The 1AC is an entirely canned speech that consists of a few parts — Inherency, Harms/Advantages, and Solvency.
Inherency proves the plan is not being supported (or is not being adequately supported now)
For example, the 1AC may argue that artists and authors do not have protection when AI is trained on their work.
Contention I. Inherency
Harms/significance prove that without the plan, there will be significant problems. For example, without protecting the artists’ intellectual property it may lead to unemployment
Contention II. Harms
They will then impact this. Many debaters argue this as “significance.” Why is the problem significant?
Preventing the problem identified as the harm means the affirmative plan has an advantage or advantages.
The plan is the basic outline of what policy the affirmative is arguing should be adopted. For example, a plan might say —
S
Plans are very simple statements that describe a piece of legislation.
Contention III. Solvency
Solvency says that the proposed policy will work to solve the harms.
