An ideal form of NCLB would be beneficial to the welfare of the United States.

Greetings to my opponent, Yraelz. May the most logical argument compellingly prevail. Seemingly, my opponent spuriously implies the debate topic referring to the NCLB (No Child Left Behind) Act as only having the goal of increasing education performance at primary/secondary schools. Assuming this to be the only goal of the act is entirely false, and I'll get to it shortly. I would like to first point out that this is a tight case and my opponent presents an uninteresting thesis. This debate should have at least SOME degree of pragmatism in it. I ask that my opponent give a specific and detailed plan in regards to how an ideal form of NCLB ought to function and what an ideal form means. (The current wording of the resolution is extremely biased and favorable for Pro, for obvious reasons.) Nonetheless, see Appendix A for notable definitions. An ideal form of doing something (such as in the case of proceeding with NCLB) is the method in which it ought to be carried out. That is, for this debate, one must find the optimal way of carrying out the task of improving the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools. It would even seem to me that standardized testing is something too intrinsic to the NCLB act to not requiring including it into its definition. As NCLB was originally intended, it also entailed the requirement of schools distributing "name, home phone number and address of every student enrolled to military recruiters and institutions of higher education, unless the student (or the student's parent) specifically opts out." This is in no way good. Why? Because automatically distributing personal information of students to places such as military recruiting centers is not beneficial. This only works to make military recruiting easier for nationalists. Improving government-defined educational performance is not necessarily a good thing. The government is corrupt. It cannot be trusted to make the most logical decisions. Arguably, the goal for government IS INDEED to make logical and rational decisions. But under that premise, then the government considered the initial passing of NCLB a logical act. The initial act is inherently flawed in regards to its values (such as the framework intrinsically favoring richer schools over poorer schools). A flawed decision is, by definition, not a logical decision. Given that the passing of NCLB was a flawed decision, it was therefore illogical. Recalling that the government strives to do that which is logical, they failed miserably in their task with the initial passing of NCLB. Next, the cost and expense for the funding of the initial NCLB act is already immense. But even to consider the expense of a more "ideal" version of NCLB is so astonishingly costly that it's mind-boggling. I would also like to offer the contention that a higher extent of governmental intervention of education does more harm than good. Education should instead be supported with a much more libertarian approach. Forcing any specific standards on children, as NCLB would inevitably do, only serves as a detriment in improving their welfare. Finally, a burden of proof falls upon my opponent to prove that, as the resolution states, "An ideal form of NCLB would be beneficial to the welfare of the United States." If my opponent cannot successfully prove this to be true within this debate, then a clear CON vote is in order. I would negate the resolution by arguing that an ideal form of NCLB would not necessarily be "beneficial" to the "welfare" of the United States. Substituting the definitions into that sentence, we can derive the following: An ideal form of NCLB would not necessarily be promoting or enhancing well-being to the state of being happy and healthy and prosperous. NCLB is in no way necessarily a prerequisite to such. I think that that will be sufficient for the time being. I reserve the right to expand upon or add arguments in my next round. I'll go into further depth, accordingly as needed, next round as well. Cheers, Oboeman. ============================================ Appendix A: Notable Definitions Beneficial – adjective - promoting or enhancing well-being. Welfare - noun - state of being happy and healthy and prosperous.