventually

solve the 1ac2. predictability: they force us to prepare by looking to their solvency by having a plan text with no

resolutional basis.

3. Topic-specific education: under their interpretation of debate, we never discuss the resolutional

but instead a number of unrelated steps.




12


13/69


1NC FX T

a) interpretation:

1. increase is to make larger


Increase: verb


2. An incentive is a motivation to act


Incentive: noun

Something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.

b) violation: the affirmative does not directly increase the incentives but instead takes a number of steps

which will eventually lead to an increase

c) standards:

1. limits: They allow for an infinite number of steps that eventually solve the 1ac. This is uniquely

bad because this topic doesn't mandate that affirmative increase alternative energy but only

incentives-abuse is magnified.

2. predictability: they force us to prepare by looking to their solvency by having a plan text with no

resolutional basis.

3. Topic-specific education: under their interpretation of debate, we never discuss the resolutional

but instead a number of unrelated steps.

4. bidirectionality: they allow for affs that decrease incentives in order to increase incentives in the

future, which is unpredictable

d) T is a voter for our standards and for jurisdiction



13


14/69


Alternative Energy Violations

14


15/69


1NC Cant Deplete Resources/Harm the Environment

A. Interpretation alternative energy cant deplete natural resources or harm the environment.

Oxford Diction, 2007Alternative energy is energy fueled in ways that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment

B. Violation the affirmatives use of alternative energy would (result in the depletion of resources)(and/or) (harm the environment).

C. Standards

1. Ground the negative would never have links to resource tradeoff disads, alternative energy

counterplans, case impact turns, consumption bad arguments or stability good arguments.

2. Limits this would allow any affirmative that used resources in order to create energy. Under the

affirmatives interpretation of debate the Use the End of the Oil affirmative, the Hydrogen

affirmative and Nuclear Power affirmatives would be topical.

3. Predictability the resolution implies the net increase of alternative energy, using other resourceswould allow the affirmative to be effectually topical by first decreasing energies and then

increasing them. This is abusive because the affirmative could claim tradeoff scenarios in their

1AC that the negative would never predict this is an independent voting issue for fairness and

education.

D. Voter for the reasons above.

15


16/69


1NC Alternative Energy Is Opposed to Fossil Fuels

A. Interpretation: Alternative Energy is opposed to fossil fuels

Natural Resources Defense Council energy that is not popularly used and is usually environmentally sound, such assolar or wind energy (as opposed to fossil fuels).[4]

Fossil fuels are carbon containing and either coals, liquid, or gaseous fuels.McGraw-Hill Encyclopedia of Science and Technology, 5th edition, 2008Any naturally occurring carbon-containing material which when burned with air (or oxygen) produces (directly) heat or (indirectly)

energy. Fossil fuels can be classified according to their respective forms at ambient conditions. Thus, there are solid fuels (coals);

liquid fuels (petroleum, heavy oils, bitumens); and gaseous fuels (natural gas, which is usually a mixture of methane, CH4, with lesser

amounts of ethane, C2H6, hydrogen sulfide, H2S, and numerous other constituents in small proportions).

B. Violation: the affirmative's plan is aimed at fossil fuels and not at increasing alternative energy.

C. Standards:

1. Limits: excluding fossil fuels is key to limiting the topic down, allowing fossil fuels explodes the

negative research burden and shifts the core of the topic

2. Predictability: the topic is huge and allowing fossil fuels destroys the ability of the neg to predict

the debate, destroying in-depth debate and topic education

3. Resolutional context: the framers of the resolution mean't the topic to be centered around

alternatives to fossil fuels, the resolution is the focus of the debate and shifting its focus destroys

education and fairness

4. Ground: allowing fossil fuels steals, oil d/a's, peak oil arguments, offshore drilling arguments,

power tradeoff d/a's, alt energy cps, and coal d/a's

D. T is a voter for the reasons above

16


17/69


1NC Cant Harm the Environment

a) interpretation: Alternative energy is energy that does not hurt the environment

WordNet, Princeton University, 2006

Alternative energy: energy derived from sources that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment.

b) violation: the affirmative does not increase incentives for alternative energy but instead increases

incentives for an energy that is harmful to the environment

c) standards:

1. topic-specific education: the core of the topic is a discussion of improvement of the environment.

Discussions of environmentally detrimental fuels explode it so that we no longer talk about what is

important.

2. most real world: our evidence is contextual-all literature assumes a world where alternative

energy is eco-friendly. It's key to political education that we assign to it the meaning thatcongressmen and the USFG give it.

3. ground: all our links are predicated off of an alternative energy source that isn't harmful to the

environment, as none of the literature assumes the term has such a meaning. Inefficient fuels are

advocated in the sqo-that's neg ground




17


18/69


Can't Hurt The Environment At: Mixing Burdens

1. It's not a matter of solvency but rather of definition, just like any other T debate. They only have

to provide a definition of their chosen alternative energy saying it's beneficial to the environment.

2. Mixing burdens is inevitable: because of the technical nature of the topic, we have to first

understand what certain substances are. i.e: we have to determine whether something is renewablein order to determine whether it is an alternative energy. Additional research must happen to

satisfy all T standards.

3. key to check aff side bias: they can use any incentive they want, so standards determining what

constitutes alternative energy must be more exacting.

18


19/69


Incentives Violations

19


20/69


1NC Incentives Must Be in the US

A. Interpretation the phrasing in the resolution means that in the United States directly modifies

the preceding phrase alternative energy incentives.

B. Violation the affirmative increase incentives outside of the United States (also).

C. Standards

1. Ground allowing the incentives to (also) be outside of the United States would destroy links to

virtually ever disadvantage. Public perception links, coercion links, consult counterplans

incentive counterplans, mandatory counterplans, states counterplans, states PICs, and

development kritiks would all have no solvency advocates and would be impossible to strategically

deploy.

2. Predictable Grammar the only grammatically correct way to interpret the resolution is to

interpret the modification of word incentives. Any preceding direct object to a prepositional

phrase is modified by that prepositional phrase. Grammar is key predictability; a non-stable

interpretation of the resolution would allow the affirmative to take any action destroying fairnessand education.


20


21/69


1NC Incentives Must Be Throughout

A. Interpretation the phrase in the United States modifies incentives. In means throughout.

The connotes a whole. This means that all of the United States must receive incentives.

B. Violation the affirmative increases incentives only in a part of the United States.

C. Standards

1. Ground the negative would never be able to win politics disads, economy disads, states PICs, oi

disads, tradeoff disads, permits counterplans or case turns. Without this ground the affirmative

would have a strategic advantage and win most debates.

2. Predictable Limits allowing the affirmative to specific where in the United States the incentives

are would allow incentives to any combination of states. Assuming there are at least 10 alternative

energy incentives and 50 states, even without combinations, thats 500 affirmatives that thenegative would need to be prepared to debate.


21


22/69


1NC Incentives Must Cause Action

A. Interpretation incentives must cause action.

Merriam and Webster Online, 2008 (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/incentive)Incentive: Something that incentives or has a tendency to incite determination or action

B. Violation the affirmative doesnt directly result in an action.

C. Standards

1. Effectually Topical the affirmative would be able to give any incentive that would result in an

action after a number of steps instead of causing the increase that the resolution modifies this

destroys the negatives ability to debate. This would allow the affirmative to be effectually anti-

topical because they could increase an incentive that would decrease alternative energy. This is an

independent voting issue for abuse.

2. Predictable Limits the number of potential affirmatives would be ridiculous under the

affirmatives interpretation of debate. Any action that resulted in an increase in alternative energy

would be topical destroying all predictable affirmative ground.


22


23/69


1NC Incentive Group SPEC

A. Interpretation the affirmative cant specify the group that receives the incentives.

B. Violation the affirmative specifies (that ______) (a group) that receives the mandated incentives

of the plan.

C. Standards

1. Limits the number of potential affirmatives is literally infinite. States, cities, classes, career

groups, age groups, professions, organizations, industries and individual people would all be made

topical under the negatives interpretation.

2. Ground the affirmative would be able to spike out of any negative disad; links and solvency

advocates for counterplans would be impossible to find without doing mass amounts of research

for every specific entity within the United States.

3. The Tie Breaker under our interpretation the affirmative could claim advantage ground off of

specific groups being targeted while at the same time the plantext would not specify allowing thenegative to have increased ground predicated off of normal means debates.


23


24/69


1NC Incentives Must Be Plural

A. Interpretation the resolution does not say incentive rather incentives thus this indicates that

these incentives must be plural.

B. Violation the affirmative only offers one incentive.

C. Standards

1. Ground allowing the affirmative to only give one incentive would destroy links to politics, links

spending disads, solvency advocates for virtually every counterplan and trade off disads.

2. Grammar ignoring the pluralization of incentives destroys the grammatical intent of the

resolution. Grammar is the most important standard because it establishes a common ground for

the resolution to take place, ignoring the technicalities of grammar would cause affirmatives to

interpret the resolution in any way they wanted and win the debate.


24


25/69


1NC Incentives Must Be Voluntary

a) interpretation: An incentive is a reward for desired behavior and is voluntary

Shane Smith, graduate student in the Political Science Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Research Assistant at

the University's Conflict Research Consortium, published atBeyond Intractability, an academic research site, "Incentives," 2004


In an incentive,A promises rewards toB in an attempt to getB to do or not doX. (In our discussion, we will refer toA as a "sender,"

andB as a "target.") When punishments or sanctions are likely to be ineffective, providing rewards for preferred behavior may

produce a more desirable outcome. However, incentives have been frequently associated with weakness or indecisiveness. As a result,

scholarship has tended to focus more on sanctions than incentives. This unequal attention has skewed the perceived effectiveness of

threats over promises. Incentives can be an effective alternative for managing conflicts. As with all such devices, however, they must

be carefully administered with attention to matching the right tool with the right problem.

b) violation: the affirmative increases coercive regulations, or sanctions, rather than incentives

c) standards:1. limits: this limits out mandatory programs, making the case list shorter and closer to the core of

the topic; anything that involves mandatory incentives means affs can just create laws and don't

need solvency advocates-make them research and find ev saying people will ascribe to the

incentive

2. education: this allows us to debate both sides of the issue-if every aff chose to do mandatory

things, we'd never learn about voluntary programs

3. real world: Voluntary actions are used by the USFG-there's a more predictable literature base

Encyclopedia of Global Change, "Energy Policy," 2002

Government energy policies can encourage voluntary actions on the part of individuals and corporations. The Energy Star and GreenLights programs in the United States are highly successful in promoting more energy efficiency in buildings, appliances, and lighting.

Contests have been devised to promote development of energy-efficient designs of buildings and high-efficiency appliances.

For a time, electric utilities were encouraged through were encouraged through regulatory incentives to sponsor voluntary actions such

as the development of a highly efficient refrigerator. Deregulation may reduce the incentive to participate in such programs.

4. ground: fiated laws or sanctions are neg ground and are key to check unpredictable affs-they get

infinite prep in which to find solvency advocates




25


26/69


1NC Incentives Must Attract Industry Development

A. Governmental Incentives attract the development of industry in specified areas.A Dicitionary of Geography, 2004, Susan Mahew, http://www.answers.com/topic/government-incentives?cat=technology,

Measures taken by a government to attract the development of industry in specified areas. These include grants for

building, works, plant, and machinery, assistance in encouraging sound industrial projects, removal grants to new

locations, free rent of a government-owned factory for up to five years, taxation allowances against investments, loans,

and contract preference schemes

B. Violation: the affirmative offers a plan that it not a government incentives

C. Standards

1. Limits: we provide the best limits by limiting the topic down to a specific subset of cases that are

both predictable and offer lots of ground

2. Ground: by limiting affirmatives to the mechanisms listed above, the negative ensures links to

alternate incentive counterplans, politics d/a's, and alternate actor counterplans.

3. Predictability: by limiting affirmatives to the mechanisms listed above, it ensures that both the

affirmative and negative will be predictable thus leading to more in-depth debates with betterclash

4. Bright line: our definition provides a clear bright line as to what is and is not an incentive, which

is key to limits, ground and education.

5. Resolutional context: the resolution specifies an incentive to be enacted by the USFG q.e.d. A

government incentive. Resolutional focus is key because it is the focus of the debate and skewing

it destroys fairness and debatability.

E. T is a voter for the reasons above

26
http://www.answers.com/topic/government-incentives?cat=technologyhttp://www.answers.com/topic/government-incentives?cat=technology


27/69


1NC Incentives Cant Be Disincentives

a) 1. An incentive is a motivation to act


Incentive: noun

Something that incites or tends to incite to action or greater effort, as a reward offered for increased productivity.

2. The removal of tariffs or a barrier isn't T-the disincentive was disproportional to begin with and its

removal isn't an incentive but rather a way to remedy previously unjust punishment

Shane Smith, graduate student in the Political Science Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Research Assistant atthe University's Conflict Research Consortium, published atBeyond Intractability, an academic research site, "Incentives," 2004

One type is the removal of existing penalties, such as sanctions,embargoes, investment bans, or high tariffs, in exchange for

specific policy changes. This was an implicit part of the U.S. incentives package, which tried to encourage Libyan cooperation

with U.N. antiterrorism conventions and seek Libyan assistance in the hunt for the perpetrators of the September 11th attacks.

However, this approach is not always viewed as an actual incentive. If the penalties being relaxed are thought to be

disproportionate to the alleged actions, or the penalties are perceived to be wrongly imposed in the first place, or their mere

withdrawal is thought to be insufficient compensation, then the target may not view such an offer as an incentive at all. While

these incentives may be viewed as bribes or be resented as invasions of sovereignty, the willingness to lift sanctions in exchangefor particular policy changes can create an atmosphere more conducive to compromise than can the threat of more sanctions

b) violation: the aff decreases a disincentive but does not increase an incentive

c) Standards:

1. limits: allowing disincentives makes the topic bidirectional. It allows cases that decrease something

in order to lead to a future increase that might never occur.

2. FX: this is a classic example of removing a barrier and allows for an infinite number of steps,

exploding limits

3. clash: it allows for affs that aren't researchable and functionally doubles the research load-there

are an infinite number of obscure actions that could lead to an eventual increase

4. most real world: Deregulation decreases incentives

Encyclopedia of Global Change, "Energy Policy," 2002

For a time, electric utilities were encouraged through regulatory incentives to sponsor voluntary actions such as the

development of a highly efficient refrigerator. Deregulation may reduce the incentive to participate in such programs.

d) T is a voter for our standards and for jurisdictione) Evaluate T in a framework of competing interpretations; if we win that our interpretation is best for


27
http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/arms_embargo/http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/arms_embargo/http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/arms_embargo/http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/arms_embargo/


28/69


1NC Incentives Must Be Financial

a) interpretation: Only voluntary, conditional, economic incentives are T-our evidence is contextual

Shane Smith, graduate student in the Political Science Department at the University of Colorado, Boulder, and Research Assistant at

the University's Conflict Research Consortium, published atBeyond Intractability, an academic research site, "Incentives," 2004

Another type of incentive is one used to improve the recipient's economic standing.[2] This can include financial assistance, access to

technology, loans, or investment initiatives, in return for certain concessions. The foreign policy community in the United States hasrecently pushed this strategy. In early 2002, for instance, the U.S. Senate introduced a resolution encouraging greater use of economic

incentives as a diplomatic tool in the fight against terrorism. Joan Nelson and Stephanie Eglinton of the Overseas Development

Council have suggested that foreign aid, typically considered a tool of support or tacit persuasion, should also be used as a form of

pressure by making it explicitly conditional .[3] Ways of achieving this, they argue, include providing more aid to those who meet

certain criteria and making aid contingent on prearranged policy reforms. In 1992, for example, President Bush indicated that financia

assistance to Israel would be contingent on its limiting settlement activities in the occupied territories.

b) violation: the affirmative provides incentives that aren't financial

c) standards

1. limits: there are an infinite number of areas of incentivizing that aren't financial-to the point atwhich the aff doesn't have to increase alternative energy but only has to increase incentives, we

need ground for disad and K links

2. predictability: all the literature assumes a world where the USFG gives financial incentives in

relation to policy affairs-our definition proves. This is the most accessible literature base.

3. education: a discussion of financial incentives allows us to focus the topic and have greater depth.

It's better for us to really understand one part of the resolution than to briefly discuss the rest.




28


29/69


2AC Counter Interp Modules

29


30/69


2AC Incentives Can Be Rewards or Punishment

(__) Counter Interpretation

A. Incentives can be rewards or punishment.

Words and Phrases Online, 2008 (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/incentive)Incentive: Something, such as the fear of punishment or the expectation of reward, that induces action or motivates effort.

B. We meet our interpretation we provide either a reward or a punishment.

C. Superior Interpretation

1. The negative interpretation over limits the debate to a small number of affirmatives that would be

only one or the other.

2. Education our interpretation allows a comprehensive analysis of incentivized alternative energy;

any other interpretation would limit the topic to a non-real world standard that would dilute the

debate and render all education useless.

3. Ground our interpretation allows a fair division of ground. The research for positive and

negative incentives is inevitable and the ground provided on each side of this debate is enough to

win a debate.

30


31/69


2AC Alternative Energy Includes Nuclear


A. Alternative energy includes alternatives to fossil fuel, which are nuclear energies, combustibles

biomass, synthetic fuels and oil/ natural gass.

Encyclopedia of Environmental Science, 1999The primary sources of energy for modern living are the fossil fuels: oil, natural gas and coal. Non-fossil fuels include nuclear

power, a significant source of electricity in countries outside the United States; renewable, such as solar, wind, geothermal

steam, waterfalls and tides; combustibles, such as wood, biomass and trash; and synthetic fuels (q.v.). such as ethanolproduced

from corn, and oil and natural gas produced from coal and oil shale.

B. We meet our interpretation we increase energy alternative to fossil fuels.


1. Real world our interpretation of the resolution allows a more real world approach to alternative

energy debates. Alternative energy should include a vast scope of things because the resolution

doesnt specify alternative to a specific entity.

2. Education only a comprehensive approach to alternative energy would allow the education that

is needed. Depth would never be able to be covered enough or agreed upon, breath is the only

alternative.

3. The negatives interpretation over limits to a small number of affirmatives that use only wind or

solar power, this would destroy the intent of the resolution and make it impossible to defend the

affirmative.

31


32/69


2AC Alternative Energy is Renewable


A. Alternative energy is renewable energy.

Minerals Management Service, last updated in 2008Alternative energy: fuel sources that are other than those derived from fossil fuels. Typically used interchangeably forrenewable energy. Examples include: wind, solar, biomass, wave and tidal energy.

B. We meet our interpretation we increase incentives for energy that is renewable.


1. The negatives interpretation over limits to a small number of affirmatives, this would destroy the

intent of the resolution and make it impossible to defend the affirmative.

2. Education - only a comprehensive approach to alternative energy would allow the education that

is needed. Depth would never be able to be covered enough or agreed upon, breath is the only

alternative.

3. Real world in the real world alternative energy and renewable energy are functionally

synonymous, there is no reason this should not also be true in debate rounds.

32


33/69


Standards Blocks

33


34/69


FX T Bad

1. Unlimits any action taken that eventually will eventually result in a topical action, forcing unfair

burdens upon the negative.

2. Eliminates negative ground any counterplan we read could be topical effects as much as theplan.

3. Mixes burdens the judge must determine jurisdiction before considering the merits of the plan

FX mixes burdens destroying the judges ability to non-arbitrarily decide a round.

4. Makes T probabilistic T should be a yes or no question but FX T makes it a question of degree.

5. Unpredictable there is no way to research backwards, finding an alternative energy problem and

then tracking all the ways to fix it would destroy debate.

6. Arbitrary any counter interpretation that limits the number of steps can be adjusted based onthe actual action of the plan; this would allow any affirmative to be topical.

34


35/69


FX T Good

1. Overlimits every case on the topic takes a number of steps in order to be topical, an incentive

must result in an action that causes alternative energy to increase, the USFG has to pass a plan

that funds incentives, there literally would be NO aff ground.

2. Real world every action in policy making is judged by the effects that it will have.

3. Increases ground every additional step taken by the affirmative is another way to get links to

criticisms, disads and PIC ground.

4. Still predictable the plan is still germane to the resolution, and finding literature on our aff is

easy.

5. No abuse there is no real abuse from us taking any steps in the round, dont vote on potential

abuse itd be like punishing us for a crime we never committed.

6. Increases education we increase the education about the topic by alternative causation, causing

more research, higher education levels and better debate.

35


36/69


Extra T Bad

1. Proves the resolution is insufficient if the affirmative can not take a solely topical action to it

proves that the resolution is not enough to warrant a ballot in and of itself.

2. Unpredictable the affirmative could take any number of actions outside the resolution that wewould never be able to predict, this destroys all ground.

3. Promotes lazy debate there would be no reason to settle for clash when you can just be extra

topical.

4. Kills education it makes in depth debate vacuous because the affirmative isnt germane to the

resolution.

5. Reject the entirety of the affirmative, not just the extra topical portions anything less creates

being extra topical as a no loss option for the affirmative. We have to read this argument just to

get to ground zero in the world created by the aff.

36


37/69


Extra T Good

1. Increases education discussing things outside of the resolution increases the breath of education

over all.

2. Real world in the real world proposals arent limited exclusively to one topic.

3. Reasonability checks back we are still germane to the resolution, and there is plenty of literature

on our case.

4. Increases ground every part of our plan that is extra topical is another place for the negative to

get disad links, counterplan solvency differentials and PIC ground.

5. At worst reject the extra topical portions of the affirmative not the aff team. This checks back

any in round abuse.

6. No abuse we dont use the extra topical portions of the plan to spike out of disad links orcounterplans.

37


38/69


THEORY O/W T

1. In-round abuse always o/w potential abuse-don't punish us for what we could have done when

they did something illegitimate

2. Even if they win that we destroy debate for a year, they destroy debate forever by justifying

sketchy strats that will ruin education on every topic

3. Fairness: the resolutional literature basis checks unpredictable affs and makes research possible

whereas there is no check on unpredictable neg strats.

38


39/69


T O/W Theory

1. Untopical affirmatives justify sketchy neg strats

2. Even if they win that we destroy debate for a round, there is no overall precedent set because we

are responding to an untopical aff; they destroy debate for an entire year by justifying abusive

cases.

3. Topic-specific education o/w general education because topic specific education is a prerequisite to

education in general-only the resolutional is predictable ground for research. Debates grounded in

the resolution are key to clash.

39


40/69


41/69


Depth O/W Breadth

1. education: depth is crucial to our understanding of issues. This education o/w superficial

education we get with breadth.

2. more limiting: focuses the topic on what is essential and allows us to have fair debates for which

we are prepared3. most real world: policy makers discuss all the intricacies of an issue so they can make the best

decisions and formulate the best policies-we can never make informed decisions when we have

only superficial knowledge of the topic

4. breadth is pointless without depth-it's terminal impact is topic specific education, but depth solves

that better.

41


42/69


Education O/W Fairness

1. education is the terminal impact of fairness-this means if we win that our interpretation creates a

more educational debate, this comes first. Fairness doesn't exist for fairness's sake but rather to

promote education.

2. fairness frameworks exclude important discussions of things like racism that may not necessarilybe included in the res

3. unfairness in debate is inevitable-sandbagging and illegit argumentation happens; education has

more of a unique impact

4. after the round, education has a longer-lasting impact, whereas fairness exists only in the context

of particular rounds.

5. Fairness is arbitrary-the aff always want to exclude the neg and the neg always want to exclude

the aff. Education is the only objective standard.

6. Education is key to critical thinking, which is key to innovative debate that allows smaller schools

to compete even when they can't produce as much evidence. This is the best internal link to

fairness because it creates an inclusive activity.

42


43/69


Fairness O/W Education

1. Fairness is the best internal link to education and is a prerequisite to it: fairness is key to

predictability and Ground, without which there can be no clash and substantive discussion

2. The education we gain from maintaining the structure of debate o/w topic specific education

because it allows for education generally, not just on this topic3. Fairness is the procedural gateway-it is the only way to evaluate the T debate, whereas education

is an issue of content. A framework for evaluating T has to be established before we evaluate it.

43


44/69


Reasonability Good

1. Education: it allows us to discuss substantive issues and real political implications, as opposed to

discussing T every round. We'll never learn about the topic if every debate is about limits

2. most real world: policy makers don't argue about semantics, they look for the best policy option

3. lit checks solves all the reasons why reasonability is bad because it checks absurd, unpredictableaffs

4. fairness: allows the neg to pick unfair, limiting definitions contrived to exclude topical affs

5. don't vote on potential abuse: it doesn't set a precedent, key to fairness

a) it's inevitable, we could always beat them up or read a new aff in the 2ar. Don't punish us

unless we actually do it.

b) no brightline: there are an infinite number of possible abusive actions-one instance of in-

round abuse and you vote us down.

44


45/69


A2 Reasonability Is Vague

Our interpretation of reasonability is that affs with contextual literature and solvency advocates are

topical.

a) best topic-specific education: encourages in-depth research and allows us to access the core of the

topicb) most predictable, solving why vagueness is bad. Negs prep based on the available literature base,

which is more predictable than random definitions.

45


46/69


A2 Reasonability=Judge Intervention

1. reasonability is the most objective paradigm because we ask the judge to isolate one instance of in-

round abuse. Competing interpretations forces the judge to decide what we wouldhave done

2. It's least arbitrary because definitions are grounded in literature; neg definitions are taken out of

context3. It's inevitable, there is some amount of judge intervention in every round. Even in competing

interpretation debates, the judge has to decide which args are most reasonable

4. Judge intervention is good; it forces us to be persuasive and checks bad arguments like racism

good

46


47/69


Competing Interpretations Good

1. best for topic specific education: discussing definitions is key to determine what the topic should

look like and key to determining which parts of it are key. This discussion is a prerequisite to

meaningful and substantive debates about political implications.

2. most objective: checks judge intervention by making us debate T like other arguments3. fairness: checks abuse by establishing which definitions are best for reciprocal ground

4. key to contextualizing evidence by forcing comparison, which allows more in-depth research

5. Vote on potential abuse-if we prove their interpretation is bad for debate, you vote them down. It's

not what they do, it's what they justify.

a) they destroy debate for the rest of the year by encouraging people to run similar affs

b) potential abuse is functionally in-round abuse: it determines what we will run and skews

our strategy. We're not going to waste time reading a disad they'll just link out of.

47


48/69


A2 Race to The Bottom

1. it's not a race to the bottom if you can prove that other standards o/w limits or that overlimiting is

bad

2. it's no more a race to the bottom than other arguments. We're not necessarily looking for the most

limiting definition but rather the one that's best for debate: perms of definitions are legit3. The aff always has the advantage when it comes to T definitions. They can find specific evidence

pertaining to their aff-competing interpretations is key to check infinite prep

48


49/69


A2 Competing Interpretations=Arbitrary Definitions

1. Competing interpretations is about determining which world is best for debate; an arbitrary

definition constructed to exclude the aff will never win the standards debate

2. And all you have to win to defeat arbitrary definitions is that overlimiting is bad

3. Author quals check. We have to have contextual literature written by someone in the field; thedefinition can't be arbitrary

49


50/69


A2 Clash Checks

1. We do not need a non-viable negative strategy to prove the abuse.

2. The time that we spent researching on their non topical aff, we should spend on topical affs.

3. There can be clash on anything. Our argument is that there should be better clash

50


51/69


A2 Lit Checks

1. This does not prove that they are topical. This just means we did our research.

2. We do not need a non-viable negative strategy to prove the abuse.

3. You can find literature on anything. They expect us to read the entirety of the internet articles on

this just to find stuff on their case.

4. Jurisdiction still applies. The judge can not vote for aff that isnt topical regardless of whether or

not there is literature on it.

(only read if g-stein is the judge)

5. Lit checks is dumb

MICHAEL B. GREENSTEIN, PROFESSOR OF DEBATE AT GEORGETOWN, 2007 (NOTE: THIS CARD WAS NOTACTUALLY PUBLISHED)

If someone read the penguin testicles aff and I had my icy hot disad ready to go, does that make them topical? NO!!!

51


52/69


53/69


A2 Competing Interpretations Bad

1. The affirmative is the team who created the competing interpretation.

2. Competing interpretations are good because they are the only non arbitrary thing on topicality.

3. If we prove that our interpretation is better than your counter interpretation this standard goes

away.

53


54/69


A2 Potential Abuse Not a Voter

1. Just because theres not visible abuse doesnt mean that there wasnt any. We werent able to run

any disads or counterplans off of the way that you increase which is something you should have to

defend.

2. Proving in round abuse is always going to loose because you can say it didnt happen.

3. Potential abuse is always going to be a voting issue because its not what you do its what you

justify.

54


55/69


A2 Our Aff Is the Only T Aff

1. Any affirmative team will be able to say this proving that you cant vote here.

2. This decreases education because you would only be learning about 1 of the countless affirmatives.

3. Destroys framers intent- if the framers meant for only one aff to be topical they would have made

this the resolution instead.

4. Counter counter interpretation only ______ is topical.

55


56/69


A2 Reverse Voting Issue

1. This is dumb. You dont win a debate just because your case is topical.

2. Defecating on flows is better than this.

MICHAEL B. GREENSTEIN, PROFESSOR OF DEBATE AT GEORGETOWN, 2007(NOTE: THIS CARD WASNOT ACTUALLY PUBLISHED)

90% of the time, if a team just defecated on their flow and handed to me, I would vote for them over a reverse voting issue on

topicality.

56


57/69


58/69


Definitions

58


59/69


Resolved

Resolved means to express by formal votethis is the only definition thats in the context of the

resolution

Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1998 (dictionary.com)

Resolved:

6. To express, as an opinion or determination, by resolution and vote; to declare or decide by a formal vote; -- followed by a

clause; as, the house resolved (or, it was resolved by the house) that no money should be apropriated (or, to appropriate no

money)

59


60/69


Federal Government

Federal government is central governmentWEBSTER'S NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY UNABRIDGED, 1976, p. 833.

Federal government. Of or relating to the central government of a nation, having the character of a federation as distinguished from

the governments of the constituent unites (as states or provinces).

Federal government is central governmentPRINCETON UNIVERSITY WORDNET, 1997, p. http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=federal%20government.

Federal government. n: a government with strong central powers.

Federal government is in washington, d.c.WEST'S LEGAL THESAURUS/DICTIONARY, 1985, p. 744.

United States: Usually means the federal government centered in Washington, D.C.

60


61/69


Federal

Federal means relating to the national government of the United StatesBlacks Law Dictionary, 1999federal, adj. Of or relating to a system of associated governments with a vertical division of governments into national and regional

components having different responsibilities; esp., of or relating to the national government of the United States.

61


62/69


Government

Government includes all three branches of government.

Political Science Dictionary 73 1973 (Dryden Press, Illinois, p. 174)

Government is the political and administrative hierarchy of an organized state. Governments exercise legislative, executive, andjudicial functions; the nature of the governmental system is determined by the distribution of these powers. Government may take

many forms, but it must be sufficiently powerful and stable to command obedience and maintain order. A governments position alsodepends on its acceptance by the community of nations through its diplomatic recognition by other states.

Government includes all three branchesShafritz 88 1988 (The Dorsey Dictionary of American Government and Politics, p. 249)Government is the formal institutions and process through which binding decisions are made for a society. Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) wrote in Civil

Disobedience (1849) that that government is the best which governs least. This statement is often attributed to Thomas Jefferson but while it certainly reflects his

philosophic sentiments, it has never been found in any of Jeffersons writings. 2 The apparatus of the state, consisting of executive, legislative, and

judicial branches. 3 A political entity that has taxing authority and jurisdiction over a defined geographic area for some specified purpose, such as fire protection orschools. 4 The indiciduals who temporarily control the institutions of a state or subnational jurisdiction. 5 The United States government, especially as in the

government.

62


63/69


Should

Should is equal to obligationWORDS AND PHRASES 1953, Vol. 39, p. 313.

The word should, denotes an obligation in various degrees, usually milder than ought Baldassarre v. West

Oregon Lumber Co., 239 p.2d 839, 842, 198 Or. 556.

Should is used to express probability or expectationWEBSTER'S II, 1984, p. 1078

Should - used to express probability or expectation. They should arrive here soon.

Should means expectation of future actionRemo Foresi v. The Hudson Coal Co, SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 106 Pa. Super. 307; 161 A. 910; 1932 Pa.Super. LEXIS 239 July 14, 1932

As regards the mandatory character of the rule, the word 'should' is not only an auxiliary verb, it is also thepreterite of the verb, 'shall' and has for one of its meanings as defined in the Century Dictionary: "Obliged orcompelled (to); would have (to); must; ought (to); used with an infinitive (without to) to express obligation,necessity or duty in connection with some act yet to be carried out." We think it clear that it is in that sense that theword 'should' is used in this rule, not merely advisory. When the judge in charging the jury tells them that, unless they find from all the

evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged, they should acquit, the word 'should' isnot used in an advisory sense but has the force or meaning of 'must', or 'ought to' and carries [***8] with itthe sense of [*313] obligation and duty equivalent to compulsion. A natural sense of sympathy for a few unfortuna

finished t file - fellows

Documents