You are on page 1of 1

CAFE Standard Elimination Flow Matthew Hamilton, Eveready

___________________________________________________________________________________________

CAFE Standard Elimination Flow


Teams running case:
Hoffmann/Profitt

Goal: Protection of Human Life


Harm 1: CAFE Costs Lives
A) 500 lbs weight reduction on cars use CAFE standards. This results in an increase of traffic fatalities
due to lighter cars.
Harm 2: Harms, Rather Than, Helps Environment
Mandate: No Fuel Economy Standards
Advantage 1: Saved Lives
Cross-Examination:
-What is the number of traffic fatalities you listed under your first harm?
-Wouldn't you agree a large number of those could be related to speeding and/or drunk driving?
-Are you intruding on state's CAFE standards?
-What Act were CAFE standards enacted under?
-Are you blocking future CAFE standards?
Arguments:
-Topicality: Energy Policy(Aff will probably get up and say “One of the main reasons for CAFE
standards was to curb global warming”. You can say in response “The biggest reason however is our
addiction on oil.”)
-Solvency: Hybrids – People are converting to hybrids which are smaller and lighter. So the traffic
fatalities due to lighter cars will still continue.
-Inherency: CAFE standards are good and decrease our dependence on foreign oil
-Inherency: California Has CAFE – Plan would lead to the following DA:
-DA: Unconstitutionality – Impeding on state's rights.
-DA: Oil Dependency Increase – CAFE increases MPG. Taking them away decreases MPG.

You might also like