Post Info TOPIC: Negatives: Plans faced, Evidence used, Attacks made, etc.

Negatives: Plans faced, Evidence used, Attacks made, etc.

For all of you who are negatives, please see the email I sent out concerning the forum.  Use this space to collaborate professionally on the plans you faced, the evidence they used, the attacks you made, the defensive arguments they used, etc.

Justin Besse


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.

-- Edited by mre at 18:49, 2006-12-12



When I faced West Bridgewater and B Novice Team, there plan was to increase the number of people serving in all of the corps including the armed forces. To do this, they were goin to make a quota to take the number of illegal immigrants comming into the country and give them the choice of either going into one of the one of the corps and the armed forces they have to serve for 2 to 4 years OR have a 7% increase tax.There plan was very unclear and hard to follow. They mentioned something about the armed forces and then jumped to the peace corps and then added something about americorps. There information and thought were VERY unorganized. The plan was not topical because it was not substancially increasing the number of people serving. There plan gave them a choice if they WANTED to join not inforcing them to join.

Question: Do you have to be a Us Citizen To be Part of the US Military?

The aff. team mentioned in there plan something about involving the peace corps and the military
Military- fighting for freedom and Peace Crops keeping peace in countries? Go together??

They also didnt have an inherent barrier.





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. 


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



Attacking the Criminal Plan

Stang, Novice - Their plan was to increase the number of persons serving in the armed forces by taking criminals, who commited non-violent crimes. They had the option whether to choose jail or serving in the military. If chose serving in the military, the criminals would serve as long as their sentence would be.  If they "messed up" or did something wrongful while serving, their sentence would start over and they would lose the opportunity to serve and would go right to jail.

Who in their right mind would go into the military knowing if they "mess up" their sentence would start over and they would go straight to jail without the option of military service. Also in jails, criminals have privilages such as, television, magazines, workout center, and they are able to play sports. The way I see it, being in jail would be a better option.

-- Edited by mre at 02:23, 2006-12-09

-- Edited by mre at 18:49, 2006-12-12



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



Okay, this plan I didn't actually face, but I sat in because I won round two by forfeit.  This was Bishop Connoly Affirmative C Varsity and it was to substantially increase the number of persons serving in the Peace Corps.  The affirmatives proposed that they would do this by advertising and recruiting people from schools starting with Juniors and Seniors in High School, and moving onto college.  They would do this by getting money out of Ear Marks and they would want 3 billion dollars every year for six years.  The need for this plan was other countries look down upon the United States and by increasing the number of persons serving in peace corps, we could better the appearance of the United States because Peace Corps is an organization that helps other people and not just ourselves.  The affirmatives also said that the plan was needed because there were- i believe, 94 countries that wanted our help but we could only help 72.  So by increasing the budget along with the number of persons serving, we could help more countries and gain the respect back from other countries, as well as gain allies. Currently, I can't remember what the inherent barrier was, but I'll try to get that for you once I get my notes sheet back. 


The negative team mainly argued two points.  1. being that Peace Corps is an inefficient organization, which was knocked down extremely easily by the affirmative team, and 2. being that one of the requirements for Peace Corps is that you must be a college graduate.  However, according to this plan, Peace Corps would be lowering their standards for their volunteers, and that training cannot give you life experience and the service would not be as effective.

From what I gathered, the money figures were slightly misleading in the sense that the affirmative team was getting 3 billion dollars annually towards advertising and school recruitments, but if they're doing this then (correct me if I'm wrong), but they would also have to increase the budget in order to get more supplies and especially training for undergraduates.  That being the case, their workability would have holes as well.

As for other countries looking down on America, my partner and I found several cases directly from the Peace Corps website where the volunteers have actually commited serious crimes while serving, so expanding Peace Corps will not necessarily better the image.

Also as for the inefficency of Peace Corps, one could argue that simply increasing the number of persons serving in an organization with a high failure rate (said by several people who have actually served in Peace Corps, so they have first hand experience), you would not be solving the problem stated.

Like I said, I didn't actually debate this and I'm not too sure what other attacks to make so please help out :]



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?



In addition to Justin's reply, we also went up against a team that wanted to increase the number of persons serving in the armed forces by eliminating descrimination and prejudice, by removing the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. They had a TON of evidence supporting their plan. They had stated that the Armed Forces are already struggling to meet their recruitment goals. They also tried to prove that the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy prevents gays and lesbians from enlisting in the first place, which it doesn't. Another arguement that they used was that the United States wastes $190 million on training these gays and lesbians who were discharged. The arguments that Justin and I used against them was that heterosexuals are not allowed to express their sexuality in the Armed Forces, so intern the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy is working fine. We also argued that a nonsubstantial amount of people are being discharded becuase of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy, this was under topicality becuase their plan would not "substancially" increase the number of persons serving in the Armed Forces. Another topicality argument was that this team was not creating their own plan but only removing a plan that already existed. There was also no inherent barrier because their is nothing stopping the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy from being removed. This team had numerous quotes that would disprove evidence that the opposition had, they were a very prepared team. The team was Hingham Varsity A.



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.



Bishop Feehan did the resolution to change the name of the Senior Corps to the Wisdom Corps and reducing the age limit by 5 years, to 50.

The main flaw in the plan was the fact that a certain number of volunteers was never brought up. The Affrimative continued to state that "even one person would make a difference." They also failed to bring up a funding system, claiming to take a chunk of the Corps budget and just throw it around. Coupled with this funding flaw was the legislative costs to change the legalilty of the Senior Corps. The Affirmative skipped around the topic of changing the name altogether, allowing us to take down a half of the plan immediately.

There was also a recurring arguement of the words substantially, and substantial.

This was a very mundane debate, in which these were the only arguements brought up. When they were brought up, they were immediately shut down. The only hard part about this debate was listening to ALL of the affirmative definitions in the constructives for absolutely nothing.

I have faith in anyone going against the plan that if you DO come across it, you will emerge victorious. Good Luck!



Attacking the Criminal Plan

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

Source: 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."

-- Edited by mre at 18:37, 2006-12-12

-- Edited by mre at 18:46, 2006-12-12



Attacking the Criminal Plan

On the point of recidivism (those who got out of jail and commit crimes again), this site seems to have a great deal of statistics.  See if there's anything in here that can be used to prove that letting non-violent criminals serve in national service programs will only increase the rate of recidivism.

-- Edited by mre at 18:48, 2006-12-12



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

-- Edited by mre at 18:51, 2006-12-12



Attacking the Criminal Plan

I have gathered some information on the Stang, Novice plan about having criminals in the military.

Recidivism-is the act of a person repeating an undesirable behaviour after they have either experienced negative consequences of that behaviour, or have been treated or trained to extinguish that behaviour.

As reported on BBC Radio 4 on 2 September 2005, the recidivism rates for released prisoners in the United States of America is 60%


  • Of the 272,111 persons released from prisons in 15 States in 1994, an estimated 67.5% were rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3 years, 46.9% were reconvicted, and 25.4% resentenced to prison for a new crime.
  • The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers.


-- Edited by mre at 18:52, 2006-12-12



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.

-- Edited by mre at 19:24, 2006-12-12



This is in response to Laura's post about the Bishop Connoly C Affirmative Plan to increase the Peace Corps.

1. What is the current budget of the Peace Corps?

2. How would 3 billion dollars annually fit into said budget?

3. Physical Evidence showing that other countries "look down upon the United States of America."




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.



does anybody have any good information on senior corps, because i know that one of the bishop connoly varsity teams have a plan regarding senior corps, and i dont have much information on it.  let me know please


ban on abortion

 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.


dont ask dont tell

Again, on the forums i saw a plan where the affirmative team wanted to repeal dont ask dont tell only regarding the media and public affairs officers of the military.  They'd sleep and shower at home and work in the office buildings.  Technically, they'd be serving and they'd be employed by the united states armed forces, but they woudln't have any of the physical contact issues of the typical soldier.


mandatory national service

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.




space plan

Advantages: Prevents all extinctions by allowing cultivation of life on other planets
Key to US Hegemony
Stops all disease
Stops all U.S human soldier loss
and finally stops Nuke War.


community health clinics

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



 increasing the number of persons serving in the peace corps in order to address the hiv/aids epidemic in africa.


RE: Negatives: Plans faced, Evidence used, Attacks made, etc.

I researched a couple plans off, 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.



I found all these plans on

  • Women in Combat-to increase the number of women serving in the armed forces by provided full gender equality.

  • NASA and airforce

Plan for Nasa and airforce-

you Switch NASA int a branch of the military or under the Airforce. Solves for NASA failures and military overstrechment


Someone on the debate central website posted there plan on the joining NASA to AirForces.

Plan Overview: Right now an asteroid called Apophis is headed towards earth. If it hits, it will annihilate 96% or more of life on earth. Currently, there is no technology or plan for dealing with this incoming threat. This plan proposes that NASA join the Air Force, and through cooperation solve for this impending crisis.

Therefore, we the Affirmative team stand
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should establish a policy substantially increasing the number of persons serving in one or more of the following national service programs: AmeriCorps, Citizen Corps, Senior Corps, Peace Corps, Learn and Serve America, Armed Forces.

HARM – (Proves that there is a problem with the status quo (current system) which is or will result in loss of life, human rights violations, or other serious harm)

1. An asteroid hitting the earth would have cataclysmic affects
NASA has estimated that an impact from Apophis would release more than 100,000 times the energy released in the nuclear blast over Hiroshima. Thousands of square kilometres would be directly affected by the blast but the whole of the Earth would see the effects of the dust released into the atmosphere.
2. A significantly sized asteroid hitting the earth soon is likely
"It's a question of when, not if, a near Earth sized 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 overdue for a big one."
Monica Grady, an expert in meteorites at the Open University, Dec. 7, 2005

“..we astronauts and cosmonauts are particularly concerned by a far more threatening natural disaster for which the world is totally unprepared; namely the future impact of a near-Earth object (NEO) with the Earth.” [ellipses in original]  3 March, 2006
A professional organization of over 300 astronauts and cosmonauts from 30 nations,

INHERENCY – (Proves that the current system will not solve the harm if left alone)
1. We currently do not have the technology to divert an asteroid
Why the hurry? It is because if we should need to deflect the asteroid, our technology requires that the deflection take place before the close flyby in 2029. Before 2029 we only need to move it enough to miss the keyholes (which are less than 1 km across). But if a deflection were required after 2029, it would have to be enough to miss the much larger target of the Earth itself, which is far beyond present technology for as asteroids this large.
July 22, 2005 By: David Morrison, NASA official

2. NASA lacks equipment, personnel, and funding to test and/or produce new asteroid diversion theories
“A series of steep cuts in aeronautics research at NASA threaten to undermine the nation's aviation industry and delay a new air traffic system needed to prevent gridlock in the skies, according to members of Congress, industry officials and scientific leaders.
Groups of lawmakers from both parties, academics and aerospace leaders say the reductions are hampering NASA's ability to develop new aviation technology.
"I think its almost criminal," said Roy Harris, retired head of aeronautics at NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia. "We are dropping the ball."
NASA has lost hundreds of millions of dollars in aviation funding over the past decade and is struggling to pay for repairing the space shuttle and for President Bush's plan to send people to the moon and Mars. Next year, the agency faces a proposed 20% cut in aviation research. That means that, after adjusting for inflation, it could lose nearly two-thirds of that research funding since it peaked in 1994 at the equivalent of nearly $2 billion.
Red Orbit News, September 28, 06.

3. NASA does not have any authority to act upon future asteroids
Although the study of near-Earth asteroids has come a long way in the past decade, one big question still hangs in the air: Who takes over if Yeomans and his colleagues actually spot an asteroid or comet heading our way?
At least officially, it's not NASA. True, NASA identifies and tracks potentially threatening near-Earth objects, and NASA does have plans to respond to Apophis if necessary. However, dealing with an actual threat is not part of the space agency's job description, Yeomans said.
"NASA does not have the charter to look at that, nor does anyone else," he said. "That's the point - no one does at the moment."
Alan Boyle, Science editor, MSNBC December 30, 2005

  • Coast Guard-to increase the number of persons by forcing criminals to join a training camp to enter the coast guard. 

  • Draft-to increase the number of persons serving in the military.

  • Employment- increasing the number of persons service in national service programs by providing government sponsored employment programs.





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 <----- 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 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 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"

... "SO THAT THE PEACE CORPS CAN BE EFFECTIVE." hm. so that's basically saying that peace corps is not currently effective and last i checked, doubling the size of an ineffective organization is not going to make it any more effective.  By doubling it, you are just spending more money on an ineffective organization and wasting time and effort for nothing.

"we should subtract some of the budget from the army’s band which is 320 million dollars and add it to the peace corps."

...deducting money from the army could be a huge disadvantage because the negative could argue that we are currently in a war on terror as well as the war in iraq and we cannot subtract money from the army because we would be wasting money on an organization that the affirmative team called inefficient and sacraficing our security as a result.  Also, saying "we should subtract SOME of the budget..." doesn't give us an actual number, which could put the army into a huge hole.



"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.





Military Draft.

Plan: The United States Government should establish a policy to draft men and women above the age of 18 for two years of military service.

More Troops Necessary for Current Engagement
The End of the Draft is a Top Reason for U.S. Military Overstretch.

CNN 2006 (January 25, 2006, “Army Needs More Troops to Fight in Iraq,”)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Pentagon-commissioned study on Army troop deployment
concluded what some people in Iraq and the United States have been saying all along:
There aren't enough soldiers to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"The ground forces required to provide the necessary level of stability and security to
Afghanistan and Iraq clearly exceed those available for the mission," says the study of
Army manpower by Andrew Krepinevich, a former Army officer who is a military



A Draft if Necessary to Fight the War on Terror

Moskos and Glastris 2001, [Charles Moskos and Paul Glastris “Now Do You Believe

We Need a Draft?” Atlantic Monthly, November 2001]

President Bush has said that the new war against terrorism will be "a different kind of
conflict." He is more right than he knows. Not only are we facing a uniquely shadowy
enemy, one committed to inflicting mass civilian casualties on U.S. soil. But for the first
time in our history we are entering a war of significant size and probable duration
(administration officials have said it may last for "years") without drafting young men to
fight the threat.

Not only are we not drafting our young men. We are not even planning to draft them.
Elected leaders are not even talking about the possibility of drafting them. That terrorists
might poison municipal water supplies, spray anthrax from crop dusters, or suicidally
infect themselves with small pox and stroll through busy city streets, is no longer
considered farfetched. That we might need to draft some of our people to counter these
threats---now that's considered farfetched, to the extent that it's considered at all



The US Military is Stretched to the Breaking Point
Burns, 2006
[Robert Burns “Army Stretched to the Breaking Point,”Associated Press,
January 24, 2006]

Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a
"thin green line" that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the
Pentagon. Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a
Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments
to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the
Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year
was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended. As evidence,
Krepinevich points to the Army's 2005 recruiting slump _ missing its recruiting goal for
the first time since 1999 _ and its decision to offer much bigger enlistment bonuses and
other incentives. "You really begin to wonder just how much stress and strain there is on
the Army, how much longer it can continue," he said in an interview. He added that the
Army is still a highly effective fighting force and is implementing a plan that will expand
the number of combat brigades available for rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan. The 136-
page report represents a more sobering picture of the Army's condition than military
officials offer in public. While not released publicly, a copy of the report was provided in
response to an Associated Press inquiry. Illustrating his level of concern about strain on
the Army, Krepinevich titled one of his report's chapters, "The Thin Green Line." He
wrote that the Army is "in a race against time" to adjust to the demands of war "or risk
`breaking' the force in the form of a catastrophic decline" in recruitment and reenlistment.
ol. Lewis Boone, spokesman for Army Forces Command, which is
responsible for providing troops to war commanders, said it would be "a very extreme
characterization" to call the Army broken.



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."






national service programs are adequate:

James Carafano of The Heritage Foundation on the use of reserves:

 Announcement of the IRR mobilization prompted shrill criticisms that the military is overstretched, as well as ill-considered recommendations to bring back the draft to increase the size of the Army permanently. But we are using our Reserves exactly like we’re supposed to -- calling on them when the nation truly needs them.

Gene Healy, senior editor at the Cato Institute, May 7, 2004

The nationwide outpouring of gratitude for Pat Tillman--the NFL star killed in Afghanistan, who gave up a multimillion dollar contract for $18,000 a year as an Army Ranger--gives the lie to the notion that Americans need to be dragooned into service.  Our volunteer military is peerless--and more than up to the task of fighting the rag-tag, stateless irregulars that make up al Qaeda and its affiliates.  If more soldiers are needed tp clean up the mess in Iraq, we ought to shift them out of obsolete Cold War-era deployments like Germany and South Korea.



Tax Cut Negative Quotes

They(The Democratic party), won no mandate to kill President Bush's tax cuts or to erect barriers to trade. Lower taxes and international competition have helped keep the economy strong, prices low and ports like Tampa's busy.

"The Democrats will never make tax cuts permanent. Bush would never sign a repeal. And the Democrats aren't going to stick their necks out for something that will be vetoed."

Look at what's happening after the Democrats won nationwide and locally. The new House speaker already wants to eliminate the Bush tax cuts. Net effect: The middle class pays more. The minimum wage goes up, so do prices we all pay, and raises will be reduced for workers who also work with minimum wage earners.





AmeriCorps is Not Volunteerism
Weinstein, 1997
[Kenneth R. Weinstein, “A Good Example of Bad Volunteerism,”
Insight on the News, May 26, 1997]
One program contributing to this deterioration is Clinton's showcase program for
promoting youth volunteerism, AmeriCorps. As if to illustrate the degree to which the
spirit of community service is dying in this country, AmeriCorps pays its volunteers. This
is the very opposite of volunteerism. The supreme irony of the volunteer summit is that
one of the major organizations behind it -- the Corporation for National Service -- is the
$400 million federally funded agency that oversees and pays for AmeriCorps. Instead of
praising AmeriCorps, summit attendees should denounce it.
AmeriCorps is the largest extension of the federal government in recent years -- and the
biggest federally funded program to "promote volunteerism" since the days of the New
Deal. But AmeriCorps has proved to be a failure even on its own terms. AmeriCorps
grants federal funds to various organizations that, in turn, pay "volunteers" a stipend; at
the completion of their service, full-time participants also are eligible for a $4,725
voucher for educational expenses. When AmeriCorps was created, Congress was assured
that cost per "volunteer" would be under $18,000, that federal funds would leverage
many times their value in private donations, that the program would be a cost-effective
way to help young people pay for college and that 80 percent of participants would
complete the program.
Instead, the program has become a case study as to why government should stay out of
the volunteer sector.


AmeriCorps is Wasteful
Weinstein, 1997
[Kenneth R. Weinstein, “A Good Example of Bad Volunteerism,”
Insight on the News, May 26, 1997]
A July 1995 audit by the government's accounting arm, the General Accounting Office,
or GAO, showed that the average cost per AmeriCorps member ran from $26,000 to
$32,000 -- nearly double the expected cost. Although a second GAO audit of a sampling
of 24 AmeriCorps projects, completed in February 1997, did not seek to determine
average cost per participant, it did find some equally disturbing trends:
* Nearly 40 percent of AmeriCorps' paid volunteers in GAO's sample dropped out of the
* AmeriCorps has failed to generate significant private-sector support. Instead, 83
percent of funding for the projects GAO examined came directly from the taxpayers.
* Barely half of those who completed the programs sampled used their educational
awards. Although these numbers certainly will increase during the seven years that the
awards can be redeemed, in some programs as few as 18 percent of the education awards
were used. This fact leads some critics to wonder whether AmeriCorps merely has
become another expensive federal jobs program.
* One AmeriCorps project, the Casa Verde Builders, cost more than $100,000 per
"volunteer" who completed the program. Other audited programs showed similar waste.
The independent accounting firm Arthur Andersen twice has examined AmeriCorps
books, finding them to be unauditable and incomplete -- grounds for criminal prosecution
in the private sector. Most disturbing, a follow up study concluded that the program could
not account for $38 million in federal funding.
Even a study of the program for the Independent Sector, a group that supports
AmeriCorps, found that the presence of AmeriCorps members created only a "3.5 percent
increase in hours volunteered by genuine volunteers."
Yet, despite this record of mismanagement, Clinton wants to increase spending for
AmeriCorps to $546.5 million next year -- a figure equal to all the money the government
receives in taxes from a total of more than 2.5 million average working families.
According to Sen. Charles Grassley, Iowa Republican, "It's an outrage that the president
proposes to increase spending for this program, which can't even pass an audit."
In short, AmeriCorps neither is an effective means for promoting volunteerism nor a costeffective
means to help families pay for college. It's time to end this expensive
boondoggle. If the presidents' summit truly wants to promote volunteerism in America, it
should work to end AmeriCorps.


AmeriCorps Wastes Money Bovard, 2000 [James Bovard, “AmeriCorps: Six Years of Waste and Fraud,” Capital
Research Center, 2000]
Beginning with 20,000 recruits in 1994, AmeriCorps by 1999 had 50,000 paid
"volunteers" on its payroll, many of whom worked only part-time. Almost half have quit
the program before completing their term of service. Despite this fact, Clinton in his final
budget proposed to double AmeriCorps to 100,000 members by 2004 and increase its
budget from $433 million to $533 million. [3]
Anyone age 17 or older can join AmeriCorps. Full-time members are supposed to put in
1,700 hours of "service" a year in return for a stipend of up to $8,750 (sometimes paid as
a straight wage) plus health insurance, emergency dental care, free child care, and an
education award worth up to $4,750 for tuition or paying off college loans. Many recruits
are on welfare, and the money they collect from AmeriCorps (unlike that from a privatesector
job) does not affect how much they receive in food stamps or housing subsidies.
Because many recruits are relatively unskilled, their pay and benefit package is more than
they could earn in the private sector. The average recruit costs AmeriCorps and its
sponsors more than $23,000 annually—the equivalent of almost $12 an hour for
minimum-wage tasks!


AmeriCorps is Misguided and Useless
O’Beirne, 2002
[Kate O’Beirne, “Corps-Crazy: The administration and its new, needless
initiative,” National Review, February 25, 2006]
AmeriCorps is a misguided response . . . to a nonexistent problem: Even before Sept. 11,
the citizenry was plenty active, without Washington's help. According to the most recent
survey by the Independent Sector, a coalition of volunteer groups, in 2000, 44 percent of
adults -- an estimated 84 million people -- volunteered with a formal organization, for an
average of 3.6 hours a week (per volunteer). Charity closer to home, not included in the
survey, would have included additional millions who are caring for an aging family
member, babysitting for a relative, or helping a sick friend. An effort like the first
President Bush's much-ridiculed "Thousand Points of Light" -- a simple call to service,
and a celebration of those who answer -- could likely mobilize more volunteers than the
hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants that fund paid volunteers to piggyback on
well-established local programs. In one of its glossy brochures, the Corporation for
National and Community Service points out that AmeriCorps' troops typically serve with
organizations like Habitat for Humanity, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, and Boys and Girls
Clubs. Former GOP congressional aide Derrick Max, who studied the program during his
stint in the House, found that cost-shifting wasn't uncommon, with an AmeriCorps
worker sometimes replacing one of a community group's salaried employees.





With George Bush still in the White House, it is easy to exaggerate the economic

consequences of a Democratic victory on November 7th. For all the talk of rescinding the

Bush tax cuts and doing more to help the middle class, Mr Bush's veto pen will limit how

much the Democrats could do even if they were to take over both chambers of Congress.

The stalemate of divided government might well lead to better policy, particularly on the

budget. But in one area Democratic control of one, let alone both, parts of the legislature

would mark a clear change for the worse. Mr Bush's trade agenda would be stalled. And

as the economy slows, the White House might then find it harder to hold off protectionist

pressure from Capitol Hill.



Peace corp.

Lex Rieffel, guest scholar in Goverance Studies at the Brookings Institution:

Bipartisan support for the Peace Corps is strong and its cost is miniscule. Thus this expansion seems unambitious relative to the magnitude of the task of building a more stable and prosperous world. But a sharp increase in the number of volunteers in the next several years may not be feasible. Countries such as Brazil and India, which could absorb large numbers of Peace Corps volunteers, may resist. Recruiting enough qualified volunteers could be difficult under the current conditions of service.

Victor C. Johnson

One of the Peace Corps' most unrecognized blessings is precisely that its legislative mandate has remained fundamentally unchanged since its creation 40 years ago. The mandate is clear enough to give the Peace Corps its essential direction, yet broad enough to enable the Peace Corps to be responsive to changing host-country needs. Contrast that with USAID--a quintessentially failed agency--which gets a new mandate with virtually every administration, and seems to have no idea what it's supposed to be doing anymore. That's the more typical experience of a government bureaucracy, and it's why I greet with some skepticism recurring suggestions that we "update" the Peace Corps' mandate. The existing mandate, it seems to me, has served the Peace Corps well, and is not a barrier to most things that the Peace Corps would want to do.


senior corps

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




matt and caleb are new affirmatives (novice) and this is their plan

please tear it to shreads and help with the inherent barrier =]


Resolved: The United States federal government should establish a policy substantially increasing the number of persons serving in one or more of the following national service programs: AmeriCorps, Citizen Corps, Senior Corps, Peace Corps, Learn and Serve America, Armed Forces.


Plan: The United States federal government will substantially increase the number of persons serving in the Armed Forces by bringing NASA into the Air Force in order to create a plan to eliminate the chances of getting hit by Apophis, an asteroid estimated by NASA to hit in the year 2036.  Our plan will also bring DARPA into the picture by linking them in with NASA and the Air Force to help with their plan.



United States: The executive and legislative and judicial branches of the federal government of the United States.

Federal Government:  A government with strong central powers.

Should: Be logically necessary.

Establish: Institute, enact, or establish.

Policy: A line of argument rationalizing the course of action of a government.

Substantially: Important, essential.

Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ED., 04, 1245.

Increasing: becoming greater or larger

Number: A quantity or amount.

Pocket Oxford English Dictionary, 10th ED., 05 615.

Person: An individual human being.

Pocket Oxford English Dictionary, 10th Ed., 05, 669-670

Serving: Work for, under, provide help to.

Collins Webster’s Dictionary, 3rd ED., 05

In:  So as to be included or involved

Pocket Oxford English Dictionary, 10th ED., 05, 457

Armed Forces: the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps.

U.S. Code, Chapter 10, Paragraph 113 (2005). Online. Lexis Nexus Academic Universe. Jan. 22, 06.

NASA: an independent agency of the United States government responsible for aviation and spaceflight

Torino Scale: The Torino Scale is a method for categorizing the impact hazard associated with near-Earth objects (NEOs) such as asteroids and comets.

DARPA: DARPA stands for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is an agency of the United States Department of Defense responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military.



part 2


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.

“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”

“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.


“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.”,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.”,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.",14493,1660485,00.html



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.

DARPA also collects 3.2 billion annually.

We would be using this money in addition to the budget of the Armed Forces. They collect   441.6 billion yearly.



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.


Inherent Barrier:



RE: Negatives: Plans faced, Evidence used, Attacks made, etc.


advancements in space technology.  these advancements can be used daily, such as satelites, computers, calculators, etc.  with the advancement in space technology, we also get advancements in regular technology...=advantage.





NASA would want to do this because they would now have access to the military's budget and technology.



inherent barrier

our inherent barrier is long established firewalls established by the federal government designed in order to create a separation between the military and space programs, such as NASA.  These "firewalls" are refered to in the following quote.

"In an appearance with OKeefe Jan. 22 at NASAs Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) said the United States should think carefully about breaching the long established firewalls that were designed to maintain a separation between military and civilian space programs. "When it comes to working with Defense, when it comes to working with intel, I think we need to be very careful and very prudent," Mikulski said."

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard