![arguments against every mans battle arguments against every mans battle](https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/e2/34/e2348766-e32d-4265-8c9d-ab09b6104d69/mc12en_ant-man-ally.png)
On a more technical level, defining it is quite troublesome. On a “common-man” level we all know what transportation policy means. Ultimately this resolution will be an interesting one to define. Quoting a well-respected, detailed definition will add to your Ethos. The strategic benefit of this resolution is it can be used to add credibility to your team if you need to define the resolution. The definition would allow for teams to run cases that only affect the transportation system, which broadens the resolution by tens of times, if not more. The Hofstra definition states that transport policy deals with constructs related to the transport system. Russian policy would be affected, but the case is not policy WITH Russia). if the resolution was to reform policy with Russia, a case would be “affects-topicality” if it reformed policy with Ukraine on the Russian issue. Affects topicality is when a case is only “topical” because it has an impact on the resolutional topic (i.e.
![arguments against every mans battle arguments against every mans battle](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/07/26/opinion/26signsV2/24SignsV2-superJumbo.jpg)
Their definitions of “transport policy” is as follows (URL included) Hofstra University, located on Long Island, gives us another possible definition. The federal government is not the only place we can look. In a round, you’d be able to distinguish for a judge if a plan is topical by simply running your finger over Title 49’s table of contents. It provides extremely clear lines on what is and what is not topical, avoiding any type of in-round confusion. Why is this transportation policy, but not highways?Īs a quick note, there is a clear strategic advantage of using this definition. It deals with pipelines – standards, safety, &c. A prime example is Subsection VIII of the Title. This definition also includes things that wouldn’t seem to be transportation policy.We therefore are left with a question – was the government incorrect in how it defines its own transportation policy? Is Title 23 also transportation policy?
Arguments against every mans battle code#
However, Title 23 is the part of US Code that deals with highways. We can probably all agree highways should be considered part of transportation policy. Here are the justifications for rejecting this definition.
![arguments against every mans battle arguments against every mans battle](https://images.ctfassets.net/j95d1p8hsuun/7yqyTKtqhVSeaO566eA7OX/093a5417e49e6233d2d7d86fa1e0ac0b/forge.jpg)
It is THE section of US Code that deals with the resolution.Įvery argument has a counter-argument every point has its downsides. Title 49 is the government’s policies on transportation in their purest form. The second argument for this definition is the most simple, and we actually went over it already. Of course, this begs the question, “what is that policy?” The policy that it regards as regarding transportation. The resolution reads “The United States Federal Government should substantially reform its transportation policy.” Based on that word, one could argue that we should examine what the federal government considers to be the transportation policy that belongs to it. This word, included in the resolution, can actually be important in the topicality debate regarding this subject. There are arguments for and against this definition though. Title 49 of US Code, luckily enough, is called “Transportation.” So, in effect, Title 49 is literally the USFG’s policies on transportation. The first place to look for a definition of the federal government’s transportation policy is the federal government, so let’s start there.
Arguments against every mans battle how to#
This blog post is intended to provide some succinct ideas for how to define this resolution when the need arises. If you have one, please comment below! Even if there is one, however, it’s still a good idea to have several definitions in your back pocket. No matter how you search, you won’t find a credible definition of “transportation policy” on the web. Easy enough to debate, easy enough to define.