Annual Mathus Debate Competition - ​Debate​Genius

National Online Tournament

Research and Bill Docket

The packet contains the following:

a. Bill Docket: ​There are two bills attached. Participants MUST prepare one
speech for each of the two topics as the topic for the preliminary round will
not be revealed until the day of the tournament. The bill topics are as
follows:
Topic A - Convicted Felons
Topic B - United Nations
The preamble of each bill provides statistics and background facts about the
bill topic. This information is provided only to give some context. Participants
MUST research independently to create strong, cohesive speeches.
Additionally, because neither bill was written by any participant, there will be
no formal authorship or sponsorship speech. We will directly move to the first
affirmation/pro speech and then continue to switch sides until all participants
have spoken. That being said, please keep in mind that because we are
giving participants the right to choose which side they want to argue,
participants may want to take a side that they believe will have fewer people
arguing for (although the judges have tried to make both topics as enticing
and debatable as possible) so that they are able to bring up new points
rather than find themselves repeating other students.
b. Research Guide: ​The research guide is merely a helping tool. It is designed
to provide some more information than the preambles to give debaters some
direction when it comes to researching. Some links are also included which
will be helpful for gaining some understanding for each topic. You can use the
information provided as the basis for your arguments but need to add
analysis. Again, participants MUST research independently to create strong,
cohesive speeches. Please do not rely solely on the information provided in
the research guide as every other debater will have that information and that
will put you at a disadvantage.

If you have any questions about any of the content in this document, please feel
free to reach out!

Good luck and happy researching!

1 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

Title:​ An Act to Give Convicted Felons That Have Completed Their Sentences
the Right to Vote in the United States.

Preamble:​ Whereas an estimated 6.1 million people with a felony conviction are barred from
voting in elections, and since barring people from voting is also known as voter
disenfranchisement, and since of the 6.1 million people barred from voting, 4.7 million are no
longer incarcerated.and since only two states allow convicted felons to vote while in prison or
after their release, and since 13 states allow convicted felons to vote just after their incarceration
ends, and since 23 states allow convicted felons to vote only after their post-incarceration parole
or probation ends, and since 12 states permanently remove the right of a convicted felon to vote
based upon factors such as the number and types of crime committed.

Be it hereby enacted by ​Debate​Genius​ Congress:

Section 1:​ Any convicted felon who has completed their sentence will be granted the right to
vote in American elections given that:
a. Only convicted felons who are United States citizens will have the right to vote in
presidential elections,
b. Noncitizens will be given the right to vote in local and/or state elections, depending on
each state’s laws regarding noncitizens voting;

Section 2:​ ​A convicted felon will be defined as any individual who has been convicted of
committing a felony, a crime with an incarceration time longer than one year, that is either
violent or nonviolent;

Section 3:​ ​If the convicted felon returns to jail after being released, the felon’s right to vote will
be withheld until the felon has completed the sentence as determined by a judge;

Section 4:​ The Department of Justice shall oversee enforcement of this bill;

Section 5:​ This bill will take effect 91 days after its passage.

2 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

 Title:​ An Act to Let the United States Leave the United Nations

Preamble:​ Whereas the United States entered the United Nations on October 24, 1945,
following World War II, and since the United States is a founding member of the United
Nations, and since the United States is one of the five permanent members of the United Nations
Security Council, and since the United States does not endorse the International Court of Justice
and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which is also known as
the Law of the Sea treaty, and since the United States left the United Nations Human Rights
Council in mid 2018, and since the United States is already in the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization which is an associate of the Eurpoean and North American countries form in 1949.

Be it hereby enacted by ​Debate​Genius​ Congress:

Section 1:​ The United States will disband its ties with the United Nations and retract its
membership from the organization;

Section 2:​ ​The United Nations must move its headquarters in New York City, New York to
another location within one year of the passage of this bill;

Section 3:​ ​After the United Nations has moved the location of its headquarters, the land
occupied by the headquarters––which is currently considered international territory––will be
considered the land of the United States;

Section 4:​ The Department of State shall oversee enforcement of this bill;

Section 5:​ This bill will take effect 91 days after its passage.

3 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

Research Guide: Topic A - Convicted Felons

Pro (for the bill)

● Felony disenfranchisement creates divisions between the American
public: ​Felony disenfranchisement removes human dignity by relegating
people to second-class citizen status and making them subject to a state that
has no electoral accountability to those that have been convicted of felonies.
Furthermore, by assuming that a felon is unable to participate productively in
society after completing their punishment, we send the message that those
who have done wrong do not have the potential to improve.
● Disenfranchisement negatively affects elections:​ According to
Christopher Uggen, “disenfranchisement really does reshape the electorate in
critical ways,” Christopher Uggen, regents’ professor of sociology at the
University of Minnesota and the report’s lead author, told TakePart. “It
weakens the collective impact of the black vote.”
● Some states have already started giving convicted felons the right to
vote:​ Florida voters passed Amendment 4, giving 1.5 million citizens with
felony convictions in the state the right to vote, except those convicted of
murder and felony sex crimes.Florida election officials ​are now in the process
of implementing the new amendment​, which allows people with felony
convictions who have served out the full terms of their prison sentence,
probation, and parole, to exercise their right to vote.

https://www.sentencingproject.org/issues/felony-disenfranchisement/
https://www.brennancenter.org/criminal-disenfranchisement-laws-across-united-st
ates
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/08/20/jim-crow-s-lasting-legacy-at-the-b
allot-box
http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/10/06/election-more-6-million-americans-ca
nt-vote/​https://www.businessinsider.com/felony-disenfranchisement-states-florida-
amendment-4-voting-rights-2018-11

Con (against the bill)

● It is important to take into consideration public safety:​ Ex-felons
should demonstrate they are willing to abide by the law during a certain time
period before they are allowed to vote again, according to Florida Gov. Rick
Scott. Although restoration of voting rights helps offenders return to society,
it should be done carefully, he said. Public safety and incentives for an
ex-felon to avoid future crimes should be considered.

4 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

 ● Felons don’t care for the law, so they shouldn’t be granted rights
given by the law:​ ​When a person compels with criminal behavior, they're
validating an absence of respect for the law. When laws are broken, people
turn into criminals, and when someone becomes a criminal, they are limited
to their civil rights. Those who actively break the terms upon the trust of the
law should not have a say in what is going on in the society outside of a jail
cell.Since the right to vote has a high symbolic importance and comparatively
low practical worth, disenfranchisement is preferably suited to mark the
breach of civic trust that criminal wrongdoing represents without unduly
disrupting an offender’s daily life.
● Criminals have a proven history of bad judgment:​ The reason why these
individuals are in jail is because they are not productive members of society,
have caused great harm in some way or another to others, and have shown
that they do not have the ability to make good decisions. We cannot trust
them to vote for people who will be making important decisions.

https://www.theperspective.com/debates/politics/convicted-criminals-right-vote/
https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/there-are-good-reasons-fe
lons-lose-the-right-vote
https://www.theodysseyonline.com/felon-voting
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/20/opinion/why-felons-shouldnt-vote.html

Research Guide: Topic B

Pro (for the bill)

● Leaving the UN is a better alternative that defunding the
organization: ​Congressional Republicans want to defund the U.N., a
193-nation boondoggle for which the United States alone pays well over a
quarter of the freight — about 22 percent of the regular operating budget,
and close to 30 percent of the much larger peacekeeping budget (for which
we get more ​scandal​ than peace). At best, denying our annual $3 billion
payment would accomplish nothing. Defunding measures are called for
periodically, whenever the U.N. induces a congressional tantrum over one or
another of its obscenities. The money is not the real problem. Political power
is.
● The UN is representing countries that have a history of misusing
power and abusing their people: ​The United States left the UNHRC for a
good reason. According to the UNHRC, it will only let countries that are in
good standing in regards to human rights to serve on the committee.
However, a significant number of the countries on the council have been
states which are​ not noted for their domestic human rights protections​. For

5 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

 example, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Indonesia and Cuba have
all at various times held a seat on the council.
● The UN often supports laws and policies that are contrary to the
policies of the US government:​ U.N. pursues an agenda that often runs
counter to what supporters believe America’s policy goals should be. “The
U.S. bankrolls nearly 22 percent of the U.N.’s annual budget. Still, the U.N.
continues to promote many ideals that attack American sovereignty. This
includes initiatives like The Law of the Sea Treaty, The U.N. Framework
Convention on Climate Change’s recent move to re-establish an international
regulation regime to end global warming, which would heavily target fossil
fuels, and the potential Arms Trade Treaty, which would threaten Americans’
Second Amendment rights.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/01/us-leave-united-nations/
https://govtrackinsider.com/should-the-u-s-exit-the-united-nations-22e458014216
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/usa-donald-trump-un-human-rights-council-
israel-a8407941.html
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2018-06-19/is-leaving-the-u
n-human-rights-council-a-big-deal
https://www.theglobalist.com/does-the-united-states-need-the-un/

Con (against the bill)

● Walking away from the UN will not solve any problems: ​The US left the
UNHRC because the US didn’t agree with the actions of the UNHRC. However,
despite its flaws, the HRC does make decisions that benefit human rights,
even in the face of political lobbying by members with scurrilous motives. For
example, a special rapporteur was appointed to investigate ​Iran​ (after the
application of US pressure), and it remains in place, despite that influential
country’s forceful efforts to dismantle the mandate. A ​special rapporteur on
LGBTI rights​ was appointed in 2016, despite fierce opposition from the OIC
and homophobic states, due to an alliance of developed and developing
states, and civil society. The HRC will continue to be an imperfect institution
for as long as the UN is made up of states with imperfect human rights
records.  
● The UN is necessary to protect the citizens of the world, something
the US cannot do by itself:​ America can't police every conflict, end every
crisis, and shelter every refugee. The UN provides a real return on our tax
dollars by bringing 192 countries together to share the cost of providing
stability, vital aid, and hope in the world's most broken places. Because of
the UN, the world doesn't look to America to solve every problem alone. And
the UN offers our troops in places like Afghanistan the international

6 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.

 legitimacy and support that comes only from a Security Council
mandate-which, in turn, is a force multiplier for our soldiers on the frontlines.
It is all too easy to find cases where the UN could be more efficient and
effective. But judging the UN solely by isolated cases of mismanagement or
corruption misses the forest for the trees. We're far better off working to
strengthen the UN than trying to starve it and then having to choose
between filling the void ourselves or leaving real threats untended.
● The UN needs the United States’s financial and political power to help
unfortunate people:​ The United States remains the largest donor to the
United Nations, contributing more than $10 billion in 2017, roughly one fifth
of the body’s collective budget. Part of the US’s financial help allows the UN
to send aid where needed. Every day, the UN provides food to 90 million
people in seventy-three countries, and assists over 36 million refugees and
people fleeing war, famine or persecution. If the US pulls out of the UN, it
will hurt other countries. For example, the UN agency for Palestinian
refugees, UNRWA, which previously depended on the United States for about
a third of its budget, said it would be forced to ​cut 250 jobs​ in 2018 after the
Trump administration eliminated over $300 million in funding. In a
September 2018 letter​ [PDF], more than thirty U.S. senators warned the
administration that the cuts could prevent 140,000 people from receiving
food aid and more than 70,000 people from accessing clean water, though
European and Gulf donors have helped to ​make up for the shortfall​.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2003-09-01/why-america-still-needs-united
-nations
http://theconversation.com/as-the-us-leaves-the-un-human-rights-council-it-may-l
eave-more-damage-in-its-wake-98618
https://www.thenation.com/article/more-ever-we-need-un/
https://www.cfr.org/article/funding-united-nations-what-impact-do-us-contribution
s-have-un-agencies-and-programs
https://www.globalpolicy.org/un-reform/general-analysis-un-reform/49903-facing-
21st-century-threats-why-america-needs-the-un.html

7 Copyright 2019 Mathus Academy​TM​. All rights reserved.