KC-Central BC

Negative Novice Update

HOMELESS VETS /BROADBAND (1)

1 Topicality

T: INCREASE NOT CREATE- SHELL

A. Definition: Increasing social services is not creating a new programs. Random House Websters College Dictionary (Second edition), 2000 increase (v. in krest; n. hi/1as), v., -crossed, -creeping, n. v.t. 1. to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment: to increase one's knowledge. B. Violation: the affirmative creates a new program. Specifically, they [insert explanation] C. Reasons to Prefer:

1.) Ground- there are an infinite number of new programs that could be passed. This explodes the research burden because there is no way to predict what programs the aff team could create. Building on previous programs guarantees stable ground because those programs are in place. This is clearly the ground that is dictated by the resolution because if it was supposed to be about new programs it would say create. 2.) Education-Current policies are already in the literature. Having programs that are based in large amounts of literature is crucial to creating a full understanding of the. Programs. Even if they have solvency evidence for their new programs there is overall less evidence about the programs and none of the evidence can be empirical because the programs is not in effect. Talking about empirical arguments for and against programs provides better argumentation and critical thinking about evidence, because experts in the field have already examined the programs.
D. Voter: T is a voter for competitive equity, jurisdiction, and competing interpretations.

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update
HOMELESS VETS./ BROADBAND (2)

2 Topicality

1NC INCREASE SHELL-ALREADY EXISTING

A. DefinitionIncrease means to augment something already existing. Dictionary.com, 09. (2009. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase) Increase- to augment; applies to what is already developed or well under way B. Violation- The resolution calls for an increase in social services, which means an already existing program must be augmented. The Affirmatives plan creates a new Social Service instead of enlarging an already existing program. C. StandardsGrounds- The Negative loses ground because we cant make quality arguments against new Social Service programs when the resolution calls for an already existing program to be enlarged. Bright Line- Theres a clear line between an already established program being enlarged and a new program being created. Limits- The Affirmative limits the topic by only focusing on new Social Service programs instead of enlarging one of the many already established programs. It limits the topic down to the established literature base. D. Voting IssueFairness- The Affirmative destroys fairness in the round. By creating an un-topical plan there is no way for us to prepare for the infinite number of plans they could run. Education- The Affirmative ruins education by preventing us from learning about an already existing Social Service, the intended topic of discussion. Abuse- We cant argue an un-topical case. The Affirmative could create an infinite amount of untopical plans. They have an excess of prep time, they should be topical. Jurisdiction- Its not within the judges jurisdiction to vote for an un-topical plan.

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update

3 Topicality

STATE BLOCK GRANTS (1)

1nc Social Services =/= Third Parties

A. Social Services are distinct from third party mandates
James Midgley, Harry and Riva Specht Professor Dean Emeritus, 1997-2006 @ Berkeley and Michelle Livermore, Assistant Professor @LSU, The Handbook of Social Policy 2008 Pg. 10 Social services are regarded by many social policy scholars as the primary means by which governments seek to enhance the well-being of their citizens. Throughout the world, governments have adopted policies and enacted statuses that govern the way these social services operate and meet their goals. Conventionally, the term social services has been used to connote government programs operating in the fields of health, education, housing, income security, and family welfare. The last two fields are often classified under the heading of social welfare policy. Social workers have played a major role in implementing welfare policies and, particularly, in using family and community welfare policies to discharge their professional obligations. In addition to using legislation to create social service programs and fund these programs, governments also enact laws that impose mandates designed to improve social welfare. This mechanism is known as statutory regulation. Legislation of this kind is regularly enacted to require employers, homeowners, educational institutions, commercial firms, hospitals, and many others to adopt measures that have a direct impact on social welfare. Many areas of welfare, including housing, health, incomes, employment, and education, are shaped by government regulation. The minimum wage, rent control, affirmative action, school attendance, adequate safety at work, and a host of other statutory prescriptions and proscriptions all affect peoples welfare. Of course, administrative decisions and the use of executive orders by the executive branch of government may also function as a regulatory mechanism. However, it is expected that administrative decisions and executive orders will be compatible with the laws enacted by Congress and that they will generally support the intent of social welfare legislation.

B. Violation: The Aff doesnt directly contribute to a social service. They just change regulations to make others increase social services C. Standards 1. Limits: Any regulation that could indirectly serve society letting in third party mandates allows any regulation to be topical. That creates an impossible research burden, and forces bad debates by making everything about generics 2. Ground: Statutory regulation of other entities avoids core disads and counterplans. Also makes the topic bi-directional because it would allow affs to repeal existing restrictions. 3. Effects independently bad: Even if the aff increases some social services, the federal government isnt directly increasing but only acting indirectly through some other agent. That destroys limits and neg ground because the aff can always just remove a restriction to increase social services. Its a Voter for fairness, education, and jurisdiction.

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update
STATE BLOCK GRANTS (2)

4 Topicality

1nc - United states federal government excludes the states 1nc A. Definition:

1. The is used to denote a specific entity

American Heritage, 00 (Fourth Edition, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the) the1 P (the before a vowel; the before a consonant) def.art. Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or things: the baby; the dress I wore.

Federal government is central government

WEBSTER'S NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY UNABRIDGED, 1976, p. 833. Federal government. Of or relating to the central government of a nation, having the character of a federation as distinguished from the governments of the constituent unites (as states or provinces).

B. Violationthe affirmative acts through state governments, not through the central

government C. Standards 1. limits: allowing the states also allows different types of state compacts, or allows the affirmative to exclude certain states like California to avoid disad links 2. negative groundnone of our disads link to the states; they assume a central government actor, and all of the topic literature that describes federal action refers to the central government. Its not predictable for us to have disads to the state action 3. fiat abuse: allowing 50-state fiat isnt real world and destroys education; theres almost zero literature on all states acting together. It also creates terrible debates and is worse for the affirmative because it justifies multiagent counterplans that also arent predictable 4. its extra topicalit requires the creation of state coordinating bodies and compacts to create a federal government; this is a voting issue because it expands affirmative advantage ground unpredictably Voter for fairness education and jurisdiction

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update
Homeless Vets/ Immigrant Medicare

5 Topicality

1nc In = Throughout
A. DefinitionIn means to include throughout a whole. Dictionary.com, 09. (2009. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/in.) In: With reference to a whole which includes or comprises the part spoken of. B. Violation- The plan doesnt include ALL of the people living in poverty throughout the United States. It merely targets one area of poverty in the U.S. C. StandardsGrounds- The Negative loses ground because we cant make quality arguments against one group of people as the resolution calls for all persons living in poverty. Bright Line- Theres a clear line between including all persons in poverty and one specific group. Limits- The Affirmative limits the topic by only focusing on one part of the poverty population. D. Voting IssueFairness- The Affirmative causes an unfair debate because the negative is unable to prepare for all the possible un-topical plans. Education- The Affirmative ruins education by preventing learning on Social Services that includes the entire U.S. Their plan is specific to a small group in the U.S. which prevents a better understanding of Social Services across the entire country. Abuse- We cant argue an un-topical case. The Affirmative has an infinite amount of prep time, they should be topical. Jurisdiction- Its not within the judges jurisdiction to vote for an un-topical plan.

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update Food Stamps

6 Topicality

1nc Should =/= Past Tense

A. Interpretation: Should refers to something in the future. B. Violation - Should refers to a future act that has not been carried out the affirmative must defend a world where the federal government enacts a policy increasing social services to those living in poverty that has not yet been enacted the aff refers to an act that has already been enacted.
Remo Foresi v. The Hudson Coal Co, SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA, 106 Pa. Super. 307; 161 A. 910; 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 239 July 14, 1932 As regards the mandatory character of the rule, the word 'should' is not only an auxiliary verb, it is also the preterite of the verb, 'shall' and has for one of its meanings as defined in the Century Dictionary: "Obliged or compelled (to); would have (to); must; ought (to); used with an infinitive (without to) to express obligation, necessity or duty in connection with some act yet to be carried out." We think it clear that it is in that sense that the word 'should' is used in this rule, not merely advisory. When the judge in charging the jury tells them that, unless they find from all the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged, they should acquit, the word 'should' is not used in an advisory sense but has the force or meaning of 'must', or 'ought to' and carries [***8] with it the sense of [*313] obligation and duty equivalent to compulsion. A natural sense of sympathy for a few unfortunate claimants who have been injured while doing something in direct violation of law must not be so indulged as to fritter away, or nullify, provisions which have been enacted to safeguard and protect the welfare of thousands who are engaged in the hazardous occupation of mining.

C. Standards 1. Limits There are a huge number of past instances where the federal government has increased social service search of these is wildly unpredictable for the negative. AND, the abuse of unlimited topics is magnified when debating the past since we cant have generics every case occurs in a different timeframe which means our disadvantages and case arguments have to be written to dozens of different contexts. We would literally have to have a tub for every era of American history. 2. Ground Consensus is generally settled on historical questions which means you can choose ones where the literature is not only slanted but actually indicates such a slanted consensus. Moreover, we know past actions didnt cause nuclear wars or anything else extreme but the aff still has the opportunity to make counter-factual claims about failure to enact such programs causing nuclear war this is a losing proposition they will ALWAYS outweigh 3. Education Debate trains us to be future policy makers, lawyers and activists. All of these require the ability to make COST-BENEFIT CALCULATIONS relying on PREDICTIVE INFORMATION to be effective. This is a skill that can only and best be taught in policy debates using the assumptions of fiat. If history is valuable and relevant it can be used as empirical examples to prove and disprove future arguments which solves all your offense

Voter for fairness and competitive equity.

KC-Central BC
Negative Novice Update

7 Topicality