Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[82]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[83]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[82]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-03-09 19:03:02.630
	1	+2017-03-09 19:03:02.0

Caselist.CitesClass[83]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,18 @@
	1	+Interpretation: Right” is defined as a claim which can be acted on by individuals without government assistance or coercion. That means the aff must defend a negative right, not a positive right.
	2	+Yates explains the distinction between rights and entitlements
	3	+Yates, Steven (Ass’t Prof of Philosophy, U of South Carolina). “Rights Versus Entitlements.” Foundation for Economic Education. 1 September 1994. https://fee.org/articles/rights-versus-entitlements/
	4	+In other words, there is a hard and fast difference between rights and entitlements, a difference which the past seventy years of government policy has blurred to the point of indistinguishability. A free society must recognize the distinction. Otherwise, it has no way of knowing which claims of rights to acknowledge and which to reject as spurious. Legitimate rights are easy to recognize. They can be acted on by individuals without the assistance of government and without forcibly interfering with other individuals. Entitlements, on the other hand, cannot be fulfilled except through specific government actions which require forcible interference with others. Protecting rights is thus compatible with limited government. Granting entitlements requires an ever-expanding and increasingly meddlesome state. The more entitlements the state grants, the more it must extend itself to make good on its promises, and the greater its level of interference with people’s actions. Moreover, by interfering with successful actions, government becomes a drain on the individual’s energies. The individual must expend more and more effort to get the same personal benefits. This translates into a disincentive to produce, and when less is produced, there is less to seize and distribute. Soon, the state can no longer keep its promises.
	5	+Section 8 and voucher programs are entitlements, not rights.
	6	+Hartman Hartman, Chester (director of research at the Poverty and Race Research Action Council). “The Case for a Right to Housing.” National Housing Institute. Issue #148, Winter 2006. Web. http://nhi.org/online/issues/148/righttohousing.html
	7	+Some specific, although quite limited, rights/ entitlements exist in the housing area. Local housing codes (varying enormously with respect to coverage and standards) provide something of a right to decent physical conditions. But enforcement is a problem and market realities limit the benefits these regulations offer. A warranty of habitability and rent-withholding provisions exist in some jurisdictions. While this levels the playing field somewhat between landlord and tenant, it falls short of guaranteeing decent housing conditions and, as is true of housing codes, does not deal with the key issue of affordability. In those few areas that still have rent control, limits are placed on rent increases. Federal, state and local laws bar discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, disability and other personal characteristics, as well as source of income. But again, enforcement is far less than ideal, and more subtle forms of residential discrimination are hard to detect and prove. Due process must be followed in eviction and foreclosure proceedings. Relatedly, some jurisdictions provide protection to tenants against condominium conversions and demolitions. In a few areas, "just (good) cause" eviction statutes limit eviction to stipulated reasons. Tenants in public and Section 8 housing are required to pay no more than 30 percent of their income as rent. In a few areas, by statute or litigation, homeless persons have a right to shelter (not to be confused with housing), and for the homeless there also exists, again in just a few areas, what might be labeled "a right not to freeze to death": ordinances requiring that public buildings be opened to homeless persons when the temperature dips below a certain level. And, as is constantly pointed out by low-income housing advocates, while there is no entitlement to a Section 8 certificate or a public housing unit, all homeowners are entitled to the most massive, albeit indirect, housing subsidy of all - the ability to deduct every dollar paid in property taxes and virtually all dollars paid in mortgage interest from their taxable income base, providing a huge and highly regressive housing subsidy to those who need it least. (Other provisions of our tax laws as they affect homeowners add to this disparity.) So, our society has lots of rights and entitlements, with some limited kinds of rights in the housing area, but we're way shy of a right to decent, affordable housing for all.
	8	+
	9	+Vote Neg:
	10	+1. Precision
	11	+2. Limits
	12	+3. Field Context
	13	+Morais 05 Lochner Marais (PhD, University of the Free State, Bloemfonte Professor) in Social Policy) and Johannes Wessels, Housing Standards and Housing Rights: The Case of Welkom in the Free State Province, 16 URB. F. 17, 20 (2005)
	14	+In general, it seems as if the right to housing does not mean that governments are supposed to construct houses for the entire population (Leckie, 1990; Kok and Gelderblom, 1994). Rather, it is more concerned with the obligation of the state not to act in a way that will undermine the opportunity of households to gain access to housing. For example, making laws or regulations that undermine access to housing will not be conducive to the furtherance of the right to housing. In terms of established informal settlements, the right to housing would probably have the implication that one may not remove informal settlers without providing alternative accommodation and without meeting all of the legal requirements. Furthermore, it probably also requires the state to develop an implementation plan as to how it will ensure that this right is upheld.
	15	+Voter: Fairness jurisdiction
	16	+Drop debater on t
	17	+competing interps
	18	+t isn't an RVI

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-03-09 19:03:04.171

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Nolan Burdett

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lindale AR

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+43

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Strake Jesuit Chen Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+MA - T - Entitlements

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+TFA