Author: Matt Liu, University of Wyoming Director of Debate
I’ve had the opportunity to do a little research on the new PF topic. These are my first thoughts about the January 2024 PF resolution: Resolved: The United States federal government should repeal Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Intro In short, Section 230 provides immunity for online computer services with respect to third-party content generated by its users. Translation: Facebook et al can’t get sued for almost all content that is shared by its users. Section 230 was part of the Communications Decency Act, the rest of which was tossed out by the courts as unconstitutional (ironically the rest of the law was very anti-speech and anti-internet, Section 230 was a last-ditch amendment to try and preserve the burgeoning internet by some tech-friendly Representatives). What kinds of things might folks sue over if Section 230 was repealed? Well, Democrats argue that Section 230 allows hate speech and misinformation to go unchallenged. Conservatives argue that Section 230 provides platforms immunity for ideological biases (the GOP loves to argue that Big Tech’s platforms have a liberal bias). Read the complete article below the fold.
0 Comments
Author: Riley Talamantes, University of Wyoming debater
The NSDA PF topic is: Resolved: On balance, charter schools are beneficial to the quality of education in the United States. Charter schools and their educational value are truly a controversial debate subject. Because charter schools operate independently from school districts, they have the opportunity to build their own curriculum and cater to students learning styles. However, charter schools in the past have posed issues with adequately teaching students and can be known for posing structural barriers to entry. Here I have written up some thoughts on pro ground, con ground and other strategies that PF debaters can use to make their debating efficient and strategic on this topic. Below the fold is my analysis. Authors: Matt Liu, University of Wyoming Director of Debate, and Josh Mitchell, University of Wyoming debater
The March PF topic is: Resolved: The United States should increase its use of nuclear energy for commercial energy production. Almost all energy debates are fantastic. US energy policy is situated at the intersection of the environment and the economy, a juncture that regularly produces great debates and great topic literature. Nuclear power is no exception. The PF Topic Committee is doing excellent work. We hope you're as excited to debate this topic as we were to write about it. We have 8 thoughts about debating this topic: Author: Matt Liu, University of Wyoming Director of Debate
Our series on cross-x will return shortly, but we’re taking a quick break to give you a timely PF topic analysis. The February PF topic is: Resolved: The United States should replace means-tested welfare programs with a universal basic income. Universal Basic Income (UBI) is an enormous topic with a huge literature base. It’s such a good topic I’d be sad to only have a month on it. It’s such a big topic that we wrote way too much on it (sorry not sorry). I was originally upset the topic was tied to an elimination of means-tested welfare, but after some initial research I’m not as worried about it. UBI is an old idea but one that has recently returned to prominence in mainstream politics. In the US, that’s been largely driven by Democratic candidate for President Andrew Yang, who made a UBI the centerpiece of his presidential campaign. Fear of automation taking jobs, the rise of “the Gig economy” and precarious labor, flatlining wages, and intensifying inequality all mean that people are increasingly willing to hear out UBI advocates. However, this resolution is not Andrew Yang’s UBI. Yang proposes a variety of mechanisms to pay for a UBI, the most significant of which would be a new VAT tax. The crux of this resolution is a trade: UBI in exchange for eliminating means-tested welfare (MTW). That both (1) sets the terms of the debate and (2) will sometimes shift it from UBI good/bad to MTW good/bad. That’s important to remember as you prepare for February. I’ve got 5 thoughts about UBI and MTW below the fold. Author: Matt Liu, University of Wyoming Director of Debate
The January PF topic is: Resolved: The United States should end its economic sanctions against Venezuela. Venezuela is in an economic tailspin. Hyperinflation is sinking the economy, there’s a refugee crisis that looks like it will soon overtake Syria as the largest in the world, food and medicine shortages are widespread, famine might be just around the corner, and electricity shortages are routinely plunging the country into darkness. The core controversy of this resolution is can sanctions fix the real problem (ousting Maduro) or are they merely exacerbating the economic crises and killing 40,000 Venezuelans a year? I’ve got five observations about debating this topic: |
MissionWyoming Debate Roundup is dedicated to providing quality debate content to Wyoming and Rocky Mountain area high school debaters. We’re a resource for Wyoming debaters by Wyoming debate coaches. Categories
All
Archives
February 2024
|