SEHS
PICs GOOD
2NC/1NR AT: ``PICS ARE GENERIC/REDUNDANT''



1.  SO WHAT-- SO IS CLINTON.

There are lotsa generic arguments that can be run nearly every debate.  If
they link, in this case compete, then being generic does not make them
illegitimate.  If anything, it means that the aff should be prepared.


2.  THIS PIC IS NOT GENERIC.

The on-point net benefit evidence proves that this counterplan is tailored
to the affirmative plan.


3.  TURN-- PICS REDUCE GENERIC DEBATE.

By focusing the debate on a less frequently examined portion of the plan,
the counterplan allows us to escape the monotony of the same topic
generics that are heard over and over.


4.  COMPETITION PREVENTS IT FROM BEING TOO GENERIC.

No counterplan competes with every case, or even close to every case.  The
aff mechanisms are too disparate for that; no PIC could compete with a
carbon tax and with military procurement of solar cells.


5.  NO IMPACT.

You shouldn't vote for a plan just because the reason not to do it is
generic.  The absurdity of this is clear; for instance, we would spend
trillions of dollars for microscopic advantages.