Topicality: State to State

A) Interpretation Mexico refers to the United Mexican States, composed of states

and the federal district
Encyclopedia Britannica No Date http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/379167/Mexico
Mexico, country of southern North America and the third largest country in Latin America, after Brazil
and Argentina. Although there is little truth to the long-held stereotype of Mexico as a slow-paced land
of subsistence farmers, Mexican society is characterized by extremes of wealth and poverty, with a
limited middle class wedged between an elite cadre of landowners and investors on the one hand and
masses of rural and urban poor on the other. But in spite of the challenges it faces as a developing
country, Mexico is one of the chief economic and political forces in Latin America. It has a dynamic
industrial base, vast mineral resources, a wide-ranging service sector, and the worlds largest population
of Spanish speakersabout two and a half times that of Spain or Colombia. As its official name suggests,
the Estados Unidos Mexicanos (United Mexican States) incorporates 31 socially and physically diverse
states and the Federal District.
B) Violation- the aff clearly does not engage with Mexico, but rather a group of
people in Mexico

C) Standards-

1. Limits means their aff is not justified. Allowing their interpretation of the topic
allows for an infinite number of affirmatives, being able to engage with various
individuals or groups rather than the government itself. Voting issue for
competitive equity

2. Real World- Economic engagement between countries is done entirely through
state actors, not intermediaries, which makes the aff unrealistic and out of the
bounds of topicality

3. Grounds- the interpretation of the aff blows up affirmative grounds while
shrinks key negative ground, allowsing us to run less CPs while simultaneously
giving the aff an advantage in lit ground and offense.

D) Topicality is a voter for reasons of:

1. Education- policy debate comes down to whether or not we are being educated
within the confines of the resolution. If we are not, then were wasting our
time.


2. Fairness- it is extremely unfair for the negative side in debate to have to
prepare for all possible affs that are allowed under the affs interpretation,
which kills debate.