Instigator / Pro
Points: 48

Policy Style: Withdraw United States Federal Involvement in Education.

Finished

The voting period has ended

After 7 votes the winner is ...
Joshua1
Debate details
Publication date
Last update
Category
Politics
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
Points: 2
Description
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should withdraw or repeal all federal policies regarding education.
This will be a policy-style debate. There will be four rounds of argumentation:
1. Constructive
2. Constructive
3. Rebuttal
4. Rebuttal
During constructive rounds new arguments may be introduced in addition to rebutting, in rebuttal rounds no new arguments may be introduced; only rebuttals may be made.
Round 1
Published:
In this debate I intend to prove that the United States Federal Government was never within its constitutional authority to be involved in the educational process in any way, and thus has no power to be there today. As such, all policies regarding or affecting education are an overreach and should immediately be withdrawn.

I. Definitions:

Education: “the action or process of educating or of being educated” (1)

Legislative: “belonging to the branch of government that is charged with such powers as making laws, levying and collecting taxes, and making financial appropriations” (2, def. 1. b)
 
II. Problems:

A) Federal Education Policies are Constitutional Overreach:

The Constitution of the United States declares, in Article I, Section 1 that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” In other words, all power to make laws belongs to Congress. And Congress’ power is limited, as is deduced from two more constitutional clauses:
Article I, Section 8: “The Congress shall have Power To…”
Amendment X: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

These clauses make clear that certain powers are granted to Congress and by extension the United States Federal Government, and all powers not explicitly granted are reserved for the states. Therefore, if a power is not granted, it is not in the authority of the Federal Government to exercise that power or make any legislation regarding the subject named.

Finally, a careful examination of Article I, Section 8, wherein legislative powers are granted to the Congress, will reveal no power regarding education is granted. Therefore, the Federal Government has no power to legislate regarding education.
 
B) Federal Policies on Education Exist

A quick perusal of the U.S. Department of Education page will reveal multiple currently effective policies in existence regarding education. (3)
 
III. Solution:

To solve this problem, I put forward the following mandate:

Mandate:
The United States Congress shall immediately pass a law dissolving the U.S. Department of Education and at one and the same time repealing all laws affecting education within the United States, doing both at the end of two years from passage of such law.

Enforcement:
The United States Congress and President
 
IV. Advantages:

In order to show that my mandate should be accepted, I put forward the following advantages:

1) Counteraction of Tyranny

In that the United States Federal Government is governed by the constitution thereof, it is a definite advantage to take any step towards obedience of it. The further the government gets from obedience to the constitution, the more in danger we, as the people under its rule, become. As James Madison stated, “It will not be denied that power is of an encroaching nature and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it.” (4)

2) Increased Power to People

Enacting my mandate will give the full power of education back to the individual states, which will put more power back into the hands of the people. Education can be localized, allowing different population groups to have more influence in how their children are educated. If in a certain state the laws are too restrictive for a certain family, relocating to another state can provide a simple solution.

3) Cuts Federal Spending

Currently, the United States Department of Education has an annual budget of $68 billion (5). Cutting this department would cut this much money annually from Federal spending, which is currently significantly over-budget (6). This would increase financial stability in the United States.
 
Overall, enacting my mandate would solve a glaring problem in the United States Federal Government and provide multiple benefits to the people of the United States. 

Forfeited
Round 2
Published:
In the interest of fair play, I will waive my right to argue this round. As my opponent has failed to respond to any part of my case, the entirety of my argumentation carries into this round uncontested.
Forfeited
Round 3
Published:
Likewise with this round.
Published:
I am defeated.

If you are curious, you're wrong. A parent could even raise their children into an incest cult if the state doesn't intrude their privacy and have a say in the child's raising and education. The state is not more evil than some parents are, it is a democratically elected leadership mechanism that represent's the nation's will for what their young should be raised and educated by.

I concede this debate because of time and effort.
Round 4
Published:
Victory by concession.

I will respond to my opponent's point; the argument was that the United States Federal government has no authority in education. However, the individual state governments most certainly do. My contention is not for no government intervention in education; simply that the Federal government in particular remain within its limits of power. That's all.
Published:
This is as much of a scapegoat cowardly way to win than Virtuoso's 'hurr durr we teach them Creationism is wrong' to win a debate on teaching Creationism in science class.
Added:
--> @bmdrocks21
Don't worry; I'm planning on trying to find time to do it again. I was too.
Instigator
#9
Added:
So sad. I was looking forward to this one.
#8
Added:
--> @SupaDudz
Yeah, see, you already lost me. NCFCA in general wasn't that complicated or to that level, and definitely not me on my first year! I learned most of my theory (which I really love) by participating in forums after the fact. I far prefer Aff, and generally focus on clearer, slower speaking and simple points. I often go for ideals, too; there were people who told me I was more an LD debater because of my emphasis on values. I tried to run a counterplan once; it went up in epic flames.
Instigator
#7
Added:
--> @Joshua1
Epic Aff Cases are amazing when you make them, pain in the ass to go against. It seems like every DA just gets flamed
I am a NEG person. I am fast speaker and run 8 Offcase, 4 DA's, 2 CP's, 1 K's, and a Theory
Usually am done within 30sec and then line by line some case points
Most I have done was with a team that was bad and we already made playoffs, so I ran 12 offcase and they dropped 1/2 of Offcase and their case
#6
Added:
--> @SupaDudz
Haha... that's fair. :D Oh well... that was always the fun anyway, waiting to see what kinds of arguments the other team brings up. I did a year of Team Policy with NCFCA and loved it. Our Aff case went undefeated except for one round where the judge clearly had bias.
Instigator
#5
Added:
--> @Joshua1
Not the exact version, but topics like it. 2017 it was USA NSDA Policy Topic. I would tell you the DA's that were run, but it would ruin the suprise :)
#4
Added:
--> @SupaDudz
I appreciate the tips; thanks!
I honestly had no idea this had been a resolution. I just have been thinking this in general for a while, and decided to do this just for fun. I took some old stuff I had bouncing around in my head and came up with this just this morning. :D
Instigator
#3
Added:
--> @Joshua1
I would read 35 case cards in a debate. Simply to prove points for people to use prep to use harder args
#2
Added:
--> @Joshua1
Your Round 1 needs to have a link why power to people for things like education is good. I would prepare for that rebuttal since that is a strong argument to run against. This is 2017 topic of how to improve education and have run against it. Hated this topic, ran so many DA and CP against it. 10 OFFCASE on it my g. You need to prove that Power to People is good
#1
#7
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Concession
#6
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
concession
#5
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
DynamicSquid, forfeiting is just letting the time run out on your args. A concession is willingly telling your opponent that you lose.
#4
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
What does "concession" actually mean in terms of debate? Is it different that a "forfeit"?
#3
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Concession.
#2
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Con
ceded
#1
Criterion Pro Tie Con Points
Better arguments 3 points
Better sources 2 points
Better spelling and grammar 1 point
Better conduct 1 point
Reason:
Concession.