Public Forum Debate was designed to enable debaters to discuss current events in an accessible, conversational format. Public Forum rounds feature polished delivery, exciting clash, and fast-paced refutations. The format also allows debaters to work together as partners. For these reasons, Public Forum Debate often comes closest to what many beginning debaters imagine debate will look like.
The central component of Public Forum Debate is the resolution, which is the topic that the students debate. Resolutions are voted on by members of the National Speech & Debate Association and published at www.speechanddebate.org/topics.
Resolutions are intended to be “ripped from the headlines” and to reflect prevailing issues about which most well-read individuals would be informed.
Previous resolutions have covered a wide array of topics such as 9/11 security measures, cyberbullying, and civil disobedience.
Two example resolutions are:
• Resolved: The costs of a college education outweigh the benefits.
• Resolved: The United States federal government should permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation.
The NSDA guidelines state that Public Forum Debate does not have preestablished burdens of proof for either side of the debate. In other words, neither the pro nor con team is obligated to debate in a certain way to uphold certain arguments; instead, the resolution itself will generate those burdens of proof. Each resolution dictates the substance of debating for both sides. For example, the first resolution posits a fact that the costs of a college education outweigh the benefits. For this resolution, the debaters must prove or disprove this fact to win the debate. The second resolution posits an action that the federal government should take, namely allowing financial incentives to encourage organ donation. For this resolution, the debaters must prove the desirability (or lack thereof) of this action.