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

Shut down Congress

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: 3/18/2015 Category: Economics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 638 times Debate No: 71958
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




There is a lot of talk about taking back America...but no ACTION!!!
You noticed in history, Americans took action against the British.
So, how do we take it back?? revolt. Oh, you dont want to die for freedom/change/take back...sooner or later, you or your children will have to do something drastic to make/take back America.
Here is my plan...PAY NO MORE City, State, Federal entities. If only 25% of Americans/American Businesses took these steps....Congress would freeze/stop...Govenment Officials would be on their knees in seconds...asking the PEOPLE; "What do you want me to do?"""TODAY???
...oh! dont want to go to jail...freedom is not how many will they have to jail???
The key to successfully "not pay taxes" NOT PAY who?...not... the City/State/Federal entity....but keyhole it until we get America back....believe me, this will work, much better than TALK!


I'm not certain if I see a structure to my opponent's opening statement and challenge.
I will accept the challenge on the assumption that he/she is arguing FOR the shutdown of government by means of refusal to pay taxes.

With the recent debates on legislation on Capitol Hill that have caused so many scenarios of gridlock between both political parties, as well as between the House of Representatives and Senate, the claim that Congress has displayed their impotency time and time again would not be rebutted. While there are many suggested solutions to these issues, most of them can be sorted into two categories with basic underlying themes: shut down the government, and take action to resolve all issues, or keep the government running, and work from there.

I will argue that we should keep Congress running to resolve these issues. I will defend this view with these contentions:

1) The citizens of our nation and all of its territories would be in severe danger from physical threats, foreign and domestic, from the lack of functioning and necessary key federal government components.

2) Our country would face severe financial issues from shutting down the government.

3) The citizens of our nation are unprepared to take the actions that are necessary in the event of a complete shutdown.

I will expand on each of these points individually.

Contention #1:
Shutting down the government would imply the shutdown of the Department of Defense (DOD) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), as well as all key members of the departments and agencies of the federal government responsible for military action, intelligence collection, and all-around national defense. This, combined with the undeniable reporting of such an event occurring around the country and globe, would be an open-invitation to all who wish to do our nation harm. With the military unfunded, there would be no access to ammunition or fuel, widely considered to be two of the most important resources for a military in conflict. This would leave what little resources that are actually available at the military posts the only means of action to take. Suggesting that a militia would be more than enough to defend our nation is immature. I'm not implying that they would, but if Russia and China had decided to take advantage of the situation, they would hardly be stopped by militia and a military with no munitions or fuel to utilize their vehicles.

Contention #2:
The financial implications of a shutdown would be severe, and would be damaging enough to not justify it. As of November 2014, there were over 2.7 million citizens who were employed by the federal government, and this number is combined of all 3 branches, including all military personnel (1). These people would immediately lose their only source of income, which would result in over 200 billion dollars, which is based on the average government salary of $79,374 in 2013 (2), that would immediately become unavailable to these employees to pay their bills and reciprocate into their local businesses; this is the very backbone of our economy. Though our Senators and Representatives would go unpaid, our military personnel would also be unpaid.

Contention #3:
The total shutdown of the government, in the intention of removing our current legislators, would require a new group of citizens to restructure Congress and fill the roles that are subsequently changed and/or added. I would argue that the majority of Americans are unprepared to perform such an act. Many still-employed Americans would be reluctant to leave their jobs and careers in such a volatile time. Also, with the country's wide political belief gap leaving so many Americans divided on their ideals of how our government should function, it would be near-impossible to be able to reconcile the differing beliefs into a compromised idea to install and operate.


"You noticed in history, Americans took action against the British."
This is a false analogy. The situation and context of the American Revolution was completely different than the current time period. It was a different time, with different people, and international law was incredibly primitive. Many of my opposition's supporters would argue that the issues are the same in principle, but merely the advancements and increased sophistication of modern law and modern mindsets make the idea of another revolution completely unnecessary.

"...PAY NO MORE City, State, Federal entities."
You can refer to my contention above regarding the shutdown of government and how this would reflect on employees' pay. Even if one were to argue to not shutdown all of the government and only Congress, to suggest that we refrain from paying taxes would create this exact effect. Everything stated about federal employees would in turn affect city and state employees and defenses, if taxes and funding is refused.

"...until we get America back....believe me, this will work, much better than TALK!"
In such an age as 2015, the simple acts of conversation and debate are truly what sets us apart from previous generations.

I suggest that we use a different means to fix the issues. It's as simple as this: Individual members of federal government are the causes of these problems, so these individuals need to be removed. I suggest that we introduce new legislation that directly addresses the performance of our Senators and Representatives. This legislation would include term limits and decreased pay. I also suggest we introduce legislation that removes any politician from office if he writes or sponsors a bill that is found to be unconstitutional. This would ensure that laws would never be enacted on unconstitutional grounds, and would immediately remove those who wish to impose these laws.

Also, we should undergo an intense audit of all federal statutes, regulations, laws, and acts, by a committee consisting of lawyers and judges whose expertise is in constitutional law. They would review each law/regulation/etc... for its constitutionality, and all that are found to be contrary to it would be rescinded.

I believe that these suggested actions would be incredibly more effective towards government reform than simply refusing to pay taxes.

Debate Round No. 1


cweinacker forfeited this round.


Just to update the readers, my opponent has commented on my profile page that he does not intend to continue the debate.
Debate Round No. 2


cweinacker forfeited this round.


I guess closing remarks?

Vote con, or something.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by bluesteel 3 years ago
>Reported vote: Futurepresident2048 // Moderation action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (arguments), 1 point to Con (conduct). {RFD = Reasons for voting decision: I hate when people give lengthy round arguments. Keep it short and too the point. Therefore i give it to pro.}

[*Reason for Removal*] Too generic on arguments. Failure to explain conduct.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit, the forfeits are critical enough to also award arguments for the amount of dropped arguments.