JSA OR Regional Agenda

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses of angsty teenagers yearning to debate freely.”

Or something like that.

In Portland, OR (a.k.a “Hipster Mecca”), there’s a counterculture sentiment brewing among the youth (pun intended). Everyone’s a rebel, and this social revolution is not just about wearing funky glasses. Portland is also a hotbed of progressive politics. Everyone has a political opinion, and we know how to “Keep Portland Weird” - and radical. What defines our political-social revolution? Does the radical policy we youngsters promote just represent ephemeral teenage angst? And to what extent is all this progressivism viable in American politics?

Today is about debating the future. By 2015 the millennial generation (that’s us!) has the potential to control a third of the vote. We are the future of this country, and so it’s about time we decided whether our crazy youngster policies are realistic and applicable.

By attending today’s convention, you’re showing an effort towards crafting a more perfect union, towards improving our government and our society. Thanks so much for coming, and we hope you enjoy the debates!

Jackie Salzinger Geetha Somayajula

April 20th, 2013, 11:00-4:30 OMSI, Portland, OR

JSA OREGON REGIONAL:

IconoclastiCon

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

April 20th, 2013

Opening Session 11:00-11:15 Auditorium

Block One 11:15-12:00

Resolved, that organized religion causes more harm than good. Auditorium

Resolved, the SAT is not a worthwhile means of determining intelligence. *tag-team debate Classroom 1

Thought Talk: What are the futures of the dominant U.S. political parties and the party system? Parker Room

Block Two 12:00-12:45

Resolved, that marijuana be legalized nationwide. Auditorium *taboo debate

Resolved, that the U.S. implement a two-child policy. Classroom 1

Resolved, that “you didn’t build that.” Parker Room *cross-examination

Lunch 12:45-1:45

Candidate’s Forum: 1:45-2:45 Auditorium

Vice Mayor: Uma Ilavarasan

Mayor: Maddie Rosser, Will Darmohray

LTG: Jackie Salzinger, Austin Weinstein, Andrew Lee, Michelle Chen, Christine Shoemaker

Governor: Tyler Pichette, Will Badart

Block Three: 2:45-3:30

Resolved, that the American Dream is dead. *gavel debate Auditorium

Resolved, that the hipster movement propagates harmful rebellion among youth. Classroom 1 *humor

Thought Talk: What is the function of the gender equality movement in today’s society? Parker Room

Keynote Debate: 3:30-4:15 Auditorium

Resolved, that liberalism is a naive philosophy not viable in the real world.

Closing Session 4:15-4:30 Auditorium

Oregon Regional: IconoclastiCon

Pacific Northwest Junior State of America’s Oregon Regional Conference 2

April 20th, 2013

Resolved, that organized religion causes more harm than good. Auditorium

Pro: Uma Ilavarasan, Westview High SchoolCon: Jackie Salzinger, Westview High SchoolMod: Abbey Gilliard-King, Pullman High School

Few social institutions have survived throughout the millennia, but organized religion persists over the years as a fundamental part of our society. Most people in the world identify themselves as religious, about 80% as part of an organized religion [Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life]. However, growing numbers of people, especially in developed nations, are experiencing disillusionment with organized religion. It is from this trend that New Atheism and secularism get their strength. Some people argue that religion is a buffer in society, a constant and positive source of moral knowledge and teachings. However, other argue morals can and should be learned independent of such organized institutions, and that negative conservatism and proselytization have hindered societal progress and directly harmed people in religious conflicts. Where do your beliefs fall - do you have faith in organized religion as a positive actor in society? Or are you ready to usher in a more secular age?

Resolved, the SAT is not a worthwhile means of determining intelligence. *tag-team debate Classroom 1

Pro: Natalia Rios and Paige Hall, Sunset High SchoolCon: Marthadina Russell and Madie Winter, Newberg High SchoolMod: Yani Ngo, Southridge High School

Every year, over a million people take Collegeboard’s SAT. And as hyperactive teenagers, perhaps it’s only natural for us to grumble about four-hour-long standardized tests. But, trying to think objectively, is there value in SATs? Some argue that the SAT is a well-written, effective reasoning test that assesses reading, writing, and math - skills that are critical to success in high education. Others, many students included, think that the disadvantages outweigh the benefits; they believe that four hours of one’s life spent bubbling in circles shouldn’t be an important factors in college admissions. Being the predominate test of its kind, what is the true value of the SAT? Just as we band together to complain about these tests and/or try to find collective optimism that we didn’t just waste hours of our lives, this will be run as a tag-team debate.

Thought Talk: What are the futures of dominant U.S. political parties and the party system. Parker Room

Mod: Mac Heffernan, Sunset High School

The two-party system has divided our country since its inception, and it seems like there is perpetual agreement that it is a failure of our government and our democracy. Intransigence abounds in Washington, D.C., and Americans are fed up with the federal government’s inability to...well, govern. In the near future, Democrats will have to size up a new presidential election and reflect on the previous administration’s degree of liberalism - is the future of the party further left, or in the center? Conservative Republicans, meanwhile, are still scrambling to

Block One 11:15-12:00



Opening Session (Auditorium) 11:00-11:15

April 20th, 2013

comprehend the failure of the Romney campaign, and have finally woken up to the new demographic era in the U.S. They will have to decide how to attract women and minorities to the party with policy that often contradicts the rights of these interest groups - what does that mean for the future of America’s conservative, traditional party? It may be cliché, but change is imminent, and as the young people of this country, we will surely play a vital role in the development of new political identities, parties, and change even perhaps for the party system itself.

Resolved, that “you didn’t build that.” *cross-examination Parker Room

Pro: Nitya Janardhan, Westview High SchoolCon: Chase Mayer, Westview High SchoolMod: Kayliana Prioleau, Forest Ridge High School

Barack Obama was plagued during the 2012 presidential election by four words during a campaign speech: “you didn’t build that.” The President was discussing the importance of government in conducting societal affairs, including providing the infrastructure and necessary institutions for the growth of businesses. Put simply by Obama himself in that speech, “If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help.” Conservatives remarked at the audacity of the President to seemingly spit in the face of private, successful entrepreneurs whose hard work and effort often single-handedly (allegedly) created business. The question is one of economics and social order, a fundamental question that often reveals partisan lines and party politics. What is the line between the individual and society? Is there such a thing as individual work and intellectual property? Did you “build it” or did society? Perhaps throughout the debate about what Obama truly meant in this phrase, it could have been useful to have a direct back-and-forth between opposing sides of the issue; in that vein, this debate will include a cross-examination.

Resolved, that the U.S. implement a two-child policy. Classroom 1

Pro: Geetha Somayajula, Westview High SchoolCon: Andrew Harris, Aloha High School Mod: Maddie Leonard, Sunset High School

Talk about radical policy! Or is it? Many people argue that uncurbed population growth is detrimental to the environment and to our resources. Furthermore, some people say households with too many kids are under difficult economic pressure, and that this could be relieved by limiting the number of children per household. These people argue that if someone were to have more than two children, they should have to pay a heavier tax to offset the societal issues that arise from the use of additional resources. However, others are outraged and consider this a ridiculous governmental infringement on one’s human rights. The one-child policy in China is despised by many Americans, who can’t even begin to fathom something similar here at home. They also argue this could be hard to enforce and may push parents into hiding a third child from society, education, medical treatment, etc. Is this “radical” policy really beyond question, or is it a practical step in solving many of our current economic and social issues.

Resolved, that marijuana be legalized nationwide. *taboo debate Auditorium

Pro: Tyler Pichette, Central Valley High SchoolCon: Cosmo Spada, Newberg High SchoolMod: Catherine O’Brien, Bellevue High School

Block Two 12:00-12:45



April 20th, 2013

It’s 4/20, a perfect date for debate about illicit substances. This is a regular political discussion that pits personal freedom against socially-agreed upon morality and health concerns. While liberals generally think that government has overstepped its bounds in this regulation (often recalling the effectiveness of Prohibition in the 20s), conservatives argue that the negative health effects and social effects of allowing this substance to be used outweigh any possible benefits of changing the law. Today, perhaps many people are in a substance-induced, mind-altering haze, but debaters in this block will have to be sharp. Just as “4/20” functions as a more subtle substitute phrase, this will be run as a taboo debate in which the words “marijuana,” “weed,” “pot,” “cannabis,” “legalization” and “drug” cannot be used.

We encourage you to try out OMSI’s food court (don’t worry, plenty of time to hit up the exciting downtown restaurants during and after our Portland Scavenger hunt!

OR Vice-Mayoral Candidates: Uma Ilavarasan

OR Mayoral Candidates: Will Darmohray, Maddie Rosser

LTG Candidates: Jackie Salzinger, Andrew Lee, Michelle Chen, Christine Shoemaker

Gubernatorial Candidates: Nicole Rogovoy, Will Badart, Tyler Pichette

Resolved, that the hipster movement propagates harmful rebellion among youth. *humor Classroom 1

Pro: Kenneth Xu, Westview High SchoolCon: Riley Francis, Newberg High School Mod: Jeffrey Humphrey, Newberg High School

If a tree falls in the woods, and nobody’s around to hear it, will a hipster buy the soundtrack? Everyone knows the type - always claiming to be ahead of what’s cool and often dreaming of rebellion more than living it. Maybe a Bon Iver CD or two is harmless, but are there aspects of the hipster lifestyle that are detrimental to individuals and society? Grounded revolution and a little teenage angst is one thing, but it is the baseless rebellion of hipsters that cause many people to steer clear of that label and idea. When grouchy adults talk about “damn youngsters,” it used to be that they talked about rock-and-roll or hippies or 80s materialistic prepsters, but now the label falls to the hipsters. But is the hipster movement really so bad?

Resolved, that the American Dream is dead. *gavel debate Auditorium

Lunch 12:45-1:45

Candidate’s Forum (Auditorium) 1:45-2:45

Block Three 2:45-3:30



April 20th, 2013

Pro: Calvin Kocher, Beaverton High SchoolCon: Abbey Gk, Pullman High SchoolMod: Maddie Rosser, Sunset High School

“American Dream Declared Dead As Final Believer Gives Up” reads a famous The Onion headline. Now, The Onion may be a joke of an online newspaper, but as always, the headline leaves us asking: is there a grain of truth in the joke? The American societal identity is based on a set of fundamental ideals. We were founded on the concept of democracy, power to the people, and new beginnings. All of our original citizens were immigrants or from immigrant families, here to make a new beginning in the “New World.” We are known as a “country of opportunity” where everyone - rich, poor, man, woman, of every origin and race - has a chance to find success in life. But how does this ideal stand up to the test of reality? Increasingly, the wealth gap has exploded and minorities and poor people seem to have a much harder time getting again - is that the “equality” we so-often hail as an American virtue? Others argue that, comparatively, the U.S. is still the predominant land of freedom and opportunity, and our level of both are sufficient to say we shouldn’t bury our collective Dream just yet. Must we say RIP to the American Dream?

Thought Talk: What is the function of the gender equality movement in today’s society? Parker Room

Mod: Adrienne Hubbard, Skyline High School The women’s rights movement has had a tumultuous last century, from winning the right to vote to entering the workforce during WWII to the debate over an Equal Rights Amendment in the 70s. Lots of people still claim to be “feminists” and many others have come out as “anti-feminists,” but what does feminism even mean? Many argue that women and men have achieved equity under the law and that 21st century feminists are just leftovers from past battles. What does the gender equality movement stand for today, and where do we go from here?

Resolved, that liberalism is a naive philosophy not viable in the real world.

Pro: Zoltan Van Dyke, Westview High SchoolCon: Jackie Salzinger, Westview High School Mod: Maddie Rosser, Sunset High School

This is the age-old battle of politics: liberalism vs. conservatism. On the surface, everyone could probably agree that liberalism has good intentions and ideas - government control of programs like health-care and education and social safety nets sounds like a good idea that promotes equality and security in the world (we’re defining liberalism as the economic and social philosophy that drives the modern-day U.S. liberals). However, a deeper look brings the arguments to the surface. Many conservatives argue that these types of programs will allow slackers to game the system, and they believe the costs of these programs are far too high to be realistic. Is this true? Is liberalism a nice idea, but unrealistic? Or is it practical enough to be applied in the real world?

Keynote (Auditorium) 3:30-4:15

Closing Session (Auditorium) 4:15-4:30



Documents

JSA OR Regional Agenda