THEORY 101:
The Stock Issues
of Debate
Quick Review
• Every year there is a resolution. This year’s is
______? (do you remember it exactly?)
• Every round has two teams of two debaters
– The Affirmative Team (AFF) : has a plan which
supports the resolution
– The Negative Team (NEG): must prove the AFF’s plan is
a bad idea
[Arguments are (hopefully) partially scripted, and
supporting EVIDENCE is prepared in advance]
Review pt. 2
• Every debate follows the same format
• There are 2 types of speeches in policy debate.
– Constructives
• 8 minutes long
• Each team ‘builds’ their case
• Followed by a 3 minute CX
– Rebuttals
• 5 minutes long
• The evidence is weighed, but no new evidence can be
considered.
Review pt 3
• Debate is a yes/no question of the AFF plan*
• The 1st Aff. Constructive (1AC)
– A scripted, 8 minute speech in which the AFF
• States an existing problem in the Status Quo (SQ)
• Proposes a plan of action for addressing this problem
• Demonstrates significant advantages to adopting their
plan
The Stock Issues (finally)
• The role of the negative team is to tear apart
the AFF however they can. Traditionally, there
are 5* types of arguments used in policy
debate:
– The ‘burdens of the affirmative,’ which are:
Topicality, Harms, Inherency, Solvency
– Disadvantages
Topicality
• THE FIRST QUESTION OF EVERY DEBATE:
– Is the AFF talking about the resolution?
– Why do you think this might be an important
question to ask? Does it really matter?
– Topicality is considered an apriori issue in a debate
round (What does that mean?)
2010 Resolution
• Resolved: The United States Federal Government should
substantially reduce its military and/or police presence
in one or more of the following: South Korea, Japan,
Afghanistan, Kuwait, Iraq, Turkey
• Questions for thinking
about ‘T’
– Have you ever had an
argument about what a
word means?
– Are there any words in
the resolution that
people might disagree
about?
– Any words you have an
opinion on? Anything
in there you just don’t
understand?
Inherency: What is going on now, and
how is that different from plan?
• Has the AFF team
presented a plan that is
significantly different
• What prevents the AFF
from the SQ?
plan from already being
• Is the problem already
part of the SQ?
being addressed?
– (“INHERENT BARRIER”)
Would doing the AFF
even make a difference?
Harms
• “Harms” are the bad
things that are
happening in the SQ
• What might be bad
about US military
presence around the
world?
• What kinds of things do
you think the NEG might
say about these harms?
Solvency
• Does the AFF solve their stated harms and
associated advantages?
• Three types of solvency argument
– The AFF does NOT solve
– Advantage Turn (link)- The AFF actually makes the
problem worse
– Advantage Turn (impact)- The ‘Advantage’ of the
AFF is undesirable.
Disadvantages
– Doing the AFF plan might result in BAD
THINGS!
– Spending, econ, education gap, lowering
healthcare quality, economy, TYRANNY,
PROLIFERATION, WAR, NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST,
EXTINCTION OF ALL LIFE ON THIS AND ANY
OTHER PLANETS, ETC.