Skip header content and main navigation Binghamton University, State University of New York - Patrick
Banner Brandon Evans Brittney Bleyle Trevor Reddick Phillip George Sonya Robinson Maneo Choudhury Daniel Friedman Joe Leeson-Schatz Anna Pinchuk Masakazu Kurihara Joshua Frumkin

Binghamton Speech & Debate

Proposition: Eesha Kodali (Novi Middle School) vs. Opposition: Vera Tolari (Colegio Bilingüe New Horizons)

Judge: Peter Beadle (Binghamton University)

Resolution: Finals Week: This House Believes that Animal Testing Should be Banned.

  • Eesha Kodali
    Eesha Kodali

    Vera Tolari
    Vera Tolari
    Click to begin

    Speech Details

    Click on the other tabs to watch watch that speech.

    Posted at June 2, 2020 03:21:17AM EST by Eesha Kodali



    Posted at June 3, 2020 05:58:04AM EST by Vera Tolari



    Manudeep Bhuller, Gordon Dahl, Katrine V. Løken, Magne Mogstad, and Christa Freeland 03/26/2019 (World Economic Forum and VoxEU, "What the rest of the world can learn from Norway's prison system")

    Judith Collins 07/13/2010 (Beehive (New Zealand Government), "New prison will have a significant economic impact")

    Emma Jane Kirby 07/07/2019 (BBC, "How Norway turns criminals into good neighbours")

    Baz Dreisinger 07/19/2018 (Business Insider, "I toured prisons around the world - and the system that seems the most relaxed is also one that works")

    Amend US 01/2020 ("Our Impact")

    Zoe Williams 12/15/2010 (The Guardian, "Yes, prisons work. No, I am not a Michael Howard clone")

    Civitas UK 02/2010 (Crime Briefing, "Fighting Crime: Are Public Policies Working?")

    Posted at June 4, 2020 01:28:46AM EST by Eesha Kodali



    Posted at June 5, 2020 07:06:10AM EST by Joe Leeson-Schatz



    - E. Ann Carson 08/07/2016 (U.S. Department of Justice, "Prisoners in 2016")

    - Dominic Taylor 09/2010 (National Offender Management Service, Prison Service Journal, Issue 191, "Structured Communications in Prison: a project to achieve more consistent performance and fairer outcomes for staff and prisoners", pages 24-26)

    - Rep. Doug Collins and Craig DeRoche 04/06/2018 (Fox News, "Prison reform would reduce crime, turn former prisoners into productive citizens")

    - David Roodman 09/2017 (Open Philanthropy Project, "The impacts of incarceration on crime")

    - Eli Lehrer 10/09/2000 (The Heritage Foundation, "The case against the case against jail")

    - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 05/14/2020 ("Viral Testing Data in the U.S.")

    - Alexis C. Madrigal and Robinson Meyer 05/21/2020 (The Atlantic, "The CDC and states are misreporting Covid-19 test data")

    - German Lopez 05/14/2020 (Vox News, "America’s coronavirus testing numbers are really improving — finally")

    - United States Court of Appeals 02/28/2020 ("Judgment in Barrientos, Velasquez-Galicia, Ahmed v. CoreCivic Inc.", No. 18-15081, D.C. Docket No. 4:18-cv-00070-CDL)

    Posted at June 5, 2020 09:02:54PM EST by Eesha Kodali




    This match has been completed. Show the Decision.

    Submitted at June 6, 2020 03:57:30PM EST by Peter Beadle

    Category Eesha Kodali Vera Tolari
    Use of evidence: 5 5.5
    Delivery skill: 5.5 5.4
    Coherence of arguments: 5 5.4
    Responsiveness to opponent: 4 5.1
    Identification of key points: 4.5 5.1
    Comments: Constructive: good structure and well presented

    Rebuttal: feels like a missed opportunity. Vera laid down a strong constructive and you barely argued against her points, choosing instead to add new advantages to your case in chief. You do not challenge her framework, nor do you really refute her "reform works", Norway-model, and high-recidivism arguments, which is a real problem. You have some cards in your Constructive that could help here, but you do not extend and apply them. Also, you mis-argue the prisons-tax argument. Its more that prisons generate tax revenue by increasing employment and helping the economy and you do not otherwise challenge her economic arguments. How about some moral outrage that we are justifying locking people up and subjecting them to virtual slavery to pay for the local library?

    Closing: That Netherlands card was really intriguing, but then it went nowhere. That should have been in your constructive and then we'd have an example of how to exist without prisons that would presumably be better than mere "reforms". But other than saying the Netherlands doesn't have prisoners, you don't explain why/how that came about. And its entirely new in your closing. The rest of your arguments in closing still fail to refute idea that reforms can get the job done without having to abolish the prisons.

    I acknowledge that the Proposition's rebuttal was posted late, but you did not establish you suffered actual prejudice from this, so I do consider the Proposition's rebuttal.
    Constructive: very strong, good structure and well presented.

    Rebuttal: I would have extended your Constructive arguments first, as these are largely dropped by your opponent and easy to quickly extend. Then I would have added your extra points. You had me worried until the end when you went back and extended your points, but you do a good job solidifying the argument that abolition is not needed because there are reforms that can accomplish much better conditions, lower recidivism rates and lower crime rates, while providing economic benefits. Incidentally, you also end up mis-arguing the "higher taxes" argument. Its not that people are taxed more to pay for the prison, its that since the prison directly and indirectly increases employment, more tax revenue is generated from those salaries. You had a good card, trust it, don't assume your opponent framed it correctly. In any event, your framework is untouched, so question for me is has it been proven that prisons should be completely abolished?

    The decision is for the Opposition: Vera Tolari

    Reason for Decision:

    The Framework put forward by the Opposition (and effectively conceded by the Proposing side) is that it must be proven prisons should be completely abolished. The Proposition constructive makes a strong argument about the shortcomings of prisons and the need to abolish all (I accept that private prisons are included in this argument and the resolution), but as the round develops, the Framework is not contested, and prison reforms in Norway and Oregon demonstrate that prison abolition is not necessary. These arguments are not really refuted. Yes status-quo prisons are generally terrible, but they can be reformed. The Framework is not satisfied and the Proposition is not justified, so I vote for the Opposition.

    Add Comment

    Please Create an Account or Log-In to post comments.

    Connect with Binghamton:
    Twitter icon links to Binghamton University's Twitter page YouTube icon links to Binghamton University's YouTube page Facebook icon links to Binghamton University's Facebook page Pinterest icon links to Binghamton University's Pinterest page

    Binghamton University Online Debate Platform powered by: