The “Harms-Solvency” case is the traditional policy debate case where the problems are defined and a plan is proposed to solve them. “Coach Vance” Trefethen explains how to build the strongest harms-solvency case.
Supply and demand is the basic principle to all economics. “Coach Vance” Trefethen explains how this basic principle can (and should!) be used to win policy debate rounds.
After establishing how a negative debater should be thinking (like a pirate!), “Coach Vance” Trefethen explains how negative debaters can strategically and tactically blow up the affirmative case.
In policy debate, “topicality” helps keep the debate within the boundaries of the resolution. In this camp session, “Coach Vance” Trefethen explains what topicality is, how it is used, and how to impact it in a debate round.
Case Summary: The Rohingya are an ethnic and religious minority group living in a region of Myanmar (also known as Burma). They have been relentlessly persecuted by the government, stripped of their citizenship, killed and chased out of their villages, and rejected by other nations when seeking asylum. Many end up in camps in Bangladesh, where conditions are terrible and the poor Bangladeshis cannot afford to feed them. The Trump administration has lowered the number of Rohingyas being allowed to enter the US as refugees, a terrible policy that needs to be reversed. Resettlement in safe places, like the US, is the only workable solution to the Rohingyas’ plight, since their own country rejects them and neighboring countries cannot care for them.