JUDGING PHILOSOPHY STATEMENT

LEEPER, KARLA

BAYLOR UNIVERSITY SOUTH CENTRAL REGION

15 YEARS JUDGING 30 ROUNDS ON THIS TOPIC

I view debate as an opportunity for two teams to compare policy alternatives. The best debates will be well evidenced, well organized clashes over carefully thought out strategies.

I am usually a much better judge for the affirmative than the negative. One reason is that I scrutinize link evidence and arguments closely to decide whether they offer a compelling reason to reject the plan. Another reason is that I demand that negative counterplans provide a clear net benefit over the plan or permutation. I also am sympathetic to the claims that plan inclusive counterplans are harmful to debate. However, this standard of scrutiny cuts both ways. Plans should provide clear evidence of solvency, and turns should be turns and not just add ons. Affirmative theory arguments must be clearly articulated and they must assess the implications on ground and the quality of argument of the theory they indict.

I believe that topicality is a voting issue. Its main function is to fairly divide ground between the affirmative and negative in order to produce quality debate.

I have never been a real fan of the Kritik. However, I do believe that some Ks are really disads with impacts that are something other than lives or nuclear war. As such, I believe they should demonstrate clear links to the affirmative, and some kind of alternative to the paradigm utilized by the affirmative.

Rebuttals are crucial. I have seen many debates this year where the last two rebuttalists try to do too much and end up doing nothing very well. Focus the debate and evaluate the arguments made by both sides. Compare your evidence—don’t just extend it. The bibliographic tour of the constructives is interesting but completely ineffective in my mind. Don’t forget to compare impacts and implications as well. The debates on this topic have become so interrelated that it is sometimes difficult to assess how the various arguments interact.