SEHS
PICs GOOD
2NC/1NR AT: ``ENCOURAGES VAGUE PLANS''



1.  SOLVENCY EVIDENCE CHECKS.

The aff will always have to specific enough for their solvency evidence
to apply, or they'll lose.  This prevents a plan that says, ``just change
some stuff topically.''


2.  PROCEDURAL ARGUMENTS CHECK.

Negative arguments about the abusiveness of vague plans would check before
the plans become so vague that it's detrimental to education.  It's not
too hard to win that ridiculously vague plans are bad.


3.  NO IMPACT.

If affs write vaguer plans, that just means the debate will be somewhat
more abstracted.  We won't have counterplan competition, but they won't
have good solvency.  We would learn about more general principles
underlying the topic.  That might be good once in awhile.


4.  EMPIRICALLY DENIED.

People have been running PICs for awhile, and we haven't seen plans that
just say ``pass the resolution.''