Use document above to identify which version of they aff they'll read below. 3 cards are added that will be added to the file list after dinner.

Jina/Rachel – Boycott Aff
Deja/Rayvon – Boycott Aff
Alwin/Tahir (AM)– Port Security (Terrorism and Econ adv) or NIB Aff (Posted Above)
Shayna/Joy (MZ) – Kritikal Transportation inequity (disposable bodies and environmental racism)
Chase/Mike – port security (competitiveness, econ, terror)
Sabrina/Marlee/Sophia (WJG) Kritikal version of transportation inequity (disposable bodies and environmental racism)
Sam/Kanav – NIB (economics adv)
Alexandra/Anmol (Kritik version of transpo inequity disposable bodies and environmental justice))
Adam/Jack W. (NIB with econ advantage)
Joel/Connor (Mass transit policy – disposable bodies and warming)
Jack T./Steven (Port Security with terrorism and econ adv)
Madison/ Katrina (Policy transpo infrastructure with econ and warming/pollution adv.)

Plan Texts/Advocacy Statements:

The "k" version in the aff file - NOT the hardcore boycott the topic version - is "my partner and I demand that the usfg substantially increase transportation infrastructure investment for the purposes of mass transit in inner city areas in the united states." or a slight variation of that.

Policy version: the usfg should substantially increase transportation infrastructure investment for the purposes of mass transit in inner city areas in the united states.

Boycott:Advocacy Statement: We boycott the resolution. The state has already proven itself an unethical actor specifically in the area of transportation infrastructure investment. Federal policy developed, participated in and actively maintained transportation apartheid and racial segregation, dumping billions of our tax dollars into a highway system designed to separate the urban, poor people of color from the white middle to upper class.
The harms we identify cannot be resolved through a single federal policy action, the federal governments culpability is so extensive that a thorough interrogation and reformulation of federal policyaround transportation, education, housing, and environmental protection would be necessary to reverse decades of government sponsored, protected and maintained racism.

Only social movement and activism will force the kind of conversation about racism, capitalism and segregation can target the dynamics of power that interact to maintain the oppression of poor people and poor people of color.

And, the exclusions we identify in the broader structure of federal transportation policy are replicated in the exclusionary practices in the debate space. The vision of debate as a white male policy maker factory is detrimental to our society and government. Traditional debate ensures the maintenance of a white supremacist hetero-patriarchy, through its idealization of the white, middle class, male body as the iconic image of debate success. The norms and practices of traditional debate simply contribute to this endless cycle of segregation, racism, and poverty that dominates our society today. Questioning these practices is essential to our survival.

While debating in this fiat world of the resolution, traditional debate continues to pretend that the USFG is an ethical actor committed to helping the people. The communityactively ignores the problems of oppression and subjugation in our own communities where we use diversity to hide the fact that racial minorities,particularly African-Americans, remain a statistical minority far below their representation in the general population. Just as the USFG turns a blind eye to the suffering of the poor and poor people of color in inner-cities across the nation, seemingly colorblind or neutral practices result in segregation andinequality in our own community, guaranteeing that the playing field is notlevel and those who lack resources or the social status of race and/or gender privilege are more consistently the losers than the winners.