Você está na página 1de 3

Con Case WACFL 3

My partner and I would like to negate the resolution Resolved: In the United
States, current income disparities threaten democratic ideals for the following 3
contentions. In order to proceed with the debate, we would like to provide few
definitions
Democratic ideals: Qualities or standards of government behavior that are felt to
be essential for the continuation of a democracy
Democracy: A government of, for, by the people Abraham Lincoln
Wealthy: 250,000$ income per year or greater (Given by the Tax Federation),
everything under is considered to be common, or poor

Judge, we would like you to focus on income disparities. If con can prove that
income disparities is not the threat to democratic ideals OR rather if rather
something else poses a threat to democratic ideals, then con wins this debate. Pro
must show how democratic ideals are threatened, and all we must do is refute
them. The following three points will be the basis for our argument, and throughout
the debate, we hope to uphold their validity.
Contention 1: Income disparities are not the main threat to democratic
ideals, but rather the lack of socioeconomic programs to prevent income
disparities
First and foremost, democratic ideals are not threatened by income disparities.
Professor Harrison Webster of Arizona states that, Differences in income are a
natural sign of a healthy democracy, and should be preserved to maintain it.
Furthermore, even if everyone was of equal economic status, it would not
necessarily result in a preservation of democratic ideals. If every citizen were
represented equally, this may cause an imbalance in the political and economical
system. According to Professor Samuel Huber of Syracuse, In the US, the least
motivated, and least educated consist of the lowest income bracket of 45,000$ or
less a year. If these people were allowed to be represented equally as desired, it
may be harmful to the democratic ideals, as it may create a government filled with
incapable leaders at the helm. In addition, Huber says A nation must focus on
socioeconomic programs and education rather than monetary status to if it hopes
improve its democracy as programs do not balance out the income disparities, but
rather raises the entire populations income. He continues on to say that the
imminent danger to America is the lacking total number of programs that could be

beneficial. Statistics released from the Department of Treasury shows that the
number of aid programs has declined over 18% throughout the past 8 years, and
this holds the bigger threat to democratic ideals, rather than income disparities
alone.
Contention 2: The US government is a representative democracy which
protects democratic ideals
Many people fear that the current US government is becoming a plutocracy, a
government run by the few wealthy elite. Many also fear that this will lead to
political corruption, and lobbying. This is absolutely not true at all. When our
founding fathers created the nation, they already had in mind a potential large
difference in income. To overcome this issue, they designed a representative
democracy a government system where the few elected elite protect the rights
and interests of all. These representatives act in the interests of the poor, and move
to preserve the personal liberties and individual rights of the common people. The
people select and distribute the duties of each representative. Through the 1 st
amendment, every person is given to the right to petition and to overthrow a
corrupt government. This gives the common people the power to create a
government for the people and not for the select, wealthy elite. Examples of this
power being exercised were seen during the impeachment of former president Bill
Clinton, the resignation of Richard Nixon, and more recently through the Occupywall-street movement.
All of this is taken into consideration by our government and therefore the income
disparities between the leaders and the common men cannot threaten democratic
ideals. This is why democratic ideals are being protected and held true in America
today.
Contention 3: Democratic Ideals are not composed of equality of monetary
status, but rather equality of opportunity and rights
The goal of the US government is not to create equivalent monetary status for every
person, but to grant equal rights and opportunity for any person who wishes to
achieve their dreams. Currently, each and every person has equal footing in the
political realm. Through the 14th amendment, every citizen in this nation has the
right to vote. Whether a person chooses to vote or not, is of no importance, as the
democratic ideals were still preserved. In addition, the American Dream stands true
in this nation. This is the idea known as social mobility. According to James
Pethokoukis and the Tax Foundation, over a 10 year period, 58% of the people in the
bottom 20% of income moved to a higher income bracket, while 38% of the people
in the upper 10% of income fell to a lower income bracket, so there is a balance
between the wealthy and the less wealthy. Thomas Shapiro, authoritative Professor
of Sociology at Brandeis University, states that Social mobility at the heart of the

American dream. The constitution gives everyone an equal opportunity for all. The
American Dream holds this to be true.
Conclusion
In conclusion, in any democratic society with capitalistic beliefs, it is inevitable that
income disparities exist. However, if democratic ideals are derived from what
citizens deem a democracy should provide, then income disparities is a necessity
for a healthy democracy and poses no threat but rather a lack of socioeconomic
programs. Furthermore, the structure of the government created by the Founding
Fathers was designed to prevent income disparities from being an issue, and is still
currently used to help uphold and protect the democratic ideals of our citizens
today.
Because of these reasons, we would highly like to urge you to vote for a con ballot.
Thank you.

FINAL FOCUS
Income Disparities are bound to exist in any capitalistic society, and as all measures
of economic nature are bound to fluctuate, it should be no surprise that income
disparities have increased. The point of Democracy is to put all citizens on equal
ground politically, and if that is done effectively by the structure of government, and
socioeconomic programs, income disparities, no matter how great, cannot threaten
our basic democratic ideals. Moreover, even though society has its imperfections,
the government of the United States is structured so that ideally the poor have
equal political representation. Even in the present, Government officials are elected
to represent the nation as a whole, and take into consideration the actions that are
the most beneficial to all. Thus income disparities are not the main threats to
democratic ideals, and therefore we urge a con ballot.