Democracy: Public\’s Right to Know vs Candidate\’s Right to Privacy
Current Research for the MLA LD & PF Debate Topic…
TOPIC: Public\’s Right to Know vs Candidate\’s Right to Privacy
Resolved: In a democracy, the public’s right to know ought to be valued above the right to privacy of candidates for public office.
Background:
When Political Campaigns Turn Private Lives Public (New York Times, May 15, 2011)
Last week, Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, entered the Republican race for president. His marriage to his third wife, Callista, has come under renewed scrutiny because that relationship began as a six-year-long affair when he was married to his second wife. The spotlight cast on spouses and families during campaigns can be glaring for any couple. Mitch Daniels, the governor of Indiana, in considering a presidential run, is said to be weighing the toll a national campaign could take on his wife, Cheri, who eschews politics.
\”Paid\” Research Packets (Free to Use):
[-] LD Research – Public Right to Know vs Candidate Right to Privacy (Champion Briefs, 2018-10-01).pdf
[-] LD Research – Public Right to Know vs Candidate Right to Privacy (Premier Debate, 2018-11-01).pdf (DOC)
[-] LD Research – Public Right to Know vs Candidate Right to Privacy (Victory Briefs, 2018-10-01).pdf
Whiteboard Photos (& Outlines):
[Later!]
Research Videos (Required):
How a presidential candidate’s personal life changed political journalism,
PBS Newshour, December 2, 2014 – 7 min
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/presidential-candidates-personal-life-changed-political-journalism
Candidates who won\’t disclose taxes shouldn\’t be on the ballot,
Laurence H. Tribe, Richard W. Painter & Norman L. Eisen, CNN, April 14, 2017 – 3 min
https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/14/opinions/state-laws-requiring-tax-return-disclosure-legal-tribe-painter-eisen/index.html
Research Articles (Required):
When Political Campaigns Turn Private Lives Public
Various Authors, New York Times, May 15, 2011
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/05/15/when-political-campaigns-turn-private-lives-public
IMPORTANT: Pick just one author and cite one quotation from that article. Thank you.
Do voters have the right to know presidential candidates\’ health histories?,
Sandee LaMotte, CNN, December 15, 2015
https://www.cnn.com/2015/12/14/health/presidential-candidate-health-disclosure/index.html
Should a politician\’s private misconduct cost them your vote for public office?
Kayla Epstein, The Guardian, July 9, 2013
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/spitzer-politician-private-misconduct-vote
Candidates weigh family’s privacy vs. political gain in campaigns,
Debbie Siegelbaum, The Hill, March 13, 2012
https://thehill.com/capital-living/cover-stories/215619-candidates-weigh-familys-privacy-vs-political-gain-in-campaigns
Research Articles & Videos (Optional):
From Gary Hart to Donald Trump: How politics went tabloid
Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigative Correspondent, Yahoo News, October 9, 2018
https://www.yahoo.com/news/1987-sex-scandal-says-politics-today-121834066.html
Resolved: In a democracy, the public’s right to know ought to be valued above the right to privacy of candidates for public office.
Shattering the Lens, October 2018
http://shatteringthelens.com/2018/10/01/resolved-in-a-democracy-the-publics-right-to-know-ought-to-be-valued-above-the-right-to-privacy-of-candidates-for-public-office/
Political Privacy Should be a Civil Right,
Paul Sherman, Institute for Justice, June 2011
https://ij.org/ll/june-2011-volume-20-number-3/political-privacy-should-be-a-civil-right/
T: Improving Gender Equity/Tolerance
S: According to… Prof. Stephanie Coontz, Evergreen College, NY Times, July 13, 2012
[Stephanie Coontz teaches history and family studies at the Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash. Her most recent book is \”A Strange Stirring: The Feminine Mystique and American Women at the Dawn of the 1960s.\” Politicians’ Personal Lives: The Reality Show, New York Times, July 13, 2012]
Q: She states… Feminists and social conservatives have argued, from very different perspectives, that the personal is political – that how people treat their friends and family speaks to their core values. And for a time, open discussion of previously hushed-up transgressions, including public mea culpas about them, helped Americans develop new standards of gender equity and personal accountability, as well as more tolerance for the complexity of family life.
F: What the author is telling us… by having open discussions about the personal lives of political figures has led to new standards of gender equity and tolerance.
C: This means… prioritizing the public’s right to know, has led to JUSTICE for hundreds of millions of people who otherwise would be silenced in our society.
Contact Information (Coach Bill):
Bill Eddy,
coachbill@magnetacademy.com
714.655.8135 (I prefer text)
When contacting me, please include your name and class information (day/time). Thanks!
NEG: [Discrimination Based Upon Perceived Disabilities]
S: According to… Dr. Emily Largent, Ph.D., JD & RN, Harvard Law, June 7, 2018
[Dr. Emily Largent, Ph.D., JD & RN, Prof. at the Univ. of Pennsylvania, \”State-Level Solutions to Discrimination in Organ Transplants,\” Harvard Law, June 7, 2018]
http://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/category/contributors/emily-largent/
Q: She states…
Popular interest in cases like Amelia’s and Paul’s helps explain growing state-level attention to the issue of discrimination in transplantation on the basis of physical or mental disability. California, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusettes, Oregon, Delaware, and Kansas now have laws on the books prohibiting such discrimination. Meanwhile, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New York have bills pending. (Pennsylvania’s is known as \”Paul\’s Law\” after Corby.) With the exception of California\’s Law—which was enacted in 1996 after Sandra Jenson, a Californian with Down Syndrome, was twice denied a heart-lung transplant—these anti-discrimination laws were passed in or after 2013.
F: What the author is telling us…
C: This means…
Why is Privacy Important?
Privacy Fundamentals, Privacilla.org, Last Updated: December 2, 2001
http://www.privacilla.org/fundamentals/whyprivacy.html
NEG: Privacy is Crucial to Autonomy
S: According to… Privacy Fundamentals, Privacilla.org, Last Updated: December 2, 2001
http://www.privacilla.org/fundamentals/whyprivacy.html
[No Author Information, Privacy Fundamentals, Why is Privacy Important?, Privacilla.org, Last Updated: December 2, 2001]
http://www.privacilla.org/fundamentals/whyprivacy.html
Q: It states… The first is that privacy helps individuals maintain their autonomy and individuality. People define themselves by exercising power over information about themselves and a free country does not ask people to answer for the choices they make about what information is shared and what is held close. At the same time, this does not mean that public policy should shield people from the costs of their choices. American privacy allows our many cultures and subcultures to define for themselves how personal information moves in the economy and society.
F: What the author is telling us…
C: This means…
NEG: Respect for Privacy Increases Safety
S: According to… Privacy Fundamentals, Privacilla.org, Last Updated: December 2, 2001
http://www.privacilla.org/fundamentals/whyprivacy.html
[No Author Information, Privacy Fundamentals, Why is Privacy Important?, Privacilla.org, Last Updated: December 2, 2001]
http://www.privacilla.org/fundamentals/whyprivacy.html
Q: It states… For example, anonymity and pseudonymity protect the privacy of people\’s identities, which has the functional benefit that someone may speak at a political rally — or go to a bar — and not have to answer later to political opponents or unwanted suitors. Anonymity and pseudonymity lend to both privacy and these safeguards for safety and peace of mind.
F: What the author is telling us…
C: This means…