Attacking the Criminal Plan

Foxboro A Varsity case has to do with taking criminals who have committed minor crimes (one they suggested was involuntary manslauter) and putting them into national service programs. The affirmative felt that putting these criminals seemed to think that putting these criminals in the programs will better them. however, most of the people will just join the program and won't be in it to do good, they just would not want to go into prison. the case has no workability they have no idea of the cost all they said was "it won't cost much" the statements contridict each other. their inherent barrier is weak, they only said americans won't like the the plan, ask for evidence to defend this statement. on this case find evidence of the United States penal system working, and allowing criminals to go out on the streets to join national service programs won't work.

For round one of debate I faced Bishop Feenan Varsity D and their plan was to substantially increase the number of persons serving in Learn and Serve America by providing scholarships for everyone serving.  The scholarship would be $1000 dollars for one year and they would have to sign a contract in order to ensure that the volunteers would actually serve for that amount of time.  If the volunteers wanted to, they could also sign a contract saying that they would be serving for an additional five years in order to obtain an additional $5,000.  After recieving the money and serving their time, they would then be free to leave if they wished.  The need to this plan was simply that Learn and Serve America needed more people serving in it and there was also a need for more scholarships and by combining the two needs together, there would be an even greater need.  The workability was to take a maximum of 15.5 billion dollars from the pork and barrel funds, which would supply the annual scholarships.  Their inherent barrier was that the United States Federal Government did not want to admit that they were spending tax dollars on "frivilous things" Their plan was stated solvable because their plan would increase the number of persons serving as well as provide scholarships which was stated as their need. 

ATTACKS

This plan had many holes in it! First off, Topicality.  In the affirmative's plan, they defined service as authorative or service that is GUARANTEED however, they had no evidence what-so-ever that volunteers would be guaranteed. Also, we argued that the plan therefore would not increase anything because the affirmative team didn't know whether or not it would be guaranteed and even if peopel would come in, anyone in their right minds, or anyone looking for scholarship money, would serve until they recieved their money and then would go off to school.  That being said, they would not necessarily be increasing the numbers, but simply maintaining the same numbers each year since the people would just leave when they got the money and so on and so forth.  We also asked whether or not the increase would be over 20% and of course, the affirmative team said yes.  However, they did not have evidence for this and we argued that it therefore would not be substantial because in the negative topicality bailor breifs there is a quote saying that an increase less than 20% would not be substantial.

Next is Need.  Need can also be identified as "problem" and so we asked the affirmative team what the "problem" was.  The affirmative team failed to identify a problem, and if there is no problem, there is also no need.  Lastly for need, we actually have a quote saying that Learn and Serve America currently does something very similar to this plan and I'll try to get that quote up if anyone is interested, and we also mentioned all these different organizations who provide scholarships for service.

The Workability for the plan was just to pull money out of the pork and barrel funds but 15.5 billion dollars is a substantial amount for a plan that is not even guaranteed.  Not to mention, when we asked what the pork and barrel funds were, the affirmative team said that it was just a fund system that is wasted on "frivilous things" but when asked to identify some of these "frivilous things," they could not.  Also, the plan didn't show where the money was going (or if there was a chance of money embezzlement), the steps that they would need to actually put out their plan, or even who would advise it. 

As I stated, the Inherent Barrier was that the United States Federal Government did not want to admit that they were wasting tax dollars on "frivilous things"  To my knowledge, this is not a valid inherent barrier, which I pointed out.

I hope this helped! Ask me if you have any questions

this is for the West Bridgewater B novice team reasearch for becomming a united states citizens in the military

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/theorderlyroom/l/aacitizen1.htm

Has anyone heard about the plan to reform the Senior Corps by changing its name to the Wisdom Corps and dropping the age qualifications by 5 years?  How about a plan out there to divert money from social programs (welfare) and use it to fund national service programs such as those in the resolution?  What arguments and evidence can you find to counter each of these?

Heather and Nicole covered two plans from West Bridgewater, their second debate had been our first. They were the same plan, to require immigrants to serve in all of the national service programs. I think all of West Bridgewater has that plan. Their coach has never tought debate before and their school has never been in the league either, so the team we faced wasn't too skillful. They were very unaware of the way a debate proceeds and weren't great speakers. The plan had a few weak spots, mostly workability. They didn't really have a way to fund things such as the training costs. They also mentioned a seperate test to determine if an immigrant could become a citizen. This carried the disadvantage of more rejected immigrants becoming illegal immigrants. Another problem is the fact of loyalties and if they would hold their loyalties to America or the country they're from; if they are forced into service just to become a citizen. There were a few other little arguements that weren't significantly strong which i have failed to remember, i appologize.

Attacking the Criminal Plan

The US military will allow persons with criminal records to serve.

Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/congress/2006_rpt/060913-murtha-obey_army-readiness.htm US Military Readiness, Representatives Murtha and Obey, September 13, 2006

"Senior Army leaders worry that Washington has failed to generate a national commitment to the wars, forcing them to rely on increasingly risky measures to make their recruiting and retention goals, such as increasing bonus incentives, relaxing age limitations and tattoo policies, expanding the number of Category 4 recruits (those who score lowest on entrance exams), and expanding the number of recruits entering the service who have criminal records."

Attacking the Criminal Plan

The Foxborrow A Varsity team plan of increasing the number of persons serving by giving criminals the option is pretty weak. 

1.Would anyone want a non-violent pedophile serving in Learn and Serve America or any of the other community service programs? They may be a threat even if they haven't been violent

2.What about potentially violent people in the Armed Forces with military training, after they get released back into the community? The Armed Forces may make them even more of a threat to society

3.Did they have any information regarding how many criminals in jail were non-violent and if this may constitute "substantial"? What if their isn't a large enough number to seem like a substantial increase

4.How about these criminals being in the Peace Corps... would other countries approve of us sending our criminals to other countries to help there? There may be political pressure against this plan

5.What if the criminals were to give a bad impression of America, when the function of the Peace Corps is to increase foreign relations? Our law enforcement would have significantly less control over them

6.What about the criminals corrupting the volunteers already serving in the service programs? Permitting such a thing could easily increase crime rates

7.Could a criminal whom has performed financial felonies be permitted to handle any financial work within those organizations? The contributions those sort of criminals can make would be significantly reduced

8.The justice system was established to handle criminals within the law, if you were to permit criminals to have another option, then how much faith would be laid upon our justice system; wouldn't there be less to deter people from doing criminal acts? If the penalties for committing crimes were to be reduced then there would surely be less of a deterant against crime

9.Would the forced volunteers do their job decently? They are forced to work, that doesn't mean that they will do their job well

10.Do they intend to quarantine these criminals from a society in any way as they would in jail? There is a lot of risk to society if criminals are permitted to associate freely with the general population

Attacking the Peace Corps Plan

Source: Laura Vanderkam, Member of USA Today's board of contributors, October 25, 2005.  USA Today, p. 13A.

It costs roughtly $80,000 to support a volunteer for two years [in the Peace Corps]. 

Use this quote to challenge the amount of money needed to effectively run a Peace Corps that could have potentially a LOT more members.  It seems their $$ is budgeted towards advertising and not an operating budget.

The plan Laura mentioned that she had observed doesn't have many negative points, class is about to end so i only have one so far.

$3,000,000,000 is a lot to spend on advertising and recruiting. Suppose there are only 50,000 new Peace Corps recruits(which is extremely substantial over the 7,000 persons already serving)... that means $60,000 will be wasted PER PERSON, just for advertising and recruiting? Added to this would be the cost of living for these recruits. If in the end these persons only serve for less than 2 years, the annual costs per person would be greater than the average annual salary of a person with an associates degree.

 when i was looking through the forums on debate central, i came across a ridiculous plan on banning abortion because by banning abortion, there would be a larger population, and more chances for people to serve in the national service programs.  this plan obviously has a lot of holes, but it didn't have the whole plan anyway. just a thought.

the united states congress should establish a policy of manditory national service and that no 4 year collage or university be allowed to enroll unless that student has completed a 12month to 2year term of servce in either the military or amricorps.

...?

increasing the number of persons in americorps in order to increase the number of persons serving in the health corps, community health clinics.

I researched a couple plans off http://www.debate-central.com, and I have to say, not many of them are comprehensive.

The Fire Corps plan - A branch of the Citizen Corps, the Fire Corps will create an ad campaign to promote volunteer firefighting. The current inherency includes funding and depleting volunteers.

an advantage of back pains are causing suffering all over the world.  And that if there plan went into effect chiroprators would be boosted and jobs would open up, ending back pains across the planet

Ex-Felon working in AmeriCorps to decrease their sentence.

Increasing the Coast Guard to support seaports from terrorist attacks.

Aff. Plans

1.The united state congress should establish a policy providing necessary funding to increase the number of volunteers serving in the peace corp. 7,000 to 14,000 people so that peace corp. can be effective and have sufficient numbers > we should subtract some of the budget from the army’s band which is 320 million dollars and add it to the peace corps. Budget.

2.the us Federal Government should provide linguists with military status in order to attract linguists to join.  (iraq and africa scenario)

3.Here's the plan
Inh. prisons overloaded
Plan: Allow prisoners to serve thru AmerCorps to decrease time in prison
Solv. Decreases return rates for prisoners
Adv. Prisoners can work hard for little return
http://debate-central.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=31091 <----- attacks to that

4.National Civilian Conservation Corps plan is taking law offenders that would normally be sentenced to comunity service and sticking them into the NCCC

5.to increase the number of person serving in the armed forces to proveide for more middle easter language translator

6.allow handicapped people in military because there are positions other than ground combat that handicapped people cna do just as well as normal people

"the us Federal Government should provide linguists with military status in order to attract linguists to join."

...currently, linguists serving in the military, already have military status, so the plan the affirmative team is proposing, already exists.  Therefore, there is no need.

Good Negative Quotes.

Women In combat

Restrictions on Women Combatants Are Eased During Emergencies
Field and Nagl, 2001
(Kim Field and John Nagl, “Combat Roles for Women: A Modest
Proposal,” Parameters: US Army War College June 1, 2001, Vol. 31, Issue 2)
In times of national emergency, traditional restrictions on gender roles tend to be eased.
Some 33,000 women served in the US armed forces during World War I, most in the
Nurse Corps; more than ten times that number served during World War II. In the wake
of those national emergencies, traditional restrictions were again applied; the Women's
Armed Services Integration Act of 1948 permitted no more than two percent of the
enlisted ranks in the Army to be filled by women, a limit which was not lifted until
another national emergency in 1967.[4]
Women became an increasingly important part of the military after the creation of the allvolunteer
force in 1973, and they demonstrated that they had become essential to the
successful employment of the military during the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91, in which
some 40,000 women served, representing seven percent of the total deployed forces.[5]
The combat exclusion rule was revealed as dubious during that conflict, as women served
in logistics bases forward of all-male infantry and armor units, but not on aircraft carriers
hundreds of miles to the rear of the front lines. After that conflict, opportunities for
women were expanded, and women were given the opportunity to serve in combat planes
and on combat ships. The November 1993 law that repealed the Naval Combatant
Exclusion Law also required the Secretary of Defense to:
Ensure that qualification for and continuance in
occupational career fields is evaluated on the basis of a
common, relevant performance standard and not on the basis
of gender; Refrain from the use of gender quotas, goals, or
ceilings, except as specifically authorized by Congress; and
Refrain from changing occupational standards simply to
increase or decrease the number of women in an occupational
career field.
To comply with that law, in January 1994 the Secretary of Defense lifted the "risk rule"
which had prevented women from serving in units which had a high probability of
engaging in combat, partly in recognition of the fact that given the changing nature of
warfare there were no longer any "safe" places on the battlefield. Instead, women were
prohibited from serving in units that were designed and intended to engage in direct
ground combat, defined as "engaging an enemy on the ground with individual or crewserved
weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high probability of direct
physical contact with the hostile force's personnel. Direct ground combat [normally]
takes place well forward on the battlefield while locating and closing with the enemy to
defeat them by fire, maneuver, or shock effect."

Tax Cut Negative Quotes

Promoting Senior Volunteerism is Unnecessary

1.Senior Coprs numbers are increasing

The best antidote to terror and hate in society are acts of kindess and service.  President Bush spoke to our country's finest traditions of civic duty when he called on all Americans to volunteer 4,000 hours in their communities in their lifetimes.  In a little more than a month, after the President made his call for Americans to serve, applicants to Americorps increased by over 50% and interest in senior corps programs at the corporation rose dramatically.

west coast handbook

Need:

Our plan is needed because there is a significant threat that we will be hit with an asteroid called Apophis, and when it hits, the impact will be equivalent to 1480 megatons of TNT, which is clearly a substantial problem.

“On Thursday, December 23, scientists announced that a space rock named 2004 MN4, or Apophis, had about a 1-in-300 chance of striking Earth on April 13, 2029. As recorded by NASA, this was actually a 1-in 266 chance of striking Earth.  On Friday, the risk was upgraded as more observations rolled in. The asteroid was given an unprecedented risk rating of 4 on the Torino Scale, which means it warrants careful monitoring. The odds at various times were put at 1-in-63 and 1-in-45.  As of Monday, the chances of an impact on April 13, 2029 stood at about 1-in-40, or 2.6 percent.”

What this is saying, is the risk of the asteroid hitting continuously increased.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/asteroid_update_041227.html

“However, initial observations indicated a relatively large probability that it would strike the Earth in 2029.  Additional observations provided improved predictions that eliminated the possibility of an impact on Earth or the Moon in 2029. However there remained a possibility that during the 2029 close encounter with Earth, Apophis would pass through a "gravitational keyhole", a precise region in space no more than about 400 meters across, that would set up a future impact on April 13, 2036. This possibility kept the asteroid at Level 1 on the Torino impact hazard scale until August 2006.”

This is saying the chances of Apophis hitting in 2029 are close to none.  However, if this asteroid goes through the proposed “gravitational keyhole” it could be catastrophic.

“This plan is so necessary that The Planetary Society is offering a $50,000 prize for the best plan to put a tracking device on or near the asteroid”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis

“Scientists call for plans to change asteroid's path Developing technology could take decades.”

“NASA initially estimated the energy that Apophis would have released if it impacted Earth as the equivalent of 1480 megatons of TNT.  The impacts which created the Barringer Crater or caused the Tunguska event are estimated to be in the 10-20 megaton range. The 1883 eruption of Krakatoa was the equivalent of roughly 200 megatons.”

The Barringer Crater which was only roughly 10 megatons is a 35 mile crater.  Imagine what 1480 megatons of TNT could do.  This is not something that we can risk, which is why our plan is necessary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99942_Apophis

[Also]

“NASA has estimated that an impact from Apophis, which has an outside chance of hitting the Earth in 2036, would release more than 100,000 times the energy released in the nuclear blast over Hiroshima. Thousands of square kilometers would be directly affected by the blast but the whole of the Earth would see the effects of the dust released into the atmosphere.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article/0,14493,1660485,00.html

There is also a high need for our plan because time is running out.  After we hit a certain time, there will virtually be no time left to construct a plan in order to prepare ourselves or potentially eliminate the possibility of the Earth getting hit.

“Scientists insist there is actually very little time left to decide. At a recent meeting of experts in near-Earth objects (NEOs) in London, scientists said it could take decades to design, test and build the required technology to deflect the asteroid.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article/0,14493,1660485,00.html

Our plan, in a sense, would not be wasting any money because either way, the United States- as well as the rest of the world, needs to conduct a plan in order to prepare ourselves for a case like this because it will happen.

“Monica Grady, an expert in meteorites at the Open University, said: "It's a question of when, not if, a near Earth object collides with Earth. Many of the smaller objects break up when they reach the Earth's atmosphere and have no impact. However, a NEO larger than 1km [wide] will collide with Earth every few hundred thousand years and a NEO larger than 6km, which could cause mass extinction, will collide with Earth every hundred million years. We are over-due for a big one."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/space/article/0,14493,1660485,00.html

Workability:

The workability for this plan is joining NASA and the Armed Forces together to eliminate the chances of being hit by Apophis. DARPA will also be teaming up with the two other organizations to create new technology to diminish the problem.

Money to make this plan work is not an issue because NASA’s fiscal budget is 16.8 billion dollars for the year 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA

DARPA also collects 3.2 billion annually. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darpa

We would be using this money in addition to the budget of the Armed Forces. They collect   441.6 billion yearly. http://en.wikipedia.org/armedforces

Solvency:

Our plan is solving the problem presented because by combining NASA with the Air Force and bringing in the help of DARPA, we are essentially abolishing Apophis, which abandons the thought of catastrophe and potentially an impact winter, which could lead to extinction events.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_winter

Inherent Barrier: