The Instigator
Pro (for)
7 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Rick Perry is corrupt

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/22/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,329 times Debate No: 18010
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




Debate starts in round two, rebuttals in three. This is my first debate, so let's all have fun.


Just fyi, I'm doing this totally from a devil's advocate position, since I need to know how to defend any position for my class. I just want to define corrupt real quick.

"Having or showing a willingness to act dishonestly in return for money or personal gain."

I'll step back now so pro can start his argument.
Debate Round No. 1


First off, thanks for accepting the challenge! I look forward to an excellent debate!

First off, I agree with your definition, with a small addition, coming from the same source that you provided: "Evil or morally depraved" This is done so the debate is not based entirely around money. Now, to the debate!!

To begin, I'd like to start off by listing my contentions.

1. Rick Perry is a "Governor for sale"

"Consider the numbers: Throughout his campaigns for governor, Perry raised $102 million, half of which came from just 204 sources." Source 1
Campaigns in Texas, unlike for the presidency, put no cap on donations. In simple speak, people can give as much money as they want to their candidates. As shown above, Perry has raised $102 million dollars(more than anyone in Texas history) One would assume that Perry just had a really good grassroots campaign. After all, he's a man of the people, right?

Wrong. Of the 102 million, half, $61 million, came from just 204 sources. Now I wonder why they would donate so much money to this man? It must be because they really share the same value system as him, right?

Wrong. Half of those 204 donors received "tax breaks, appointments or large business contracts. Half have received payments from two funds, sponsored by Perry, to funnel tax dollars to private business"1

"Take Harold Simmons, owner of Waste Control Specialists, for example, who contributed more than $1.1 million to Perry and whom the Los Angeles Times featured in its analysis of Perry's fundraising. In 2006, Simmons told the Dallas Business Journal that his company was losing millions of dollars a year but would enjoy a strong turnaround if he could get approval for a radioactive waste facility in Texas. "We first had to change the law to where a private company can own a license, and we did that," said Simmons. "Then we got another law passed that said they can only issue one license. Of course, we were the only ones that applied." In addition to signing those laws, Perry appointed members to a commission that approved the radioactive site, despite loud objections from a team of Texas environmental scientists. In the end, Simmons's contributions to Perry's campaigns will net his business roughly $2 billion, according to Tom Smith, director of Public Citizen's Texas office." 1

So Simmons donates money to Perry's campaign, to be rewarded with a license issued to them, and only them, resulting in around 2.2 billion dollars. 2.2billion/1.1 million=2,000,00
2 million percent return!!!!!!!!!! Ladies and gentlemen, time to break out your wallets, cause we've found the perfect system to line your wallets with cash, forget wall street, bonds, savings accounts! Instead, donate money to Perry, and make a return no bank can top. You can't get this offer anywhere else folks!!!

Another example, pointed out by the Los Angeles Times, "in return for $400,000 in contributions to the governor, B.J. McCombs, the primary backer of a Formula One racetrack development, will receive $25 million a year in state subsidies for the project."

Even the New York times sees the truth! "A review of Mr. Perry's years in office reveals that one of his most potent fund-raising tools is the very government he heads."

Obviously, I've proved my first contention.

Contention 2: Perry abuses the public's trust in him

Even though his state has a deficit of 11 billion, Perry has no problem spending $600,000 of taxpayers money on a rental home, or mansion, located on hills above the capitol. Costing 120,000 dollars a year in rent, we can tell he spends his money frugally.

Did we mention how this GOP presidential candidate's previous home fared? Oh, it seems I forgot. It was a victim of arson when the governor moved into his new home to allow the Governor's mansion to undergo some "repairs" Well, maybe the repairs were merely for Perry's obviously poverty lifestyle. I guess a state owned mansion that costs the taxpayers next to nothing isn't good enough for him. No, he really needs to have the following stuff.

"His 6,386-square-foot rental sits on more than three acres and was advertised in 2007 for sale at $1.85 million. Perry's state-paid expenses at the home include $18,000 for "consumables" such as household supplies and cleaning products, $1,001.46 in window coverings from upscale retailer Neiman Marcus, a $1,000 "emergency repair" of the governor's filtered ice machine, a $700 clothes rack, and a little over $70 for a two year subscription to Food & Wine Magazine.

Maintenance on the heated pool has cost taxpayers at least $8,400, and the tab for grounds and lawn maintenance has topped $44,000, the records show. All told, taxpayers have spent at least $592,000 for rent, utilities, repairs, furnishings and supplies since Perry moved in."

Mhhhhm, emergency repair indeed.

Finally, we reach our last contention. Duh duh duh!!!!!

Perry condones the killing of innocent people.

Normally, with Perry's death penalty record, he could never even be considered as a candidate for the greatest office in the land. With Cameron Todd Willingham, he refused to stay his execution, even when the evidence "overwhelmingly suggested" that he was innocent. To try to cover up this decision, he replaced three members of the commission investigating the case, replacing them with political lackeys. What's more so, after two decades on death row, Anthony Graves was released only after a lengthy investigation from Texas Monthly showed that he had been wrongfully convicted. And Perry's doggedly embraced the death penalty even as studies continue to show that executions are costing his cash-strapped state hundreds of millions of dollars. Some supporters of Perry say he's commuted the death sentences of 31 death row inmates. It's hard to argue with that fact. It is true. But what they fail to mention is this.

In 30 out of 31, he commuted the cases only because the Supreme Court ordered him to! Even recently, they had to get involved, saying that the state was required to consider DNA evidence in a death row appeal!

"In 2010, a Houston district judge ruled the state's death penalty system was unconstitutional because it violated the 8th and 14th Amendments. Earlier this year, a Texas House committee considered a bill to put a two-year moratorium on executions, in light of continued evidence of wrongful convictions. And in April, a psychologist frequently employed as an expert by the state in death penalty cases was banned from performing mental evaluations after she was found to be using "unscientific" methods in her official analyses. Through it all, Perry has maintained the same confident tone: "I think our system works."

Well Perry, I hope the system will eventually work for you, and give you the punishment you so deserve. We can only hope.

SO yes, ladies and gentlemen. Rick Perry is corrupt. Your turn con. And good luck to you!

Source 1:


curious18 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


First off, I just wanted to say I'm really dissappointed in how this debate went. I was really hoping we'd be able to have a good, informative debate. Also, curious has been on today, 12 hours ago from right now, so obviously she had the opportunity to debate, and she chose not to. Therefore, I urge an affirmative ballot.


I'm so sorry for missing the last round. I didn't see that these were only 24 hours when I accepted. It would be totally unfair for me to make any argument now so I must simply admit a loss.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Pompey 6 years ago
dude, if you actually read the whole thing, you can see that con didn't respond. I put a lot of work into my arguement, and I really wanted to do this debate, so I made ONE other debate, surely not worthy of "How many times are you gonna use this argument"
Posted by medic0506 6 years ago
Pro, how many debates are you going to do using the same exact arguments?? Do you debate anything other than Rick Perry is corrupt??
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit.