Cross Examination DebateCross Examination Debate

Notes – Debate INotes – Debate I

RutledgeRutledge

Characteristics of CX DebateCharacteristics of CX Debate

Policy decisions/options are debatedPolicy decisions/options are debated Rounds last 90 minutes (average)Rounds last 90 minutes (average) 2 debaters on each side2 debaters on each side Deals with stock issuesDeals with stock issues

– TopicalityTopicality

– InherencyInherency

– HarmsHarms

– SignificanceSignificance

– SolvencySolvency

What are the two sides in a CX round?What are the two sides in a CX round?

AffirmativeAffirmative NegativeNegative

Key TermsKey Terms

Status Quo:Status Quo: The present systemThe present system CX:CX: To ask questions of your opponentTo ask questions of your opponent Disadvantage:Disadvantage: Anything negative that occurs from enacting Anything negative that occurs from enacting

the affirmative plan.the affirmative plan. Solvency:Solvency: Proof that the affirmative plan works.Proof that the affirmative plan works. Inherency:Inherency: Reasons why action cannot be taken nowReasons why action cannot be taken now Topicality:Topicality: Being on topicBeing on topic Harms:Harms: Bad things that occur in the status quoBad things that occur in the status quo Significance:Significance: Important or significantImportant or significant Flow:Flow: To take abbreviated notes during a roundTo take abbreviated notes during a round Resolution:Resolution: The statement being debated (begins with The statement being debated (begins with

“Resolved..)“Resolved..)

What does the Affirmative side do?What does the Affirmative side do?

The affirmative team is responsible for upholding the The affirmative team is responsible for upholding the resolution.resolution.

The affirmative team must explain why the present The affirmative team must explain why the present system is bad.system is bad.

The affirmative team must offer a solution to solving The affirmative team must offer a solution to solving the problems they have pointed out.the problems they have pointed out.

The affirmative team must offer The affirmative team must offer proofproof that what they that what they want to do will work to want to do will work to solvesolve the problems they have the problems they have pointed out.pointed out.

The affirmative team must point out why changes The affirmative team must point out why changes cannot occur now in the present system.cannot occur now in the present system.

About ResolutionsAbout Resolutions

Current Resolution:Current Resolution:– Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its

engagement toward Cuba, Mexico or Venezuela. engagement toward Cuba, Mexico or Venezuela.

Past Sample Resolutions:Past Sample Resolutions:– Resolved: That the United States federal government should establish a foreign Resolved: That the United States federal government should establish a foreign

policy significantly limiting the use of weapons of mass destruction.policy significantly limiting the use of weapons of mass destruction.

– Resolved: That the United States federal government should establish an Resolved: That the United States federal government should establish an education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary education policy to significantly increase academic achievement in secondary schools in the United States.schools in the United States.

– Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase alternative energy incentives in the United States.alternative energy incentives in the United States.

What does the Negative side do? What does the Negative side do? Your options include:Your options include:

Defend the status quo (present system)Defend the status quo (present system) Speak against change, which is what the resolution asks Speak against change, which is what the resolution asks

for.for. Explain how the affirmative plan makes things worse. Explain how the affirmative plan makes things worse.

This is known as a This is known as a disadvantagedisadvantage.. Explain how there is sufficient ability in the present Explain how there is sufficient ability in the present

system to do this plan now.system to do this plan now. Convince your judge that the affirmative is off topic. Convince your judge that the affirmative is off topic.

This is know as This is know as topicalitytopicality..

Speaking OrderSpeaking Order

1AC (First Affirmative Constructive)1AC (First Affirmative Constructive) 8 Minutes8 Minutes CXCX 3 Minutes3 Minutes 1NC (First Negative Constructive)1NC (First Negative Constructive) 8 Minutes8 Minutes CXCX 3 Minutes3 Minutes 2AC (Second Affirmative Constructive)2AC (Second Affirmative Constructive) 8 Minutes8 Minutes CXCX 3 Minutes3 Minutes 2NC (Second Negative Constructive)2NC (Second Negative Constructive) 8 Minutes8 Minutes CXCX 3 Minutes3 Minutes 1NR (First Negative Rebuttal)1NR (First Negative Rebuttal) 5 Minutes5 Minutes 1AR (First Affirmative Rebuttal)1AR (First Affirmative Rebuttal) 5 Minutes5 Minutes 2NR (Second Negative Rebuttal)2NR (Second Negative Rebuttal) 5 Minutes5 Minutes 2AR (Second Affirmative Rebuttal)2AR (Second Affirmative Rebuttal) 5 Minutes5 Minutes

Who Cross Examines Who?Who Cross Examines Who?

1AC1AC CXCX by the 2NCby the 2NC 1NC1NC CX by the 1ACCX by the 1AC 2AC2AC CX by 1NCCX by 1NC 2NC2NC CX by 2ACCX by 2AC 1NR1NR 1AR1AR 2NR2NR 2AR2AR

Why do we Cross Examine?Why do we Cross Examine?

To expose errors in an opponent’s argumentTo expose errors in an opponent’s argument To clarify information we did not hear or do not To clarify information we did not hear or do not

understandunderstand To set the foundation for a new argument in the futureTo set the foundation for a new argument in the future

Stock IssuesStock Issues

S - SignificanceS - Significance H - HarmsH - Harms I - InherencyI - Inherency T - TopicalityT - Topicality S - SolvencyS - Solvency

Or “S-H-I-T-S” for shortOr “S-H-I-T-S” for short

Significance and HarmsSignificance and Harms

Significance: The state of being important.Significance: The state of being important. Harms: Bad things that occur now in the status quo.Harms: Bad things that occur now in the status quo.

Harms MUST BE Significant as they are the basis that Harms MUST BE Significant as they are the basis that the affirmative argues for change to occur.the affirmative argues for change to occur.– Ex: One baby dies every six months due to malnutrition in Ex: One baby dies every six months due to malnutrition in

Sub-Saharan Africa (Not Significant)Sub-Saharan Africa (Not Significant)

– Ex: 1 Million babies die each year due to malnutrition in Ex: 1 Million babies die each year due to malnutrition in Sub-Saharan Africa….(Significant)Sub-Saharan Africa….(Significant)

I - InherencyI - Inherency

Inherency: The reasons why a problem cannot Inherency: The reasons why a problem cannot be solved now (in the present system).be solved now (in the present system).

Three Types:Three Types: Attitudinal – attitudes which existAttitudinal – attitudes which exist Structural – laws which existStructural – laws which exist Existential Existential

T - TopicalityT - Topicality

This means that the affirmative case is on topic and This means that the affirmative case is on topic and abides by all words in the resolution. For instance:abides by all words in the resolution. For instance:

– If the resolution calls for the US Federal Government to take If the resolution calls for the US Federal Government to take action, the party enacting a plan cannot be the European action, the party enacting a plan cannot be the European Union. This would not be on topic.Union. This would not be on topic.

– If the resolution is about increasing US student test scores the If the resolution is about increasing US student test scores the plan cannot be about lowering teenage pregnancy.plan cannot be about lowering teenage pregnancy.

S - SolvencyS - Solvency

Solvency is the proof that what you advocate is Solvency is the proof that what you advocate is something that has been (or can be) proven effective.something that has been (or can be) proven effective.– Must have reputable sourcesMust have reputable sources

– Should have current datesShould have current dates

– Must have cards to prove your case effectivenessMust have cards to prove your case effectiveness

– Must solve for all of your harmsMust solve for all of your harms

– Can solve for more but is not necessaryCan solve for more but is not necessary This is called an This is called an advantageadvantage..

Recap:Recap:

CX Debate focuses on the advocacy by one side CX Debate focuses on the advocacy by one side (the affirmative) for a change in the present (the affirmative) for a change in the present system (status quo). The negative team opposes system (status quo). The negative team opposes this change and believes the present system this change and believes the present system (status quo) is better than any proposed change.(status quo) is better than any proposed change.