Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Topicality
Topicality ............................................................................................................................................................... 1
Resolution .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Shells for Camp Affs ......................................................................................................................................................... 3
Desalination .................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Rubbish ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Rubbish - Alternative Violation – Exploration excludes surveys .................................................................................. 6
Ocean Acidification ........................................................................................................................................................... 7
Natural Gas ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Russia Cooperation ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
Offshore Wind............................................................................................................................................................... 10
Topicality Impacts .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
Limits ............................................................................................................................................................................ 12
Precision ........................................................................................................................................................................ 14
A2: Aff Flexibility ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
A2: Breadth Good ......................................................................................................................................................... 16
Other Topicality .............................................................................................................................................................. 17
Development ................................................................................................................................................................. 18
Exploration .................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Substantially .................................................................................................................................................................. 20
Create Not Increase ....................................................................................................................................................... 21
Aff ev ................................................................................................................................................................................ 22
Reasonability................................................................................................................................................................. 23
Topic education ............................................................................................................................................................. 24
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
1
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Resolution
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military
exploration and/or development of the Earth’s oceans
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
2
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Shells for Camp Affs
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
3
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Desalination
A. Interpretation – a coastal zone is not the ocean
Keith 82, Kent M. "Laws Affecting the Development of Ocean Resources in Hawaii." U. Haw. L. Rev. 4 (1982): 227.
A "coastal
zone" is broadly defined in the CZMA as the coastal waters and adjacent shorelines which are "strongly influenced by
transitional and intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands and beaches. Specifically, the zone
extends "seaward to the outer limit of the United States territorial sea," and "inland from the shoreline only to the extent necessary to
each other," including
control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters.""' The definition was designed to be broad to suit the diverse needs of
all thirty-four coastal states and territories.2
B. Violation – the plan happens on the coast and not the ocean
Tsiourtis 01, Nicos X. "Desalination and the environment." Desalination 141.3 (2001): 223-236.
The plant site should be close to the raw ¶ source of water and to the brine reject area. ¶ Thus, the quality of the raw water is safe- ¶ guarded and the distance of seawater
and brine transfer is minimized so the risk of land ¶ pollution or contamination is reduced. Large ¶ desalination
plants must be located on the ¶
coast. The seawater must be of good quality ¶ and the risk of pollution or contamination ¶ must be very remote (the intake to be away ¶ from ports or points of
discharge of water of ¶ questionable quality, etc). ¶ The plant site should be close to the existing ¶ water system or to the city to be
supplied with ¶ desalinated water, thus reducing the costs of ¶ water transfer and pumping and avoiding the ¶ installation of additional conveyors.
¶
C. Standards
1. Limits—Oceans is one of the only limiting terms in the resolution—force the aff to do deep
ocean exploration. This interpretation is best because it excludes plans that would supply the
mainland with immediate resources making the ocean aspect of the resolution meaningless.
Require a clear bright line for the definition of ocean. Oceans are already a massive part of the
continent; don’t let the aff talk about continental projects. Limits is the internal link to
education, without effective and predictable limits our research is non productive nor focused.
2. Best Topic education—Forces aff to discover something new which increases everyone
education about oceans. Our interp still allows for all plans that occur away from the shore.
3. Ground – our interp allows for spatial-based counter plans (coast, land), which allows for
education on geographical benefits of plan implementation. The aff kills international territory
disadvantages because the plan happens always the US. This removes a core part of the topic
literature about the division of the ocean into pre-existing nations and how these borders
function alongside exploration/development. Ground is the internal link to fairness, if we don’t
have equal access to ground aff becomes artificially more likely to win. Makes being neg
impossible.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
4
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Rubbish
A. Interpretation – ocean exploration is search for the purpose of discovery and excludes survey
and at-sea research
NOAA Science Advisory Board 12 Panel Chair is Jesse Ausubel, Director, Program for the Human Environment,
The Rockefeller University, Member President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration (2000), member of Ocean Exploration
Advisory Working Group to NOAA’s Science Advisory Board. “Ocean Exploration’s Second Decade,”
http://www.sab.noaa.gov/Working_Groups/docs/OER%20review%20report%20from%20SAB_FiNAL_5%20updated%2
003_26_13.pdf
The present Panel affirms the brief definition of exploration of the 2000 Panel: Exploration is the systematic search
and investigation for the initial purpose of discovery and the more elaborated definition of the US Navy:
Systematic examination for the purposes of discovery; cataloging/documenting what one finds; boldly going where
no one has gone before; providing an initial knowledge base for hypothesis-based science and for exploitation.
The Panel affirms that Ocean Exploration is distinct from comprehensive surveys (such as those carried out by NAVOCEANO and
NOAA Corps) and at-sea research (sponsored by National Science Foundation, Office of Naval Research, and other agencies), including hypothesisdriven investigations aimed at the ocean bottom, artifacts, water column, and marine life.
B. Violation – Monitoring is continual surveying and only magnifies the link
Naylor 13 Anna S.R., Masters of Marine Management from Dalhousie University. Integrated Ocean management:
Making local global: the role of monitoring in reaching national and international commitments. August 2013
http://dalspace.library.dal.ca/bitstream/handle/10222/37034/Naylor,%20A%20%20Graduate_Project2013.pdf?sequence=1
Monitoring, in the broadest sense, is defined as the routine measurement of chosen indicators to understand the condition
and trends of the various components of an ecosystem (Bisbal, 2001). It is an important part of any policy as it allows for two parts. First, it
allows for a community or government to monitor the changing state and resiliency of the relevant coastal and marine systems.
This includes both the biophysical components as well as the human dimensions (Kearney et al., 2007). Second, it also allows
managers to assess the extent to which said policy is working in practice at the various levels (local or national). To be able to properly monitor ocean and coastal
policies, objectives and goals need to be clearly defined so developing and utilizing appropriate indicators can be used to track changes over time.
C. Standards
1. Limits—their aff opens the potential for monitoring any activity, quality, and variable of the
ocean, which makes research impossible and splinters and predictable literature base. A strict
interpretation of the mechanism “exploration” is crucial since the geographic breath of the topic
is already huge. Limits is the internal link to education, without effective and predictable limits
our research is non-productive nor focused.
2. Ground—exploration beyond discovery artificially inflates aff ground by allowing them to
claim spotlighting and monitoring advantages that are not germane to ocean discovery. Negative
loses access to process counterplans concerning the repeated implementation of the plan. Ground
is the internal link to fairness, if we don’t have equal access to ground aff becomes artificially
more likely to win. Makes being neg impossible.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
5
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Rubbish - Alternative Violation – Exploration excludes surveys
Exploration is distinct from survey and at-sea research about artifact and their effects on marine
life
Ban 12 Raymond, Chair, NOAA Science Advisory Board and managing Director of Ban & Associates, LLC. November
26, 2012. Letter to Jane Lubchenco, Administrator of NOAA.
http://www.sab.noaa.gov/Reports/OER_Review_TransmittalLetter_Final.pdf
I am pleased to transmit to you the following report from the
Ocean Exploration and Research (OER) Program review. This review was
conducted under the Science Advisory Board Ocean Exploration Advisory Working Group (OEAWG) as per its terms of
reference. The review panel found that the OER Program has had impressive successes in science, mapping, data management, education, politics, and diplomacy.
However, there remain vast unexplored regions of the ocean. The panel’s major finding is there is undiminished motivation for
ocean exploration research. The panel affirmed that ocean exploration is distinct from comprehensive surveys and atsea research, including hypothesis-driven investigations aimed at the ocean bottom, artifacts, water column, and marine
life.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
6
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Ocean Acidification
A. Interpretation – Development is utilization of ocean energy, resources, and spaces
JIN No Date [Japanese Institute of Navigation, “Ocean Engineering Research Committee,” http://members.jnavigation.org/e-committee/Ocean.htm]
Discussions of "Ocean Engineering" are inseparable from "Ocean Development." ¶ What is ocean development? Professor Kiyomitsu Fujii of the University of ¶ Tokyo
defines ocean development in his book as using oceans for mankind, while ¶ preserving the beauty of nature. In the light of its significance and meaning, ¶ the term
"Ocean Development" is not necessarily a new term. Ocean
development ¶ is broadly classified into three aspects: (1) Utilization of
ocean resources, ¶ (2) Utilization of ocean spaces, and (3) Utilization of ocean energy. ¶ Among these, development of
marine resources has long been established as ¶ fishery science and technology, and shipping, naval architecture
and port/harbour ¶ construction are covered by the category of using ocean spaces, which have ¶ grown into industries in Japan.
When the Committee initiated its activities, however, ¶ the real concept that caught attention was a new type of ocean development, ¶ which was outside the coverage
that conventional terms had implied.
Exploration is systematic discovery of all aspects of the ocean
NAS 9 [National Academy of Sciences, 2009 “Ocean Exploration Highlights of National Academies Reports”
http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static assets/osb/miscellaneous/exploration_final.pdf ]
What Is Ocean Exploration?¶ As defined by the President’s Panel on Ocean Exploration (National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, 2000), ocean exploration is discovery through disciplined, diverse observations and recordings of
findings. It includes rigorous, systematic observations and documentation of biological, chemical, physical,
geological, and archeological aspects of the ocean in the three dimensions of space and in time.
B. Violation – plan is neither of those – it creates an administrative program office, which in a
vacuum neither explores nor develops the ocean
C. Standards –
1. Limits – breadth of the topic is already geographically and conceptually huge – allowing the
creation or modification of agencies explodes negative research burden by including a vastly
different administrative lit base, making negative prep impossible. Limits is the internal link to
education, without effective and predictable limits our research is non productive nor focused.
2. Ground – Inflates aff ground and destroys links to some of the only core neg generics, allowing
affs to spike out of topic-specific da’s, international and agent cp’s which are key to testing core
parts of the resolution. Ground is the internal link to fairness, if we don’t have equal access to
ground aff becomes artificially more likely to win. Makes being neg impossible.
3. Topic-specific education – including agency creation allows affs to claim administrative
advantages internal to federal bureaucracy not germane to oceans, trading off with substantive
discussion about the desirability of ocean development/exploration.
4. FX T – at best the plan is effectually topical which is bad – mixes burdens by making t a
solvency question and allows any aff to be topical as long as its effects are ocean-related,
destroying predictable neg ground
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
7
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Natural Gas
A. Interpretation – the word it’s shows possession
Using English 13 , http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/possessive-pronoun.html)
Mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs are the possessive pronouns used to substitute a noun and to
This is your disk and that's mine. (Mine substitutes the word disk and shows that it belongs to me.)
show possession or ownership. EG.
B. Violation – the affirmative increases exploration and development by private companies, not
the federal government itself.
C. Standards
1. Limits – there are tons of things that the federal government can make easier for private
companies to do – allowing all of them to be topical makes it impossible for the negative to
prepare.
2. Ground – there is a huge difference in the literature between federal government and private
company actions – the aff kills things like the privatization CP. Also means it kills a core topic
debate – which is key to education.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
8
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Russia Cooperation
A. Interpretation – the word it’s shows possession of United States Federal Government
Using English 13 , http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/possessive-pronoun.html)
Mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs are the possessive pronouns used to substitute a noun and to
This is your disk and that's mine. (Mine substitutes the word disk and shows that it belongs to me.)
show possession or ownership. EG.
B. Violation – Plan shares possession of the project to non-USFG actors
Multinational control requires shared ownership
Desai et al. 04. "The costs of shared ownership: Evidence from international joint ventures." Journal of Financial
Economics 73.2 (2004): 323-374.
Multinational firms
have the option to own 100 percent, majority, or minority shares of newly created foreign entities; additionally, they might
participate in foreign markets by exporting from home countries or by permitting foreign companies to produce under licensing agreements. These alternatives imply varying levels of control and commitment and allow firms
to tailor the organization of foreign operations to market circumstances. A variety of ownership forms entailing less than 100 percent parent
ownership, and the accompanying coordination of interests between more than one firm, are loosely grouped in the academic and popular
The appropriate ownership of productive enterprise is a central issue in economic theory and a very practical question for multinational firms establishing new foreign affiliates.
frequently
literature and known as “alliances.” The rapid pace of globalization suggests to many observers that international alliances are essential to the success and survival of multinational enterprises.1 This viewpoint has not,
however, been subjected to sharp statistical tests based on actual practice, in part due to the difficulty of identifying the determinants of such a heterogeneous group of activities as those encompassed by alliances. The purpose
of this paper is to identify the factors associated with one class of such activity, situations in which American multinational firms share ownership of foreign affiliates. The comprehensive U.S. data described in section 3, and
analyzed in section 4, offer clues to the magnitudes of the costs and benefits associated with partial ownership, as revealed by the behavior of American companies in creating new foreign affiliates. The data also answer the
question of whether the joint venture form of international alliance is an increasingly important feature of international business, and indicate the way in which ownership decisions have responded to the changing nature of
globalization over the last two decades. A comprehensive review of all U.S. overseas affiliate activity from 1982 to 1997 indicates that American multinational firms are decreasingly likely to establish their foreign affiliates
as joint ventures. Over the same period, these companies have increased the extent to which they exchange goods and intangible assets between parent companies and their own foreign affiliates. The decline in the use of
shared ownership is consistent with an increased
C. Standards
1. Limits – Their aff opens the potential for a plan with around 200 other nations. This makes
research impossible and splinters and predictable literature base. Our interp allows for private
org licensing with the US but excludes international cooperation. This is best for the debate
because it keeps the focus on the benefits of the project in context of the US. Limits is the internal
link to education, without effective and predictable limits our research is non productive nor
focused.
2. Ground – international cooperation allows for advantages to be claimed based on the
interactions of nations rather than what is germane to ocean development. The aff kills consult
and cooperation counterplans. Ground is the internal link to fairness, if we don’t have equal
access to ground aff becomes artificially more likely to win. Makes being neg impossible.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
9
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Offshore Wind
A. Interpretation – resources must come from beneath ocean waters
Keith 82, Kent M. "Laws Affecting the Development of Ocean Resources in Hawaii." U. Haw. L. Rev. 4 (1982): 227.
In the following months, the Ocean and Marine Resources Committee of the State House of Representatives considered H.B. No. 77, "A Bill for an Act Relating to the Leasing of Ocean and
Marine Resources," known by its short title as the "Ocean Leasing Act." This bill remained in Committee during the 1981 Session, but as of this writing, has emerged as House Draft 2 in the
1982 session." The issuance of ocean leases is considered a critical step in establishing mariculture, OTEC, marine mining and other ocean industries."2 As stated in the findings section of
H.B. 77, the
management and develop- ment of ocean resources may require defined rights of property in state marine
waters and submerged lands.83 The purpose of the Ocean Leasing Act would be to authorize and establish guidelines and general proce- dures for the grant of leases for
marine activities within state marine wa- ters and submerged lands.3' The impetus for the bill was the perceived need for rights of tenure and private property for major ocean
developments.38 As reflected in its vari- ous provisions, it was not proposed that all of Hawaii's offshore waters be divided and leased; only that certain areas of the ocean be leased
for spe- cific purposes.36 Passage of the Ocean Leasing Act would establish the leasing procedure; these would be similar to the procedures now used for leasing public lands.37In order for the
state to lease its offshore waters, it must, of course, have jurisdiction over them. Although it is clear that the State of Hawaii has legal jurisdiction over the submerged lands within its ocean
boundaries, it is not clear that it has jurisdiction over the vertical water column. Under the
federal Submerged Lands Act (SLA), the state was granted title
to the lands beneath navigable waters to the extent of state jurisdic-
tion.40 There is, however, no mention of state control or ownership of the vertical water column
or ocean surface. However, the authors of Ocean Leasing for Hawaii have advanced four arguments in the state's favor. First, it is argued that the
broad definition of
natural resources in the SLA would seem to include all living and non-living resources on, beneath or above the
ocean floor. It is inferred that the states have proprietary rights for all purposes not excluded under the SLA.41
B. Violation – Offshore wind is a resource that comes from above the ocean’s water surface
Giordano 09, Michael P. "Offshore Windfall: What Approval of the United States' First Offshore Wind Project Means for the
Offshore Wind Energy Industry." U. Rich. L. Rev. 44 (2009): 1149.
shelf MOS% are abundant and broadly dispersed_ AB mentioned earlier, the winds off the United States' co.ts carobin more po-tential energy than the nation's total
amount of current installed electric capacity." Of the lower forty-eirod Estates, twenty-eight bonier a co..... These same twenty-eight states oro 28% of the nation's
electricity.° Offshore wind above waters measuring less than thirty meters deep contains enough energy supply ell but two
of these coastal states with at least 20% of their electrici-ty n...° °For most coastal states, offshore wind ream.es are the o.y indigenous energy source capable of making
a significant energy contribution'" Offshore wind M a viable rum:note located in close proximity to areas of the eolootry where electricity is Wgheat in demand. Why,
.., are there no commercial offshore wind fame along the United States' cants,
C. Standards
1. Limits – our interp allows for topical affs that occur within the water of the ocean.
Mariculture, otec, marine mining, and other ocean industries are all topical under our defintions.
We exclude affs that can occur at any point in the atmosphere such as satellite and weather
balloon monitoring. Opening the topic to include all parts of the atmosphere destroys negative
preparation and detracts from the topic. Limits is the internal link to education, without effective
and predictable limits our research is non productive nor focused.
2. Bright line – the ocean’s surface is a clear bright line that is distinct from the different parts of
the atmosphere
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
10
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Topicality Impacts
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
11
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Limits
Limits key to effective decision making for ocean related policy
Pendelton 12. Lindwood Pendelton is an American environmental economist and a Senior Scholar of Ocean and
Coastal Policy at Duke University's Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions. “Towards More
Standardization in the Collecting and Reporting of Marine Ecosystem Service Valuations” April 2012.
Over the past two decades the valuation literature for coastal and marine resources has ¶ rapidly expanded. This has
led to a wealth of valuation estimates for policy makers and ¶ resource managers to incorporate into their decision
making. The rapid growth of the ¶ literature has been supported by a wide variety of approaches, methodologies, and contexts ¶ leading to a broad and diverse field.
Although the diversity of the field can lead to innovative ¶ ideas and perspectives, the variations in approaches and reporting has also lead to
uncertainty ¶ and differing interpretations of values.¶ This Master’s Project works with the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership (MESP) and
¶
their partner the World Resources Institute (WRI). The purpose was to analyze the current ¶ state of ecosystem services valuation and the feasibility of bringing
Standards could help improve the reliability of estimates, increase comparability of studies, ¶ and
encourage better communication within the field. ¶ A three part study, this project 1) analyzes the MESP database of values for gaps and trends, ¶
standards to the field. ¶
2) interviews economists to gather their views on standardization, 3) interviews data users of ¶ the WRI Coastal Capital project to see how they have used the project
and how they would ¶ improve it going forward. This Master’s Project focuses on three ecosystems: coral reefs, ¶ mangroves, and seagrasses. At the end of the project,
recommendations were given to the ¶ MESP on how they could improve their database and ways to better facilitate a discussion ¶ concerning the needs, obstacles and
opportunities surrounding standardization.
Their interpretation allows all oceanography only a clear restriction of exploration to discovery is
the only viable mechanism
NAS and NAE Joint Committees Report 69 – National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of
Engineering. US Department of Commerce NOAA Coastal Services Center Library. “In an Ocean Quest— The
International Decade of Ocean Exploration,” http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CZIC-gc11-o25-1969/pdf/CZIC-gc11-o251969.pdf
The term "International Decade of Ocean
consideration to the
Exploration' can be interpreted very broadly. Thus the Steering Committee gave early
features that could serve to distinguish programs of the Decade from the whole of ocean science and
engineering. A broad statement of the basic objectives of the Decade was developed, as follows:
To achieve more comprehensive knowledge of ocean characteristics and their changes and more profound understanding of oceanic processes for the purpose of more
In contrast to the total spectrum
of oceanography and ocean engineering, the principal focus of Decade activities would be on exploration effort in support of such objectives as
effective utilization of the ocean and its resources. The emphasis on utilization was considered of primary importance.
(a) increased net yield from ocean resources, (b) prediction and enhanced control of natural phenomena, and (c) improved quality of the marine environment. Thus
Decade investigations should
be identifiably relevant to some aspect of ocean utilization. The word "exploration" has a number of
meanings, extending from broad reconnaissance to detailed prospecting. Exploration effort of the IDOE should include the scientific
and engineering research and development required to improve the description of the ocean, its boundaries, and its contents, and to understand the processes that have
led to the observed conditions and that may cause further changes in those conditions. Of all the ocean investigations that will contribute in some way to enhanced
utilization, we believe that those involving cooperation among investigators in this country and abroad are particularly appropriate for the Decade. Decade Programs
would often be of long-term and continuing nature, would require the facilities of several groups, and would be directed toward objectives of widespread, rather than
local or special, interest. It is anticipated that these programs within the United States may be cooperatively implemented both by government agencies (federal and
state) and by private facilities (academic and industrial). As the title suggests, international cooperation will be of particular importance. Such cooperation has long been
a characteristic of oceanog- raphy, for reasons described in the following paragraph (from "Inter- national Ocean Affairs" published by the Scientific Committee on
Oceanic Research in 1967). The
world ocean covers 71 % of the earth's surface. Most countries have sea coasts and make
some use of the sea, although national jurisdiction extends over only a small fraction of the ocean's area; the remainder is common property.* The waters of the
world ocean and their contents intermingle without serious restraint. Many oceanic processes are of large scale and are driven by forces
of planetary dimension, The organisms inhabiting the sea are influenced by these processes and forces, and their
distribution, abundance and behaviour are often influenced by events occurring far beyond the territorial limits
recognized by rtian. Most international cooperative investigations have consisted of a set of national programs suitably modified and coordinated to achieve
international objectives. The Decade is envisioned as a period of intensified collaborative planning, development of national capabilities, and execution of national and
international programs. This report gives principal attention to the development of U.S. programs that could contribute to the Decade. Integration of these programs and
those of other countries into a comprehensive international program was not discussed in detail, but has been left for consideration by appropriate international bodies.
It is hoped that this report will be a useful contribution to those discussions. In the light of the goals and features discussed above, there appear to be important aspects
of ocean research and development that lie outside the framework of the Decade. For example, some
aspects of theoretical and experimental
research, or the development and application of specific exploitation techniques, may not be appropriate. Some oceanographic research of an academic nature and certain mission-oriented pro- grams of government and industry will not fit logically into the Decade For example, the
National Council on Marine Resources and Engineer- ing Development has estimated that only about 30 percent of the present
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
12
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Limits key to clash—minimize neg research burdens that facilitate generics
Hardy ’10 (Aaron T. Hardy, Coach at Whitman College, “CONDITIONALITY, CHEATING COUNTERPLANS,
AND CRITIQUES: TOPIC CONSTRUCTION AND THE RISE OF THE “NEGATIVE CASE””, Contemporary
Argumentation & Debate, 2010, pg. 44-45, http://www.cedadebate.org/cad/index.php/CAD/article/view
File/271/243)
First, narrow topics are most likely to encourage substantive clash. One of the primary motivations for negative teams
running away from engagement with the specifics of the affirmative is fear of “falling behind” in the necessary research
effort. On a topic with 200 topical affirmative plan mechanisms, it is extremely unlikely that all but the most precocious
of negative teams will be prepared to debate each one, and much more likely that they will turn instead to as generic of an
approach as possible. Despite sentiments from some corners that the topic writing process is already too narrow and
specialized, I would submit that the debate community has not yet truly experimented with what a radically narrower topic
might entail. Even the smallest topics in recent memory have afforded the affirmative an incredible amount of flexibility,
usually as a compromise to the “broad topics good” camp. A quick perusal of any of the archived case lists from the past
decade reveals that even the narrowest topics the community has debated have entailed dozens (if not hundreds) of
discrete affirmatives. Instead, envision as a potentially hyperbolic example, a topic with truly only five topical cases.
With essentially no room for maneuver, it is easier to envision negative teams feeling empowered “stale” could be
replaced with “nuanced,” even if debates superficially resemble each other as the year progresses.
Limits ensure predictability and don’t undermine affirmative flexibility
Kupferbreg ’87 (Debate Coach at University of Kentucky) 1987 (Eric, “Limits – The Essence of Topicality”, Latin
American Politics: The Calculus of Instability)
If you are negative, two lines of argumentation should be advanced. First, it is necessary to explain that the affirmative
interpretation unlimits the resolution. It should be explained that many cases normally thought to be outside of the
resolution would become topical. Special emphasis should be placed on explaining why the affirmative definition
would serve as a precedent to an undebatable topic. A premium should be placed on pointing out absurd examples that
would be allowable under the broader interpretation (or, the sheer number of cases that would fall within the resolution).
Second, it is the negatives responsibility to explain that their own interpretation would allow for an adequate number
of cases. If the negative is able to list several fruitful case areas that would remain topical, then the negative position
appears less abusive.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
13
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Precision
Legal precisions outweighs limits and ground --- it’s a prerequisite to effective policy education
Shannon 2 – Bradley Shannon, law at University of Idaho, January 2002 (Washington Law Review, 77 Wash. L. Rev.
65, Lexis
The first answer to this question is, why should we not care? If proper terminology (of whatever type) is readily available and comprehendible, why should one not
though many misuses of Rules
terminology might not seem to cause serious problems, surely that is not an argument in favor of a disregard of proper Rules
want to use it? Does one really need a reason for not misusing any word, technical or otherwise? In other words,
terminology, particularly where the cost of using proper terminology is negligible. 79
The second answer to the question why we
seemingly
should care about the use of proper Rules terminology goes to the cost of using improper terminology even in
trivial contexts . Understanding legal concepts is difficult enough without the confusion created when an
inappropriate term is used to represent those concepts. And this is true regardless of how minor the misuse. In some
sense, every misuse of legal language impedes the understanding - and, consequently, the progress - of the law.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
14
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
A2: Aff Flexibility
Strict limits enable creativity. Beauty emerges from identifying constraints and working within
them.
Flood 10 (Scott, BS in Communication and Theatre Arts – St. Joseph’s College, School Board Member – Plainfield
Community School Corporation, and Advertising Agent, “Business Innovation – Real Creativity Happens Inside the
Box”, http://ezinearticles.com/?Business-Innovation---Real-Creativity-Happens-Inside-the-Box&id=4793692)
It seems that we can accomplish anything if we're brave enough to step out of that bad, bad box, and thinking
"creatively" has come to be
synonymous with ignoring rules and constraints or pretending they just don't exist. Nonsense . Real creativity is put to the test within the box. In
fact, that's where it really shines. It might surprise you, but it's actually easier to think outside the box than within its confines. How can that
be? It's simple. When you're working outside the box, you don't face rules, or boundaries, or assumptions. You create your own as you go along. If you
want to throw convention aside, you can do it. If you want to throw proven practices out the window, have at it. You have the freedom to create your own world. Now,
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with thinking outside the box. At times, it's absolutely essential - such as when you're facing the biggest oil spill in history in an
environment in which all the known approaches are failing. But most of us don't have the luxury of being able to operate outside the box. We've been shoved into
reality, facing a variety of limitations, from budgets, to supervisors' opinions and prejudices, to the nature of the marketplace. Even though the box may have been given
a bad name, it's where most of us have to spend our time. And no matter how much we may fret about those limits, inside that box is where we need to prove ourselves.
If you'll pardon the inevitable sports analogy, consider
a baseball player who belts ball after ball over 450 feet. Unfortunately, he has a
can't place those hits between the foul lines, so they're harmful strikes instead of game-winning home runs. To the out-of-the-box
advocates, he's a mighty slugger who deserves admiration, but to his teammates and the fans, he's a loser who just can't get on base. He may not like the fact
that he has to limit his hits to between the foul poles, but that's one of the realities of the game he chose to play. The same is true of ideas and
approaches. The most dazzling and impressive tactic is essentially useless if it doesn't offer a practical, realistic way to address the need or
application. Like the baseball player, we may not like the realities, but we have to operate within their limits. Often, I've seen people blame the
wee problem: he
box for their inability or unwillingness to create something workable. For example, back in my ad agency days, I remember fellow writers and designers complaining
about the limitations of projects. If it was a half-page ad, they didn't feel they could truly be creative unless the space was expanded to a full page. If they were given a
full page, they demanded a spread. Handed a spread, they'd fret because it wasn't a TV commercial. If the project became a TV commercial with a $25,000 budget,
they'd grouse about not having a $50,000 budget. Yet the
greatest artists of all time didn't complain about what they didn't have; they
worked their magic using what they did. Monet captured the grace and beauty of France astonishingly well within the bounds of
a canvas. Donatello exposed the breathtaking emotion that lurked within ordinary chunks of marble. And I doubt that
Beethoven ever whined because there were only 88 keys on the piano. Similarly, I've watched the best of my peers do amazing things in
less-than-favorable circumstances. There were brilliant commercials developed with minimal budgets and hand-held cameras. Black-and-white ads that outperformed
their colorful competitors. Simple postcards that grabbed the attention of (and business from) jaded consumers. You see, real creativity isn't hampered or blocked by
limits. It actually flowers in response to challenges. Even though it may be forced to remain inside the box, it leverages everything it can find in that box and makes the
Real creativity is driven by a need to create. When Monet approached a blank canvas, it's safe to say that
he didn't agonize over its size. He wanted to capture something he'd seen and share how it looked through his eyes. The size of the canvas was incidental
to his talent and desire. Think about the Apollo 13 mission. NASA didn't have the luxury of flying supplies or extra tools to the crew. They couldn't
rewrite the laws of physics. Plus, they faced a rapidly shrinking timeline, so their box kept getting smaller and less forgiving. And yet they arrived
upon a solution that was creative; more important, that was successful. The next time someone tells you that the real solution
involves stepping outside the box, challenge him or her to think and work harder . After all, the best solution may very
well be lurking in a corner of that familiar box.
most of every bit of it.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
15
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
A2: Breadth Good
Depth is more educational than breadth --- studies prove
WP 9 (Washington Post, “Will Depth Replace Breadth in Schools?” http://voices.washingtonpost.com/classstruggle/2009/02/will_depth_replace_breadth_in.html)
The truth, of course, is that students need both. Teachers try to mix the two in ways that make sense to them and their students. But a
surprising study —
providing new data that suggest educators should spend much
more time on a few issues and let some topics slide . Based on a sample of 8,310 undergraduates, the national study says that students who spend at least a
certain to be a hot topic in teacher lounges and education schools — is
month on just one topic in a high school science course get better grades in a freshman college course in that subject than students whose high school courses were more balanced. The study,
appearing in the July issue of the journal Science Education, is “Depth Versus Breadth: How Content Coverage in High School Science Courses Relates to Later Success in College Science
Coursework.” The authors are Marc S. Schwartz of the University of Texas at Arlington, Philip M. Sadler and Gerhard Sonnert of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and Robert
H. Tai of the University of Virginia. This is more rich ore from a goldmine of a survey Sadler and Tai helped organize called “Factors Influencing College Science Success.” It involved 18,000
undergraduates, plus their professors, in 67 colleges in 31 states. The study weighs in on one side of a contentious issue that will be getting national attention this September when the College
Board’s Advanced Placement program unveils its major overhaul of its college-level science exams for high school students. AP is following a direction taken by its smaller counterpart, the
International Baccalaureate program. IB teachers already are allowed to focus on topics of their choice. Their students can deal with just a few topics on exams, because they have a wide
choice of questions. AP’s exact approach is not clear yet, but College Board officials said they too will embrace depth. They have been getting much praise for this from the National Science
Foundation, which funded the new study. Sadler and Tai have previously hinted at where this was going. In 2001 they reported that students who did not use a textbook in high school
physics—an indication that their teachers disdained hitting every topic — achieved higher college grades than those who used a textbook. Some educators, pundits, parents and students will
object, I suspect, to sidelining their favorite subjects and spending more time on what they consider trivial or dangerous topics. Some will fret over the possibility that teachers might abandon
breadth altogether and wallow in their specialties. Even non-science courses could be affected. Imagine a U.S. history course that is nothing but lives of generals, or a required English course
that assigns only Jane Austen. “Depth Versus Breadth” analyzes undergraduate answers to detailed questions about their high school study of physics, chemistry and biology, and the grades
they received in freshman college science courses. The college grades
of students who had studied at least one topic for at least a month in a high school
compared to those of students who did not experience such depth. The study acknowledges that the pro-breadth
forces have been in retreat. Several national commissions have called for more depth in science teaching and other subjects.
A 2005 study of 46 countries found that those whose schools had the best science test scores covered far fewer topics
than U.S. schools.
science course were
Especially for high school students
SD 9 (Science Daily, “Students Benefit From Depth, Rather Than Breadth, In High School Science Courses”,
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090305131814.htm)
A recent study reports that high school students who study fewer science topics, but study them in greater depth, have an
advantage in college science classes over their peers who study more topics and spend less time on each. Robert Tai, associate professor at the
University of Virginia's Curry School of Education, worked with Marc S. Schwartz of the University of Texas at Arlington and Philip M. Sadler and Gerhard Sonnert of
the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics to conduct the study and produce the report. The study relates the amount of content covered on a particular topic in
high school classes with students' performance in college-level science classes. "As a former high school teacher, I always worried about whether it was better to teach
less in greater depth or more with no real depth. This study offers evidence that teaching
fewer topics in greater depth is a better way to prepare
students for success in college science," Tai said. "These results are based on the performance of thousands of college science students from across the United
States." The 8,310 students in the study were enrolled in introductory biology, chemistry or physics in randomly selected four-year colleges and universities. Those who
spent one month or more studying one major topic in-depth in high school earned higher grades in college science than their peers who studied more topics in the same
period of time. The study revealed that students in courses that focused on mastering a particular topic were impacted twice as much as those in courses that touched on
every major topic. The study explored differences between science disciplines, teacher decisions about classroom activities, and out-of-class projects and homework.
The researchers carefully controlled for differences in student backgrounds. The study also points out that standardized testing, which seeks to measure overall
knowledge in an entire discipline, may not capture a student's high level of mastery in a few key science topics. Teachers who "teach to the test" may not be optimizing
their students' chance of success in college science courses, Tai noted. "President Obama has challenged the nation to become the most educated
in the world by having the largest proportion of college graduates among its citizens in the coming decade," Tai said. " To
meet this challenge, it is
imperative that we use the research to inform our educational practice." The study was part of the Factors Influencing College Science
Success study, funded by the National Science Foundation.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
16
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Other Topicality
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
17
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Development
Development must provide production infrastructure
Fearnside 97, P.M. 1997. The Main Resources of Amazonia. Paper presented at Latin American Studies Association
(LASA), XX International Congress, Guadalajara, Mexico, 7-19 April 1997. LASA, University of Pittsburg, Pittsburg,
Pennsylvania, U.S.A
The term 'development'
implies a change, usually presumed to be in the direction of improvement. What is developed and whom the improvement
order to be considered 'development,' the change in question
must provide a means to sustain the local population. Infrastructure that does not lead to production is not development (such as
should benefit are items of widely differing opinions. This author holds that in
swimming pool complexes built for small towns in the interior of Roraima prior to a recent election), nor is a project that exports commodities from the region while
generating minimal employment or other local returns (perhaps aluminum processing and export provides the best example). Production of traditional commodities
often fails to benefit the local population. Conversion of forest to cattle pasture, the most widespread land-use change in Brazilian Amazonia, brings benefits that are
extremely meager (although not quite zero). High priority must be given to redirection of development to activities with local level returns that are greater and longer
lasting. Tapping the value of environmental services offers such an opportunity. Keeping benefits of these services for the inhabitants of the Amazonian interior is the
most important challenge in turning these services into development (Fearnside, 1997a).
Development is mineral based
US Code, 14 http://law.onecle.com/uscode/43/1331.html US Code > Public Lands > 43 USC 1331 - Definitions
(l) The
term "development" means those activities which take place following discovery of minerals in paying quantities,
including geophysical activity, drilling, platform construction, and operation of all onshore support facilities, and which are for
the purpose of ultimately producing the minerals discovered;
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
18
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Exploration
Exploration means the process of searching for resources and development means extracting
them
US Code, 14 http://law.onecle.com/uscode/43/1331.html US Code > Public Lands > 43 USC 1331 - Definitions
(k) The
term "exploration" means the process of searching for minerals, including ¶ (1) geophysical surveys where
magnetic, gravity, seismic, or other systems are used to detect or imply the presence of such minerals , and ¶ (2) any
drilling, whether on or off known geological structures, including the drilling of a well in which a discovery of oil or natural gas in
paying quantities is made and the drilling of any additional delineation well after such discovery which is needed to delineate any reservoir and to enable the lessee to
determine whether to proceed with development and production; ¶
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
19
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Substantially
Substantially means real, not imaginary
Wollman ’93 (Circuit Judge, US Court of Appeals – 8th Circuit, Kansas City Power & Light Company, a Missouri
corporation, Appellee, v. Ford Motor Credit Company, a Delaware corporation; McDonnell Douglas Finance Corporation,
a Delaware corporation; HEI Investment Corp., a Hawaii corporation, Appellants, 995 F.2d 1422; 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS
13755, L/N)
Instruction No. 10 was not given in isolation, however. The district court's instructions also contained a definition of "substantial." Instruction No. 11 defined
"substantial" as meaning "true, real or likely to materialize" and as not meaning "imaginary or unlikely
to materialize." This instruction properly limited the potential bases for the jury's decision, which is the essential function of jury instructions. When combined
with the contract and the verdict-directing instructions, [*1432] which tracked the operative language of the contract, Instruction No. 11 required the jury to find that
KCPL had determined a real risk, not some imaginary hypothetical risk premised solely on a reduction in the DRD. Because the contract provided only one means of
creating a risk of making an indemnity payment--a demand notice from an Investor--the jury's discretion was properly channelled into deciding whether KCPL had
sufficiently studied and honestly considered the likelihood of receiving such a demand notice. That determination is all that the contract required.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
20
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Create Not Increase
Policy must exist in law before it can be increased
Ripple ‘87 Federal Circuit Judge Emmlee K,. Cameron v. Frances Slocum Bank & Trust Company, State
Automobile Insurance Association, and Glassley Agency of Whitley, Indiana, 824 F.2d 570; 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS
9816, 9/24, lexis nexus
Also related to the waiver issue is appellees' defense relying on a provision of the insurance policy that suspends coverage where the risk is increased by any means
within the knowledge or control of the insured. However, the
term "increase" connotes change. To show change, appellees would
have been required to present evidence of the condition of the building at the time the policy was issued. See 5 J. Appleman & J.
Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, § 2941 at 4-5 (1970). Because no such evidence was presented, this court cannot determine, on this record, whether the risk
has, in fact, been increased. Indeed, the answer to this question may depend on Mr. Glassley's knowledge of the condition of the building at the time the policy was
issued, see 17 J. Appleman & J. Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, § 9602 at 515-16 (1981), since the fundamental issue is whether the appellees contemplated
insuring the risk which incurred the loss.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
21
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Aff ev
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
22
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Reasonability
Reasonability is necessary for decision making on issues of ocean policy
Levy 93 (Dr Jean-Pierre Levy is Director, Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations, New York. “National
Ocean Policy: An elusive quest”
Integration, comprehensiveness, rationality. The technical literature in recent years has been replete with these words in relation variously to coastal management, sea
use planning, and ocean policy making. The idea conveyed is that all are desirable attributes, and indeed they are. There is also a widely felt belief that in view of the
numerous uses of the ocean and its resources, a global vision, embodied in an
integrated ocean policy - one that would take into account
all the characteristics of the ocean environment and the innumerable conflicts and complementarities of use
therein - is within easy reach; and that the objectives and decisions of any government, in asserting and defending a multiplicity of
interests in ocean space, should be able to coexist and at least be compatible, if not complementary. The central proposition
of this paper is twofold: first that the words integration, comprehensiveness and rationality must be used cautiously, taking into account the decision-making
context to which they are applied and the spatial extent of their application, the scope of the political and technical
factors impinging on the decision-making process, the time horizons involved, and finally, the inherently malleable
meaning of these words. Second, it is posited that a perfectly integrated ocean policy - that is, a policy that is ‘rational’ from all points of
view and at all levels of interest - does not and cannot exist. This is due to the complexity of the policy process itself and
to the impact of internal and external factors that come into play at different stages of the policy formulation and
implementation process as well as to the type of policy problems under consideration. The integration of ocean
policy requires a sound understanding of the different phenomena taking place in the marine environment, active
participation between the actors intervening in various sectors, close coordination at the decision-making level,
harmonization at the planning level and substantive cooperation at the implementation level.
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
23
Topicality
UTNIF 2014
Topic education
Exclusion of parts of the ocean destroys topic education
Committee on Exploration of the Seas 2003. (National Research Council. Exploration of the Seas: Voyage into
the Unknown. p. 175-176 Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2003.)
Joe Baker, Chief Scientist for the Queensland Department of Primary Industries and Commissioner for the Environment, discussed the value of ocean exploration—
exemplified by Australia's dependence on marine resources for its economic well-being. The scientific value of exploration is not the highest priority. It is the use of the
data—and the assimilation and transmission of information to decision-makers—that is essential. Australia is one of the 12 mega-biodiverse countries, and the only
developed country among the 12 mega-biodiverse countries. With the exception of Australia, the other eleven have an inverse proportion of gross national product to
mega-biodiversity. Australia has a well-educated population, is politically stable, and has many special features such as the Great Barrier Reef. There is significant
expertise in tropical marine systems, and as a result, Australia has responsibility for leadership in management and conservation for protection of mega-biodiversity.¶
definition of ocean exploration is broad and includes a comprehensive awareness of the nature, role, and
function of the oceans. It should be multidisciplinary and multinational. A coordinated international exploration program adds value by sharing costs and
Dr. Baker's
assets, sharing output, and eliminating overlap. Such a program should include studies of impacts of change on human populations, interactions at boundaries (e.g., ice,
coastal margins, sea beds), the interdependency of living and nonliving components of ecosystems, bio-prospecting for pharmaceuticals, and bio-mining for exploitation
ocean exploration should not
focus exclusively on offshore oceanic environments. Coastal ocean exploration is equally important as offshore
because these are the areas where the impacts of change will be the most severe. Finally, he offered the opinion that good
exploration shares costs and benefits with developing countries in order to help all parties achieve sustainable
development of ocean resources.
of natural resources. The challenge is to determine priorities and develop criteria for study selection. ¶ He emphasized that
University of Texas National Institute in Forensics
24