{"text_format":"3","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":12,"sheets":["NOTES","Solvency","Miscalc","Deterrence DA","North korea","ESR CP","Agenda DA","war powers","rule of 2cp","2020 DA","Off 6","Macros"],"not_rendered":{"macros":1,"defined_names":11},"read":"whole","date_system":"1904"}

{"sheet":"NOTES","index":0,"n_rows":2,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":2}
["1AC",null,"1NC","2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["operational change explanation seemed outlandish to me",{"$nulls":3},"2nc needs way more sign posting"]

{"sheet":"Solvency","index":1,"n_rows":1,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":1}
["1AC",null,"1NC","2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]

{"sheet":"Miscalc","index":2,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":11}
["1AC",null,"1NC","2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Absent NFU, the pressure to preempt makes nuke war inevitable \nBlair 18 ",null,"No accidental war  cohen 16","blair--advisors will pressure trump",null,"structurally empowered on false warning",null,"deliberate misplaced use"]
["Extinction\nGlikson 18 ",null,null,"small decision time",null,"early warning sucks",null,"track 2 doesn't solve"]
["deterrence fails-barash 18",null,null,"two smalls examples not in the US",null,"accidents inev",null,"empirical examples"]
[null,null,"No use it or lose it",{"$nulls":4},"tech is failing"]
[{"$nulls":3},"ambiguity--can't deter 2nd stike",{"$nulls":3},"close calls"]
[{"$nulls":3},"irrational actors",{"$nulls":3},"jittery comanders"]
[{"$nulls":3},"nothing to lose",{"$nulls":3},"advisors push for strikes"]
[{"$nulls":3},"empirical examples",{"$nulls":3},"sheer luck"]
[{"$nulls":7},"predelegation add-on"]
[{"$nulls":7},"blows up everything"]

{"sheet":"Deterrence DA","index":3,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":11}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Congressional authorization for use wrecks deterrence – invites russia war\nJacobson 17",null,"Deterence not credible now – commitment trap – rapp hooper on the noko adv is specific to china ",{"$nulls":3},"ambiguity causes war now"]
["Russia war escalates and goes nuclear\nRojansky 15",1,{"$nulls":4},"nfu solvs"]
[{"$nulls":6},"reduces arms racing"]
[null,null,"Decades of wars proves nukes can’t effectively deter – statistical analysis proves compellant threats fail to change target behavior, rely on an incoherent model of political rationality, and first use triggers incentives for arms races and miscalc – that’s Barash ","no O cp solves it","straight turn, no credible detetence, try or die",null,"us-russia war is most nukes"]
[{"$nulls":4},"operational changes",null,"cp doesn't solve by meeting"]
[{"$nulls":4},"russia war-30 minutes",null,"advisors push for war"]
[null,null,"No nuke deterrence now  dodge 18",{"$nulls":3},"downgrades the risk"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Ambiguous role of nukes causes rapid Nato-Russia escalation \nDownman 17 "]

{"sheet":"North korea","index":4,"n_rows":11,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":11}
["1AC",null,"1NC","2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["The plan’s WPA restrictions ensure a deliberative process that solves accidental NoKo escalation\nBader 17 ",null,"Plan triggers open noncompliance\nWoodford 18 ","other page","no enforcement","operational solves-take away foot ball"]
["First-use doctrine creates commitment traps that either result in nuclear war with North Korea or loss of security credibility – incentivizes north Korean first use \nNarang 17 ",1,null,"durable fiat","The plan causes deferential Court rulings on executive power---turns “Congress oversight/authority good” arguments. \nHuq 18","no court challenges, amend legislation, gets rid of the justification fo fights"]
["That ensures short-term nuclear escalation\nBrunnstrom 17 ",{"$nulls":3},"court battles take out certainty ","they don't amendl egisation"]
["Global nuclear war \nHayes and Green 10 ",{"$nulls":4},"two competing interps"]
[{"$nulls":5},"links more to cp's"]
[null,null,"Nuclear vs Non-Nuclear War with North Korea is identical. Either China gets involved – uses nukes – causes escalation even post-plan OR North Korea will use their CBWs, etc. and billions still die.","we control escalation, commit trap, follow through or back down which causes nk provocation which draw in","they don't solve china or nk introducing nukes over other issues?","commitment trap causes war"]
[{"$nulls":3},"china won't help us because trade war or something"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"No Korean war  AP 17"]

{"sheet":"ESR CP","index":5,"n_rows":66,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":66}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Perception isn’t just declaratory policy – it’s also force posture and readiness – CP solves signal better than the aff which just declares NFU without changing force posture\nMiller 3 ",null,"This CP is a voting issue - CP fiat is restricted to policy devices --- they can fiat the existence of an XO, a guidance memo, a policy memorandum, a law, a Court ruling etc, and they can fiat it won’t be rolled back, but they can’t fiat that all people follow it --- justifies every variant of multi-actor fiat including “nobody ever goes to war” and “everyone in the government becomes an Orthodox Marxist” --- wrecks aff ground, destroys incentive to research, makes debate pointless ","We don’t fiat mindset shift—we have an actor do something—functionally ends durable fiat","follow on links to da--legislation, delay argument","kicking everything but track 2 and uq cp."]
["Red teams” and lesson-learned reviews solve groupthink and warfighting\nRies 16 ",1,null,"Interp’s arbitrary","causes more congressional infgihting, new war powers act, more show downs","I am going for the planks the dropped","track 2 doesn't matter without operational changes"]
["Track 2 solves security impacts even if NFU fails\nKaye 7 ",null,null,"no neg resolution","operational or predel key, low level diplomcay doesn't matter if nuke sole authority--blair, criisis instability","I am going for diplomacy to solve north korea, so nothing  links to the cp","that is key to trust"]
[{"$nulls":3},"don't fiat mindset shift","links to da because external actors and breaks down","they didn't cause operatioanl changes, you can have icbms and nfu, they don't fiat operational changes, don't have a card that says it will happen","doesn't solve crisis stability"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Tests the core of the resolution, how to restrict the President. An alternative to statute or courts is internal measures. It’s educational, literature based, and non-topical.","perm do both shields ??","even worse interps of normal means questions","plan text is not entirely bill"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Neg flex: it’s the only generic across 5 disjointed topic areas. ",null,"plan is an nfu, why do they do operational changes","blair--hamstrings president"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Defending “Trump Good” is infeasible. The question is how to constrain. That matches the academic debate. DAs don’t solve – force us back to indefensible “Trump Good” arguments. ",null,"be skeptical they cause those other things","cx clarifies"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Functional limits: it forces “external restrictions” key warrants and makes Affs about authority instead of practice---checks a proliferation of single-harm-area cases that overstretch the Neg",null,null,"infinite neg ground-specify everything in plan, that's pics"]
[{"$nulls":3},"It’s fair: precedent, signal, or authority-based advantages are easy to find. It’s their fault that they built their 1AC to lose to this.",null,null,"we have cards that say it"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Hard debate is good because it’s strategic---they should have to prove we make it impossible",null,null,"infintirely regressive"]
[{"$nulls":3},"RANT",null,null,"no authority to launch strikes"]
[{"$nulls":6},"we have nfu solvency cards generally"]
[]
[null,null,"Perm do both – so many planks and so much involvement of different branches means the cp either doesn’t do enough to solve our NFU key warrants or definitely links to the net ben – they change congressional authority ","Links—includes executive restrictions—CP doesn’t—this is on face"]
[{"$nulls":3},"don't amend the wpr"]
[{"$nulls":3},"something about new answers"]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Obvi doesn’t solve war powers – ESR doesn’t codify further congressional war powers which means it cant solve interventions or our spillover internals ","Counterplan declares and establishes an NFU--on face"]
[{"$nulls":3},"The operational changes plank overcomes deficits. It de-alerts nuclear weapons, withdraws forward deployed weapons, unmates warheads from delivery systems, and includes other changes to reflect NFU in actual war planning – that’s Miller. "]
[{"$nulls":3},"Solves perception better – fear of revoking NFU also applies to Congress. The CP makes durable changes in posture and preparation which are more important to their war-fighting advantages and our ev is comparative that it better solves the signal advantage."]
[{"$nulls":3},"The CP fiats it – for the aff it’s a normal means question and they have no ev it’ll happen.\nWe also do NFU as well\n"]
[{"$nulls":3},"track 2 cp, dropped, dialogues with nk and china, clear what our posture is"]
[{"$nulls":3},"we solve congress--their thesis is use existing statutes, president compliance is sufficient. They don't need to use stuff if the president complies"]
[{"$nulls":3},"no solvency for adv either because congress won't care"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Nothing short of statutory restriction solves misalc \nHallinan 18 ","statute not ke to that","predelegation is bad causes nuke war"]
[{"$nulls":3},"we restrain first use","more ev--blair 16"]
[{"$nulls":3},"No delegated authority to cause accidents\nCohen 16 "]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Doenst solve noko – trumps diplomatic strategy inev fails, only congress draws effective red lines","they can't stop trump rhetroic","NK deficit-chaning doctrine and operational, sole authority bad, exec branh not credible, fire fury rhetoric"]
[{"$nulls":3},"sanctions"]
[{"$nulls":3},"incoherent policy inevi"]
[{"$nulls":3},"president signaling outweighs other stuff"]
[{"$nulls":3},"follow on-card"]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Counterplan’s illegal – NDAA prohibits it.","they don't solve icbms"," Congress will pre-empt any operational changes – they love ICBMs and will push back hard against any effort to de-alert or remove them, hawks think their important for deterrence, and Plains senators want the jobs, that’s Donnelly, "]
[{"$nulls":3},"ton of exceptions ndaa 18","1. It’ll be a bipartisan assault on Trump---and they force the rebuilding of weapons\nFred Kaplan 18"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Only covers deployment of ICBMS—doesn’t cover LOW ","2. Military sides with Congress\nFred Kaplan 16"]
[null,null,"Congress will fight operational changes. Donnelly 16","Congressional power of purse can never check – president can always find funds","3. Even minimal opposition is fatal because of the structure of the Senate "]
[{"$nulls":3},"only ndda funds, not other","Courts would side with Congress  neumeister 18"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Low bar for solvency – CP’s tweaks are cheaper than maintaining the arsenal and even if the executive ran out of money, it would be a titanic shift in policy","Courts will strike down the CP, they always side with the more specific constitutional part, means they value appropriations over commander AND their’s no ev for preclusive power – that’s Allen"]
[{"$nulls":3},"They’ll use agency slush funds – there’s tons of money\nFeld 16 ","congress drains slush funds-kosar 17"]
[{"$nulls":3},"ibc inev--trump lashout to plan, no spillover to congress page, more hawkish, if it only takes 12 senators to get their way","can only use for foreign shit"]
[{"$nulls":3},"No impact to Congressional backlash – other assurances and discussion doesn’t collapse deterrence\nBell 17 ",") NDAA prohibits.\nNDAA 18 "]
[{"$nulls":3},"Partisanship more important. \nKristensen 14 "]
[null,null,"ICBMs encourage use or lose pressures by both the U.S. and Adversaries---they have no deterrent value ",null,"icbms=nuke war"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Counterplan links by triggering checks allen 2k8"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Causes a fight – links to politics and turns solvency.\nRovner 11 "]
[]
[]
[null,null,"red team stuff – trump appoints it – not believed, will fire "]
[]
[]
[null,null,"xo can't solve signal, especiially with NK--rapp hooper 17"]

{"sheet":"Agenda DA","index":6,"n_rows":37,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":37}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Debt ceiling will barely get raised now – if not, it melts the financial sector\nSzapiro ’19 ",null,null,"Multilateral cooperation on every issue outweighs and turns case –","get rid of sole authority or trump rhetori thumps it?","march 1st, global econ, worst financial system","fossil fuel prices, stranded assets, economy and environment makes debt inevitable"]
["Plan’s tone-setting results in unique executive lash-out\nTess - November 7 - ‘18\n",1,null,"1 - Collective solutions through strengthened multilateralism will contain warfighting abroad and great power military tensions  – and they crush those remedies bc debt default = loss of confidence","other countries can fill in","impacts are sturcutrla, been around for years, drop dead","shocks in the future"]
["Trump reaction cycle means no coop on debt issues - melting the world economy\nMatthews – Nov 8th - ‘18\n",null,null,"2 - Without multilat no framework exists for conflict resolution, making Asia, Mideast war inev inevitable","debt defaults ienvitable, debt ceiling not key","AI impact, no regs, doomsday","why would japan and china stop doing safe AI after downturn?"]
["Global meltdown 2.0 is worse – big security risks, turns Aff, and cranks coop on everything.\nGonzález – Sept 12th - ‘18\n",null,null,"3 – It also ruins congressional will and capacity to gain power because it makes them look incompetent af",null,"more likely--no cooperation between states"]
[{"$nulls":3},"González says global econ decline kills a multilateral regime for AI. Without regs, accidents make extinction inevitable.\nPearson ‘14\n",null,"countries can't fill in--no financial mechanisms, no return of investments","emergency measures--treasury could do bonds and lending, within their auhtoriy, it delays until august"]
[{"$nulls":3},"In this round, “Time Frame” should be the top impact criteria.",null,"dollar system collapses","house and gop can be rude to each other ways"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Court fights mean zero Aff solvency for two years – but our disad has a drop dead time frame of March 1st. ",null,"not inevitable because debt ceiling can be raised","house is hardball now, shutdown, fights about court on nat security like travel ban"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Both teams have big impacts – but faster events give more time to live. Our impacts also turn the Aff in the interim."]
[{"$nulls":5},"MEASURES"]
[null,null,"Extraordinary measures mean they have months more – and shutdown thumps ","Card is iffy – they don’t even know when the funds get exhausted its labeled as X-date – they don’t know how much extra cash under the mattress they have","treasury can solve","treasury can't manage shit"]
[{"$nulls":3},"“Would you invest in a Bond on March 2nd after the US is legally prohibited from lending money??\nThey downgraded from AAA to AA after we ALMOST didn’t pass it in 2011\n","The Fed will figure shit out\nSaphir 1/11 ","rate raising environment--no funds"]
[{"$nulls":3},"trumps treasury dept will biff it","nothing matters until august","not possible, computers can't even figre it out"]
[{"$nulls":3},"EM’s not practical – computers can’t even do it. \nJacobson ‘17\n","Back-door ways for Congress to avert a debt ceiling crisis","no one will buy debt because uncertainty"]
[{"$nulls":5},"previous downgrades prove small uncertainty big imapct"]
[{"$nulls":5},"no tf differential to august"]
[null,null,"Funding, nominations, debt, NAFTA, and fopo fights that restrict the Preident thump the DA.","shutdown shwos it’s hard for congress to work together is not a warrant "]
[{"$nulls":3},"Wall doesn’t thump – will be over by the State of the Union. Debt vote hits March 1st. \nPolitico ‘19\n",null,"LINK DEBATE"]
[{"$nulls":3},"uq cp'ed out of shutdown",null,"trump fights against incursion of authority"]
[{"$nulls":3},"They have answered the wrong link argument – trump lashout is distinct from partisan fights",null,"durable fiat, congress has to defend the plan"]
[{"$nulls":3},"None of the issues in the swanson evidence rise to the level of turf battles of authority that go to court. ",null,"huq circumvention--tone setting debate, bad court battles"]
[{"$nulls":3},"The plan’s binding check uniquely causes Trump lashout because he’s nervous about future oversight but needs a plausible narrative of victimhood. Have a low threshold---it’ll set day one precedent which Trump empirically cares about and sends signal of possible future oversight. ",null,"protecting authority is stakes"]
[{"$nulls":3},"congress adv--It’s unique – Pelosi keeps the caucus in check now, but fiat means the plan causes a check that she couldn’t contain. ",null,"shutdowns happen every 3 years"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Pelosi moderates Dem checks now, but the plan’s increased oversight causes Trump backlash. \nPergram 11-14 ",null,"legal fights decimate governmente functioning?"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Doesn’t thump our link unless it mirrors our 1NC link OR connects-the-dot back to the Debt ceiling. Their thumper does neither. Prefer issue-specific uniqueness. ",null,"shutdown dind't go to court"]
[{"$nulls":3},"constiutitonal hardball-matthews huq, unique line",null,"uq cp'ed, trump cave"]
[{"$nulls":3},"those fights are bigger/distinct from political fights--fishkin 18",null,"court inev, authority incursion"]
[{"$nulls":3},"congress power, no court fight, possibility doesn't mean it outweighs the link",null,"pelosi will keep dems in line"]
[{"$nulls":5},"stave off checks now-reduces new thumpers"]
[null,null,"no house link--gephardt rule","House may pass Gephardt Rule – Senate won’t\nWasson ‘19\n","pelosi will moderate the plan","congress won't fight proves no thumpers, but trump fights the plan"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Gephardt Rule is uniqueness for us. It makes default less likely in the House - but doesn’t override political variables in the Senate or White House.\nReklaitis ‘19\n","travel ban proves courts getting involved in politics and playing hardball w trump inev "]
[{"$nulls":3},"hasn't passed any chamber","court constraints inev \nBrennan Center, 17 "]
[{"$nulls":4},"shutdown thumps it--cp links to da, hardball congressi s the squo"]
[]
[null,null,"debt inev\nTverberg ’17 ","obviously"]
[{"$nulls":3},"question of debt limit"]
[{"$nulls":3},"Maybe the worst thing that could happen\nLong ‘17\n"]

{"sheet":"war powers","index":7,"n_rows":19,"n_cols":8,"rows_kept":19}
["1AC",null,"1NC","2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Executive war power structurally ensures groupthink and escalatory interventions\nFleischman 10 ",null,"Double bind – either Congress has a motive to lead foreign policy and squo solves OR they don’t care at all and the plan is a one-off activation of power that doesn’t solve – Plus, Congress is polarized and the plan faces GOP opposition –past isn’t prologue and they’re not reverse causal","can't circumvent, do't have authority or mechs, they have rep costs of declaring war, sop limits options, nuclear secrecy coopts sop, plan increases info","ideologicall disagree, senate gop, pelosi hasn't done anything","congress will not fight that hard, no link to da"]
["Goes nuclear --- accidents and miscalc\nAdler 8 ",1,null,"power of purse","sanctions legislation, forching hand, something about korea, aumf passed easy","something about operational changes"]
["Unaccountable executive operations are escalating---causes blowback and regional instability\nTurse 14 ",null,null,"secrecy key and reverse causual-benedict 18","proven by inherency, congress disagrees, they agree with presidetn"]
["That draws in outside powers\nFriedman 11 ",null,null,"their ev is old, doesn't assume dems"]
["Only reinvigorating Congressional war powers can solve nuclear war \nWaxman 14 ",null,"Congress fails and aff doesn’t spillover\nJett 8 "]
["The plan solves --- invoking WPA powers to restrain presidential nuclear authority causes broader Congressional scrutiny that reins in executive warmaking \nAckerman 17 "]
["It is reverse causal – plan builds capacity and political will\nScarry 14 "]
["Nuclear authority is key --- unchecked exec power undermines political will for checks\nWills 10 ",null,"Congress fails\nMecklin 17 "]
["Congress citing the WPA is crucial to galvanize additional checks on Trump --- perception of inept White House key to galvanize and maintain further oversight \nStevenson 10/11 "]
[]
[null,null,"No group think – but Trump stupidity is inevitable. \nWarshaw 17 ","squo, fires people who don't agree with him","No group think now – originally it was group think, but then staff changes killed it – there’s so much disagreement – BUT the decision making model doesn’t matter because Trump is the top decider and he does what he wants"]
[{"$nulls":3},"secrecy in nukes makes it structuler","he is becoing less hawkish?"]
[{"$nulls":3},"adler-nuclear","Congress fails on foreign policy – collective action problems and transaction costs\nMoe 99 "]
[null,null,"US Spec ops not modeled \nMoravcsik, 5 ","doesn't assume saudi or iran, global isntability"]
[{"$nulls":3},"central africa and middle east"]
[{"$nulls":3},"escalation, gpw because economci"]
[{"$nulls":3},"wet the appetite, flex msucle"]
[{"$nulls":3},"solves congress"]

{"sheet":"rule of 2cp","index":8,"n_rows":14,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":14}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["The United States federal government should prohibit the President of the United States from initiating the combat use of nuclear weapons, unless expressly authorized by the Attorney General and Secretary of Defense.",null,"doesn’t solve war powers – doesn’t cite, doesn’t create any sense of obligation "]
["\nThat solves best\nBetts and 1AC author Waxman 18 – "]
[]
[null,null,"cant solve miscalc – only removing statutory authority solves broken arrow accidents by reoving auth – incentivizes confusion because we have to wait for new confirmations, incent allied first strike and the people who get approved will just be trump sycophants "]
[]
[]
[null,null,"doesn’t solve nk -doent change admin signals – stays within executive – means we stay in commitment trap"]
[]
[]
[null,null,"perm do both – no discernable net benefit – either congresses passes legislation intitiating the changes in CoC or its just the esr cp "]
[]
[]
[null,null,"only external enforcement solves  bunn 07"]

{"sheet":"2020 DA","index":9,"n_rows":13,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":13}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
["Dems win ---restrictions turn political blame against Democrats – costs them 2020\nBlake 18",null,"Trump will win "]
["Withdrawal from Paris will be decided in 2020---staying prevents extinction-level warming\nSchlanger 17 ",1]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Dem overreach link is overblown\nDionne 18 "]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Way too soon to predict "]
[]
[]
[]
[null,null,"Paris fails—\n\n1. No follow through\nRatha and Mahapatra, 17"]

{"sheet":"Off 6","index":10,"n_rows":3,"n_cols":7,"rows_kept":3}
["1NC",null,"2AC","2NC","1AR","2NR","2AR"]
[]
[null,1]

{"sheet":"Macros","index":11,"n_rows":18,"n_cols":2,"rows_kept":18}
["Command","Function "]
["Control+Shift+N","Auto-Numbers"]
[]
["Control + I ","Add Row "]
[]
["control + b","Group Selection "]
[]
["control + shift + b","Undo Group Selection "]
[]
["Control + S ","New Sheet "]
[]
["Control + L ","5 spaces down "]
[]
["Control + K ","5 spaces up"]
[]
["Control + Pageup","Next Sheet to the left"]
[]
["Control + Pagedown ","Next Sheet to the Right "]