There are six stock issues to be considered in the analysis of proposition of policy. Both the affirmative and negative will need to defend their position on the basis of these issues.
1) Problem or Need. Is there a problem in existence which needs to be solved? Before we change to a new way of doing things, we normally have to be convinced that there is something wrong at the present with the old way, or that the old way may cause difficulty in the future. Such an analysis ordinarily uncovers any problems related to the present, and why these problems came about.
2) Inherency. Is the problem an inherent part of the status quo? Not only must we be able to visualize a problem before we make a change, but we also must realize that we cannot overcome the problem with our present policy. The issue of inherency deals with the relationship which exists between the present problem and the present policy.
3) Plan. After deciding that there is an inherent need for a change in the present policy, you must determine what type of policy related to the proposition can be proposed.
4) Practicality. Is it reasonable to assume that the plan implied by the resolution could be implemented if it were found desirable? It is not too difficult to figure out answers to solve problems. It is quite another thing to put these solutions into practice.
5) Advantages-Disadvantages. The basis upon which many people decide to accept a new policy in preference to an old one is that they believe the effect of their decision will be advantageous in the long run.
6) Counter plan. Affirmative debaters are obliged to show that there is a need for a new policy, and that it would be advantageous if adopted. They also are obliged to demonstrate, if challenged, that no other alternative policy would be as good as the one which they propose. Be able to attack any counter-plans proposed.
PARTICIPANTS of the constructive speeches:
AC1. The first affirmative speaker – presents a case and a plan which falls under the current resolution and is the basis for the debate.
NC1. The first negative speaker – presents negative arguments, shows disadvantages of the suggested by the first affirmative speaker policy proposal.
AC2. The second affirmative speaker – answers the arguments put out by the first negative speaker.
NC2. The second negative speaker – enters new arguments into the round, points out errors in the arguments presented by the affirmative speakers. It is possible also to extend the arguments generated by the first negative speaker and to respond to the second affirmative speaker.
PARTICIPANTS of the rebuttal speeches:
NR1.The first negative rebuttal speech covers what the second negative speaker did not answer that the negative team feels is important.
AR1. The first affirmative rebuttal speech covers all the affirmative arguments and gives answers to all previously stated negative arguments. It is one of the most difficult speeches in the debate round.
NR2. The second negative rebuttal speaker explains to the judge why he/she should vote for the negative rather than the affirmative team. The speaker also emphasizes the arguments from the NC2 speaker and the NR1 speaker.
AR2. The second affirmative rebuttal speaker presents the last opportunity for the affirmative team to make an impression on the judge. At this point the affirmative team should have explained why they have won the round, and why the case outweighs the harms of the disadvantages.