Public Forum Debate http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php?blog=1 Public Forum Debate en-US http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 NFL Nationals Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/nfl-nationals-issue-released?blog=1 Thu, 26 May 2011 21:18:39 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 156@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: That the United States should intervene in another nation's struggle for democracy.<br /> <br /> Foreword: Democracy promotion is currently an important goal of U.S. foreign policy. For example, one of President Bush’s major goals in Iraq was to democratize the state (although the primary stated goal was to disarm Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction). However, Bush’s predecessors in office have subscribed to a similar conception of democracy promotion as a crucial foreign policy tool for several decades. For example, the U.S. supported the democratization of Germany, Japan, and Italy post-WWII, and the U.S. aggressively encouraged states to adopt democratic forms of government to counter communism and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The question is whether democracy promotion remains a legitimate foreign policy goal in the current international environment.</p> <p>Congratulations on qualifying for nationals! Enjoy the experience, and remember the way to win is to be more informed than the other team. Good Luck!</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: That the United States should intervene in another nation's struggle for democracy.

Foreword: Democracy promotion is currently an important goal of U.S. foreign policy. For example, one of President Bush’s major goals in Iraq was to democratize the state (although the primary stated goal was to disarm Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction). However, Bush’s predecessors in office have subscribed to a similar conception of democracy promotion as a crucial foreign policy tool for several decades. For example, the U.S. supported the democratization of Germany, Japan, and Italy post-WWII, and the U.S. aggressively encouraged states to adopt democratic forms of government to counter communism and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The question is whether democracy promotion remains a legitimate foreign policy goal in the current international environment.

Congratulations on qualifying for nationals! Enjoy the experience, and remember the way to win is to be more informed than the other team. Good Luck!

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/nfl-nationals-issue-released?blog=1#comments
April 2011 Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/april-2011-issue-released?blog=1 Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:53:25 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 155@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation. <br /> <br /> Foreword: This topic is challenging, because it attempts to balance the important interests of desperate patients, grieving families, and needy donors. The current system is undeniably broken; thousands of patients are dying each year from organ failure, while at the same time, life-saving organs are being burned and buried. There is no question that a policy change must be instituted, but this particular policy may cause more problems than it solves. The purpose of this topic is awareness, and in addition to participating in the debate, you can take the small step of registering yourself as a donor, and encouraging your friends and family to do the same.</p> <p>If you are interested in a position as a researcher at Finalist Files, please contact me at <a href="mailto:Michelle@finalistfiles.com">Michelle@finalistfiles.com</a>. Thank you to those of you who have responded already, I’ll be in touch. Good Luck with your last month of debating before Nationals!</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation.

Foreword: This topic is challenging, because it attempts to balance the important interests of desperate patients, grieving families, and needy donors. The current system is undeniably broken; thousands of patients are dying each year from organ failure, while at the same time, life-saving organs are being burned and buried. There is no question that a policy change must be instituted, but this particular policy may cause more problems than it solves. The purpose of this topic is awareness, and in addition to participating in the debate, you can take the small step of registering yourself as a donor, and encouraging your friends and family to do the same.

If you are interested in a position as a researcher at Finalist Files, please contact me at Michelle@finalistfiles.com. Thank you to those of you who have responded already, I’ll be in touch. Good Luck with your last month of debating before Nationals!

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/april-2011-issue-released?blog=1#comments
March 2011 Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/march-2011-issue-released?blog=1 Tue, 15 Feb 2011 12:20:43 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 154@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: North Korea poses a more serious threat to United States national security than Iran.</p> <p>Foreword: This topic is a disappointing selection on the part of the Forum community. North Korea and Iran both pose a threat to U.S. security; to say that the threat posed by North Korea outweighs that of Iran has no impact, because the U.S. will continue to counter both threats simultaneously. Further, the research burden presented by this topic is enormous. To engage in a comparative analysis of North Korea and Iran within the time constraints of a Forum round will result in a gross oversimplification of the issues on both sides. Lastly, this topic (like so many other Forum topics) does not give students an opportunity to discuss potential solutions to looming nuclear proliferation. To invest so much time learning the details of the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, without evaluating solutions, so that you can make a meaningless determination as to which threat is greater, is an unjustifiable expenditure of energy.</p> <p>On a different note, I would like to make a dent in our 9.8 percent unemployment rate, so if you are interested in conducting preliminary research for Finalist Files, please send me an e-mail at <a href="mailto:Michelle@finalistfiles.com">Michelle@finalistfiles.com</a>. I am looking for undergraduate students, but if you are a senior and would like to remain involved in the debate community post-graduation, you may still contact me and we will discuss the 2011-12 academic year.</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: North Korea poses a more serious threat to United States national security than Iran.

Foreword: This topic is a disappointing selection on the part of the Forum community. North Korea and Iran both pose a threat to U.S. security; to say that the threat posed by North Korea outweighs that of Iran has no impact, because the U.S. will continue to counter both threats simultaneously. Further, the research burden presented by this topic is enormous. To engage in a comparative analysis of North Korea and Iran within the time constraints of a Forum round will result in a gross oversimplification of the issues on both sides. Lastly, this topic (like so many other Forum topics) does not give students an opportunity to discuss potential solutions to looming nuclear proliferation. To invest so much time learning the details of the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs, without evaluating solutions, so that you can make a meaningless determination as to which threat is greater, is an unjustifiable expenditure of energy.

On a different note, I would like to make a dent in our 9.8 percent unemployment rate, so if you are interested in conducting preliminary research for Finalist Files, please send me an e-mail at Michelle@finalistfiles.com. I am looking for undergraduate students, but if you are a senior and would like to remain involved in the debate community post-graduation, you may still contact me and we will discuss the 2011-12 academic year.

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/march-2011-issue-released?blog=1#comments
February 2011 Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/february-2011-issue-released?blog=1 Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:22:22 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 153@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: Wikileaks is a threat to United States national security.</p> <p>Foreword: Throughout 2010, WikiLeaks has disclosed classified U.S. documents to the world. In April, the site released a video showing members of the U.S. military in a helicopter shooting and killing individuals on the ground, two of whom were journalists with Reuters (the inference was that the shooters mistook the targets’ camera equipment for weapons). In July, WikiLeaks provided the media with 90,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan. In October, it leaked 400,000 documents on the war in Iraq. And then, at the end of November, WikiLeaks began a gradual leak of its 250,000 diplomatic cables or communications between U.S. diplomats and the State Department. This topic is timely; so much so, that many of the effects of the leaks have not yet been discerned. However the wording of the topic strikes me as somewhat ridiculous because it excessively limits the Con’s grounds. Of course WikiLeaks is a threat to national security; the real question is, is the threat so substantial as to outweigh the protection of free speech, or the transparency of government? It’s impossible to take the topic seriously, and thus, the debate is not really about whether WikiLeaks is a threat, but rather, how grave the threat really is.</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: Wikileaks is a threat to United States national security.

Foreword: Throughout 2010, WikiLeaks has disclosed classified U.S. documents to the world. In April, the site released a video showing members of the U.S. military in a helicopter shooting and killing individuals on the ground, two of whom were journalists with Reuters (the inference was that the shooters mistook the targets’ camera equipment for weapons). In July, WikiLeaks provided the media with 90,000 documents on the war in Afghanistan. In October, it leaked 400,000 documents on the war in Iraq. And then, at the end of November, WikiLeaks began a gradual leak of its 250,000 diplomatic cables or communications between U.S. diplomats and the State Department. This topic is timely; so much so, that many of the effects of the leaks have not yet been discerned. However the wording of the topic strikes me as somewhat ridiculous because it excessively limits the Con’s grounds. Of course WikiLeaks is a threat to national security; the real question is, is the threat so substantial as to outweigh the protection of free speech, or the transparency of government? It’s impossible to take the topic seriously, and thus, the debate is not really about whether WikiLeaks is a threat, but rather, how grave the threat really is.

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/february-2011-issue-released?blog=1#comments
January Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/january-issue-released?blog=1 Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:24:37 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 152@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: In the United States, plea bargaining undermines the criminal justice system.</p> <p>Foreword: I apologize for the delay in this release; unfortunately because of final exams, the January topic is often released much later than I would like. When there is a trade-off between the quality of the file and the timeliness of the release, I’ll choose the former, but I know it puts most of you in a time crunch so for that I’m very sorry! I hope you will find this file particularly useful because the evidence is unique, and so is the perspective. I had the privilege of studying criminal law this semester with the leading critic of plea bargaining, Professor Alschuler. I’ve used the strategy guide to make his arguments, as well as the arguments of other legal commentators, more accessible to you. </p> <p>95 percent of defendants choose to forfeit their substantive rights and plead guilty to a crime in exchange for a lesser sentence. As a result, the protections afforded to criminal defendants in court are often irrelevant in practice. Prosecutors and defendants alike have determined that plea agreements serve their interests, and the plea bargaining process is efficient, but is plea bargaining consistent with the principles of the criminal justice system? Given the prominence of plea bargaining in the system, this question is one of great importance.</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: In the United States, plea bargaining undermines the criminal justice system.

Foreword: I apologize for the delay in this release; unfortunately because of final exams, the January topic is often released much later than I would like. When there is a trade-off between the quality of the file and the timeliness of the release, I’ll choose the former, but I know it puts most of you in a time crunch so for that I’m very sorry! I hope you will find this file particularly useful because the evidence is unique, and so is the perspective. I had the privilege of studying criminal law this semester with the leading critic of plea bargaining, Professor Alschuler. I’ve used the strategy guide to make his arguments, as well as the arguments of other legal commentators, more accessible to you.

95 percent of defendants choose to forfeit their substantive rights and plead guilty to a crime in exchange for a lesser sentence. As a result, the protections afforded to criminal defendants in court are often irrelevant in practice. Prosecutors and defendants alike have determined that plea agreements serve their interests, and the plea bargaining process is efficient, but is plea bargaining consistent with the principles of the criminal justice system? Given the prominence of plea bargaining in the system, this question is one of great importance.

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/january-issue-released?blog=1#comments
December Issue Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/december-issue-released?blog=1 Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:19:29 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 151@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: Cyberbullying should be a criminal offense.</p> <p>Foreword: December’s topic will give you the opportunity to consider the purposes of punishment in the criminal legal system, and also to examine the challenges students have faced in light of the explosion of social media. This topic is timely, given the national spotlight on cyberbullying following the suicides of many young victims. Cyberbullying is a problem, but is involving the criminal legal system an appropriate solution? The strategy guide will provide you with the legal foundation that you need to structure your arguments, and begin to think about whether the solution to cyberbullying lies in schools, at home, in the civil legal system, or in criminalization.</p> <p>Direct questions on the topic to <a href="mailto:Michelle@finalistfiles.com">Michelle@finalistfiles.com</a> or the “Public Forum Debate” Facebook page. Good luck and enjoy debating!</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: Cyberbullying should be a criminal offense.

Foreword: December’s topic will give you the opportunity to consider the purposes of punishment in the criminal legal system, and also to examine the challenges students have faced in light of the explosion of social media. This topic is timely, given the national spotlight on cyberbullying following the suicides of many young victims. Cyberbullying is a problem, but is involving the criminal legal system an appropriate solution? The strategy guide will provide you with the legal foundation that you need to structure your arguments, and begin to think about whether the solution to cyberbullying lies in schools, at home, in the civil legal system, or in criminalization.

Direct questions on the topic to Michelle@finalistfiles.com or the “Public Forum Debate” Facebook page. Good luck and enjoy debating!

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/december-issue-released?blog=1#comments
December Topic Announced http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/december-topic-announced?blog=1 Mon, 01 Nov 2010 22:10:27 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 150@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: Cyberbullying should be a criminal offense.</p> Resolved: Cyberbullying should be a criminal offense.

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/december-topic-announced?blog=1#comments
November 2010 Released http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/november-2010-released?blog=1 Mon, 18 Oct 2010 01:51:13 +0000 Michelle PF Releases 149@http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/
Notice: Undefined property: Item::$ptyp_ID in /home/ff/public_html/blogs/skins/_rss2/index.main.php on line 102
<p>Resolved: High school Public Forum Debate resolutions should not confront sensitive religious issues.<br /> <br /> Foreword: The mid-term elections are expected to result in substantial gains for conservative candidates in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A new political party is emerging from its infancy and continues to inch its way into the mainstream political scene. The unemployment rate is 9.6 percent and the national debt is inching toward $14 trillion. Businesses are struggling to comply with new financial regulations and health care reform. Congress recessed before passing tax legislation for 2011, compounding the uncertainty felt by individuals and businesses in the current economic environment. Teenage bullying is leading to the loss of many young lives in schools across the country. Europe is on high alert as a potential target of anticipated terror attacks. And the NBA has announced that it is requiring its coaches to wear collared shirts. Because of the apparent lack of substantive issues to address, the NFL writing committee has you spending your month debating about debating.</p> <p>I know many of you will not be using this topic; for those of you who are, my advice is to establish a framework to guide your thinking. My basic approach was to apply John Rawls’ philosophical work on political liberalism to the debate context, making this month’s file an interesting combination of LD and Policy argumentation. The strategy guide pulls on the ideas from the evidence without using the technical terminology (in an attempt to pretend like this is still Public Forum). The evidence packet is short because this month, your experiences have qualified you as an expert, and you’re probably your own best evidence. Good Luck.</p> <p>Michelle Schmit</p> Resolved: High school Public Forum Debate resolutions should not confront sensitive religious issues.

Foreword: The mid-term elections are expected to result in substantial gains for conservative candidates in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. A new political party is emerging from its infancy and continues to inch its way into the mainstream political scene. The unemployment rate is 9.6 percent and the national debt is inching toward $14 trillion. Businesses are struggling to comply with new financial regulations and health care reform. Congress recessed before passing tax legislation for 2011, compounding the uncertainty felt by individuals and businesses in the current economic environment. Teenage bullying is leading to the loss of many young lives in schools across the country. Europe is on high alert as a potential target of anticipated terror attacks. And the NBA has announced that it is requiring its coaches to wear collared shirts. Because of the apparent lack of substantive issues to address, the NFL writing committee has you spending your month debating about debating.

I know many of you will not be using this topic; for those of you who are, my advice is to establish a framework to guide your thinking. My basic approach was to apply John Rawls’ philosophical work on political liberalism to the debate context, making this month’s file an interesting combination of LD and Policy argumentation. The strategy guide pulls on the ideas from the evidence without using the technical terminology (in an attempt to pretend like this is still Public Forum). The evidence packet is short because this month, your experiences have qualified you as an expert, and you’re probably your own best evidence. Good Luck.

Michelle Schmit

]]>
http://www.finalistfiles.com/blogs/index.php/releases/november-2010-released?blog=1#comments