While most resolutions in Parli today fall into the category of “policy” resolutions, it’s important to tell the judge how you chose to interpret the resolution if it is unclear what category it falls into.
You can also outline a value/criteria here if appropriate. Value/criteria serve as a lens through which to weigh impacts. (Sometimes policies even weigh impacts through a value/criteria, but usually policy cases use “net benefits” as the criterion).
For fact or value cases or policy cases where net benefits is not the framework, explain the ground division between the government and opposition. For “net benefits” policy frameworks, the implied opp burden is for the opp to prove the world of the status quo or counterplan more beneficial than the world of the plan.
POLICY CASE CONSTRUCTION
State the resolution at the beginning of the first speech, then give:
Define the words in the resolution as you want them, especially if the resolution can be interpreted multiple ways. This is very important in answering Topicality. Also define what framework the judge should use to evaluate the debate.
This is what is happening in the status quo that prompted the resolution. Try not to include harms in this section. This section is more about explaining things the judge/opposition needs to know to understand why you are introducing the plan, how the plan is topical, or the details of a piece of legislation your Plan is enacting.
This is what you will advocate for. At a minimum, it should include an agent and an action. Always be careful when writing a plan text; some teams will want you to specify more or less than you did, so make sure to have reasons why you chose to include (or omit) everything in your plan text. Other teams may challenge the topicality of your plan; make sure to have topicality answers ahead of time if you think your plan might not be topical.
The above is generally referred to as Top of Case, and is usually on its own sheet of paper. Advantages are each written on their own sheet of paper.
This is what is wrong in the status quo that your plan will fix.
How your plan will solve the problem you presented in the Harms.
The results of your plan. This can be both the good effects of solving the harms, as well as other beneficial things that will result. One term you will hear constantly is “Terminalize your Impacts.” This means you should take your Impacts all the way to their logical conclusion. If your plan solves for the economy, you shouldn’t stop at saying the DOW goes up. Always ask, “Why is that good?”
An example for the economy would be: Economic growth leads to higher employment and better job security, which will allow people to buy food and prevent malnutrition. Malnutrition causes learning difficulties in children, which results in higher drop out rates and perpetuates the cycle of poverty. This dooms large segments of society to poverty, which is the most enduring, probable, and highest magnitude impact in the round.
EXAMPLE POLICY CASE
Government subsidies on residential and commercial solar power expire.
The renewable energy tax credit amounts to up to a third of the cost of commercial projects and has been a major driver of investment in solar power.
The US Government only invests a small amount into solar power every year.
The AC system is out of capacity, leading to shortages in California and other regions.
The United States Federal Government will subsidize a total of 420 billion dollars through 2020 to the solar power industry for concentrated solar collectors and high voltage direct current development and placement.
NM: Subsidies would be deployed from 2011 to 2020. The HVDC transmission companies would not have to be subsidized, because they would finance construction of lines and converter stations and earn revenues by delivering electricity.
Solar concentrators operate on near-ideal Stirling and Rankine engine cycles, meaning that they have the highest energy conversion (input to output) ratio known
Plan provides government subsides, which are the critical barrier preventing solar development.
Japan, France, and Germany have realized this and provide subsidies for solar
Ad 1: Energy security
Using coal for electricity has devastating environmental effects