Inside the 2027-2028 NFHS Policy Topic Writing Process

The full conversations and topic discussion is below in each topic area with the finalized topic wording. The second straw vote of all members in the room dictate what topics make the ballot on Sunday. They need at least 17 votes in order to be on Sunday’s vote.

Space did not make it to Sunday.

Latin America Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico. The discussion began with what countries to include - the main thought was about the inclusion of Cuba. The concerns for Mexico deal with uniqueness of economic/diplomatic engagement. El Salvador was included for foreign aid, migration, and other affs. But needed to be with Honduras and Guatemala as they’re usually a triangle of countries in the literature. Cuba, Mexico and Northern Triangle Countries seem to be a stable three areas for debate. There is a motion to add Cuba and alphabetize the list of countries on the topic. That passes. There is a motion to add Venezuela to the list of countries. This motion passes. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: Cuba, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Venezuela.

Military Presence Resolved: The United States federal government should signficantly reduce its military presence in Northeast Asia and/or the Arab States of the Persian Gulf. The preferable way to name the area is ‘Gulf Arab States’ rather than ‘Arab States of the Persian Gulf.’ Motion to replace this passes. Resolved: The United States federal government should signficantly reduce its military presence in Gulf Arab States and/or Northeast Asia.

North Africa Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: Arab Republic of Egypt, Republic of Sudan, State of Libya. ‘North Africa’ as a topic area does not include South Sudan and Ethiopia - the authors believe that those countries can still be accessed through the topic as written. The committee believes that the title should not necessarily control this since the literature includes the country. There were arguments to add countries to insure that the topic has enough viable areas come 2027 given potential political instability. Motion to add Ethiopia to the topic. Motion passes. Motion to add South Sudan to the topic. The discussion shifted to about how formal names are required when discussing government to government engagement. Motion passes. There is desire to explore other countries being added to the topic. No countries were added in callback. Topic passes as-is. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more of the following: Arab Republic of Egypt, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Republic of South Sudan, Republic of Sudan, State of Libya.

Foreign Aid Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its foreign technical assistance for humanitarian development. This topic is not viable and thus has a complete proposed re-write to start the day: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its foreign assistance to one or more of the following: Democratic Republic of the Congo, People’s Republic of Bangladesh, and the Republic of Haiti. Motion fails. The committee determined this topic was not viable and has been withdrawn.

Space Exploration Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Kármán line. The discussion started with the question, Is this international? This is more of an issue given that the Arctic topic was more domestic than intended, this is more of an issue. There are thoughts that the

China topic can solve the desire for having space debates. The phrase ‘exploration and/or development’ really creates more of the issue than just thinking about space. The author is the only one who can withdraw a topic, the author chose to continue with this topic but expects it not pass the first round tomorrow (if it makes tomorrow). The discussion centered around ‘the Kármán line’ and the difference in definitions. The topic was accepted as-is. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Kármán line. China Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its negotiations towards an agreement with the People's Republic of China in one or more of the following areas: artificial intelligence governance, climate change, global health security, outer space. The discussion began with ‘negotiations towards an agreement’ becoming binding. The literature does support this, but still allows for ‘say no’ debates and the paper supports for this is the best solution to the debate. The discussion also discussed ‘climate change’ vs ‘climate change reduction/mitigation’. The body indicated that reduction would have to change the term ‘climate change’. There were thoughts though that even if climate change is bidirectional, the negotiations aren’t - thus the ground is still there. The topic was accepted as-is. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its negotiations towards an agreement with the People's Republic of China in one or more of the following areas: artificial intelligence governance, climate change, global health security, outer space.

West Africa Resolved: The United States federal government should significantly increase its official development assistance to one or more of the following: Federal Republic of Nigeria, Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, Republic of Ghana. The issue was the country list vs the 16 countries in West Africa. These are the three largest countries in the area and make up a majority of the literature. The issue though may be about uniqueness to the countries selected - that we do give ODA to these countries but maybe not the other members of the West Africa. There is a concern that the literature in the topic paper do not support the three countries listed. The phrase ‘official development assistance’ may or may not include military and may also just be money and grants. There is desire to explore other countries being added to the topic. After the callback, West African states is the preferable term. If country list is preferred, Senegal and Liberia would be the countries they would want to add. The committee would prefer Liberia and Senegal. This motion passes A new concern was brought about ODA as the verb. The alternative to ODA per the authors is 'foreign assistance'. There is a motion to move ODA to 'foreign assistance in the humanitarian and/or development sector.' This motion passes. Resolved: The United States federal government should significantly increase its foreign assistance in the humanitarian and/or development sector to one or more of the following: Federal Republic of Nigeria, Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, Republic of Ghana, Republic of Liberia, Republic of Senegal.

South America Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more South American countries. The initial add was to add in countries - Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more following: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela. There was an additional add to Chile and Peru - for the reason of critical minerals debate. Thus it is now - Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more following: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Venezuela. This motion passes. The discussion then affirmed that the China DA did in fact link to all proposed areas of the topic. To insure that economic engagement is government to government, there is a motion to add ‘states’ after following. This motion passes. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement with one or more following states: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Peru, Venezuela.

Southeast Asia Southeast Asia - The United States federal government should substantially increase its diplomatic and/or economic engagement with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and/or Vietnam. The discussion started with removing Cambodia from the topic due to the lack of viable affirmatives. The issue was brought up that the entire topic suffers from a uniqueness issue and including Cambodia may help this. There are supplemental materials to be posted so that we can decide this issue based on evidence. Supplemental materials to defend this are posted This motion fails. The topic stays as-is. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its diplomatic and/or economic engagement with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and/or Vietnam.

Western Balkans Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its non-military support of democratic institutions in one or more Western Balkan countries. The discussion started around the term ‘support’ and how ‘support of democratic institutions’ and how it magnifies the topic. There was a motion to replace ‘support’ with ‘democracy assistance’. This motion passes. After discussing the redundancy of ‘of democractic institutions’, there was a motion to remove it. The motion passes. The discussion around the term ‘Balkan’ and its potential problematic usages. There is a desire to move to a list of countries — “Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia” This motion passes. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its democracy assistance in one or more of the following: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia.

Nuclear Arms Control Resolved: The United States federal government should negotiate and implement binding international nuclear arms control. This topic proceeds as-is. Resolved: The United States federal government should negotiate and implement binding international nuclear arms control.

Presidential War Powers Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase statutory restrictions on the war powers authority of the President of the United States in foreign deployments of United States Armed Forces, Offensive Cyber Operations, and/or targeted killings. The discussion started with adding back ‘and/or judicial’ before restrictions. This motion passes. Next, there was a discussion about whether this is in an international topic. Since the operations are directed outwards, the affirmative is mandated to do some sort of international discussions. Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase statutory and/or judicial restrictions on the war powers authority of the President of the United States in foreign deployments of United States Armed Forces, Offensive Cyber Operations, and/or targeted killings.

South Asia Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its defense cooperation with the Republic of India. There are concerns about inherency and uniqueness issues the ‘defense cooperation’. There was a motion to add to the end “one or more following: security assistance, armaments cooperation, logistics support.” The term ‘security assistance’ still is huge and potentially means R&D affirmatives exist. This motion fails. To resolve the inherency issue, there is a proposal to flip direction - to change ‘increase’ to ‘decrease’. The motion was withdrawn. There is also discussion to add a list of countries that excludes India and to return to the initial list in the paper - ‘to one or more of the following: Afghanistan, India, Pakistan. The callback includes a new part at end 'in one or more of the following: co-production, technology transfer, reciprocal defense procurement, and military basing.' The next motion is to add 'one or more South Asian nation-states' in place of 'the Republic of India'. There is pushback to this as it includes Bhutan or Nepal without evidence in the topic paper. This motion fails The committee is asking to make the topic a list of countries about India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. A fourth country would be hard to decide. so 'the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, Republic of India, Islamic Republic of Pakistan'. The body then discussed using formal names or common names. This motion fails. A new amendment lists common names "one or more of the following states: Afghanistan, India, Pakistan". This motion passes The final motion is to flip the 'one or more' phrases and eliminate the first one or more, and change 'in' to 'through'. This motion passes Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its defense cooperation through co-production, military basing, reciprocal defense procurement, and/or technology transfer with one or more of the following states: Afghanistan, India, Pakistan.

---

---

Marshall Subcommittee Notes

The NDCA did not have representatives in each group so not all topics will be discussed below.

Southeast Asia

The author prefers #1: The United States federal government should substantially increase its economic and/or diplomatic engagement toward one or more mainland Southeast Asian countries.
What is "mainland Southeast Asia"? Paper says includes some but not all of Malaysia: "Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam, along with the peninsular region of Malaysia."
We discussed excluding Myanmar given its government (and that engaging with that government might not make sense.)
We discussed "engagement toward" or "engagement with" — this will need a full body conversation.
The United States federal government should substantially increase its diplomatic and/or economic engagement with Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and/or Vietnam.

South Asia

The author prefers a variation of a resolution “The United States federal government should substantially increase its defense cooperation with one or more South Asian nations” — this is where we ended in 2024.

The conversation mostly surrounded how the resolution should be narrowed — should it narrow defense cooperation? should it narrow South Asia as a region to a country or list of country?

Other terms besides ‘defense cooperation’ were explored - which included a search of defense cooperation agreements and military-to-military engagements.

The United States federal government should substantially increase its defense cooperation with the Republic of India.

China

The author prefers a variation of #1 in their paper: Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its negotiations with the People's Republic of China toward an agreement in one or more of the following areas: artificial intelligence governance, climate change, global health security, space.”

The conversation started around the terms ‘its negotiations… toward an agreement” being the best term of art.

If we determine the topic is too big as written, ‘global health security’ should be the one axed. It’s probably the smallest of the four areas

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its negotiations towards an agreement with the People's Republic of China in one or more of the following areas: artificial intelligence governance, climate change, global health security, outer space.

War Powers

Author prefers #1 or #5: Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase statutory and/or judicial restrictions on the war powers authority of the President of the United States in one or more of the following areas: targeted killing; private military contractors, anticipatory self-defense; or introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities.
Resolved: The United States Federal Government should substantially increase statutory and/or judicial restrictions on the war powers authority of the President of the United States in introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities.
We eliminated "judicial" pretty early.
Lots of conversation about "introducing United States Armed Forces" and whether that would allow the aff to takesies backsies Iran, whether "Armed Forces" means just humans or also drones, etc. He wants to make sure that it doesn't include nuclear forces.

The United States federal government should substantially increase statutory restrictions on the War Powers Authority of the President of the United States in foreign deployments of United States Armed Forces, Offensive Cyber Operations, and/or targeted killings.

Military Presence

The USFG should signficantly reduce its military presence in...
1. SK and Japan description — "Northeast Asia"
2. Bahrain, Kuwait, other friends like Qatar, Oman, SA and others — "The Arab States of the Persian Gulf"
Discussed "why regions vs. countries?"
Answers: 1. "what happens if we've shifted our troops around by then", 2. answers some circumvention arguments.
One knock on = has to remove from region rather than country. Neg would get intra-regional reallocation CP.
ASOTPG = a little clunky but well-defined and includes what we want it to include.
"Gulf Arab States" = fewer words, needs more vetting.

The United States federal government should signficantly reduce its military presence in Northeast Asia and/or the Arab States of the Persian Gulf.

Space

The author prefers - Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its space exploration and/or development beyond the Kármán line.

The discussion started with the ‘Kármán line’. Topic expert said this was the best term.

The disucssion then shifted to whether this is a domestic or international topic. The author qualifies that this generates plenty of negative ground that is based in an international lens.

The final portion of the discussion centered around ‘space’ vs ‘outer space’ and the placement of those words.

Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its exploration and/or development of space beyond the Kármán line.

---

The National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Topic Selection Meeting (TSM) is a cornerstone event in the policy debate community. Each year, it brings together coaches and contributors from across the country to determine the direction of the upcoming debate season. For 2027–2028, thirteen topic papers were submitted, forming the basis for deliberation and eventual selection of five final resolutions.

These papers represent extensive research and intellectual labor.

We also want to give a special shout out to the NDCA members who authored papers this year:

• Ian Beier, College Prep School — China

• Teja Vepa, Collegiate School — Space Exploration & South Asia

Topic Paper	Download Paper	Author
Arms Control	Click Here to Download Paper Supplemental Materials	Brett Bricker
China	Click Here to Download Paper	Ian Beier
Foreign Aid	Click Here to Download Paper	David Trigaux, Sitara Mazumdar, & Jay Yoon
Latin America	Click Here to Download Paper	Patricia Leon
Military Presence	Click Here to Download Paper	Brett Bricker
North Africa	Click Here to Download Paper	McAlister Clabaugh & Daniella Choi
Presidential War Powers	Click Here to Download Paper	Jake Lee
South America	Click Here to Download Paper	Moselle Burke
South Asia	Click Here to Download Paper	Teja Vepa
Southeast Asia	Click Here to Download Paper	Ryan Franklin
Space Exploration	Click Here to Download Paper	Teja Vepa
West Africa	Click Here to Download Paper	Megan Hagaman & Dakota Yates
Western Balkans	Click Here to Download Paper	Sawyer Partney

How the Meeting Works

Day 1 — Friday: Topic Area Exploration & Subcommittee

The first day is all about learning the landscape of each topic proposal. Authors begin by giving short, focused elevator pitches outlining their topic areas. From there, coaches rotate through Debatability Roundtables, where every attendee meets with each author to ask questions and evaluate:

• The scope of the topic

• Its timeliness for the 2027–2028 season

• The balance of arguments available on both sides

This is a valuable time for authors to gather feedback and refine their ideas before entering the Marshall Subcommittees.

In the afternoon, the Marshall Subcommittees meet. Here, each author presents and defends their full report in detail. These sessions are facilitated by the Wording Committee co-chairs, who guide discussion and later report outcomes in the general session. This is a crucial stage where wording revisions and topic direction take shape—so if you have input, this is your moment. Once these meetings conclude, a First Vote (Straw Poll) is taken. Topics receiving at least 25% of the vote from those present will advance to Saturday’s working session.

Day 2 — Saturday: Wording of Topics & Group Cross-Examination

Saturday is the longest and most intensive day of the TSM—and arguably the most rewarding. Each author has a dedicated time block to present their refined topic to the full Wording Committee and respond to questions. This session resembles a giant cross-examination, where anyone present can ask about key decisions made during subcommittees.

At the end of each session, a proposed resolution is submitted for consideration.

After all presentations, a Second Vote is taken. To move on to the final day, a topic must now receive support from 33% of those present.

Day 3 — Sunday: Final Voting & Resolutions

On the final day, finalized resolutions are presented to the full delegation. The NDCA will also host a public straw poll on this blog to gather feedback from our wider community.

During the in-person session, delegates representing state and national organizations cast binding votes. Coaches have time to caucus between each of the four rounds of voting, which narrow the field to the top five resolutions for the national ballot.