2019 Novice Policy
Novice Policy Debaters are required to use the evidence presented in the Novice Evidence Packet linked on this page. Novice debaters may only read evidence from this novice packet. They may not read evidence from their own personal files that are not in the novice packet. This does not preclude them from making analytic responses to arguments but does prevent them from reading carded responses to arguments that are not in the evidence packet. The ONLY changes permitted are the inclusion or modification of Plan text to align with the Idaho State Novice Case List. In the event that any material present in the Novice Evidence Packet include Plan texts not found on the Idaho Novice Debate Case List debaters may modify or include the correct plan text. Debaters may not, regardless of materials presented in the evidence packet, run any plan not found on the Idaho Novice Case list presented here:
Novice Plan Text List 2019-2020
1. The United States Federal Government should end direct commercial and foreign military sales of military grade drone technology
2. The United States federal government should end Direct Commercial Sales and Foreign Military Sales of arms from the United States to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
3. The United States Federal Government should end its Foreign Military Sales and Direct Commercial Sales of small arms to Mexico
4. The United States federal government should end Direct Commercial Sales and Foreign Military Sales of arms from the United States to the Republic of China.
5. The United States Federal Government should cease its Foreign Military Sales and Direct Commercial Sales of arms to Israel
The hopes of this initiative are threefold. 1) We hope this increases the quality of clash in the debate through a focus on understanding arguments rather than trying to surprise (or being surprised) by new evidence. 2) We hope this will equalize the playing field for all debaters regardless of the total policy experience present on the team or by the coach. 3) We hope this incentives the learning of policy debate by improving access and a lower threshold for entry.
Any Competitor who is found to be using evidence not found in the Novice Debate Packet may be subject to loss of rounds and/or disqualification. At the conclusion of the tournament we will welcome feedback on this initiative.
1. Policy debate, also known as team debate, is a series of contention-quote-analysis organized argumentation between two teams of two members each. The debate is like a trial, but an idea or proposal is being tried rather than a person.
2. There are two sides to a debate - affirmative which attempts to show something is wrong with the present system (status quo) and thus a change is needed, and negative which usually takes the position that the present system is acceptable, that no problem exists to an extent that warrants or justifies a change.
3. It is the obligation of the affirmative to debate the topic and offer reasonable solutions. The negative usually argues that the status quo is proven to be workable and that a minor change may be all that is needed. (Negative may use a counter plan.)
4. The affirmative team should sit on the judge’s left and the negative on the judge’s right, whenever possible.
Time Limits for Policy Debate
Speech Times First Affirmative Constructive (1AC) 8 minutes Cross-examination of First Affirmative by Second Negative 3 minutes First Negative Constructive (1NC) 8 minutes Cross-examination of First Negative by First Affirmative 3 minutes Second Affirmative Constructive (2AC) 8 minutes Cross-examination of Second Affirmative by First Negative 3 minutes Second Negative Constructive (2NC) 8 minutes Cross-examination of Second Negative by Second Affirmative 3 minutes First Negative Rebuttal (1NR) 5 minutes First Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR) 5 minutes Second Negative Rebuttal (2NR) 5 minutes Second Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR)