Tournament: Yale Rounds 2 and 5 | Round: 2 | Opponent: Bronx DR and Hunter College DL | Judge: Koh and MILLMAN
A is the link.
The aff advocacy is a façade - a fake image of progress which reinforces power structures through “gifts” for the minority which strengthen the narcissism of the majority.  Arrigo and Williams , “The entrenched ... postmodern thought."
Christopher R. Williams. (PhD, forensic psychology, professor and chairman of the Department of Criminal Justice Studies at Bradley University). Bruce A. Arrigo, PhD, administration of justice, professor of criminology, law, and society, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of North Carolina, Faculty Associate in the Center for Professional and Applied Ethics, “The (Im)Possibility of Democratic Justice and the ‘Gift’ of the Majority,” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 16, No. 3, August 2000, pgs. 321-343). 2000.

And, the aff enforces a paternal political mindset as the minority is viewed as needing guidance and compulsion is a benefit for them.  Lever, “At the ... partially self-induced threat.”
Annabelle Lever. “Is Compulsory Voting Justified?” 2009.

He concedes during CX that politicians are nearly all rich white men.  He inherently speaks from a point of privilege (Diganta)

He concedes during CX that his advocacy towards empowering and allowing the minority to be heard.  There is no way he doesn't link. (Danny)

B is the Impact.
This narcissistic reinforcement of wealth entrenches the minority in such a status and also turns the case.  Arrigo and Williams 2, “Reciprocation on ... the advantaged.”
Ibid.

And, this attitude exacerbates the alienation of those who do not vote because of alienation, dissolving their status and further justifying the oppression and abuse of the disadvantaged which also turns the AC.  Lever 2 , “Above all ... debate about political engagement”.”
Ibid.

And, there is inevitable coercion as penalties to enforce this paternal mindset have the heaviest impact on the vocal minority, which also turns the case.  Rovensky , “Surely, for ... on its head."
Jan Rovensky. “Voting: A Citizen’s Right, or Duty? – The Case Against Compulsory Voting” 2007-2008.

C is the Alternative:
Reject the aff to show the success of plebeian resistance.  We the commoners must reject and resist this paternal mindset and deny that the policy of the wealthy is key to the empowerment of the poor.  Boileau, "Based on Taylors ... aesthetic ideal."
Philosophy Professor, Seattle, GENUINE RECIPROCITY AND GROUP AUTHENTICITY, 2000, p. 60

Perms are severance, the aff embraces a politic of wealth.  However, a ballot for the negative solves because only through plebeian resistance can we reach a valid solution.

And you must vote neg because the aff is right; poverty is bad, but the aff must become the Dark Knight – the wealthy, paternal politician must become the commoner to achieve true change.  McGowan , “In contrast ... we fight.”
(Todd McGowan, Associate Professor, film theory, University of Vermont, PhD, Ohio State University, studies the intersection of Hegel, psychoanalysis, and existentialism and cinema, “The Exceptional Darkness of The Dark Knight,” Jump Cut, No. 51, Spring 2009, http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc51.2009/darkKnightKant/text.html)

D. Role of the Ballot
I honestly have no idea which cards I read for the role of the ballot against Danny.  I think they are on LD Leaks, with full citations even.

Tournament: Yale and Bronx All Prelims | Round: 1 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA
The standard is respecting freedom, defined as the ability to act without external constraints.

I contend that affirming fails to respect freedom.

First, compulsory voting entails increasing taxes since in order to fund the aff the government would need extra revenue in order to make ballots available to all citizens. Extra taxes violate freedom since they force people to pay additional funds for a service that they may or may not want. 

Second, compulsory voting violates the freedom to not participate in elections.  Lever, “Despite the ... political activity.”
Annabelle Lever. “Is Compulsory Voting Justified?” 2009.

This destroys all freedom as the government is allowed to disregard the opinions of the citizenry and do as they wish despite protest.

Third, compulsion means people who already vote and don’t need the same access to participate will be forced to pay for those who currently don’t vote. This usurps their freedom since it means people are coerced for benefits external to their own wellbeing.

Tournament: Newark and Lexington | Round: 1 | Opponent: Many | Judge: Many
I value morality.  
First, morality must address the nature of personhood in order to righteously punish. Morse, “In brief, the law’s concept of the person is a creature who acts for reasons and is potentially able to be guided by reason. Physical causes explain all the moving parts of the universe, but only human action can also be explained by reasons.  It makes no sense to ask the winds or the tides or infrahuman species why they do what they do, but this question makes sense of and is central to our explanations of human behavior.  When we want to know why an agent intentionally behaved as she did, we do not desire a biophysical explanation, as if the person were simply biophysical flotsam and jetsam.  Instead, we seek the reason she acted, the desires and beliefs that formed the practical syllogism that produced intentional conduct.”
Only a conception of morality with an understanding of reasons for why people act is able to assess conduct. Just as we don’t place noteworthy blame on a hurricane for killing people, morality must account for the responsibility of its actors. A requisite component of responsibility is agents’ abilities to reason and control their actions.

Stephen Morse is a Ferdinand Wakeman Hubbell Professor of Law; Professor of Psychology and Law in Psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania. “Rationality and Responsibility”

Morse 2 , “The law’s concept of responsibility follows from its view of the person and the nature of law itself. Unless human beings are rational creatures who can understand the applicable rules and standards, and can conform to those legal requirements through intentional action, the law would be powerless to affect human behavior. Legally responsible agents are therefore people who have the general capacity to grasp and be guided by good reason in particular legal contexts. They must be capable of rational practical reasoning. The law presumes capability and that the same rules may be applied to all people with this capacity. The law We do does not presume that all people act for good reason all the time. It is sufficient for responsibility that the agent has the general capacity for rationality, even if the capacity is not exercised on a particular occasion. Indeed, it is my claim that lack of the general capacity for rationality explains precisely those cases, such as infancy or certain instances of severe mental disorder or dementia, in which the law now excuses agents or finds them not competent to perform some task.”

Ibid.

Accounting for agent capacity is key to establishing a cogent theory of morality as different people are entrusted different responsibilities for instance if I’m being mugged I’m owe different due from a policeman than an old lady. Absent this, morality would be rampant and self-defeating since it would generate absurd conclusions ie we would hold infants to the same threshold as fully responsible adults.

Thus the standard is Consistency with culpability. You can only be held to obligations if you are responsible for the reasons behind those actions.

I contend that developing countries are not culpable for the need for environmental protections and are thus are not obligated to value environmental protection over resource extraction.
First, environmental damage has been caused by the wealthy, developed countries not the developing ones.  Guardian , “The environmental damage caused to developing nations by the world's richest countries amounts to more than the entire third world debt of $1.8 trillion, according to the first systematic global analysis of the ecological damage imposed by rich countries.  The study found that there are huge disparities in the ecological footprint inflicted by rich and poor countries on the rest of the world because of differences in consumption. The authors say that the west's high living standards are maintained in part through the huge unrecognised ecological debts it has built up with developing countries. "At least to some extent, the rich nations have developed at the expense of the poor and, in effect, there is a debt to the poor," said Prof Richard Norgaard, an ecological economist at the University of California, Berkeley, who led the study. "That, perhaps, is one reason that they are poor. You don't see it until you do the kind of accounting that we do here."”

Rich countries owe poor a huge environmental debt.” Theguardian.com. 20 January 2008.

And, any contribution to environmental degradation from developing countries is caused by the wealthier nations.  Centeno , “In the year 2000 there were approximately six billion people on the planet, 21 per cent in industrial countries, and the remaining 79 per cent in developing countries. Nevertheless, industrial countries accounted for nearly 80 per cent of all resources consumed. They were also responsible for the production of nearly 80 per cent of all waste and pollutants. If we were to measure the environmental impact of human population with a uniform yardstick, such as the amount of resources consumed by the average person in developing countries, or the amount of waste and pollutants produced by the same average person, we would then conclude that while in 2000 there were 4.7 billion people in developing countries, the population-equivalent of industrial countries would amount to 19 billion people. From the point of view of environmental impact, where is then the real population problem? If we consider the long history of slavery, abuse, exploitation and misery that, for centuries, have been imposed on developing countries by the main industrial nations, we could conclude in a gigantic environmental, economic and social debt, with which industrial countries have so far got away with.  The unsustainable growth of the population of developing countries is closely related to the extreme levels of poverty they must endure, partly a consequence of the established international economic order, designed by industrial nations at Bretton Woods to enhance their own interests, and then imposed upon the rest of the world.  Environmental devastation is related to international economic and political relationships. Developing countries must play the role of exporters of ever-larger amounts of ever-cheaper raw materials natural resources, to maintain the industrial output and wealth of the "North".  The depletion of resources, and the environmental and social costs involved, are deliberately ignored by the established economic system.”

Julio Cesar Centeno.  “Who’s Really Destroying the Earth?” 10 March 2009.

Tournament: Scarsdale | Round: 4 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA
No intrinsic or external truth.  Parrish 1, "Perhaps the single ... as extrinsic facts." 

  Parrish, Rick. “Derrida’s Economy of Violence in Hobbes’ Social Contract” Theory and Event 7:4

Only a sovereign unifies these subjective claims. Parrish 2, "All of the ... the natural condition."

Ibid

Moreover, ethics are consturcted by the most dominant power.  Rist, "The claim of ... are still idiots."

Rist, John M Prof. at University of Toronto. Real Ethics: Reconsidering the Foundations of Morality Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Thus the standard is consistency with the sovereign

China is hegemon. 

1.  Gdp.  Hutchinson, "Two possibilities exist ... your missile count."

“China's rise to hegemony.” Martin Hutchinson. June 25th 2013.

2.  Universal consensus.  Hammond, "The fact that ... supports that view."

"China Is Increasingly Seen As The #1 Power, And That's A Problem For China.” Andrew Hammond. 9/05/2013.

China values extraction over EP.

Lobello, "The chinese government ... polluted industrial regions."

Carmel Lobello.  “China’s Newest Environmental Disaster.” September 26th, 2013.

Tournament: NA | Round: 1 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA
Feel free to email me with any questions at nachanacho@aol.com or message me on facebook.

Tournament: Unbroken | Round: 1 | Opponent: NA | Judge: NA
A is the Counterplan Text: Voting in democracies ought to be voluntary but incentive-based as voters are given lottery numbers for their participation.  Rovensky  explains the advocacy, “Whichever way, ... cultural products.”
Jan Rovensky. “Voting: A Citizen’s Right, or Duty? – The Case Against Compulsory Voting” 2007-2008.

B is the Competition: The CP is mutually exclusive;

1.  You can’t have a compulsory voting system that is voluntary at the same time.  They’re definitionally opposites.
   2.  Compulsory voting is enforced by legal requirements and penalties.  Shineman , “Compulsory voting  ...  Hill 2006)”
   Victoria Anne Shineman. “Compulsory Voting as Compulsory Balloting: How Mandatory Balloting Laws Increase Informed Voting Without Increasing Uninformed Voting.” 2010.

I advocate for a lottery-based reward system.  There are no fines and there is no enforcement mechanism to make people vote so this system is nonexistent in a world of compulsory voting.

3.  The CP competes through net benefits since there are advantages to this system that don’t exist in the aff world.

SOLVENCY AND NET BENEFITS
C is Solvency and Net Benefits:
A lottery-system uniquely motivates disadvantaged and less educated citizens to vote and equalizes turnout.  Raja , “In the ...  education categories.”
Raymond J. La Raja. “Buying Voters: The Effect of Financial Incentives on intentions to Vote.” September 2, 2012.

Compulsory voting would only harm elections and progress as non-voters tend to be less educated.  Shineman 2 , “However, a difference ...  as a whole.”
Ibid.

An incentive based system solves as it increases the education level of voters.  Shineman 3 , “The mobilization ...  a good vote choice.”
Ibid.

And, compulsory voting harms well-informed citizens two fold by a. nullifying their votes and b. disincentivizing political awareness.  Moraro , “It could ...  political awareness.”
Piero Moraro. “Why Compulsory Voting Undermines Democracy.” Winter 2012. Living Ethics: Issue 88.

And, compulsory voting coerces those it is supposed to help most because the penalties have the heaviest impact on those citizens.  Rovensky 2 , “Surely, for the disadvantaged ...  turned on its head.””
Ibid.

And, four more net benefits.  Rovensky 3 , “The proponents of incentive ... in any way.”
Ibid.

And, compulsory voting exacerbates alienation of non-voters who do not vote because of alienation.  Lever , “Above all, it is ... political engagement”.”
Annabelle Lever. “Is Compulsory Voting Justified?” 2009.