Judge: Arturo Feliz (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons)
Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.
|Click to begin|
Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.
Posted at May 12, 2020 01:22:48AM EST by Scott Klein
McClellan, Mark, Lucas Scherdel, Andrea Thoumi, and Krishna Udayakumar. “Achieving Universal Health Coverage through Value-Based Care and Public-Private Collaboration.” Brookings. Brookings, November 7, 2019. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2019/09/20/achieving-universal-health-coverage-through-value-based-care-and-public-private-collaboration/.
“Op-Ed: Without Universal Healthcare, Coronavirus Puts Us All at Risk.” Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2020. https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-03-05/op-ed-time-to-ramp-up-medicaid-to-pay-for-universal-coronavirus-care.
“Priorities: Health for All.” World Health Organization. World Health Organization, July 2, 2017. https://www.who.int/dg/priorities/health-for-all/en/.
“SDGs .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform.” United Nations. United Nations. Accessed May 12, 2020. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs.
Watkins, David A, Gavin Yamey, Marco Schäferhoff, Olusoji Adeyi, George Alleyne, Ala Alwan, Seth Berkley, et al. “Alma-Ata at 40 Years: Reflections from the Lancet Commission on Investing in Health.” The Lancet 392, no. 10156 (2018): 1434–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(18)32389-4.
“What Is Universal Coverage?” World Health Organization. World Health Organization, July 9, 2019. https://www.who.int/health_financing/universal_coverage_definition/en/.
Posted at May 13, 2020 07:53:45AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz
None available for this speech.
Posted at May 15, 2020 08:14:22AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz
None available for this speech.
Posted at May 15, 2020 08:16:15PM EST by Scott Klein
Goodnough, Abby and Margot Sanger-Katz. "As Tens of Thousands Died, F.D.A. Failed to Police Opioids." New York Times, December 31, 2019.https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/30/health/FDA-opioids.html
This match has been completed. Show the Decision.
Submitted at May 20, 2020 05:26:06PM EST by Arturo Feliz
|Category||Scott Klein||瑠風 早川|
|Use of evidence:||4.4||2.8|
|Coherence of arguments:||4.9||2.4|
|Responsiveness to opponent:||4.6||2.3|
|Identification of key points:||4.4||3|
|Comments:||I enjoyed the clarify of your speech and how well you framed the round.
I think you chose your framework well, and you stuck to it and defended it throughout the round.
I do agree that inefficiency examples only speak of how it has been applied and it's not really a fundamental flaw of the idea. Meaning that is has been done wrong does not mean it can't be done right.
|You did a good job presenting your case. I feel that you needed to respond to Scott's case. You needed to respond on whether UHC was the best choice. You started to do so with cost, efficiency, and burden.
I do feel that when you agreed to his framework, you made your arguments weaker. If UHC is a public good then you make his arguments more important than yours about cost and efficiency.
The decision is for the Proposition: Scott Klein
Reason for Decision:
I'm going to go AFF on this one. NEG agreed to a framework where UHC is a public good. In this framework, as AFF argues and I agree, cost is not the main issue (even if it is AN ISSUE)
I don't agree that bad examples mean it can' be done right. I think your best case would have implied contesting the framework, because on this framework it's hard to make it. If UHC is a human right, and a public good, how can you not give it to everyone?