2.  4 th stock issue  Significance means that the issue addressed by the Affirmative team is a major force affecting a large group.  The penalty for not proving Significance is to lose the round.  The Affirmative team must prove that their case will have significance. They are required to prove that their justification [reason] is something major that affects a large number of people. For example, if the Affirmative  Significance is relative to the size of the group with which you are working.

3.  When you are on the Affirmative, you want your control group to be as small as possible, to make it easier to achieve significance.  When you are on the Negative, you want the control group to be as large as possible, to make it harder for the Affirmative to achieve significance.  Definitions – you will want the definition of significance to be different depending on whether you are affirmative or negative.  Therefore – you need to have as many definitions of significance as possible in your Debate file box when competing in a Debate tournament!

4.  Remember that the judge is the one who decides which definition is better. Both the AFFIRMATIVE and the NEGATIVE will present competing definitions, and try to persuade the judge which definition is best under the circumstances. If the AFFIRMATIVE is presenting a COMMON-USE DEFINITION and the NEGATIVE counters with an ECONOMIC DEFINITION OF STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE, it gives the judge two completely different, competing definitions from which to decide.

5.  Let’s talk for a moment about PERCENTAGES. Percentages are frequently thrown around in debate rounds. One of the things you need to understand:  Percentages mean NOTHING unless you know the baseline with which you began.  PERCENTAGES ARE RELATIVE TO The baseline with which you start [how much you have in the Status Quo at the beginning of the round], and Whether you are increasing or decreasing [it is much easier to be significant with a decrease than with an increase

6.  Your best strategy when the other team argues PERCENTAGES [regardless of whether you are Affirmative and Negative], is to ask the following question in cross-ex:  How much ______________________ are you starting with? (foreign aid, economic assistance, investment, trade, energy investment, imports, etc)

7.  So, in summary, when you are preparing to debate, you should gather as many definitions of SIGNIFICANCE as you can. When you are on the AFFIRMATIVE, you should use definitions that define significance in the SMALLEST WAY POSSIBLE. When you are on the NEGATIVE, you should use definitions that define significance in the LARGEST WAY POSSIBLE. And when the other team argues STATISTICS, you should always question the baseline with which they are starting.

8.  5 th Stock Issue  Solvency relates to whether the Affirmative plan will SOLVE FOR THE HARMS they have cited and Whether the Affirmative plan will PRODUCE THE ADVANTAGES(S) they have claimed  Solvency covers two areas:

9. 1. Solvency of Harms :This means that the Affirmative plan ELIMINATES THE HARM they have identified in the current system. 2. Solvency of Advantages: This means that the Affirmative plan ACHIEVES THE ADVANTAGES(S) they have said they can achieve.

10.  Some solvency arguments might include: 1. The PUBLIC WILL CIRCUMVENT the plan. 2. There are OTHER CAUSES of the problem. 3. These are not the causes of the problem  The Affirmative team must prove that their case has solvency.

11.  To have solvency, the affirmative team must have 3 things: 1. They must prove the affirmative plan WILL function 2. They must prove the aff plan will solve any harm they have cited 3. They must prove the aff plan will solve any advantages they have claimed  The Negative team will argue that the Affirmative plan will not have solvency. Negative will argue that the Affirmative plan:

12.  Will not function  Will not eliminate the harms they’ve cited  Will not produce the advantages they have cited  When you are writing your Affirmative case, you should think about these issues and choose your HARMS and ADVANTAGES more carefully. You will also think about the types of things other teams will argue against your case and prepare answers ahead of time.