BNE Extemp Topic Briefs

3.  Is Standard and Poor’s downgrade of America’s credit status justified?

In early August Standard & Poor (S&P) issued the first ever downgrade of America's credit status from AAA to AA+ .  Before addressing whether or not its justified its important to explain what it means.  All credit ratings are linked to how stable a borrower someone is.  Individuals with high credit scores are allowed to borrow more than individuals with low credit scores.  The U.S. has enjoyed the AAA rating for the past 70 years.  However, you don't have to look too far to see that our economy has some big problems, which would cast doubt on how strong the economy will be in the future and on whether or not the U.S. will be able to pay back its creditors. (Nearly 1/3 of our debt is foreign owned and 1/3 of that is owned by China)  All that said...here are your possible outlines:

 

Yes, it's justified because

1. Our debt has increased rapidly and shows no signs of slowing down

2. Even though it's symbolic, it should scare the govt. into change

3. It was done right after the government argued over the budget, showing they can't put politics aside to fix the economy

No, it's NOT justified because

1. It's symbolic

2. It's going to hurt the consumers and American people; those who aren't to blame

3. There was an error in the calculation (politically motivated?)

4.  Should the United States take a more active role in Somalia?

If you've seen the film Black Hawk Down, then you'll have a pretty good idea about where this question comes from.  You'll understand why we were there, why we left, and why we along with the rest of the world has been very reluctant to go back.  The key phrase in this question is "more active role."  Right now, the U.S. is running many covert operations in Somalia in an effort to combat terrorism there.  Using the tactics they used in Iraq of giving local warlords positions of power in exchange for keeping their area secure, the U.S. is slowly beating back the insurgent forces in Mogadishu known as al-Shabaab.  Yet at heart of this question is the general issue of U.S. isolationism vs. intervention.  

Yes, the U.S. should be more active because...

1. For the sake of fighting terror

2. Humanitarian role (there is severe famine there attracting international attention)

3. Pirates

* It's important to note that all three of those points are connected; eliminating the pirates will increase the success of the humanitarian aid mission and reduce.  Consider ordering your points in a way that flows logically.

No, the U.S. shouldn't feel obligated to be any more active because...

1. We're still in Afghanistan, Iraq; we're watching Libya, 

2. The current covert operation is (unfortunately) the only way to win in a hostile environment such as Mogadishu.

3. Politically unpopular (I know this sounds shallow, sorry)