NCFCA Team Policy 2021-22 Resolution Voting Guide
The new resolutions have arrived. Before we look at our options, let’s note something about all six.
The word “Resolved” is gone.
Starting resolutions with “Resolved: …” is a time—honored tradition. It comes from resolutions passed by legislative bodies. They would use a longer term like “Be it resolved: …” or “This house is resolved: …”
The word is handy because it helps signal that whatever comes next is a resolution. But it also creates the potential for confusion when debaters try to build arguments out of it. For example, they might accuse the affirmative of not being sufficiently resolved, and therefore not being topical. It also takes a bit of explanation to bring newcomers up to speed.
Overall, this change is neutral at worst. If it continues for a few years, we’ll all forget it was ever done another way.
Removing this word signals a willingness from the resolution framers to dig very deep into their craft and search tirelessly for ways to optimize. Their efforts paid off. That brings us to option 1.
The United States Federal Government should significantly reform its policies regarding convicted prisoners under federal jurisdiction.
The Good
This topic doesn’t get enough attention. 1% of the American population is incarcerated, and many people would prefer to throw away the key and never think about them again. But prisoners are human beings with pasts and futures and personalities and fears and dreams. Their lives are not over when they go to prison.
The treatment of prisoners leaves a lot to be desired. They are subjected to all kinds of cruelty - and the hands of each other, and from the prison system itself. America struggles with high recidivism and clings to policies that have been failing for decades. The potential for cases is high, but easy answers are sparse. That’s the policy resolution sweet spot.
Even if you don’t have a trace of empathy for convicts, you should care about a system that hosts so many people and costs so much money to maintain.
The resolution raises lots of great philosophical questions like the purpose of punishment and the authority of government. You can expect to regularly see Detriments and Benefits that are primarily philosophical, which is uncommon in TP.
The Bad
The resolution is a bit narrow because it only targets convicted prisoners under federal jurisdiction. By March at the latest, coming up with new cases will be difficult. Debaters will do fine with months-old briefs. The resolution needed to be narrowed beyond “reform the justice system,” but this one was overtuned.
This resolution can make young novices debate some aspects of prison life that their parents would rather shield them from for a bit longer. That’s a dilemma that crops up all over the high school forensics world, and it deserves its own post. But for now, we’ll just say: it’s worth acknowledging, but it isn’t a deal breaker.
Verdict: 4/5. This is simply a good resolution.
The United States Federal Government should significantly reform its policies regarding federally recognized tribes in the United States.
The Good
This resolution is a master class in scope. It has a manageable topic area bordering on narrow, but allows affirmatives to tackle anything they want within that area. Creativity and research are both strongly rewarded.
The wording may feel clunky, but every syllable serves a function. The meaning is clear and there’s no fodder for tedious, unintended interpretation debates.
We explored a similar resolution last summer. The potential cases are so varied that the resolution can stay robust all the way to nationals. You can expect to see a vibrant and rapidly-iterating metagame. If you like writing secret/surprise cases, this will be your year to shine.
The resolution checks all the boxes: educational, unique, urgent, and so on. Bonus: it’s just fun. It’s exactly what NCFCA policy debaters need for the 2022 season.
The Bad
None.
Final verdict: 5/5. This resolution is an instant legend.
The United States Federal Government should substantially reform its policies regarding affordable housing.
The Good
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the resolution has excellent scope and targets a pressing issue. Almost everyone can agree that affordable housing is a crisis in the United States, but fixing it will require a lot of research and creative thinking.
The resolution goes deep on a complex topic that is too often viewed simplistically. The financial crisis wasn’t just the fault of greedy bankers. Homelessness can’t be fixed by everyone just getting a job. Real estate development and management are a labyrinth of policies that you should know about.
Housing is not a subject, it is the convergence of many subjects. To win rounds consistently, you’ll need to become conversant in meta- and microeconomics, sociology, history, and more. The deeper you research, the more intrigued you will be. When nationals rolls around, you’ll be disappointed because there’s still more to learn.
The Bad
If this resolution wins, the other two lose.
Verdict: 5/5. This is a perfect resolution. And yet …
Final verdict: 2.
1 is good, 3 is perfect, 2 is legendary. We prefer 2. But if you like one of the others, feel free to vote for it. There are no wrong answers. No matter what happens, we are guaranteed to enjoy an excellent year of Team Policy debate.
We tip our hats to the framers. You knocked it out of the park this year.
The LD guide is coming soon.