[eDebate] vote for 1 (a,b, or c)
Wed Jul 9 20:00:20 CDT 2008
It's amazing that there has been ZERO discussion of the resolutions since
the topic meeting. So, here's a late appeal for one of the "1" resolutions.
Although I think "a" is the best area since the 29 commodities listed under
Title 1 scare me a little, I think the need for "1" is clear.
Originally I thought the 2nd set were better but have changed my mind.
If you read the resolutions, you will see that the independent clause (which
holds the subject and primary verb) is "usfg substantially reduce Ag
support." The dependent clause, which modifies this statement is either "by
eliminating all/nearly all" (close-ended qualifer) or "by eliminating at
least" (open-ended qualifier). If this read is accurate then an aff that
reduces an explicit topic commodity AND another form of ag support is
topical. For instance, under 2c an aff that reduces corn and fishery
subsidies is topical because both actions are "subs redux of ag support" and
the "at least" phrase justifies the fish action even though it isn't
listed. The solution to this problem would be a topicality interpretation
that says ignore "at least" and go by the explicit verbage of the
resolution. If this is the accepted interpretation, then an aff that
included export subsidies and/or market access barriers would not be
topical. While the ability to counterplan out of the "topic-mandated
extra-topicality" (or the above identified approach to T) solves the concern
a Neg team may have with the resolution, the Aff needs to be guaranteed
export subsidies and/or market access barriers (especially since the best
forms of topic creativity probably lie in the mechanism area of the rez as
opposed to the crop portion).
Anyhow, that's my read.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman