How To Deal with a Difficult Motion

By Rick Pecka

One of the most common challenges newer debaters face (and if we're being truthful, seasoned ones, too) is how to handle a motion you don't understand or just flat out don't like. No matter what league you compete in, debaters don't get a say in the motion. Expect the unexpected, and sometimes, the unpleasant.

For new competitors, this can lead to anxiety, frustration, and sometimes wanting to withdraw from a competition. While this might be a natural knee-jerk reaction, there's nothing to be gained from throwing in the towel. Competitions where you struggle with the motion can be the ones where you grow the most, even if you feel lost. Let's walk through how to tackle a difficult motion.

1. Cut through the murk.

Don’t let the wording of a motion intimidate you. Once you strip away the jargon, you can get to the heart of the matter and effectively argue regardless of side. Last season, CDA ran a motion on geofence warrants. For many debaters, judges, and even coaches, it was something they’d never heard of. But a quick read-through of the first few paragraphs in the packet revealed the real question being argued: should citizens have their cellular location data used to identify them in criminal cases?

That central question makes much more sense to all once you get through the technical language. When you get the motion, talk to your partner during prep and ask: what is this really about? Don’t worry about definitions or contentions just yet; figure out what the big idea is.

2. Consider the impacts.

Once you’re clear on the motion, your gut may be to start scouring the packet for arguments. Resist that urge. It’s more important to think about what’s at stake for each side.

Consider the famous Five Ws (and the H):

• What will happen if the motion is accepted? What happens if it’s not? 

• Who will be affected? Who won’t be? Who is being acknowledged or ignored?

• Where will the impact be felt the most? Where does it need to be felt?

• When will consequences land? Immediately, or over time? When is change most urgently needed? 

• Why is it important for a motion to pass or fail? Why is it better/worse than the status quo?

• How serious is the impact? How dire are the consequences if the motion does/does not pass?

 Let’s return to our geofence warrant motion. The wording was, “This House would prohibit geofence warrants.”

OK, so on Gov, if we track cellular data, do innocent people get caught up in searches if they’re in the wrong place at the wrong time?

On Opp, do criminals get away with serious offenses and escape accountability?

This is where you can begin brainstorming contentions before you even sift through the packet articles. But more importantly than that, you’re considering consequences. Once you realize the ripple effect, the contentions come naturally.

3. Identify the motion type.

The type of motion is as important, if not more so, than the topic itself.

Is this a policy motion where you argue concrete change? A values motion requiring you to argue ethically? Or an actor-assigned motion giving you a specific perspective to consider?

Figuring this out will determine three very critical elements for Gov:

• Your definitions

• Your weighing mechanism

• The burden you must meet

Looking at our geofence warrant motion, this is very clearly a straight policy. The literature in the packet refers to legal matters and a Supreme Court case, pointing very clearly to policy to be accepted or abandoned. By contrast, last year’s motion on AI weapons (“This House opposes delegating lethal military decisions to artificial intelligence”) points more to a values-based argument as to whether or not such choices are ethical in war.

Even if you’re on Opp in a traditional parli competition like Osterweis where you get a new motion and designated side every round, having this conversation can be extremely helpful in gauging your direction.

Practice this before you need it.

To get in the habit of doing this regularly, it will benefit you and your team to practice breaking down motions. This eases the pressure of prepping against the clock. 

Arguably, this is more helpful than running a traditional practice where only four students get to engage one another while others observe. We recommend reviewing past motions on our Results page or even checking some of the NYPDL and NPDL motions available online and picking some at random to break down using these steps. Doing this for 15-20 minutes builds the habit of analyzing a motion, which will serve you tremendously during a competition.

If you can do that before you get the packet, just imagine how effective you’ll be once you get to read it.

No Guarantees

While this process will help, that still doesn’t mean you’ll come to like the motion. Nor does it guarantee more wins. Again, even the most experienced varsity debaters wish they didn’t have to argue certain topics.

But when you walk into a round, you’ll be better equipped to argue, refute, and rebut. That’s a win in and of itself.

Rick Pecka is the coach for Fitch High School and incoming Executive Director of the CDA.