homeschool debate | Forums Wiki

HomeSchoolDebate

Speech and Debate Resources and Community
Forums      Wiki
It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 3:27 pm
Not a member? Guests can only see part of the forums. To see the whole thing (and add your voice!), just register a free account by following these steps.

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 3:01 am
Posts: 651
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Flying a UFO to an undisclosed location ;)
The FISC is highly secretive and allowed the NSA to continue collecting electronic surveillance. The case (as of now) would abolish it. I'm not finding many negative arguments. It seems like it could be susceptible to a counter-plan, but let's say that teams switch it to reform so that there is more oversight, I don't see any defendable Negative stance (that wouldn't contradict the Constitution at least). Any ideas?

_________________
John Mark Porter, Alumni
Arx Axiom/Carpe Dictum/Verdict/UADC/HSDC/HSDRC

2011-12 l Porter/Thomason, Light/Porter
2012-13 l Bailey/Porter
2013-14 l Bailey/Porter
2014-15 l Folkert/Porter

2015-16 I Childs/Porter


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 2:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:27 am
Posts: 103
Home Schooled: Yes
What is the harm that the AFF claims?

_________________
Alec Light

2010-11 |R8| Light/Light
2011-12 |R8| Folkert/Light
2012-13 |R8| Folkert/Light
2013-14 |R8| Folkert/Light
2014-15 |R8| Childs/Light
2015-16 |R8| Light/Toman


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 3:01 am
Posts: 651
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Flying a UFO to an undisclosed location ;)
Alec The Thinker wrote:
What is the harm that the AFF claims?

Most likely that justice can't happen in such an environment. It represses constitutional rights. It has basically become an arm of the executive branch, etc. etc.

_________________
John Mark Porter, Alumni
Arx Axiom/Carpe Dictum/Verdict/UADC/HSDC/HSDRC

2011-12 l Porter/Thomason, Light/Porter
2012-13 l Bailey/Porter
2013-14 l Bailey/Porter
2014-15 l Folkert/Porter

2015-16 I Childs/Porter


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 3:42 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2013 4:27 am
Posts: 103
Home Schooled: Yes
Do they claim that the approval rating of warrant requests is bad?

_________________
Alec Light

2010-11 |R8| Light/Light
2011-12 |R8| Folkert/Light
2012-13 |R8| Folkert/Light
2013-14 |R8| Folkert/Light
2014-15 |R8| Childs/Light
2015-16 |R8| Light/Toman


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:28 am 
I wrote the Cog briefset on this last year for the Stoa resolution. It was very interesting. There actually is some good academic stuff to defend FISC but it took some digging.

Quote:
I don't see any defendable Negative stance


A smattering of what I recall from the research:

-While FISC hasn't significantly blocked the NSA, they do 'steer' the NSA to mitigate problems. So they don't say "you can't do that" but they do say "if you're going to do that here's some steps to mitigate privacy loss".

-Claims that FISC is a rubber-stamp approval are based on the extremely high rate that they accept executive proposals. The response is that there's solid detailed dialogue on all steps of the process, so the executive knows what will or won't fly before they even officially go under FISC review, so they've already adjusted to the judicial demands.

-And a fun one. Basically claiming the executive is going to be doing this surveillance anyway, and if FISC was transparent and aggressive then the executive would totally ignore it. If FISC is secret and accepts a more minor role of mitigation they can at least have some positive impact.

While I'm not a fan of much of the NSA's practices, I see that as primarily an executive problem, and then a problem of congress and the Supreme Court to just let it all slide. FISC operates within a whole federal structure that prioritizes security way above privacy, and given that limitation there's at least a defensible case that it's doing the best it could do.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 16, 2015 4:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
Though it certainly isn't perfect I'd look up the USA Freedom Act which was recently past to create more transparency and accountability in the FISC and the NSA. Could be a decent Inherency point.

Also look back at history and what was happening that caused the FISC to be created (i.e. executive branch abusing it surveillance abilities to the extreme and being very secretive) then point out that an unchecked executive will be even worse today considering that surveillance is probably even more prevalent. The original "Church Committee" report to the senate on this abuse was very interesting.

Though I haven't done the research on a counter-plan yet it seems like it could be a legitimate approach. We need a strong check to executive surveillance powers and that may be best achieved through strengthening the FISC rather than abolishing it. Like I said I don't have any solid mandates to accomplish that yet but the evidence seems to suggest it could help/would be important/might work :) .

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Posts: 1377
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: H*wL*tt P*ck*rd muffins
So let me get this straight. In order to improve oversight we're getting rid of the secret court that is realistically the only body that oversees the CIA and NSA? Makes perfect sense.

_________________
-Joshua
The dumb Boatswain's Mate who once did debate
Proud Coastie, Puddle Pirate, and Shallow Water Sailor


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 6:55 pm 
Offline
melancholy milkshakes. no straws.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:31 pm
Posts: 3986
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Hinnom, TX
The solvency is questionable, as Hammy pointed out. Privacy violations starts and ends with the NSA and Patriot Act, and abolishing those would probably be too gutsy for a conservative NCFCA, so reforming the FISC to increase transparency and check its power is the most realistic option if you want to reduce the SQ harms.

What's the resolution again? :P

_________________
Joe Hughey
joehughey24@gmail.com

Two roads diverged in a wood and I -
I took the one less traveled
And that has made all the difference


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 7:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Posts: 1377
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: H*wL*tt P*ck*rd muffins
lookingforangels wrote:

What's the resolution again? :P

Reform the Federal Court System, so I feel like abolishing the NSA is out of the question. :P

lookingforangels wrote:
so reforming the FISC to increase transparency and check its power is the most realistic option if you want to reduce the SQ harms.

And it's kind of hard to reform something that no one knows anything about.

_________________
-Joshua
The dumb Boatswain's Mate who once did debate
Proud Coastie, Puddle Pirate, and Shallow Water Sailor


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Oct 19, 2015 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
Hammy wrote:
lookingforangels wrote:
so reforming the FISC to increase transparency and check its power is the most realistic option if you want to reduce the SQ harms.

And it's kind of hard to reform something that no one knows anything about.


What he said.

And they kinda already tried to "increase transparency and check its power" (see the USA Freedom Act). Either it (the USA Freedom Act) will work and, in that case, there's no reason for change (good for negative inherency or significance arguments) OR it fails and proves just how hard it is to "reform" such a secretive system. Herein lies the stance to abolish FISC: simple reform doesn't work with a system we know little to nothing about.

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:45 am 
Offline
melancholy milkshakes. no straws.
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:31 pm
Posts: 3986
Home Schooled: Yes
Location: Hinnom, TX
Seabass00 wrote:
Hammy wrote:
lookingforangels wrote:
so reforming the FISC to increase transparency and check its power is the most realistic option if you want to reduce the SQ harms.

And it's kind of hard to reform something that no one knows anything about.


What he said.

And they kinda already tried to "increase transparency and check its power" (see the USA Freedom Act). Either it (the USA Freedom Act) will work and, in that case, there's no reason for change (good for negative inherency or significance arguments) OR it fails and proves just how hard it is to "reform" such a secretive system. Herein lies the stance to abolish FISC: simple reform doesn't work with a system we know little to nothing about.

Just abolishing the FISC won't solve anything because it's not the root cause of the issue. With this resolution, I'm not sure how you can do anything with the court system that will improve transparency and NSA-sanctioned privacy violations. Those things will continue regardless. This isn't a good resolution for these particular harms.

_________________
Joe Hughey
joehughey24@gmail.com

Two roads diverged in a wood and I -
I took the one less traveled
And that has made all the difference


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Oct 21, 2015 1:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 11:12 pm
Posts: 74
Home Schooled: Yes
lookingforangels wrote:
Just abolishing the FISC won't solve anything because it's not the root cause of the issue. With this resolution, I'm not sure how you can do anything with the court system that will improve transparency and NSA-sanctioned privacy violations. Those things will continue regardless. This isn't a good resolution for these particular harms.

Exactly :D . Sorry for the confusion, I do not disagree with that (in fact it's kinda the whole negative position I've researched). I was only trying to get at the fact that the fact that a reform for "increased transparency and checks on its power" has already been attempted (see the USA Freedom Act) so either it works and the AFF plan is unnecessary or it fails and simply proves that small reforms will not work and more comprehensive change (which could be reform of surveillance as a whole) must take place!

_________________
Lincoln Douglas 2012-2013
Anastasi/Clarahan 2013-2014
Anastasi/Anastasi 2014-2015
Anastasi/Anastasi 2015-2016
Anastasi/Anastasi 2016-2017
~~~
Arete TP Club :becool:


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited