The Counterplan

1. The Counterplan by Rich Edwards Baylor University

2. What Is A Counterplan? A counterplan is a policy defended by the negative team which competes with the affirmative plan and is, on balance, more beneficial than the affirmative plan.

3. Responsibilities of the Counterplan Specificity:The counterplan text must be explicit Nontopicality:Some theorists say the counterplan must represent the NON-resolution Competitiveness:The counterplan must give the judge a reason to choose between the plan and counterplan.

4. Specificity Sample Counterplan Text: Example 1: The U.S. federal government will substantially increase “cash assistance” to the working poor by a percentage amount equivalent to the spending increase proposed in the affirmative plan. This cash assistance will be given in the form of an increase in the Earned Income Tax Credit with the “advanced payment” option so that the increase can be allocated in each paycheck received. Example 2: The fifty state governments will provide the same benefits for persons living in poverty that the affirmative plan proposes as a federal benefit for persons living in poverty.

5. Nontopicality Though some judges will continue to think this is important, MOST contemporary debate theorists say it is NOT, for the following reasons: 1. The affirmative team is asking for adoption of the PLAN not the resolution. 2. Competitiveness provides adequate protection against abuse. 3. Ground is preserved, since the affirmative team had free opportunity to choose its position first from anywhere within the resolution.

6. Standards for Competitiveness Mutual Exclusivity:It is logically impossible to do both the plan and counterplan. Net Benefits:The plan alone is more beneficial than the plan plus the counterplan Other Possibilities:Resource competition, Philosophical differences

7. Mutual Exclusivity It is logically impossible to adopt both the plan and the counterplan. Example:The affirmative calls for substantially increasing social services for Native Americans; the counterplan bans all social services for Native Americans and replaces them with an equivalent amount of cash assistance. Problems with Mutual Exclusivity:Often the competitiveness is artificial because the text of the counterplan simply bans the plan: Some of this counterplan is competitive, but certainly not all of it.

8. Net Benefits Shows why it would be undesirable to combine the plan and counterplan; as a practical matter, there is some disadvantage to the plan which the counterplan does not link to. In the state counterplan example, the counterplan would uniquely avoid the politics disadvantage which links from the public perception that the Obama administration is solving poverty.

9. Permutations A permutation is an argument offered by the affirmative to demonstrate the non-competitiveness of a counterplan; it suggests a specific way that the plan and counterplan can be desirably combined. Example: Suppose an affirmative case proposes to expand the Indian Health Service and the counterplan proposes to ban social services for Native Americans AND expand cash assistance. The counterplan is mutually exclusive only because of the ban on social services. The permutation could expand social services and cash assistance while preserving the sovereignty of Native American tribes.