Example debate NC

Adapted from handout by Robert Marmorstein

Introduction

While speed limits are not perfect, they are an important check on reckless driving that saves millions of lives every year. Therefore I oppose the idea that:

The Virginia state government should significantly change its speed limit laws.

I. Harms

Group their points A and B. I will respond to both.

A. High Speed Limits Cause Accidents

The affirmative wants you to believe that low speed limits cause accidents. However:

1. They only cite a few examples (New York and California). These two states are very different from Virginia. In fact, their own evidence shows that in Iowa, higher speed limits actually led to more accidents.

2. Their federal studies are flawed. They show that variation in speed matters more than actual speed. But there is no evidence to show that drivers will drive at more consistent speeds if the speed limit is higher.

For example, suppose we raised the speed limit to 200MPH, how many drivers would go that fast?

There is no reason to believe that existing speed limits aren't already appropriate.

3. Speeding can make you lose control of your vehicle “Speed Kills, Arrive Alive”, Evidence and Reason Blog, Oct. 23, 2011

“In favour of the slogan is that higher speeds do make it harder to control the vehicle, reduce time to react and increase the severity of a crash. Most people probably understand this already, yet they still speed. In fact people can get really upset when they can’t go as fast as they want, though the irony never wears thing when you watch someone zoom past you, weaving through traffic, only to stop behind him at the first red light. “

4. Speeding costs lives

Rick Jervis, "Super-high speed limits raising hope -- and some worry", USA Today, Dec. 29, 2012

“Speed was involved in about one-third of the 32,885 U.S. traffic fatalities counted in 2010, the latest year such figures are available, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. But the number of speeding-related fatalities has been steadily falling, from 13,799 in 2002 to 10,395 in 2010.”

B. Speeding causes more severe accidents

"Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits", Report Number FHWA-RD-92-084, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, October 1992.

“The relationship between vehicle speed and crash severity is unequivocal and based on the laws of physics. The kinetic energy of a moving vehicle is a function of its mass and velocity squared. Kinetic energy is dissipated in a
collision by friction, heat, and the deformation of mass. Generally, the more kinetic energy to be dissipated in a collision, the greater the potential for injury to vehicle occupants. Because kinetic energy is determined by the square of the vehicle's speed, rather than by speed alone, the probability of injury, and the severity of injuries that occur in a crash, increase exponentially with vehicle speed. For example, a 30–percent increase in speed (e.g., from 50 to 65 mi/h [80 to 105 km/h]) results in a 69–percent increase in the kinetic energy of a vehicle. ”

C. Higher speed limits don't reduce congestion

The affirmative wants you to believe that raising speed limits will reduce congestion, but this may not be true.

Jamie Uff, “Stepped Speed Limits improve workzone congestion and safety”, ITS International, Route One Publishing, 2015
“On the schemes where SSL is implemented, significant benefits for all stakeholders are expected. Initial micro simulation modelling of SSL indicated that the concept could yield many benefits including reduction in average travel time (and its reliability and predictability), increased flow throughput and easing of congestion.”

SSL is “Stepped-Speed-Limit” which imposes an additional, lower, speed limit before construction zones.

III. Significance

A. Traffic deaths kill more people than guns

– The affirmative wants you to believe speed is a leading cause of death, but: 1. Their own article says that firearms are expected to kill MORE people than car crashes in 2015. The information they quote is outdated.

2. They don't say how many of those deaths were from speed.

B. Traffic doesn't hurt the environment

1. Traffic encourages people to use alternative forms of transportation, such as light rail and public transportation. This decreases overall pollution.

2. Tighter emissions standards are reducing the amount of pollution from traffic.

C. Traffic is actually GOOD for the economy

1. Notice that their own source says that Indonesia is better than Egypt.

2. More traffic means more people in your community buying stuff!

Natalie Clarkson, "What is the economic impact of traffic?", Virgin.com, Oct. 31, 2014

"It’s not the same story worldwide however – many American cities with the worst congestion also have the largest economies. If nothing else, a lot of traffic is a sign that a lot of people have jobs to get to. For example, during the US government shutdown of 2013, congestion in the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington noticeably declined.”

IV. Inherency

Group points A and B. The affirmative says that the Virginia General Assembly is blocking speed limit laws. However:

1. Their evidence only shows they lowered the speed limit on dirt roads.

2. Their evidence shows that the General Assembly is willing to make changes to speed limits laws.

V. Plan

The affirmative plan has the following disadvantages.

Disadvantage 1: Cost

A. Link: Replacing speed limit signs costs money

Larry Copeland, "Texas raises speed limit to 85 mph: Other states could, too", USA Today, Sept. 8, 2012

“With federal and state dollars to rebuild highways and bridges dwindling, more states are turning to private companies to fund the projects in exchange for toll revenue or other payouts, said Joshua Schank, president and CEO of the non-partisan Eno Center for Transportation.”

B. Impact: Increased spending will cause Virginia to go bankrupt

1. This will reduce the amount of money for welfare programs.

2. Those in poverty will starve.

VI. Solvency

Group points A and B.

They want you to believe that raising speed limits has worked elsewhere, but:

1. Virginia is very different from Germany and Ohio

2. Their sample size is very small

3. There is evidence that higher speed is only safe if the roads are well engineered. Many of Virginia's highways are not engineered for high speeds.

Larry Copeland, "Texas raises speed limit to 85 mph: Other states could, too", USA Today, Sept. 8, 2012

"Texas officials say Highway 130 is engineered to safely allow the high speeds. Three weeks after opening in late October, however, the artery saw its first traffic fatality."