Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

my Affrimative case for debate

bonnieluvs
Posts: 130
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 4:43:32 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
this is my Affrimatice case for my debate team at school xD

Affrimative case: Ex-offenders
Resolve: The united states fedral government should substaintly increase social services for persons living in poverty in the United States.

Plan:
1. The U.S. federal government will substantially increase incentives and funding for training job placement and hiring of ex-offenders, including reform of employer liability laws.
2. Funding will be through:
a. Repeal of the bush-era tax cuts
b. Increasing taxation on tobacco and alcohol products
3. enforcement will be through all necessary means.

Harms
I. Criminal Recidivism is a plague upon the nation

A.Incarceration is a rampant among the poor
SK/A10.01) Bruce Western [Professor of Sociology, Harvard U.] & Christopher Wildeman [Center for social Epidemiolody & Population Health, U. of Michigan], THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January 2009 LEXIS-NEXIS Academic, p228 Incarceration is also concentrated among th disadvantage. High incarceration rates among the disadvantaged. High incarceration rates among low-status and minority men are unmistakable. The 1997 survey of state and federal prisoners shows that state inmates average less than elevn years of schooling. A third were not working at the that of other men with the same level of education. African Americans and Hispanics also have higher incarceration rates than whites and together the two groups account fo about two-thrids of the state prison population.

B. Recidivism Rates of Ex-offenders are staggering
SK/A10.02) THE CHRISTIAN CENTURY, January 23, 2007, p. 2007, p 5, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, Expanded Academic ASAP.Less well known is that even in the land of mandatory sentencing and a "Lets lock 'em up" attitude over 650,000 prisoners are released a year. What happens to them? According to some studies as many as two-thirds are rearrested within three years and over half are back in prison. That recidivism rate is not surprising given that little is being done to change ex-offenders' conditions.

C. Crime costs the nation billions of dollars
SK/A10.03) Jhon J. Donohue III, Social Research, Summer 2007, p. 379, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, Epanded Academic ASAP. For example, Jens Ludwig, udating previous figures generated by Anderson (1990) and Cohen (2005), estimates that total (variable and fixed) costs from crime to AMerican society may be in the order of $2 trillion per year. Of these total costs, nearly $700billion come from costs to victims (about 70% of which can be accounted for by just serious violent crimes alone); around $350 billion comes from government or private expenditures on protective measures; $250 billion is from the lost value due to criminals' time spent planning crimes or in prison; and the remaining $700 billion or so is from costs imposed by white collar or economic crimes.

D. The lack of a job is the major reason for recidivism
SK/A10.04) Jim Romeo, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, September 2007, p. 80 GALE CENGAGE LEARNING , Expanded Academic ASAP. As prison populations have soared, the number of prisoners who are freed has also increased the significantly. Prisons free at least 600,000 each year. But most freed inmates have few marketable job skills. The lack of a job is a major risk factor for an ex-offender to commit a new crime. Researchers say the reapeat-offense rate nationally is stubbornly high, at more that 60%

Inherency

II. Current programs for ex-offenders are inadequate

A. Barriers to employment are overwhelming
SK/A10.05) Francina C. Carter, CORRECTIONS TODAY, December 2007, p. 98, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, expanded academic ASAP. There is compelling evidence that unemployment contributes to an increased rate of parole revocation, which is a major risk factor for recidivism. Individuals released from correctional facilities often find that their search for employment is hindered by barriers such as lack of educational credentials, limited work history, poor planning skills employers' prejudice toward hiring ex-offenders and current laws in some states

B. Liablility concerns are a major disincentive
SK/A110.06) Harry J. Holzer[professor of public policy, Georgetown U.] THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January 200, LEXIS-NEXIS, Academic, p61. Employers are extremely reluctant to hire men with criminal records, especially for jobs that require contact with customers, handling cash, or other skills requiring employer trust (holzer, Rphael, and Stoll 2004; Pager 2003). Employer fear of leagal liabilities no doubt reinforces this behavior as do a variety of state laws that prohibit emloyers from hiring those with criminal records into particular sectors of the economy. Employers increasingly can check criminal records online at little cost, though questions remain about the accuracy of these checks.

C. Second Chance Act is way too limited
SK/A10.7) AMERICA, June 23, 2008, p. 5, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, Expanded Academic ASAP. The legislation [Second Chance Act] authorizes $362 millin in grants to local governments and nonprofit organizations. Given the scope of the problem, the mount is small, but it is at least a beginning. The next crucial step, however, is to see that the funds are disbursed

Solvency

III. Increased Assitance will reduce Recidivism

A. Programs to employ ex-offenders are successful
SK/A10.08) Ron Haskins [Sr. Fellow, Brookings Institution], THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January 2009, LEXIS-NEXIS Academic, p. 308. One large scale, random-assighnment study now being conducted is of a well-known program conducted by the Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) in New York City, and organization leading the nation in helping ex-felons find employment. Early results of the evaluation suggest that men who join the program soon after they are released were "less likely to have their parole revoked, to be convicted of a felony, and to be re-incarcerated" (blooom et al. 2007, 2). Both states and the federal Department of Justive should ensure that such programs continue to grow and conform to the results fo the numerous ongoing evaluations.

B. Recidivism Will be Reduced
SK/A10.09) JET, August 13, 2007, p. 16, GALE CENGAGE LEARNING, expanded Academic ASAP. In response to the tendency, the National Research Council suggests that parole offices revamp their techniques for dealing with ex-offenders in order to test the value of concentrating resouces when people are first returned to the committee, told the Associated Press. He added, that is when prisoners are more likely to commit new crimes.

C. Ex-offenders programs will pay for themselves
SK/a10.10) Ron Haskins [sr. Fellow, Brookings Institution], THE ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE, January 2009, LEXIS-NEXIS Academic, pp 307-308. Reform could reduce the explosion in spending on the nations criminal justice systems at the local state and federal level. In dollars adjusted for inflation, spending on the police, courts, and jails and prisons increased from $72.5 billion in 1982 to well over $204 billion in 2005. spending on jails prisons and parole alone has increased from $18.3 billion to $65.1 billion, an increase of more than 250% in less then 25 years (Bureau of Justice Statistics 2007a). Sending fewer men to jail would reduce prison costs. If the high rates of recidivism could be reduced, still more saving would be produced. Although calculations are speculative until we have better evidence, it is reasonable to expect that quality programs to reduce crime, avoid incarceration, reduce the length of sentences, or reduce recidivism could pay for themselves, at least partially.

Thank You! xD
bonnie was here yesterday
Sky_ace25
Posts: 190
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 5:04:27 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Is this policy, PFD, LD, Parliament, Congress, I mean you got to say what type of debate this is, it will change everything.
Seriously, Pluto is no longer a planet?
bonnieluvs
Posts: 130
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 5:11:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 5:04:27 PM, Sky_ace25 wrote:
Is this policy, PFD, LD, Parliament, Congress, I mean you got to say what type of debate this is, it will change everything.

This is a CX debate
bonnie was here yesterday
bonnieluvs
Posts: 130
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 5:47:29 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 5:01:15 PM, brittwaller wrote:
Putting a debate in a thread instead of a debate. How novel.

I'm hopping that someone can help me with my plan for debate my partner in debate is now good at making plans Dx
bonnie was here yesterday
Lexicaholic
Posts: 526
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 6:21:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I looked up the CX debate style so that I would be able to aid you, somewhat, in this area. Some notes:

1. You seem to be missing an Inherency argument - you need to explain what forms of offender rehabilitation and vocational counseling are available today and explain what increases you are specifically calling for. I know you mentioned that funds are set to be disbursed, but you need to do an in-depth analysis of what programs are being implemented now, where they fail, and what needs to be done to correct such failures.

2. Prepare for Rebuttal - you need to take into account what arguments your opponent may make and preclude them with your opening arguments, and prepare some stock rebuttals for predictable counterpoints. Here are some examples of what your opponent may argue:

a. People should be held personally accountable for their actions, and they, not the taxpaying victims of their actions, should pay for their mistakes.

b. You have stated that funding would be through taxing tobacco and alcohol products: why should decent, hard working citizens have to pay more for their vices because of other people's misconduct?

c. What are 'necessary means'? If you can't specify how you are going to implement your policy, what would keep it from being as ineffectual as the current policies?

d. Maybe there are just bad people who refuse to act like decent human beings. What are you going to do with them? Do you really want rapists working next to women, or child molesters working near children?

e. You mention that recidivism is reduced through vocational counseling services for ex-offenders, but you never say by how much. How can we know the savings will be substantial if we don't have a reasonable numerical estimate of what they would be?

Those are the only good arguments I could think of off of the top of my head, though there could be others. Double-check everything carefully so that your opponent won't be able to intelligently argue a counter-position.

Good work so far, though. :)
http://mastersofcreationrpg.com... - My new site and long-developed project. Should be fun.
bonnieluvs
Posts: 130
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/8/2010 6:40:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 6:21:47 PM, Lexicaholic wrote:
I looked up the CX debate style so that I would be able to aid you, somewhat, in this area. Some notes:

1. You seem to be missing an Inherency argument - you need to explain what forms of offender rehabilitation and vocational counseling are available today and explain what increases you are specifically calling for. I know you mentioned that funds are set to be disbursed, but you need to do an in-depth analysis of what programs are being implemented now, where they fail, and what needs to be done to correct such failures.

2. Prepare for Rebuttal - you need to take into account what arguments your opponent may make and preclude them with your opening arguments, and prepare some stock rebuttals for predictable counterpoints. Here are some examples of what your opponent may argue:

a. People should be held personally accountable for their actions, and they, not the taxpaying victims of their actions, should pay for their mistakes.

b. You have stated that funding would be through taxing tobacco and alcohol products: why should decent, hard working citizens have to pay more for their vices because of other people's misconduct?

c. What are 'necessary means'? If you can't specify how you are going to implement your policy, what would keep it from being as ineffectual as the current policies?

d. Maybe there are just bad people who refuse to act like decent human beings. What are you going to do with them? Do you really want rapists working next to women, or child molesters working near children?

e. You mention that recidivism is reduced through vocational counseling services for ex-offenders, but you never say by how much. How can we know the savings will be substantial if we don't have a reasonable numerical estimate of what they would be?

Those are the only good arguments I could think of off of the top of my head, though there could be others. Double-check everything carefully so that your opponent won't be able to intelligently argue a counter-position.

Good work so far, though. :)

THank you so much for your help xD
bonnie was here yesterday
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2010 3:56:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 1/8/2010 5:01:15 PM, brittwaller wrote:
Putting a debate in a thread instead of a debate. How novel.

Hey, saves people creating debates to steal cases then forfeit. They can just read the forums now. :P