Analysis Con Case

The public forum case speech starts with an introduction.

Intro- Government under a democracy is only as strong as each individual citizen. There is a need for everyone to answer the call for help and not rely on the government too much to be the responsible party

After the introduction, you state the resolution and whether you agree with it (if the case is pro) or disagree with the resolution (if the case is written on the con side.)

It is for this reason that my partner and I must uphold the con side in this debate on the resolution…

Resolved: That the US federal government should fund Hurricane Katrina relief and rebuilding by ending Bush's tax cuts.

Terms can be defined here if you wish. It depends on whether you have key terms that need to be defined to make your arguments clearer or stronger. I chose not to define any terms in this case.

This is a transitions sentence/paragraph. Transitions help you get from one part of the case to the next smoothly. This transition also introduces my foreshadow.

It's important to note that the government does have a role to play in Katrina relief, and there is federal disaster relief being applied. Unfortunately, FEMA has proven ineffective in distributing disaster money, regardless of its' source. But, there are important reasons why eliminating Bush's tax cuts should not be the source.

Next comes a foreshadow. This lists the main arguments of your case. You will go into detailed explanations and evidence later in the case. Here, you list the major arguments off.

The 3 main arguments we believe force the rejection of this resolution are:

1. Over reliance on federal govt. disaster funding risks fraud and abuse.

2. Citizenship requires responsibility and America is responding generously.

3. Bush's tax cuts are necessary for the economic health needed to deal with Katrina as a nation.

Next, each argument is dealt with one at a time. The main argument point is stated and then...