Basic Argumentation

CWDI, short for ‘claim-warrant-data-impact’, is the principal argument structure used in one form or another by almost everyone who makes an argument. We’ll delve into each aspect step-by-step.

Claim

Your claim is almost like the topic sentence of a body paragraph in an essay. But don’t write a four-paragraph argumentative essay and read it out as your speech. That’s boring and exhaustive and doesn’t really teach anyone anything about spontaneity and dynamism, but that’s not the focus of this guide.

Your claim is an opinion on the legislation. Something that, after having conducted all your background research, you think of the legislation. It’s a point of contention. An issue that the legislation creates, for example. Or an issue that the legislation solves.

It's important to make your claims specific, memorable, and concise. This starts by avoiding broad, meaningless, generic statements like "affirm to help Americans." Instead, be specific, "Fail this legislation to protect Americans from skyrocketing energy prices." Your claim is not the place to explain why its true.... thats the next part.  

Warrant

Warranting is an important skill to develop. Warrants are your lines of reasoning behind your claims. The question you need yourself, and everyone else in the room, to ask after your claim is ‘why’. Why do you argue that a bill to tax carbon harms the U.S. green energy shift? Or why does a U.S. trade embargo on Niger incentivize the military government to restore democracy?

You need to be able to answer the question ‘why’ in your own words. That is what your warrant is. For example, “A U.S. trade embargo on Niger will restore democracy in the region. This is because Niger relies heavily on U.S. trade and foreign investment…”

I just made a fake argument, but your warrant is your ‘this is because’ statement. This is where you can start to get into the specifics. Contextualize the situation that makes your argument reality if the legislation is passed or failed. Take notes on others’ warrants—refute them in your own speech (see “Refutation and Weighing”). And above all, make sure your warrants can logically and effectively back your claim. Make your claim make sense.

Data

This is the most straightforward part of any speech. As you do your background research, save your data points (cards). I would recommend compiling your data in various documents organized by subject so that way, you won’t need to spend hours and hours looking for data on a bill that you might have already debated.

Your data should back up your warrant. Think of your data as your warrant from an official, credible, and external source. Don’t be afraid to summarize an article—you only have three minutes to make your case about the legislation. We don’t have time for a minute of that to be a quote.

Use credible sources like The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Hill, Politico, Reuters, or research publications like the Harvard Law Review and others. There are a lot more than that which I’ve mentioned, but those are just examples. If you don’t have access or a subscription is needed to access some sources (i.e., NYT is subscription-based), check with your school’s library or a public library to see if they have a subscription you can use. They may also have access to a lot of research databases that you would otherwise need to pay for!

Important note: when you cite your data, cite with the month and year at the very least. For example, “According to The Washington Post in August 2023…” You can do more if you want, but this should be the bare minimum.

Impact

This is the most important part of your speech. Impact is actually a broad term. There are two things you need to do here.

Link – how does your entire argument now relate to the legislation? Answer the question for us here. Given all you’ve just stated, what does the legislation do if it is passed or failed?

Impact – what do your data and warrants mean for the average American, and why does it matter? What does this legislation’s passage or failure mean for the average American? How does it impact their lives?

Don’t be afraid to quantify the scale of your argument. Make it the most important argument in the room. Explain why your argument matters the most. This comes in handy when you have statistics. If 70% of Americans don’t have trust in the Supreme Court, that’s 7 in 10 people. And if trust in SCOTUS is what makes SCOTUS legitimate, then if most people don’t have confidence in SCOTUS, SCOTUS loses its credibility. See what I did there? Try to think of other impacts of that.

A key part of your actual impact is humanization. For example, let’s take a negative speech on a bill to raise the minimum wage to $15. Forbes says that 50% of small business owners would be hurt by a minimum wage increase. Put yourself in the shoes of a small business owner. What happens when you have to pay your workers more? Humanize. Make your impact real.

Above all, you should try to make sure that every piece of your speech flows logically. If you make a claim about how the U.S. interfering in Niger is good and impact it out to stopping nuclear war, make sure you take every step! How precisely and exactly does U.S. interference in Niger stop nuclear war? Lay it out for us, because even though you may understand it in your head, don’t count on your peers or your judges to understand it.

Argumentation is important. Make your arguments definitive and clear, and substantiate them with warrants and evidence. Seek to guide the chamber with your arguments. Let other speeches build off yours, and try to become the most convincing person in the room. Good luck!