For the past several years, I have participated in the Topic Selection Meeting, which formulates potential policy debate topic areas and resolutions. ˙The meeting results in five distinct resolutions, which then go up for the two-tiered voting process in which state forensic associations, the NFL the NCFL ˙and hopefully you, participate, eventually resulting in the policy debate resolution which is the subject for an entire year's competition. Given the number of debate teams which compete in a year, and given that there is (usually) only one policy debate resolution for the entire country for a particular school year, it's quite important that the Topic Selection Meeting result in a slate of ˜compelling and debatable resolutions.

The meeting is very capably run by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS), and held in a different part of the country each year; on August 6-8th it took place in Corpus Christi,Texas, and was coordinated by Bill Schuetz and David Gardner, and hosted by the Texas Forensic Association and the Texas University Interscholastic League.

Here's how the meeting works: over the course of the school year, ˙nine to twelve Topic Papers are prepared. A topic paper includes background information explaining the general topic area, a justification as to the timeliness of the topic, a defense of the topic as one which would allow for debate on both sides, a list of potential arguments for both the prospective affirmative and negative positions, and a list of potential debate resolutions. The authors of the Topic Papers travel to the Topic Selection Meeting, where they meet delegates representing various State Forensic Associations, the NFL, the NCFL, and the NDCA, and the coordinators from the NFHS. ˜˜During the first day the authors act as advocates, introducing their papers, explaining the topic areas, and de fending their topics as important ones for debate by high school student.

Then, on the second day of the meeting, something miraculous happens. ˙A Wording Committee is convened, to study each potential resolution, and to reword and craft the resolutions in order to assure that no matter which Topic Paper is eventually selected, the Resolution would provide for good, fair and useful debate. The reason the process is miraculous is that during the Committee process the authors change from advocates of their particular papers to group participants, who work together with the Committee in order to craft the best possible resolution - not just for their own paper, but often for the other resolutions as well. Many of the Topic Selection Meeting participants are old hands in this process, and thus are well aware that they cannot predict which resolution will be victorious in the election to come. ˜Thus, it is understood that everyone will benefit if each Resolution gets careful and thoughtful attention. Serving on the 2004 Wording Committee were: Sandy Patrick, Wyoming (Chairperson); William Murray, Pennsylvania; Bill Hicks, Indiana; Mike Wallmark, Oregon; W.E. Schuetz, Texas.; Kevin Minch, Missouri and Ruth Kay, Michigan. Also serving the Wording Committee as a long-time participant and advisor is Rich Edwards, of Baylor University.

On the final day of the meeting, after the Wording Committee has completed its job, the various participants switch gears again, and become advocates for their favorite slate of potential topics. People lobby for and against particular resolutions for a variety of reasons - but the most common discussion centers around whether a topic will provide sufficient interest and good debate for an entire year, and whether it will provide for fair debate; for example, an area might be extremely compelling, but may lack ground for the negative. ˜˜A series of balloting ensues, until the slate of resolutions is narrowed to five. The list of potential resolutions for 2005-2006 can be found on the NFL website www.nflonline.org (under Debate Topics). ˙Interested readers can click on each topic area in order to download and read the original Topic Paper for that area. ˙˙I invite you all to read the Topic Papers, and to lobby your associations to vote for your favorite resolution. Also, please consider attending the next Topic Selection Meeting, or writing a future Topic Paper. If your state is not represented at the Topic Selection Meeting, please consider attending - it's a strange fact that many states where policy debate is very active are nonetheless unrepresented at the meeting.

Finally, thank you very much to the NFHS for continuing to serve the Topic Selection process. It's an idiosyncratic responsibility - but it's one that the Federation fulfills very well.

(David Glass, President, NDCA)