The 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.

What Is A Counterplan?

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.

Specificity

Sample Counterplan Text: Example 1: The U.S. federal government will make permanent the

Cuban Adjustment Act and establish it as the model for comprehensive immigration reform legislation dealing with other immigrant groups.

Example 2: The fifty state governments in the U.S. will legalize the

growth, possession, and sale of marijuana. State laws will maintain appropriate prohibition on the sale and use of marijuana by minors. Businesses may continue to prohibit the use of marijuana by employees, and appropriate legislation will prohibit driving under the influence of drugs. The counterplan will end all anti-drug assistance to Mexico through the Merida Initiative.

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.

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 (suboptimal) Possibilities: Resource competition, Philosophical differences,

Mutual ExclusivityIt is logically impossible to adopt both the

plan and the counterplan. Example: The affirmative calls for substantially

increasing economic engagement with Cuba by abandoning the Cuban Adjustment Act; the counterplan does the opposite – it affirms the Cuban Adjustment Act and makes it model for all immigrants.

Problems with Mutual Exclusivity: Often the competitiveness based on mutual exclusivity is artificial because the text of the counterplan simply bans the plan. That is the case in the “Example 2” counterplan proposing drug legalization while also banning an increase in anti-drug assistance to Mexico through the Merida Initiative. The portion of the counterplan that bans assistance through the Merida Initiative is not an essential element of drug legalization. It would obviously be possible to legalize marijuana while also providing assistance to Mexico in fighting its illegal drug cartels.

Net BenefitsShows 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 marijuana legalization example, the counterplan would reduce the power of Mexico’s drug cartels while avoiding the disadvantages associated with the militarization of Mexico’s drug war.

PermutationsA 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: Consider the example of the marijuana legalization counterplan: The affirmative can suggest that the superior option is the following permutation: Legalize marijuana so as to undermine the financial power of the drug cartels, but continue assistance to fight the drug cartels in order to limit the supply of narcotic drugs and to prevent the cartels from shifting to other sources of financing, such as kidnapping and human trafficking.

Counterplan TypesAgent: Inter-American Development Bank, UN, England,

China, Private industry action, state governments

Non-economic engagement: Establish diplomatic ties with Cuba or Venezuela

No engagement: Immigration example, legalize marijuana

Use of conditions: Lift the embargo conditional on Cuban release of political prisoners (or unconditional if the plan provides conditions)

Exceptions: Lift the embargo for all except deepwater oil drilling

Multilateral: Bilateral trade agreements bad; multilateral good

Process: Executive order, waivers, general OFAC license

Capture advantage with no reference to Mexico, Cuba, or Venezuela (Expand wind power in US to solve global warming)

Consultation: Consult with OAS, NATO, etc.

End existing engagement: (Eliminate Obama’s 2009 exceptions to the Cuba embargo)