73 BQ Regulatory Negotiations Case Neg

73 BQ Regulatory Negotiations Case Neg - Reg Neg Neg DDI...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Reg Neg Neg DDI 2008 BQ Jonathan Ma and Will Miller Regulatory Negotiations Neg Strategy Sheet ............................................................................................................................................................ 12 So there are a few strategies that can be employed against the Reg Neg AFF. Ill outline a few, but feel free to mix and match until your hearts content. We included some theory arguments that you can run against the AFF as a short off-case, a few T violations, Case frontlines for all advantages with a solvency frontline, and two counterplans that you can run. .............................................................................................. 12 1.Case Dump+Disad strat- This is pretty sefl-explanatory. Read all the case frontlines and just go for a better Disad debate. Running politics or spending would be well advised, but be wary of solvency mechanism DAs (coal, natural gas, ethanol, etc), because they dont claim a solvency mechanism. You could run them with the Theory as a means to generate in round abuse (wait for them to spike out of the DA links and go for theory). ................................................................................................................................... 12 2.PIC out of negotiations- this is a risky strat in the sense that you have to be prepared for possible Add- ons they may read. The innovation turns that are included in the block are much better pieces of evidence than the cards in the 1AC, and I included some reasons to prefer the innovation turns over the solvency evidence. Your going to have to argue that the plan is sweet no matter how its run, but that instead Negotiations are bad and internal link turn the Leadership Adv. ................................................................... 12 3.50 States CP- This is the way you should probably roll with. The solvency cards arent bad that talk about why regional action is much better for innovation and how federal Reg Negs are bad. There are plenty of cards that would link only to the plan that were included under Large groups/Federal action bad. Read Politics or Federalism as a NB. .......................................................................................................... 12 Besides those three strategies, the two T violations arent bad. The evidence that Will cut talking about Reg Negs werent incentives or market based are pretty specific, and there is definitely a good chance of success in running said T violations. The competitiveness frontline is a good idea and the cards are excellent, but be careful you arent double turning yourself when you read them. ...................................... 12 The solvency Cards about challenges or litigation arent bad. You should try to find impacts to why litigation is bad. ............................................................................................................................................................
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 02/23/2012 for the course DEBATE 101 taught by Professor None during the Spring '12 term at University of California, Berkeley.

Page1 / 50

73 BQ Regulatory Negotiations Case Neg - Reg Neg Neg DDI...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online