Skip to content
May 8, 2013 / compassioninpolitics

How do you answer the consultation counter plan in the 2AC

1) Consultation Bad. There was a debate on the NDT/CEDA listserv about consultation counter plans. Casey Harrigan I believe provided a couple reasons why they are illegit.

This I believe is a response to Harrigan. But you should see some intelligent debate in the comments presumably.

You may have to get the way back machine to find the original arguments by Harrigan. It may be on the NDT/CEDA list serve

2) Process counterplans bad. There are one or more articles on this topic.

3) Dispo/Condo bad. They almost inevitably won’t run it unconitionally. Maybe condo/dispo process CPs bad. Not sure what the exact argument is, but a potentially viable argument.

Presumably these two will also work:
1) Pick one side. Yes or no. Force the other team to defend it.

2) Country X will say no, Case outweights the DA.

3) Forcing them to defend the distinction between genuine consultation and consultation.

4) Empirical denial of consultation being necessary.

5) Impact takesouts to the net benefit

6) Tying your aff to their net benefit (note: this can be done in a bad way….and backfire)

7) There is some decent evidence on consultation taking a long time or them getting hung up. Although my guess is the neg. will have decent answers to this.

To me the theory option is superior.

Thoughts??? Good/Bad???? Agree/Disagree???


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: