[eDebate] Fwd: Joe on Agriculture

Calum Matheson u.hrair
Fri Apr 25 09:57:24 CDT 2008


I would just like to point out that last time I knew the Farm Bill had not
passed.  I know there were discussions of inherency/uniqueness for disads on
Russia because of some evidence indicating the US was/is trying to cooperate
with Russia on missile defense.  Well I am sure that whatever Farm Bill does
eventually pass the Congress and gets signed into law this scenario is even
more troubling for affirmatives:

1)  If there is a reduction in subsidies in the Farm Bill all uniqueness is
done (Econ and politics as well as food prices, etc).
2)  If the farm bill passes during the year, very likely, and you then
debate a plan that reverses the policy a week after the bill passed there
would seem to be a rather strong link  and uniqueness to politics.  My guess
is that affirmative win percentage for the next 2 or 3 tournaments would be
close to zero.
3)  If the Farm Bill passes a lot of affirmatives could just disappear
overnight (this was true on the treaties topic, but everyone knew the CTBT
and ICC would never pass).

There are a couple other things I would like to mention

1) I know this has been mentioned by others, but the US did try and get
reduction of subsidies at Doha (I do not know how hard it tried; was it like
the "we will cooperate with Russia on missile defense" evidence or something
tangible?), but it does make global solvency and uniqueness just as
problematic as is claimed on the Russia topic.
2)  I am not sure why Russia would pose a unique problem of squirrelly
cases, that seems to depend on the wording.  For example, if the topic were
"The USFG should substantially reduce food subsidies" there could
potentially be hundreds of cases and if the resolution was "The USFG should
cooperate with Russia on current ABM,  the chechen conflict, and /or  Start
III" the topic would be rather limited.

I could be wrong and maybe the Farm Bill has now passed, but i believe it is
in limbo and will be that way until after the elections, which means there
will be many cards written about subsidies, etc, but it also means that the
ground is relatively unstable because no one knows quite what will happen.

Just to so everyone knows my bias (I am not a current debater); I think the
Russia topic is the best, but if a domestic topic wins I think health care
would be the most timely, relevant, and provide stable ground (even if
Hillary wins it is unlikely she will be able to reform health care in 4
months.  However, I will not defend the impact scenarios would be
particularly sexy for health care.

Just my 4 cents (adjusted for inflation).

Thank you,

Joe S.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ndtceda.com/pipermail/edebate/attachments/20080425/8ded28cb/attachment.htm 



More information about the Mailman mailing list