[eDebate] Nearly All
Wed Aug 13 08:52:38 CDT 2008
I'm curious if people have any idea as to what they think AFF plans need to
say in regards to the question of "nearly all". I guess more specifically
my question is how demanding people will be of plan texts versus a PIC that
jettisons farms from Iowa, or a specific farm, or a wee subsidy program
associated with soybeans. Is it legit for the plan to say "nearly all 'X'"
and then explain the text as meaning that the AFF will defend getting rid of
all of X unless the neg runs a CP that PICs out of some location or tiny
program or so on.
Although there will be no solvency evidence that actually advocates these
CPs, we all know they're are coming.
Certainly anything is debatable, but I'm curious to know what the general
expectation may be and then work from there.
The above interpretation seems very reasonable to me unless the NEG has a
piece of evidence that actually says eliminate all wheat subsidies with the
exception of "Y."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman