By the Equality in Forensics Contributor Team
Learn more about Equality in Forensics and our mission.
Arguments are the substance of Congress. Although not as polished as in other debate events like Lincoln Douglas or Public Forum, strong and well-reasoned arguments for or against legislation guide the round. A round without arguments is much like a steak dinner without the steak. Interesting? Perhaps. Fully enjoyable? Perhaps not.
It is imperative to develop good argumentation techniques. Beyond the three-minute speeches given in a Congress round, arguments are applied in almost every single facet of life, and the reasoning skills behind argumentation will allow you to develop into a reasoned, articulate individual.
Before delving into the technical aspects of how we argue, it’s important to understand what we argue.
Your ultimate goal in a Congress round is to convince the judges to agree with you, and rank you highly. In a broad sense, you have to argue as to why a particular piece of legislation actively improves or worsens the current state of things—the status quo.
Oftentimes, debaters run arguments about how the opposing side is partially or completely wrong. These are defensive in nature, and serve better as refutations. This guide seeks to teach you about offensive arguments, wherein your contention proves a net-benefit or net-harm, depending on which side you’re debating for.
<aside> <img src="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" alt="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" width="40px" /> If you want to learn more about defensive arguments, check out our resource page on Refutation and Weighing.
</aside>
This resource page has an accompanying slideshow created by Equality in Forensics Service Director C.J. Getting, a 2023 TOC Semifinalist in Congressional Debate.
Your job is to research the issues that a bill or resolution seeks to address, and how that bill or resolution affects those issues. Keep your end goal in mind as you prepare, and you’ll become the best debater you can be.
There is no single “correct” argument structure in Congressional Debate. Speakers must adapt their arguments as the round progresses and structure is more fluid than it is static. Especially as you become a more advanced debater, it becomes more common to adjust even the basic fundamentals of a contention’s structure to better fit your individual speech at that moment. However, this can be difficult for beginners.
Thus, there are two commonly-accepted structures that have been standardized across the circuit that are easy to pick up and use for any speech you may need them for. Those structures are:
<aside> <img src="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" alt="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" width="40px" /> This resource page focuses on the more beginner-friendly CWDI Structure. To learn more about Block Structure, check out our resource page on Mastering Constructive Speeches.
</aside>
Your claim is similar in purpose to the topic sentence of a body paragraph in an essay — it introduces your argument. However, the similarities between a speech in congressional debate and an argumentative essay end there. Essays are meant to be read, speeches are heard.
Your claim is essentially your evidence-based opinion on the legislation. After all your extensive research, your claim is the argument you believe in and are going to prove. It is the foundation of your contention or argument. It sets up the speech for a basic burden to be proven, which it is your duty (through warranting, research, and impacting) to fulfill.
Depending on what side of the legislation you’re speaking on, your claim is either your issue with the legislation, or the issue with the status quo which the legislation solves. But more importantly, a claim is all about signposting.
Signposting is just a way of communicating to your judges what exactly you are doing at a certain part in your speech. Without it, the speech just becomes a jumbled mess. While every part of your speech should include some form of signposting, nowhere else is it as clear as your claim. Depending on how many contentions you have in your speech, the first word when introducing your claim may vary, but the rest remains the same.
Pass today’s legislation because it [your argument here]. Fail today’s legislation because it [your argument here].
<aside> <img src="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" alt="/icons/star-outline_red.svg" width="40px" /> Depending on the type of legislation, you can say “Pass today’s bill” or “Fail today’s resolution…” To learn more about legislation, check out its resource page.
</aside>
As for that first word, it varies. If you only have one contention, as is common for mid- and late-round speeches, you can begin with “The sole reason you” and then go into the standardized phrase above. If you instead have two contentions, as sometimes occurs for early-round speeches, then you can begin with either “First,” or “Lastly,” before going into the standard claim wording.