Topicality - HSS 2017

Topicality HSS 2017
The Resolution
Resolved: The United States federal government should substantially increase its funding and/or
regulation of elementary and/or secondary education in the United States.
*** FUNDING
Funding---Money---1NC
Funding refers solely to money

Butler 5 Louis B. Butler, Jr., Judge on the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Joan Solie and Ann Baxter,
Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Employee Trust Funds Board and The Department of Employee Trust Funds,
Defendants-Appellants, 2005 WI 42; 279 Wis. 2d 615; 695 N.W.2d 463; 2005 Wisc. LEXIS 150, 4-19,
Lexis
The pertinent statutes do not define the terms "fund" or "credit." However, if these terms are accorded
their common, ordinary meaning when read in the context in which they appear in chapter 42, it is clear
that the retirement deposit "fund" is comprised solely of money and that a "credit" refers to a positive
balance in a teacher's retirement deposit fund account. See Wis. Citizens Concerned for Cranes and
Doves, 2004 WI 40, 270 Wis. 2d 318, P6, [**649] 677 N.W.2d 612 (unless specifically defined,
nontechnical words in a statute are accorded their common everyday meaning and are read in the
context of the statute in which they appear) (citing Wis. Stat. 990.01(1) (1999-2000)).
[*P60] The ordinary definition of "fund" is "[a] sum of money or other resources set aside for a specific
purpose: a pension fund." The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 735 (3d. ed.
1992)(emphasis in original). See also Black's Law Dictionary 682 (7th ed. 1999)(defining "fund" as "[a]
sum of money or other liquid assets established for a specific purpose"). This definition of "fund"
comports with the context in which the term is utilized in chapter 42. The retirement deposit fund is a
sum of money set aside for teachers' retirement.
[***480] [*P61] Chapter 42 indicates that the term "fund" is utilized in a financial context. Wisconsin
Stat. 42.33(1) provides, in pertinent part: "The state teachers retirement board shall at all times
maintain assets: . . . (b) In the 'Retirement Deposit Fund' equal to the liabilities for member deposits and
for state deposits for members of the separate group and the combined group and interest
accretions[.]" See also Wis. Stat. 42.243(5)(c); Wis. Stat. 42.243(6)(c); Wis. Stat. 42.45(1)(d); Wis.
Stat. 42.46(1); Wis. Stat. 42.475 (all describing a member's account in the state retirement fund
being credited with member contributions, state deposits, and interest and discussing the withdrawal,
payment, and maintenance of such monies).
[*P62] In addition, Schmidt, 153 Wis. 2d at 46, explicitly stated that a teacher who signed a combined
group waiver "only waived his right to money which accumulated in his retirement fund through state
deposits." (Emphasis added.) Likewise, Wis. Admin. Code TR 4.01 [**650] (Sept., 1964) specifically
distinguishes between "years of teaching experience" being "counted as within the system" and
"required deposits" being "paid into the fund," by stating that years of teaching experience are not to be
counted within the system until any required deposits plus interest are paid into the fund.
[*P63] In short, the "retirement deposit fund" is a fund comprised of monetary deposits established for
the purpose of teacher retirement.
[*P64] Given that 42.33(1) specifically states that the retirement deposit fund's assets are teacher
deposits, state deposits, and accrued interest, the majority's conclusion that "it is reasonable to
construe the retirement deposit fund as encompassing more than simply a lockbox for money[]" is
entirely unfounded and anything but reasonable. Majority op., P36. The majority's conclusion that a
repository of money earmarked for a particular purpose (a fund) can be comprised of something other
than money is inexplicable in light of the statutory language. Notably, the majority cites to no statute,
administrative rule, or case for the proposition that the "retirement deposit fund" may contain
something other than money. It simply declares it to be so. Simply put, nowhere does chapter 42 speak
of the retirement deposit fund being credited with, consisting of, or containing anything other than
money.
Violation---the plan provides non-monetary resources
Voting issue---
Limits---they explode the topic to include any form of transfer of any kind---
exponentially multiplying each Aff by thousands of types of mechanisms
Ground---they dodge links to budget trade-off and politics DAs, core ground on an Aff-
biased topic
Funding---Money---Limits
Broad definitions of funding ruin limits---it includes all kinds of transfers
Connecticut 79 Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of New Haven, Knights of Columbus
v. City of New Haven, 36 Conn. Supp. 63; 1979 Conn. Super. LEXIS 182; 411 A.2d 50, 11-6, Lexis
The word "funds" has been defined as a generic term which is all embracing and which in its broad
meaning includes property of every kind. Thus, under Conn. Gen. Stat. 38-215 all property of every
kind of a fraternal benefit society is exempt from all state and municipal taxation with two exceptions --
real estate and office equipment. Since no courts have defined "office equipment" as used in 38-215, it
is necessary to look to other areas of the law to ascertain whether the courts distinguish equipment
from other similar fungible items consumed in the course of operation.
Limiting it to only money solves this

Speer 2k Richard L. Speer, Chief Bankruptcy Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern
District of Ohio, In Re: Walter Collins, Jr., Debtor(s); MPC Cash-Way Lumber Co., Plaintiff(s) v. Walter E.
Collins, Jr., Defendant(s), 266 B.R. 123; 2000 Bankr. LEXIS 1834, 10-25, Lexis
The term "fund," is, in its common legal usage, given a broad interpretation. For example, it is
sometimes defined as a generic term and all-embracing as compared with the term "money," etc.,
which is specific.
Funding---Money---Definitions
Funding means money or cash

Dorsey 91 J. Bonner Dorsey, Justice, Court of Appeals of Texas, Thirteenth District, Corpus Christi,
EX PARTE: INEZ GUERRERO, Appellant, 811 S.W.2d 726; 1991 Tex. App. LEXIS 1562, 6-18, Lexis
The term "funds" is [**6] defined as "money" or "cash." Another dictionary supplies similar definitions
of these terms. See Richardson v. State, 789 S.W.2d 643, 646 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1990, pet. granted).
Applying the definitions in the context of the Controlled Substances Act, 481.126 quite clearly
proscribes a person from supplying money which the person knows or believes is intended to further
the possession of more than fifty pounds of marihuana. The statute clearly provides that the person
must intend to further the commission of an unlawful act, i.e., the possession of more than fifty pounds
of marihuana. In the present case, the indictment specifically alleged that the "funds" were United
States currency, which the defendant must have used to "invest" or "finance" the possession of more
than fifty pounds of marihuana. "Invest" and "finance" are terms which can be readily understood by a
person of common intelligence. We find that a person of common intelligence can determine with
reasonable precision what conduct is prohibited. We also find that the statute provides sufficient notice
to law enforcement personnel to prevent arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement.
Funding means money

Oxford 17 Oxford Online Dictionary, funding,
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/funding
funding
NOUN
1 Money provided, especially by an organization or government, for a particular purpose.
Example sentencesSynonyms
1.1 The action or practice of providing money for a particular purpose.
Example sentences
Funding refers only to money or financial resources

Jacob 14 Egberibin Igboroye Jacob, Department of Educational Foundations at the University of
Nigeria, MODALITIES FOR IMPROVING THE FUNDING OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT
EDUCATION AUTHORITIES IN BAYELSA STATE, January,
http://www.unn.edu.ng/publications/files/JACOB%20PROJECT.pdf
Funding according to Ogbonnaya, (2012), refers to a sum of money saved or made available for a
particular purpose. It can be called money or financial resources. In other words, funding is the amount
of money needed to fund an on-going project or programme for future development. Investment in
primary education has become internationally recognized as instrument per excellence for
development. Primary education requires adequate public financing support more than any other of the
other levels in education since it is the foundation level of any educational system. Gidado, (2000)
asserts that primary education has suffered tremendously in Nigeria from poor finances, inappropriate
allocation of funds and a host of other problems.
Funding---Excludes Tax Credits
Funding refers to money in hand

Spector 69 Spector, Judge, Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, Ruth F. SEAMAN, Appellant, v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee, 225 So. 2d 418; 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5419, 8-5, Lexis
The sufficiency of the evidence is also questioned by appellant's contention that no showing of
conversion was made nor that there was proof the property taken was in cash or checks. We think this
contention is amply refuted by appellant's own written statement by which she admitted she took funds
and spent them for her own purpose. The indictment charges that appellant took "dollars, currency of
the United States of America" as was the case in Craig v. State, 95 Fla. 374, 116 So. 272 (Fla.1928). In
Craig the court held that evidence of embezzled dollars was the equivalent of evidence of embezzled
currency of the United States. The court there simply took judicial notice that currency of this country is
expressed in dollars. In the instant case, appellant raises the [**8] point because the witnesses could
not tell whether the missing funds were in cash or checks. We do not consider this to be a fatal defect
because the appellant supplied the missing description, if any, of the property taken by referring to it in
her statement as being "funds" which she took and spent. The word "funds" is defined as including
money in hand and pecuniary resources. Random House Dictionary of the English Language,
Unabridged Edition. We think the proofs submitted to the jury were sufficient to make a prima facie
case of embezzlement under Section 812.10, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., particularly as such proof was
enhanced by appellant's own written admissions.
Funding---Aff Definitions
Funding is a broad term that includes all money and financial resources given---
attempting to arbitrarily limit it wrecks predictability
Casper 17 Denise J. Casper, United States District Judge, TERUMO AMERICAS HOLDING, INC. V.
TURESKI, Civil Action No. 14-13838-DJC (D. Mass. May. 1, 2017), https://casetext.com/case/terumo-
americas-holding-inc-v-tureski-1
The term "funding" as used in Section 1.6or otherwiseis not defined in the Agreement. "Under well-
settled case law, Delaware courts look to dictionaries for assistance in determining the plain meaning of terms
which are not defined in a contract." Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Am. Legacy Found., 903 A.2d 728, 738 (Del.
2006). "This is because dictionaries are the customary reference source that a reasonable person in the
position of a party to a contract would use to ascertain the ordinary meaning of words not defined in the
contract." Id. "There may be more than one dictionary definition, and parties may disagree on the
meaning of the definition as applied to their case, but if merely applying a definition in the dictionary
suffices to create ambiguity, no term would be unambiguous." Id. at 740 (internal quotation marks and
citation omitted).
Neither party asserts that "funding" has a "'gloss' in the [relevant] industry" and thus under Delaware
law the term "should be construed in accordance with its ordinary dictionary meaning ." See Lorillard
Tobacco Co., 903 A.2d at 740 (internal quotation mark and citation omitted). While Tureski argues that
he and "others were well aware, through personal experience and general industry knowledge, that the
total all-inclusive costs for a clinical trial from start to completion was typically tens (or even hundreds)
of millions of dollars," D. 140 at 17-18, this does indicate that the term "funding," as used in the
Agreement, has a specific meaning in the industry.
According to Black's Law Dictionary, funding is defined as "3. The provision or allocation of money for a specific
purpose, such as for a pension plan, by putting the money into a reserve fund or investments" and "4. The
provision of financial resources to finance a particular activity or project, such as a research study." Funding,
Black's Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014). The Oxford English Dictionary defines funding as "1. Money provided,
especially by an organization or government, for a particular purpose." Funding, Oxford English Dictionary,
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/funding (last accessed on May 1, 2016). The Cambridge
American Content Dictionary defines funding as "money made available for a particular purpose,"
funding, Cambridge American Content Dictionary,
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/funding (last accessed on May 1, 2017) and the
Cambridge Business English Dictionary defines it to mean "money given by an organization or a government for a
particular purpose," funding, Cambridge Business English Dictionary,
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/funding (last accessed on May 1, 2017). Likewise,
the Business Dictionary, defines funding as "1. Providing financial resources to finance a need, program,
or project. In general, this term is used when a firm fills the need for cash from its own internal reserves,
and the term 'financing' is used when the need is filled from external or borrowed money." Funding,
Business Dictionary, http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/funding.html (last accessed on May
1, 2017).
The Supreme Court has considered and described this source as a "colloquial business authorit[y]." See
Vance v. Ball State Univ., ___ U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 2434, 2444 & n.5 (2013); see also In re Filene's
Basement, No. 11-13511-KJC, 2014 WL 172137, at *5 (Bankr. D. Del. Jan. 15, 2014) (considering the
source).
These broad definitions lead the Court to conclude that an objective, reasonable third party would read the
term "funding" in the clause "funding for the CLI Development Plan" as including the monies and financial
resources Terumo expended for, or made in provision of, the CLI Developmental Plan. That is,
considering the dictionary definitions of "funding," those monies and financial resourceswhether in
the form of the salaries of Harvest personnel working full-time on the CLI Pivotal Clinical Trial and their
incurred travel and entertainment expenses, or the costs of "external" third parties such as InVentiv and
their expenses, see, e.g., D. 127 78-83, 118-22; D. 131 78-83, 118-22are properly included
towards Terumo's $6 million funding obligation as "funding for" the CLI Developmental Plan. Notably,
Tureski's proposed interpretationthe four categories of fundingis not supported by any of the dictionary
definitions and, therefore, it is difficult to conclude, as he urges, that a reasonable third party would not read
the term in such a way. Cf. Seaford Golf & Country Club v. E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., 925 A.2d 1255,
1261-62 (Del. 2007) (finding term ambiguous where dictionary definitions supported both parties'
respective interpretations).
Reading the Agreement as a whole, see In re Viking Pump, Inc., 2016 WL 4771312, at *8, Tureski's
interpretation of "funding" is also not reasonable given that there is no part of the Agreement that
includes or alludes to the four categories of funding he proposes such that an objective third party
would not read them into the term. The parties otherwise defined the scope or excluded specific costs
and expenses where certain broad terms are used in the Agreement. D. 128-1 (e.g., Sections 1.6(b)(x),
5.7(a), 8.2(a)); 128-2 (e.g., Schedule 3.9 195); D. 126 at 17-18; see 2009 Caiola Family Trust v. PWA,
LLC, No. C.A. 8028-VCP, 2014 WL 1813174, at *11 (Del. Ch. Apr. 30, 2014) (rejecting plaintiff's
interpretation of the section at issue where, among other things, it was inconsistent with other sections
of the agreement). As such, if the parties had intended to limit "funding," they could have done so as they
had in other parts of the Agreement.
Funding---Includes Tax Credits
Funding includes tax credits

Maryland 11 Maryland General Assembly, Department of Legislative Services, FISCAL AND POLICY
NOTE HB 1282, 3-16, http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2011rs/fnotes/bil_0002/hb1282.pdf
This bill requires a vehicle parking facility to allow a motorcycle to park in the facility on payment of any
applicable charges if the facility is owned, operated, leased, or receives funding from the State or a
political subdivision. The bill defines funding as any form of assurance, guarantee, grant payment, credit, tax
credit , or other assistance.
Funding---Includes Resources/Services
Funding includes both money and services

Rao 13 Jonnah Owen Rao, Master of Business Administration in Finance School of Business,
University of Nairobi, EFFECT OF FUNDING SOURCES ON FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF WATER SECTOR
INSTITUITIONS IN KENYA, October,
http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/bitstream/handle/11295/58807/Rao_Effect%20of%20funding%20source
s%20on%20financial%20sustainability%20of%20water%20sector%20instituitions%20in%20Kenya.pdf?se
quence=3
1.1.1 Funding Sources
The oxford dictionary 2013 defines funding as an act of providing resources, usually in form of money
(financing), or other values such as effort or time (sweat equity) , for a project, a person, a business, or any
other private or public institutions. Funds are injected into the market as capital by lenders and taken as
loans by borrowers. There are two ways in which the capital can end up at the borrower. The lender can
lend the capital to a financial intermediary against interest. These financial intermediaries then reinvest
the money against a higher rate. The use of financial intermediaries to finance operations is called
indirect finance. Lender can also go the financial markets to directly lend to a borrower. This method is
called direct finance (Mishkin, 2012).
It includes money or other resources

Websters 17 Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary, funding, https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/funding
Definition of fund
1 a : a sum of money or other resources whose principal or interest is set apart for a specific objective
b : money on deposit on which checks or drafts can be drawn usually used in plural
c : capital
d funds plural : the stock of the British national debt usually used with the
2 : an available quantity of material or intangible resources : supply
3 funds plural : available pecuniary resources
4 : an organization administering a special fund

Funding is more than just money and includes both provision of resources and
subsidization
French 5 Bradley T. French, JD Candidate at University of Detroit Mercy School of Law, FREEDOM
OF INFORMATION ACT - Public Body - The MHSAA is Not a "Public Body" as Defined by Section 15.232(d)
of Michigan Compiled Laws and Therefore is Not Subject to the Freedom of Information Act's Disclosure
Requirements. Breighner v. Michigan High School Athletic Ass'n, Inc., 683 N.W.2d 639 (Mich. 2004),
University of Detroit Mercy Law Review, Fall, 83 U. Det. Mercy L. Rev. 19, Lexis
In Breighner, the court examined three parts of the plaintiff's claim that the MHSAA is a state actor. n17
First, it adopted the reasoning of the court of appeals, holding that the MHSAA was not funded by state
authority. n18 This court expressly denied the trial court's interpretation of the statutory language,
holding that the MHSAA was neither funded "by" nor "through" state authority. n19 The court next
turned to the term "funded," and because it was not defined in the statute, the term must be given its
plain meaning. n20 The court then held that the plain meaning of the term "funded" meant more than
plain receipt of money in exchange for services by examining its definition and those of synonymous
words such as "subsidized." n21
[FOOTNOTE 21]
n21. Breighner, 683 N.W.2d at 645 n.2 (concluding that to "fund" under this statute required some type
of receipt of an allocation of government resources or subsidization).
Funding---Includes Valuable Assets
Funding includes the provision of valuable assets---its not limited to only monetary
instruments
Cote 15 Denise Cote, United States District Judge, United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -v- ARTHUR BUDOVSKY, Defendant, 2015 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 127717, 9-23, Lexis
Budovsky's argument fails for several reasons. First, he argues that virtual currencies are not "monetary
instruments" and thus transactions in virtual currencies are not "financial transactions." This argument
ignores the statutory definition of "financial transaction," which includes not only monetary
instruments, but also "funds." Giving effect to every clause in the statutory definition, the term funds
has a separate meaning and is not coterminous with the term monetary instrument. See In re Barnet,
737 F.3d 238, 247 (2d Cir. 2013) ("Statutory enactments should . . . be read so as to give effect, if
possible, to every clause and word of a statute." (citation omitted)).
Next, Budovsky appears to argue that virtual currencies cannot [*36] be included within the term
"funds." This precise argument was rejected recently in a case applying 1956 to the owner and
operator of the website Silk Road, a marketplace for illegal drugs that used the virtual currency Bitcoin.
United States v. Ulbricht, 31 F. Supp. 3d 540, 568-70 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). Addressing a pretrial motion to
dismiss an indictment, the Ulbricht court found that since the term "funds" is not defined under 1956,
it must be given its ordinary meaning: assets that "can be used to pay for things in the colloquial sense."
Id. at 570; see also United States v. Day, 700 F.3d 713, 725 (4th Cir. 2012) (defining funds under 1956
to include gold since it is an asset of monetary value that is susceptible to ready financial use). The
Ulbricht court's reasoning is adopted here.
Funding---Includes One-Off Payment
Funding includes single payments

Curtin 11 John T. Curtin, United States District Judge, United States District Court For The Western
District Of New York, PRIVATE CAPITAL INVESTMENTS, LLC, Plaintiff, -vs- JOSEPH V. SCHOLLARD and
JEROME J. SCHENTAG, Defendants, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82287, 7-27, Lexis
In addition, the record presented on summary judgment clearly reveals that Emerald Shares provided
express written authority in the brokerage agreement for Trinity Capital to act as its agent "for the
limited purpose of procuring funding approval from a bona fide lender or investor or purchaser" to
finance the development project. Item 23-7, at 2. The term "funding" is defined in the agreement as:
any transaction or series or combination of transactions whereby (a) a loan is made to [Emerald
Shares]; or (b) directly or indirectly, control of a material interest in the [Destin] property . . . is
transferred for consideration, including without limitation, a cash purchase, lease with or without a
purchase option, merger or consolidation of entities, a tender or exchange offer, the [*22] formation of
a joint venture, minority investment or partnership, or any similar transaction.
*** REGULATION
Regulation---Binding Control---1NC
Regulation is direct, binding control---broadening it makes the entire field of law

topical
Koop 17 Christel Koop, Department of Political Economy, Kings College London, and Martin Lodge,
Department of Government & Centre for Analysis of Risk and Regulation, London School of Economics
and Political Science, What is Regulation? An Interdisciplinary Concept Analysis, Regulation &
Governance, Volume 11, Issue 1, Wiley Online Library
2.2 Scope and distinctiveness of the intervention
While regulation is viewed as a type of intervention, there is disagreement over what the scope of
regulation is, with a particular focus on direct and indirect intervention. Authors often agree that
regulation is about direct intervention, which can be defined as the introduction and/or
implementation of standards that directly apply to the target behavior or characteristics of a specified
population. There is less agreement on whether regulation also includes indirect intervention that is, the introduction and/or
implementation of standards that apply to the context in which the target behavior or characteristics of a specified population are generated.
This may include incentive-based tools, such as taxation, subsidization, and the imposition of disclosure
requirements. It may also include the whole range of measures that are aimed at stabilizing capitalism the focus of the French rgulation
literature (Boyer 2002).8
These narrow and broad conceptions are reflected in the distinction between regulation as the promulgation of an authoritative set of rules
and as all the efforts of state agencies to steer the economy (Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 3). Whereas the former only includes direct intervention,
the latter incorporates both direct and indirect forms of intervention. The authors indicate that if we use a broad conception, we
can no longer view regulation as a distinctive form of governance (Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 4). The advantage is
that a variety of tools are considered as possible alternatives to traditional command and control type
regulation [] so that where rulemaking seems to be inappropriate as a means for achieving policy
objectives, other tools may be used (Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 3). A broad conception can, for instance, be found in the work of
Breyer, who distinguishes between classical regulation which is of a command-and-control nature and alternatives to classical
regulation, which include less restrictive interventions, such as taxation and the use of disclosure requirements (Breyer 1982, Ch. 8). For
Breyer, distinguishing between regulatory action and the entire realm of governmental activity is both difficult and subject to controversy
(1982, p. 7).
Stigler (1971) and Mitnick (1980) also advance broad conceptions. Stigler uses the term regulation to refer to a range of policy instruments that
can be used to affect business behavior, including market entry control, price setting, taxes, and tariffs (1971, pp. 36). Mitnick is primarily
concerned with regulation as the public administrative policing of a private activity with respect to a rule prescribed in the public interest
(1980, p. 7), but emphasizes that it is possible to distinguish both directive and incentive means, e.g. administrative standards vs. effluent
charges or subsidies as means or regulation (1980, p. 6).
According to Noll, however, such a

broad conception makes scholars, government officials, and business people
uncomfortable (Noll 1980, p. 14). Emphasizing the importance of conceptual familiarity, Noll conceives
regulation as only one of the methods that governments use to control private-sector economic
activities (1985, p. 9). As regulation is not just what regulators do, it is also how they do it, regulation is
characterized by the role of administrative law and procedural rules (Noll 1980, pp. 1617). Hence, regulation
is a method of control where a government agency is assigned the task of writing rules constraining
certain kinds of private economic decisions, using a quasi-judicial administrative process to develop these rules (Noll 1985, p.
9).
This view of regulation as a distinct mode of governance can also be found in other influential
contributions. For example, Lowi argues that regulation or regulatory policy refers to a specific type of policy
intervention that differs from other types. Policies vary on two main dimensions: (i) the form of the intended
impact that is, whether policies work through individual conduct or the environment of conduct and (ii) the form of expressed
intention whether policies impose obligations or positions (primary rules) or confer powers or privileges (secondary rules) (1985, pp. 73
75).9 Regulatory policy involves primary rules which work through individual conduct, where identities and questions of compliance and
noncompliance must be involved (Lowi 1985, p. 73). Although
the implementation of such policy may lead to an
environment which is conducive of certain conduct, this is a behavioral hypothesis about the political
or societal impact and has nothing to do with the definition of the legal rule itself (Lowi 1985, p. 73). While
rejecting Lowi's suggestion that policy types can easily be separated, the more recent literature on regulatory
governance emphasizes the difference between regulation and other modes of governance (Braithwaite
2000; Levi-Faur 2005), where regulation is about steering the flow of events and behavior, as opposed to
providing and distributing (Braithwaite etal. 2007, p. 3; cf. Braithwaite 2008). At the same time, for Levi-Faur (2013, p. 30), the
regulatory state, the application of informal and formal rule making, rule monitoring, rule enforcement, has to be understood as one
morph that interacts with other morphs characterizing statehood, such as the redistributional welfare state (cf. Levi-Faur 2014). On the
basis of this distinction, we may expect to find differences in terms of the political behavior of regulatory agencies and other types of
government agencies (see Dunleavy 1991, Ch. 7).
Narrow conceptions often characterize regulation as constituting a legal mandate backed by the
possibility of sanctions. Some authors have further specified the nature of this legal or official mandate.
For Hood etal. (Hood etal. 1999, p. 8; Hood etal. 2004), regulation involves a control system that requires the
existence (and functioning) of three components, namely standard-setting (the statement of the desired state of the
world), information-gathering (the tools used to detect how the actual state of the world differs from the desired one), and
behavior-modification (the tools used to align actual with desired states of the world).10 These three components are also
explicitly included in Black's aforementioned definition (2002, p. 26), and in texts that build on that
definition, including Parker and Braithwaite (2005, p. 120), Morgan and Yeung (2007, p. 3), and Lodge and Wegrich (2012, pp. 1216).
Similarly, Levi-Faur defines regulation as ex-ante bureaucratic legalisation of prescriptive rules and the
monitoring and enforcement of these rules by social, business, and political actors on other social, business, and political actors
(2011, p. 6).
Violation---the plan doesnt legally control schools through binding standards, it only
creates a standard that results in behavioral change
Voting issue---
Limits---the explode the mechanism of the topic to include any action that alters
education, like taxes, guidance, or informal standard setting---the mechanism is a key
limiter because the scope of education is huge
Ground---legal requirements are a source of key ground like Federalism, Politics, and
the Voluntary CP. Core ground is key to fairness.
Regulation---Binding Control---2NC
Restriction means binding control---expanding it to all government influence

explodes the topic
Costamagna 15 Francesco Costamagna, Associate Professor of European Union law and Lecturer in
International Public Law at the Law Department of University of Turin, Services of General Interest
Beyond the Single Market, Ed. Krajewski, p. 80
Especially in those cases where public services have been liberalized or privatized, regulation represents
the main instrument at the disposal of public authorities to achieve this aim. Before proceeding with the
analysis, it is worth observing that the notion of 'regulation has an uncertain legal meaning, at least
under international law. This chapter will use the term in a broad sense, encompassing all the
measures taken by public authorities in order to "influenc[e], control[...] and guide economic or other
private activities with impact on others".- with the aim of achieving specific socio-economic policy
objectives.3 It must be highlighted that the term "public authorities' is meant to cover not just central
authorities, but also independent agencies or bodies, as well as local authorities, which, as it will be seen
later on, play a major role in the regulation of public services.
A distinction is often made between economic and social regulation, depending on the objectives it
pursues.4 Economic regulation mainly aims at correcting market failures* that, according to the neo-
classical economic theory, may lead to an inefficient allocation of resources if not properly regulated.
Some of these failures6 are particularly relevant with regard to public services, as it is the case of natural
monopolies. Indeed, the supply of public services often require the existence of expensive network
infrastructure that cannot be duplicated so to allow the entry of new competitors. Therefore, there is
the need to avoid that the provider could exploit its monopolistic power, by. for instance, charging
excessive fees to end-users.
Regulation performs functions that go beyond the correction of market failures, as it may address
distortions that occur even in cases where the market works properly. Indeed, economic efficiency does
not ensure a fair distribution of costs and benefits and. consequently, there is the need for the Stale to
intervene in order to ensure that public services might contribute to the achievement of fundamental
social objectives. This may occur through the imposition of public service obligations upon the provider
or the providers. These obligations, which may take different forms and which may have different
scopes, are generally geared toward ensuring uffordabilily, geographical coverage and quality of public
services' supply.8
The Glossary of Industrial Organisation Economics and Competition Law, compiled by R.S. Khcmuni and
D.M. Shapiro, commissioned by the Directorate for Financial, Fiscal and Enterprise Affairs. OIZCD. 1993
defines regulation as the "imposition of rules by government, backed by the use of penalties that are
intended specifically to modify the economic behaviour of individuals and firms in the private sector".
An equally broad definition is used by Mitnick 1980, I. The A. defines regulation as **[...] the intentional
restriction of a subject's choice of activity by an entity not directly party or involved in that activity".
Regulations are government requirements where non-compliance is penalized
Litan 8 Robert Litan, Vice President for Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation, Senior
Fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution and Director of the AEI-Brookings Joint Center
for Regulatory Studies, Regulation, The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics,
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Regulation.html
Businesses complain about regulation incessantly, but many citizens, consumer advocates, and
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) think it absolutely necessary to protect the public interest. What
is regulation? Why do we have it? How has it changed? This article briefly provides some answers,
concentrating on experience with regulation in the United States.
Regulation consists of requirements the government imposes on private firms and individuals to
achieve governments purposes. These include better and cheaper services and goods, protection of
existing firms from unfair (and fair) competition, cleaner water and air, and safer workplaces and
products. Failure to meet regulations can result in fines, orders to cease doing certain things, or, in some
cases, even criminal penalties.
Regulations must control by rule or restriction

Madison 7 Kristin Madison, Assistant Professor, University of Pennsylvania Law School, and Senior
Fellow, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Regulating Health Care Quality in an Information
Age, UC Davis Law Review, June, 40 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1577, Lexis
B. Responses to Information Imperfections
While the term "regulation" generally refers to the use of rules - Black's Law Dictionary defines
"regulation" as "the act or process of controlling by rule or restriction" - and often to government
entities' use of rules, it is frequently used more broadly in the health care context. n15 Professor
Michelle Mello, Carly Kelly, and Professor Troyen Brennan, for example, have defined regulation "to
include any organized and deliberate leveraging of power or authority to effect changes in the behavior
of health care providers." n16 This Article also uses the term "regulation" and its variants broadly to
include any measure intended to intervene in the relationship between a health care provider and a
consumer-patient by mandating, incentivizing, or facilitating an action by one party that might affect the
nature of its relationship with the other. This definition is intended to capture all measures undertaken
by third parties, whether public or private, that have the ultimate aim of altering the quality of care that
providers deliver to patients. n17
It must be legally binding

Orbach 12 Barak Orbach, Professor of Law at the University of Arizona College of Law, What Is
Regulation?, Yale Journal on Regulation, http://yalejreg.com/what-is-regulation/
So what does regulation mean? We return to the starting pointthe intuitive understanding of the
word regulation: government intervention in the private domain or a legal rule that implements such
intervention. The implementing rule is a binding legal norm created by a state organ that intends to
shape the conduct of individuals and firms.22 The state organ, the regulator, may be any legislative,
executive, administrative, or judicial body that has the legal power to create a binding legal norm. This
general definition is broader than restrictions, rules promulgated by administrative agencies, laws
that serve interest groups, and related common perceptions of the word regulation.
The test is whether theres explicit punishment for non-compliance

Poutziouris 3 Panikkos Poutziouris, Professor of Entrepreneurship and Family Business at the
University of Central Lancashire, Cyprus, Impact of Regulation on SMEs, Environment and Planning C:
Government and Policy, Volume 21, p. 475
Defining regulation
Regulations relate to fiscal and tax issues, employment legislation, environmental policy, etc. The OECD
(1994) defines `regulation' as:
``...A set of `incentives' established either by the legislature, Government, or public administration that
mandates or prohibits actions of citizens and enterprises ... .Regulations are supported by the explicit
threat of punishment for non-compliance.''
Regulation---Binding Control---Limits
Expanding regulation beyond control to anything that influences behavior makes

the topic endless
Luff 11 Patrick Luff, Visiting Professor of Law, Washington and Lee University School of Law;
Candidate for D. Phil., University of Oxford, Faculty of Law; J.D., University of Michigan Law School, Risk
Regulation and Regulatory Litigation, Rutgers Law Review, Fall, 64 Rutgers L. Rev. 73, Lexis
A. Difficulties in Defining Regulation
The label of "regulation" can be applied to a wide spectrum of governmental and private activity.
Definitions of regulation in the wider field of regulatory theory have spanned the gamut from state-
sponsored efforts to command and control individual behavior through the use of targeted rules n63 to
any form of social control, regardless of the actors involved. n64 A narrow definition of regulation might
be some formulation along the lines of "any governmental effort to control behavior by other entities,
including business firms, subordinate levels of government, or individuals." n65 We might therefore take
as our starting-point definition of regulation some variation of the following: "the promulgation of an
authoritative set of rules, accompanied by some mechanism, typically a public agency, for monitoring
and promoting compliance with these rules." n66 This basic definition places the locus of behavioral
changes squarely within the state by presenting the set of rules as authoritative. n67 We might modify
this basic formulation by adding the phrase "by federal administrative agencies that govern interstate
economic behavior" to restrict our definition to those governmental activities relating to agency
regulation of interstate commerce, n68 based on the observation that "[governmental] capacity is not
exhausted by the actions of state [*90] personnel or the expenditure of state resources" n69 and a
desire to limit the scope of what we consider to be regulation. Under either formulation, however, the
definition seems deficient because the words "monitoring" and "compliance" limit the world of
regulation to restriction n70 and "an important aspect of regulation may be enablement - the creation
not merely of incentives but those conditions that allow activities to take place," such as radio-
frequency allocation. n71 Moreover, these definitions ignore governmental attempts to influence
behavior by encouraging desired behavior, such as tax credits for first-time home buyers, n72 rather
than deterring undesired behavior.
However, "it has become widely accepted that regulation can be carried out by numerous mechanisms
other than those commonly typified as "command and control.' Thus, scholars of regulation will see
emissions trading mechanisms or "name and shame' devices as being well within the province of their
concerns." n73 These latter conceptions of regulation draw into its definition attempts at social control
coming from nonstate actors. n74 In light of this realization, we might therefore want to broaden our
definition of regulation. It is tempting say that regulation is simply "the promulgation of some set of
norms, with the purpose of influencing behavior." This revision captures a wide range of circumstances
that can be thought of as regulation. It captures not just rules (governmental expressions of norms with
legal consequences) but also trade union actions, parenting, peer pressure, and a seemingly endless list
of other activities. Note that "authoritative set of rules" is omitted, which allows us to conceive of
regulation that occurs through the acts of nonstate actors. But note also that this definition of
regulation ignores both facilitative regulation and regulation that is meant to encourage activity. n75
Regulation---Binding Control---Predictability
Our interpretation is most predictable---scholarly consensus agrees that binding

control is a prototypical element of regulation
Abstract
The concept of regulation is believed to suffer from a lack of shared understanding. Yet the maturation
of the field raises the question whether this conclusion is still valid. By taking a new methodological
approach toward this question of conceptual consolidation, this study assesses how regulation is
conceived in the most cited articles in six social science disciplines. Four main conclusions are drawn.
First, there is a remarkable absence of explicit definitions. Second, the scope of the concept is vast,
which requires us to talk about regulation in rather abstract terms. Third, scholars largely agree that
prototype regulation is characterized by interventions that are intentional and direct involving
binding standard-setting, monitoring, and sanctioning and exercised by public-sector actors on the
economic activities of private-sector actors. Fourth, while there is considerable variation in research
concerns, this variation cannot be attributed to disciplinary differences. Instead, our findings support
the portrayal of the field as interdisciplinary, including a shared conception of regulation.
Prefer our evidence: its most recent and grounded in empirically-driven and
methodologically-innovative research
1 Introduction
The area of regulation has witnessed considerable maturation over the past decades. Since the 1970s,
with the introduction of the economic theory of regulation (Stigler 1971) and the rise of consumer,
risk, and environmental regulatory activity (Majone 1996, Ch. 3), it has developed into an international
field of practice and research, expanding particularly in the 1980s and 1990s. Regulatory bodies have
been established around the world, the language of regulation has become widespread in public and
academic discourse, and the effectiveness of different modes and tools of regulation has come under
scrutiny, particularly in the context of the financial crisis, environmental disasters, and the safety of food
and medicine. The field has also gone through a number of academic life stages: there has been
increased specialization in the disciplines in which regulation is studied, growth in the number of
research centers and fora for exchange, the creation of a journal devoted to the field, and the
publication of a range of handbooks.
Yet the question of what this has meant for the main concept in the field regulation is still on the
table. Some have suggested that there is agreement to disagree. For instance, Baldwin etal. argue that
there are three main conceptions: (i) regulation as the promulgation of an authoritative set of rules,
accompanied by some mechanism [] for monitoring and promoting compliance with these rules, (ii)
regulation as all the efforts of state agencies to steer the economy, and (iii) regulation as all
mechanisms of social control including unintentional and non-state processes (Baldwin etal. 1998,
pp. 34; cf. Jordana & Levi-Faur 2004, pp. 24; Baldwin etal. 2012, Ch. 1). The variation is attributed to
differences in disciplinary concerns, with lawyers, political scientists, and economists building mainly on
the first two conceptions, while socio-legal scholars emphasize the third (Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 4; cf.
Levi-Faur 2011, p. 3).
Yet some definitions enjoy cross-disciplinary appeal. For instance, many authors rely on Selznick's
definition of regulation as sustained and focused control exercised by a public agency over activities
that are valued by the community (Selznick 1985, p. 363). Equally prominent is Black's more detailed
definition of regulation as the sustained and focused attempt to alter the behaviour of others according
to defined standards and purposes with the intention of producing a broadly identified outcome or
outcomes, which may involve mechanisms of standard-setting, information-gathering and behaviour
modification (Black 2002, p. 26; cf. Parker & Braithwaite 2005; Morgan & Yeung 2007; Lodge & Wegrich
2012).1
Our study addresses the question whether we can identify any agreement on the definition of
regulation across different social science disciplines. Do we still find disciplinary preoccupations or does
scholarship point to a state of cross-disciplinary conceptual consolidation? Our main findings suggest
that there are shared conceptions of regulation across disciplines, with research interests that are not
discipline-specific driving the variation in conceptions.
We employ a new methodological approach to concept analysis that focuses on the actual use of the
regulation concept across different disciplines. We assess the conceptions held in the most-cited
articles in social science disciplines in which the phenomenon is a central concern: business,
economics, law, political science, public administration, and sociology. We focus on articles published in
journals listed in the Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index.2 By analyzing conceptions this way,
we can draw conclusions on conceptual consolidation across disciplines and on the core elements of
the concept.
What our approach has in common with conventional concept analysis is the assessment of influential
definitions in the field, and the identification of key conceptual questions. While scholars normally use
such assessment to position their own definition in the field, we draw on it to develop the analytical
framework for our empirical analysis. For each conceptual question, we analyze empirically whether,
and to what extent, there are commonalities in the answers provided by the articles we selected. This
implies that if some definition is identified, it is done on the basis of a systematic analysis of the answers
to the questions offered in the literature, rather than by us.
Regulation---Binding Control---Precision
Their interpretation blurs regulation into the larger categories of policy and
governance, which undermines precise topic-specific education
5 Discussion
What can we now say about the concept? As noted, most articles in our sample did not explicitly define
regulation. Our study has, therefore, relied on a process of careful reading, coding, and comparing.
Although there are many maybe answers, some features stand out. First, regulation is seen as an
intentional form of intervention by public-sector actors in economic activities. Private-sector regulators
and non-economic activities feature less prominently but still attract attention. Far less attention is paid
to public regulatees; hardly any attention is attributed to whether regulation requires organizational
separation of regulator and regulatee. Finally, no major disciplinary differences are observed in the way
regulation is conceptualized.
Depending on how much importance we wish to attribute to the main concerns of the articles we
assessed, we can distinguish two types of definitions that cut across disciplines an essence-based and
a pattern-based definition of regulation. These definitions are not meant to resolve debates once and
for all, but they give insight into the conceptualization of regulation in the literature. First, an essence-
based definition aims to capture the minimal essence of the concept. It is a classical definition in the
sense that it includes and solely includes those elements without which regulation loses its identity;
that is, those elements that need to be present for a phenomenon to qualify as regulation (Collier &
Mahon Jr. 1993). In our study, it excludes those elements that scholars have explicitly excluded from
regulation, while incorporating those where the balance is toward inclusion. Accordingly, regulation can
be defined as the intentional intervention in the activities of a target population. The intervention,
which this definition refers to, can be direct and/or indirect, the activities can be economic and/or non-
economic, the regulator may be a public-sector or private-sector actor, and the regulatee may equally
be a public-sector or private-sector actor.
This definition allows us to distinguish between instances of regulation and instances that do not fall
into that category primarily, instances of non-intentional intervention and instances where no
intervention is involved. However, the minimal definition leads to a rather broad conception of
regulation, which makes it hard to distinguish it from the concept of policy. The latter has, for instance,
been defined as intentional action by actors who are most interested in achieving policy outcomes
(Scharpf 1997, p. 36). Defined broadly, regulation may seem to be little more than a substitute for
policy. Similarly, regulation may resemble the concept of governance: the essence-based definition
does not allow us to regard regulation and regulatory governance as a subcategory of governance
(see Braithwaite etal. 2007). We should perhaps not be surprised to find that a classical definition is
characterized by a high level of abstraction: if the literature has an interest in a wide range of
manifestations of a phenomenon called regulation, there can only be agreement on a limited set of
constitutive conceptual elements. As Sartori (1970) emphasizes, increases in the number of referents
and decreases in the number of elements go hand in hand.
Accepting that regulation has a wide range of referents is not to say that all referents are equally
prominent. Our pattern-based definition is not less inclusive than the essence-based one, but it gives
insight into the manifestations which regulation scholars are mainly concerned with, and which we
consider more central to the concept. Attributing more importance to the variation in emphasis of
studies, regulation can be defined as intentional intervention in the activities of a target population,
where the intervention is typically direct involving binding standard-setting, monitoring, and
sanctioning and exercised by public-sector actors on the economic activities of private-sector actors.
Regulation---Prior Statutory Basis
Regulation is delegated lawmaking where agencies act on a prior statutory basis

Ellig 9 Dr. Jerry Ellig, Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University,
The Future of Regulation, 11-9, http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/academics/research/policy-
review/2010v3/content/the-future-of-regulation.pdf
Many times in casual conversation the term regulation is used to refer to any restriction imposed by
the government that defines certain actions as legal or illegal, but the definition is actually more
specific. Regulation occurs when a legislature delegates some of its lawmaking power to a regulatory
agency, which then issues detailed rules, the purpose of which is to carry out the intention of the
legislature. Regulations are issued by a regulatory agency, with the intention of filling in the gaps in
legislation. In the case of federal regulation, it fills in the gaps left by the U.S. Congress.
Two kinds of regulatory agencies exist at the federal level in the United States. Many regulatory agencies
are actually part of the executive branch and their top officials are hired and can be fired by the
President. These include agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the various agencies
that regulate transportation within the Department of Transportation, and any position within a Cabinet
department. All these regulatory agencies are directly responsible to the President.
There are also independent regulatory agencies, that is, agencies that are independent of the President,
but not independent of Congress. These agencies usually have the word commission in their title. The
President usually appoints the commissioners, who run these agencies for a fixed term, with the consent
of the Senate. The President cannot fire them, and as a result, these agencies tend to function relatively
independently of the executive branch. They do not necessarily act independently of Congress, since
Congress ultimately approves the budget and writes the laws that the agencies are supposed to
implement. Examples of this type of agency are the FCC, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Security
and Exchange Commission, and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The Federal Reserve is also
considered an independent regulatory agency. The most significant difference between the independent
agencies and the executive agencies is that executive agencies are supposed to operate within rules laid
out in executive orders. Democratic and Republican administrations issue executive orders and these
orders explain how agencies ought to analyze regulations. The White House has the ability to tell these
agencies, No, you cant issue that regulation, because you havent done your homework. The
independent agencies, on the other hand, have not traditionally been subject to that kind of oversight
by the White House.
Regulations are made through an organized process. There must be authorization in legislation for a
regulatory agency to enact a piece of regulation, and it must be empowered to issue a particular
regulation by Congress. The agency must issue any proposed regulation for public comment, and it will
take comments on the proposed regulation for an average of sixty to ninety days. It will then rewrite the
proposed regulation, and issue its final regulation. The regulation may go through several rounds of
proposals and revisions. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) reviews regulation produced by
executive agencies, both before it is released for comment and before it is officially published. Finally,
before any agency publishes a regulation, Congress is able to review that regulation. Although Congress
could nullify any regulation at any time, it also has an expedited process for reviewing regulations under
the Congressional Review Act. This Act allows Congress the power to quickly veto a proposed regulation
or to veto a final regulation after it is published by the passage of a joint resolution by a simple
majority.5 The Congressional Review Act has only been invoked once in history.
Regulation must fall within agencys statutory authority as defined by previous laws
created by Congress
Missouri 17 State of Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Laws and Regulations,
https://dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/lawsregs.htm
The term "statute" generally means an act or law passed by a legislative body, such as the Missouri
General Assembly or the United States Congress.
The term "regulation" generally means a rule or standard that has the force of law once promulgated by
an administrative agency within its statutory authority. It is sometimes referred to as a "rule."
State regulations are developed through the rulemaking process by departments or commissions given
such authority by statute.
Regulation---Excludes Forbiddance
Regulation steers valued activities and protects their worthwhile aspects---its not
the same thing as an outright ban, which is forbiddance
2 Searching for Platonic essences
As noted, scholars have stated that the diversity of properties that are associated with regulation make
it impossible to come to a single definition of the concept we refer to as regulation. As Baldwin etal. put
it, there are a variety of definitions in usage which are not reducible to some Platonic essence or single
concept (1998, p. 2).5 In addition, Black points out that the definition used often strongly depends on
the problem that the author is interested in (2002, p. 13). As a consequence, Levi-Faur argues, we
should recognize the many meanings of regulation and devote our attention to understanding each
others' terms (2011, p. 5).
Nonetheless, two main observations can be made. First, at an abstract level, authors agree that
regulation is about intervention in the behavior or activities of individual and/or corporate actors. As
Mitnick puts it, the central element of the class of behaviors that might be termed regulation is an
interference of some sort in the activity subject to regulation it is to be governed, altered, controlled,
guided, regulated in some way (1980, p. 2; emphasis in original). Similarly, Moran indicates, its core
meaning is mechanical and immediately invokes the act of steering (Moran 2003, p. 13). Mitnick adds
that this implies that regulated activities are not to be replaced or banned; they are only to be
regulated. This is reflected in Selznick's definition, which refers to activities that are valued by a
community and, thus, excludes most areas of criminal law enforcement (Selznick 1985, p. 363; cf.
Ogus 1994, p. 1; Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 3). In Mitnick's view, [t]here should be public recognition that
the regulated activity is worthwhile in itself and therefore needs protection as well as control (1985,
p. 363). Hence, we find some agreement on regulation being about intervention in activities, and there
are various attempts to establish boundaries around the realm of regulation. For Mitnick (1980) and
Selznick (1985), this is largely about separating regulatory intervention from the realm of forbiddance.
Regulation---Excludes Guidance
Intra-agency memoranda arent regulations

Connecticut 74 Supreme Court of Connecticut, Town of Greenwich v. Connecticut Transportation
Authority et al., 166 Conn. 337; 348 A.2d 596; 1974 Conn. LEXIS 902, 5-7, Lexis
Conn. Gen. Stat. 4-166 defines the term "regulation" as each agency statement of general applicability
that implements, interprets, or prescribes law or policy, or describes the organization, procedure, or
practice requirements of any agency. The term includes the amendment or repeal of a prior regulation,
but does not include (1) statements concerning only the internal management of any agency and not
affecting private rights or procedures available to the public, or (2) declaratory rulings issued pursuant
to Conn. Gen. Stat. 4-176, or (3) intra-agency memoranda.
Regulation---Forward-Looking
Regulation must include specific directives to alter future behavior, not just
compensate for the past
Morriss 5 Andrew P. Morriss * and Bruce Yandle ** and Andrew Dorchak ***, * Galen J. Roush
Professor of Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University, ** Alumni Distinguished
Professor of Economics Emeritus, Clemson University, *** Head of Reference and Foreign/International
Law Specialist, Case Western Reserve University School of Law, CHOOSING HOW TO REGULATE, The
Harvard Environmental Law Review, 29 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev. 179, Lexis
II. CHOICE OF REGULATORY INSTRUMENT
We define regulation as (1) forward-looking (rather than backward-looking), n30 (2) substantive
constraints on (3) private sector actors imposed by (4) a government actor. This considerably narrows
the scope of behavior to be explained. We think our definition is uncontroversial and only one point
needs elaboration. The first part of our definition limits regulation to those actions that prescribe the
conditions under which particular behaviors will be permitted in the future, rather than solely dictating
compensation for actions taken in the past. Thus the tobacco lawsuits constituted regulatory activity
since the tobacco products that were the subject of the suit continue in use and the substantive relief
embodied in the settlement addressed future behavior by the tobacco companies. n31 By contrast, the
suits filed in the late 1990s against the lead paint manufacturers [*185] over harms from residential
uses of their products did not constitute a regulatory activity, as lead-based paint was no longer
permitted for the uses that gave rise to the litigation. There was thus no forward-looking component in
the result. We limit our definition to actions intended to alter future conduct because it is the claimed
superiority of proactive measures to compensation for actual harms that is used to justify prior restraint
in the first place.
This is not to suggest that requiring payment of compensation for harm caused does not influence
future behavior, just that there is a difference between the generalized incentive "not to be negligent"
provided by tort law and specific regulatory directives to use particular equipment or follow particular
procedures. Tort law leaves to the private sector the decisions about how much of an activity to engage
in and how to reduce the costs of its behavior, including reducing liability costs. Regulations direct
private actors to take specific actions, eliminating or greatly reducing the discretion they have to make
choices. The specific directives were absent in the lead-paint litigation, taking it out of the regulation-
by-litigation category. n32
Regulation---Intentional
Regulation is only intentional control---other definitions are so broad as to be

analytically useless
2.1 Intentionality
Scholars have offered different answers to the question of whether regulation is, by definition,
intentional. While intentionality is an element of the first two conceptions distinguished by Baldwin
etal., the third conception regulation as all mechanisms of social control (1998, p. 4) explicitly
includes non-intentionality.6 Non-intentional regulation may be associated with the presence of norms
or the emergence of systems of accounting and population statistics that, in turn, restructure social
relationships and, subsequently, non-targeted behavior. Thus, anything producing effects on behaviour
is capable of being considered as regulatory (Baldwin etal. 1998, p. 4). Separately, Majone argues that,
in the period up to the rise of the regulatory state in Europe, European scholars tend[ed] to identify
regulation with the whole realm of legislation, governance, and social control (Majone 1994, p. 78).7 In
his view, [s]uch a broad use of the term makes the study of regulation almost coextensive with the
study of law, economics, political science, and sociology (Majone 1994, p. 78). These broad conceptions
also include intervention by culture or social norms (see Hall etal. 1999). More generally, they are
associated with studies dealing with governmentality. Here regulation involves all types of power-
relations that require individuals to auto-correct themselves in light of the dominant logic of
governing (Dean 1999; Power 2007; Miller & Rose 2008).
Various authors have pointed to the limits of such broad conceptions. Advocating the inclusion of
intentionality, Black suggests that including social norms and culture provides no boundaries as to
where regulation might end, and some other influencing factors take effect, and so provides very little
analytical purchase (2002, p. 11; p. 25). Others point out that the inclusion of non-intentional
processes is not in line with common usage of the concept. Mitnick indicates that regulation refers only
to those types of interference that are intentional: intuitively, regulation implies governed, guided,
controlled interference in the broadest sense, deliberate or intentional interference (1980, p. 3).
Finally, Selznick observes that [t]here is a strong temptation to identify regulation with the whole
realm of law, governance, and social control (1985, p. 363). Yet in the field of public policy and
administration, he argues, regulation has a more specific meaning: it is about sustained and focused
and, thus, intentional control.
This definition is the overwhelming consensus of academics---including non-
intentionally is a clear distortion of the term
For each item where the agreement score is lower than 0.90, we assess whether the disagreement
can be attributed to disciplinary differences. Starting with intentionality, the table indicates that
regulation is conceived as an intentional process in all 101 articles. Moreover, as emphasized
previously, only eight articles (8%) include non-intentionality. Six of these build on the French rgulation
literature, including three articles by Jessop (as noted, references to authors included in the list of 101
most-cited articles can be found in the appendix). We should also keep in mind that the French term
rgulation is [not to be] confused with regulation (rglementation in French) (Boyer 2002, p. 1). The
remaining two articles focus on the social regulation of feelings (James) and the regulation of medicine,
where regulation may be driven by professional (non-intentional) norms (Waring). Seven of the articles
are published in sociology, one in political science.
This is the #1 core element that distinguishes regulation

5 Discussion
What can we now say about the concept? As noted, most articles in our sample did not explicitly define
regulation. Our study has, therefore, relied on a process of careful reading, coding, and comparing.
Although there are many maybe answers, some features stand out. First, regulation is seen as an
intentional form of intervention by public-sector actors in economic activities. Private-sector regulators
and non-economic activities feature less prominently but still attract attention. Far less attention is paid
to public regulatees; hardly any attention is attributed to whether regulation requires organizational
separation of regulator and regulatee. Finally, no major disciplinary differences are observed in the way
regulation is conceptualized.
Depending on how much importance we wish to attribute to the main concerns of the articles we
assessed, we can distinguish two types of definitions that cut across disciplines an essence-based and
a pattern-based definition of regulation. These definitions are not meant to resolve debates once and
for all, but they give insight into the conceptualization of regulation in the literature. First, an essence-
based definition aims to capture the minimal essence of the concept. It is a classical definition in the
sense that it includes and solely includes those elements without which regulation loses its
identity; that is, those elements that need to be present for a phenomenon to qualify as regulation
(Collier & Mahon Jr. 1993). In our study, it excludes those elements that scholars have explicitly
excluded from regulation, while incorporating those where the balance is toward inclusion. Accordingly,
regulation can be defined as the intentional intervention in the activities of a target population. The
intervention, which this definition refers to, can be direct and/or indirect, the activities can be economic
and/or non-economic, the regulator may be a public-sector or private-sector actor, and the regulatee
may equally be a public-sector or private-sector actor.
Regulation---Agency
Regulation must involve agency action

Ellig 9 Dr. Jerry Ellig, Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University,
The Future of Regulation, 11-9, http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/academics/research/policy-
review/2010v3/content/the-future-of-regulation.pdf
Many times in casual conversation the term regulation is used to refer to any restriction imposed by
the government that defines certain actions as legal or illegal, but the definition is actually more
specific. Regulation occurs when a legislature delegates some of its lawmaking power to a regulatory
agency, which then issues detailed rules, the purpose of which is to carry out the intention of the
legislature. Regulations are issued by a regulatory agency, with the intention of filling in the gaps in
legislation. In the case of federal regulation, it fills in the gaps left by the U.S. Congress.
Two kinds of regulatory agencies exist at the federal level in the United States. Many regulatory agencies
are actually part of the executive branch and their top officials are hired and can be fired by the
President. These include agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the various agencies
that regulate transportation within the Department of Transportation, and any position within a Cabinet
department. All these regulatory agencies are directly responsible to the President.
There are also independent regulatory agencies, that is, agencies that are independent of the President,
but not independent of Congress. These agencies usually have the word commission in their title. The
President usually appoints the commissioners, who run these agencies for a fixed term, with the consent
of the Senate. The President cannot fire them, and as a result, these agencies tend to function relatively
independently of the executive branch. They do not necessarily act independently of Congress, since
Congress ultimately approves the budget and writes the laws that the agencies are supposed to
implement. Examples of this type of agency are the FCC, Consumer Product Safety Commission, Security
and Exchange Commission, and Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The Federal Reserve is also
considered an independent regulatory agency.
The most significant difference between the independent agencies and
the executive agencies is that executive agencies are supposed to operate
within rules laid out in executive orders. Democratic and Republican
administrations issue executive orders and these orders explain how agencies
ought to analyze regulations. The White House has the ability to tell these agencies, No, you cant issue
that regulation, because you havent done
your homework. The independent agencies, on the other hand, have not
traditionally been subject to that kind of oversight by the White House.
Regulations are made through an organized process. There must be
authorization in legislation for a regulatory agency to enact a piece of

regulation, and it must be empowered to issue a particular regulation by
Congress. The agency must issue any proposed regulation for public
comment, and it will take comments on the proposed regulation for an
average of sixty to ninety days. It will then rewrite the proposed regulation,
and issue its final regulation. The regulation may go through several rounds
of proposals and revisions. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
reviews regulation produced by executive agencies, both before it is released
for comment and before it is officially published. Finally, before any agency
publishes a regulation, Congress is able to review that regulation. Although
Congress could nullify any regulation at any time, it also has an expedited
process for reviewing regulations under the Congressional Review Act. This
Act allows Congress the power to quickly veto a proposed regulation or to
veto a final regulation after it is published by the passage of a joint
resolution by a simple majority.5 The Congressional Review Act has only
been invoked once in history.
Regulation refers to agency actions

Guggenheim 17 Miriam Guggenheim, JD and Lawyer at Covington & Burling LLP, et al., The
Regulatory Freeze: What it Means for Key Food Regulatory Initiatives, 1-23, https://www.cov.com/-
/media/files/corporate/publications/2017/01/the_regulatory_freeze_what_it_means_for_key_food_re
gulatory_initiatives.pdf
The regulatory freeze applies to new or pending regulations, which, with some exceptions described in
more detail below, include regulations ready to be sent to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication, regulations already sent to the Office of the Federal Register but not yet published, and
regulations that have been published in the Federal Register but are not yet effective.
The term regulation includes any regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866: any
substantive action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is
expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance
notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking. It also includes guidance
documents and any other agency statement that sets forth a policy on a statutory, regulatory, or
technical issue or an interpretation of a statutory or regulatory issue.
Regulation must be created by agencies and cannot be an act of Congress
Coble 15 Christopher Coble, Esq., JD, FindLaw, What's the Difference Between Laws and
Regulations?, FindLaw, 10-23, http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2015/10/whats-the-difference-
between-laws-and-regulations.html
When we hear that something is against the law, we generally don't question where the law comes
from. But 'the law' can mean a lot of things, from general ideas about jurisprudence all the way down to
a written ordinance. And while the words 'law' and 'regulation' are often used interchangeably, they can
refer to very distinct things.
Although the effect of laws and regulations can often be the same, it is important to understand how
they are different.
Letter of the Law
Laws are the products of written statutes, passed by either the U.S. Congress or state legislatures. The
legislatures create bills that, when passed by a vote, become statutory law.
For example, in response to the stock market crash of 1929, Congress passed the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 in an effort to curb securities fraud and insider trading. The Act is codified in the
United States Code as Title 15, Section 78a, and, among other things, prohibits the disclosure of false or
misleading information related to securities transactions. The Securities and Exchange Act also created
the Securities and Exchange Commission, tasked with enforcing federal securities laws.
Rules of Regulations
Regulations, on the other hand, are standards and rules adopted by administrative agencies that
govern how laws will be enforced. So an agency like the SEC can have its own regulations for enforcing
major securities laws. For instance, while the Securities and Exchange Act prohibits using insider or
nonpublic information to make trades, the SEC can have its own rules on how it will investigate charges
of insider trading.
Like laws, regulations are codified and published so that parties are on notice regarding what is and isn't
legal. And regulations often have the same force as laws, since, without them, regulatory agencies
wouldn't be able to enforce laws.
Regulation is delegated legislation made pursuant to statute

Levi 4 David Levi-Faur, Head of the Federmann School of Public Policy and the Department of Political
Science, at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Regulatory Reforms: Introduction, 10-30,
http://poli.haifa.ac.il/~levi/R_int.html
Finally, regulation is often defined to encompass only delegated legislation, or rules that are made
pursuant to powers granted in a parent statute (Ogus, 1994; Law Reform Commission 1986). This more
limited view of regulation as delegated legislation or as "the regs" may or may not include such other
rule-like creations as the promulgation of guidelines, codes, rule of procedures, and voluntary codes
(Grabosky 1995).
Regulation---Must Be the State
Regulations only refer to rules created by government

Roediger 4 Thomas Roediger-Schluga, Senior Researcher at the. Austrian Research Centers, The
Porter Hypothesis and the Economic Consequences of Environmental Regulation, p. 11
1.4 Key Terms and Basic Concepts
Until now, several key terms and concepts have been used without explicitly clarifying what they mean
in the context of this book. This section will therefore provide definitions for the main terms and
concepts. The term regulation refers to 'policies where the government acts as a referee to oversee
market activity and the behaviour of private actors in the economy' (OECD 1996, p. 4). Obviously, this
definition is contingent on the institutional framework in which a regulation is implemented and
operated. Therefore, the term regulation carries a slightly different meaning on either sides of the
Atlantic. In the United States, regulation is associated with the sustained and focused control of a public
agency. In Europe, the term tends to be employed in a much wider sense referring to the whole realm
of legislation, governance and social control (Majone 1992, pp. 1-2). This has to do with the fact that
specialised, single-purpose regulatory agencies are much more common in the United States than in
Europe, where regulatory functions have been assigned to traditional ministries or inter-ministerial
committees. Since the empirical material used in this book is from Austria, the term 'regulation' is used
in its broader, European meaning.
Regulations require state action

Another common perception of regulation, or at least a popular reference to regulation, equates the
concept with laws that serve interest groups.17 Economist George Stigler popularized this view, arguing
that regulation is acquired by the industry and is designed and operated primarily for its benefit.18
Richard Posner offered a more refined version of this perception: [R]egulation [is] a product allocated
in accordance with basic principles of supply and demand . . . [and] we can expect a product to be
supplied to those who value it the most.19 But, of course, not all regulations serve industries.20 Even
when the regulator is captured by industries, it is far from clear that lack of regulation would be better
for the public.21
Regulation---Includes Guidance
Regulation includes guidance documents

Guggenheim 17 Miriam Guggenheim, JD and Lawyer at Covington & Burling LLP, et al., The
Regulatory Freeze: What it Means for Key Food Regulatory Initiatives, 1-23, https://www.cov.com/-
/media/files/corporate/publications/2017/01/the_regulatory_freeze_what_it_means_for_key_food_re
gulatory_initiatives.pdf
The regulatory freeze applies to new or pending regulations, which, with some exceptions described in
more detail below, include regulations ready to be sent to the Office of the Federal Register for
publication, regulations already sent to the Office of the Federal Register but not yet published, and
regulations that have been published in the Federal Register but are not yet effective.
The term regulation includes any regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866: any
substantive action by an agency (normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is
expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance
notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking. It also includes guidance
documents and any other agency statement that sets forth a policy on a statutory, regulatory, or
technical issue or an interpretation of a statutory or regulatory issue.
Regulation includes internal agency guidance

Hahn 2k Robert W. Hahn, Director of the AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, Resident
Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and Research Associate at the Kennedy School of
Government, Harvard University, State and Federal Regulatory Reform: A Comparative Analysis, The
Journal of Legal Studies, June, 29 J. Legal Stud. 873, Lexis
n1 There is no widely accepted definition of regulation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
defines regulation as a statement by an agency to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or to
describe the procedure or practice of an agency. See OMB, Report to Congress on the Costs and Benefits
of Federal Regulation 24 (1997). The federal government and the states use similar definitions to
establish requirements for the analysis and review of administrative rule making. Therefore, although
regulations are generally perceived as agency rules that constrain the behavior of individuals or
business, the legal definition of regulation also includes internal agency management. In this paper, the
terms "regulation" and "rule" are used interchangeably.
Regulations can be created internally without notice-and-comment

Grewal 6 Amandeep S. Grewal, * B.A., Williams College. J.D., cum laude, University of Michigan.
Contributing Editor, The University of Michigan Law Review. Richard Katcher Senior Tax Prize. LL.M, with
distinction, Georgetown University Law Center, SUBSTANCE OVER FORM? PHANTOM REGULATIONS
AND THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, Houston Business & Tax Law Journal, 7 Hous. Bus. & Tax L.J. 42,
Lexis
n108. References to "regulations" in Subtitle A of the Code are commonly understood to trigger the
procedural notice-and-comment requirements of 553. See infra note 112. The word "regulation," by
itself, might not necessarily require an agency to prescribe rules through the notice-and-comment
process. For example, various statutes in Subtitle F of the Code instruct the Secretary to issue
"regulations" pertaining to agency organization, and the Secretary can fulfill the statutory mandate
without observing the notice-and-comment process. See discussion supra note 99 (noting the limited
exceptions of 553). Although some statutory contexts use "rules" and "regulations" interchangeably,
this probably is not true of the Internal Revenue Code - the Treasury does attach some significance to
the word "regulations." See 26 C.F.R. 601.601(a)(1) (2006) ("Internal revenue rules take various forms.
The most important rules are issued as regulations and Treasury decisions prescribed by the
Commissioner and approved by the Secretary or his delegate."). Thus, the statutory term "regulation,"
when found in Subtitle A of the Code, will almost always indicate that the Secretary must proceed by
notice-and-comment rulemaking, although the analytical underpinning of this conclusion is not totally
clear. See also infra note 112.
Regulation---Includes Self-Regulation
Regulation includes non-state self-regulation

2.3 Nature of the regulator
Scholars assessing the concept have also addressed the question of whether regulation is solely carried
out by state actors (see also Ogus 1994, pp. 257261). This question is at the heart of discussions of
whether self-regulation by industry can be regarded as a form of regulation. This question distinguishes
the first two conceptions identified by Baldwin etal. from their third conception that is, regulation as
all mechanisms of social control (1998, p. 4) which explicitly includes the possibility of self-
regulation.11 Some earlier studies associate regulation with state actors. For Noll (1980), for instance,
regulation constitutes one of the tools that governments can use to control the economy. For Selznick,
regulation is exercised by a public agency (1985, p. 363). For Ogus, regulation is a politico-economic
concept [which] can best be understood by reference to different systems of economic organization and
the legal forms which maintain them (1994, p. 1). Regulation would normally refer to the legal means
through which market deficiencies are corrected, thus, having a directive and state-centered public law
character (Ogus 1994, pp. 23).
Finally, Mitnick indicates that although his study mainly focuses on regulation by government, private
actors may also regulate (1985, p. 14). Black also explicitly includes self-regulation and other forms of
non-state regulation for instance, transnational regulatory regimes, such as the Forest Stewardship
Council arguing that [i]f regulation remains a concept tied inherently to the state, then in trying to
analyse it, we will find contemporary forms of rule hard to understand, if indeed, we recognise them at
all (2002, p. 22).
Regulation---Includes All Targets
Regulation can be broader than just economic issues and includes control of
government
2.4 Nature of the regulated activity
Disagreement can also be found when it comes to the question of which activities are subject to
regulation. Little disagreement exists in terms of the nature of regulation it is believed to involve
economic, social, and environmental regulation. Economic regulation traditionally involves aspects of
competition and utilities regulation (such as price-setting), but can be extended to product licensing and
the inspection of business activities. Non-economic regulation may be defined as interventions that seek
to reshape social relationships that are not directly characterized by an economic exchange relationship.
The main debate centers on the question whether only private-sector activities, or even only economic
activities, are subject to regulation. In his analysis, Noll (1980) only refers to the regulation of business
activities and, in particular, the regulation of utilities. Mitnick focuses on the policing of private activity
that is, activities that may be economic or social in nature but points out that regulation may also
target intra-governmental activities (1980, p. 6). Selznick, in turn, argues, most regulated enterprise is
private, but nominally public agencies, such as colleges, hospitals, or utility companies, are also subject
to regulation (1985, p. 364).
Elsewhere, the study of regulation has included both public and private activities. For example, Hood
etal. have focused on the regulation of government by government (Hood etal. 1999, 2004; Lodge &
Hood 2010; cf. Wilson & Rachal 1977). These studies highlight that regulatory activity involves
relationships ranging from traditional public regulation of private activities to private-private, public-
public, and even private-public relationships (see Scott 2002).
Regulation---Binding Control---Aff
Regulation are standards that influence conduct

The legal concept of regulation is often perceived as control or constraint. For example, the definitive
legal dictionary, Blacks Law Dictionary, defines regulation as the act or process of controlling by rule
or restriction.11 Similarly, The Oxford English Dictionary defines regulation as the action or fact of
regulating, and to regulate as to control, govern, or direct.12 To many people, control connotes
restrictions, although control may have other meanings.
Regulation often imposes no restrictions, but enables, facilitates, or adjusts activities, with no
restrictions. Examples of such regulations include the supply of roads, health and emergency services,
public education and public libraries, welfare benefits, reliefs to victims of natural disasters and bailouts
to failed institutions. Such services directly influence (or adjust) conduct of individuals and firms. In
the abstract, all government actions supposedly influence conduct of individuals and firms, but not
necessarily directly. For example, activities related to national defense and foreign policy tend to have
only indirect influence on conduct of individuals and firms.13
Regulation is the setting standards---it doesnt have to be binding

Abbott 9 Kenneth W. Abbott* and Duncan Snidal+, * Professor of Law and Global Studies, Willard H.
Pedrick Distinguished Research Scholar, Arizona State University, + Associate Professor of Political
Science, University of Chicago, Strengthening International Regulation Through Transnational New
Governance: Overcoming the Orchestration Deficit, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, March, 42
Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 501, Lexis
I. Introduction
Regulation of transnational business has become a dynamic area of international governance. n1

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) have demanded stricter regulation of international firms and
their suppliers, n2 especially with regard to worker rights, human rights, and the environment - the
areas addressed in this Article. n3 Revelations of politically salient problems such as sweatshops and
child labor, and high-profile crises such as the Bhopal disaster and Exxon Valdez oil spill, n4 have
stimulated significant public support for [*504] these demands. Yet business has, for the most part,
vigorously resisted mandatory (and even less than mandatory n5) regulation in these areas, even as an
increasing number of large firms n6 have responded to public demand, reputational concerns, and the
possibility of "win-win" innovations n7 to embrace corporate social responsibility, n8 self-regulation, n9
and stronger requirements for suppliers. n10 In addition, the evolving structures of global [*505]
production - multinational enterprises and global supply chains n11 - pose major challenges for
conventional "regulation": action by the state or, at the international level, by groups of states, acting
primarily through treaty-based intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) to control the conduct of
economic actors through mandatory legal rules with monitoring and coercive enforcement. n12 As
these opposing forces have collided, actors on all sides have established a plethora of innovative
institutions, n13 with the expressed goal of controlling global production n14 through transnational
norms n15 that apply directly to firms and other economic operators. n16
The new regulatory initiatives have two particularly striking features. n17 The first is the central role of
private actors, operating singly and through novel collaborations, and the correspondingly modest and
largely indirect role of "the state." n18 Unlike traditional inter-state treaties and IGOs, n19 and unlike
transgovernmental networks of state officials, n20 most of these arrangements are governed by (1)
firms and industry groups whose own practices or those of supplier firms are the targets of regulation;
(2) NGOs and other civil society groups, including labor unions and socially responsible [*506]
investors; n21 and (3) combinations of actors from these two categories. n22 States and IGOs support
and even participate in some largely private schemes, yet the state is not central to their governance or
operations. n23 Other arrangements resemble public-private partnerships, with states or IGOs
collaborating on a more or less equal footing with private actors. Finally, a few IGOs - including the
United Nations, through its Global Compact, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), through its Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises - have adopted norms for
business conduct that aim to influence firms directly (as opposed to indirectly, through rules governing
states). n24 Many of these initiatives also engage private actors in the regulatory process. Thus, even
traditional international regulatory modalities have begun to take new forms.
The second striking feature is the voluntary rather than state-mandated nature of the new regulatory
norms. n25 It is natural for private institutions formed by firms or NGOs to adopt voluntary norms, as
they lack the authority to promulgate binding law. But even the new public-private arrangements and
IGO initiatives such as the UN Global Compact operate through "soft law" approaches rather than the
traditional "hard law" of treaties.
We refer to these novel private, public-private, and IGO initiatives as forms of "regulatory standard-
setting" (RSS), n26 defined [*507] as the promulgation and implementation of nonbinding, voluntary
standards of business conduct in situations that reflect "prisoner's dilemma" externality incentives (the
normal realm of regulation), rather than coordination network externality incentives n27 (the realm of
voluntary technical "standards" such as those set by the International Organization for Standardization).
n28 RSS potentially involves all of the functions of administrative regulation in domestic legal systems:
rule making, rule promotion and implementation, monitoring, adjudication of compliance, and the
imposition of sanctions. n29 The rapid multiplication of RSS schemes is creating a new kind of
transnational regulatory system, one that demands a broader view of regulation and a more nuanced
view of the state as regulator. n30
[FOOTNOTE 30]
n30. Some definitions of "regulation" attempt to encompass such developments. For example, Errol
Meidinger, Beyond Westphalia: Competitive Legalization in Emerging Transnational Regulatory Systems,
in Law and Legalization in Emerging Transnational Relations 121, 121 (Christian Brutsch & Dirk Lehmkuhl
eds., 2007) [hereinafter Meidinger, Beyond Westphalia], defines "regulation" as "a purposive, organized
and sustained effort to establish a general and consistent order in a field of human activity." It "typically
centres on rules defined in terms of rights and duties, with differentiated official roles and normative
justifications ... characterized by a reliance on credentialed experts." Id. Similarly, Julia Black, Enrolling
Actors in Regulatory Systems: Examples from UK Financial Services Regulation, Pub. L., Spring 2003, at
63, 65, defines "regulation" as "the sustained and focused attempt to alter the behaviour of others
according to defined standards or purposes with the intention of producing a broadly identified
outcome or outcomes, and which may involve mechanisms of standard-setting, information-gathering
and behaviour-modification." Even more broadly, Stepan Wood defines "regulation" as "all calculated
efforts at social control, whether undertaken by state agents or not." Wood, supra note 15, at 229.
Regulation is broader than restriction and includes policies that influence or guide
actors
Krajewski 3 Markus Krajewski, Associate Professor of Media History of Science at the Faculty of
Media at Bauhaus University Weimar, National Regulation and Trade Liberalization In Services : The
Legal Impact of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) on National Regulatory Autonomy,
p. 4
More fundamentally, in some situations regulation enhances all choices or even enables choice in the
lira place, for example, a market economy cannot function without the provision of a legal or monetary
system or without basic infrastructure. Unless the law defines and allocates property rights, exchange
activities are not possible. As JtinJit points out. an understanding of regulation can be based on the
notion that "regulation could be designed to enable and assure the existence of a market rather than to
impede its natural operation".12 A definition of regulation should therefore not focus solely on the
concept of restricting private choices for a collective good. Regulation is more adequately understood
as a process of guiding and influencing economic actors. Regan defines regulation as "a process or
activity in which government requires or proscribes certain activities or behaviour on the parit of
individuals and institutions, mostly private, but sometimes public"." This definition is a useful approach
to the concept of regulation, which is broad enough to include regulation in most systems. Regulation in
its broadest sense should be understood as the process of influencing, controlling and guiding economic
or other private activities with impacts on others through various governmental policies and measures.
This raises the question, why and how governments regulate, i.e. which regulatory goals are pursued
and which instruments are used. Both questions will be analyzed in chapter 2.
Regulation---Agencies---Aff
Regulation does not exclusively refer to agencies

Lawyers frequently use the word regulation in reference to rules of administrative agencies. This
habit tracks the executive branchs terminology.14 For example, Executive Order 12,866, which requires
federal agencies to engage in cost-benefit analysis when deciding whether and how to regulate,
defines regulation as an agency statement of general applicability and future effect, which the
agency intends to have the force and effect of law, that is designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe
law or policy or to describe the procedure or practice requirements of an agency.15 This meaning of
the word mirrors another common perception of the term regulation, but surely does not capture the
entire spectrum of regulatory instruments. Much of our regulatory landscape does not originate in
administrative agencies.16
[FOOTNOTE 16]
For example, law made by courtscommon lawis a traditional form of regulation. See Andrew P.
Morrisss et al., Regulation by Litigation (2008); Regulation Through Litigation (W. Kip Viscusi ed., 2002);
Richard A. Posner, Regulation (Agencies) Versus Litigation (Courts): An Analytical Framework, in
Regulation vs. Litigation 11 (Daniel P. Kessler ed., 2010); see also Freedom Holdings, Inc. v. Spitzer, 358
F.3d 205 (2d Cir. 2004); Sanders v. Brown, 504 F.3d 904 (9th Cir. 2007); The T.J. Hooper v. Northern
Barge, 60 F.2d 737 (2d Cir. 1932).
[END OF FOOTNOTE]
Another common perception of regulation, or at least a popular reference to regulation, equates the
concept with laws that serve interest groups.17 Economist George Stigler popularized this view, arguing
that regulation is acquired by the industry and is designed and operated primarily for its benefit.18
Richard Posner offered a more refined version of this perception: [R]egulation [is] a product allocated
in accordance with basic principles of supply and demand . . . [and] we can expect a product to be
supplied to those who value it the most.19 But, of course, not all regulations serve industries.20 Even
when the regulator is captured by industries, it is far from clear that lack of regulation would be better
for the public.21
Regulation---Precision Impacts
Strict clarity on the definition of regulation is key to topic and legal education
People hold strong views about regulation, but do they know what regulation means? National
Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) is a landmark in regulation jurisprudence, yet the NFIB Court
was divided over the meaning of the term to regulate. Long ago, John Stuart Mill observed that we
do not [always] understand the grounds of our opinion. But when we turn to . . . morals, religion,
politics, social relations, and the business of life, three-fourths of the arguments for every disputed
opinion consist in dispelling the appearances which favor some opinion different from it. The
controversy and confusion about regulation illustrate the phenomenon. This Essay explores the meaning
of the term regulation.
People hold strong views about regulation, but do they know what regulation means? National
Federation of Independent Business (NFIB)1 is a milestone in regulation jurisprudence, yet the NFIB
Court was divided over the meaning of the term to regulate. Disagreeing on whether Congress has
authority to mandate minimum health insurance coverage, the Justices presented two opposite, yet
firm views about whether the phrase to regulate can mean to require activities.2 This fundamental
disagreement led the Justices to a debate about the question whether a health insurance mandate is
equivalent to address[ing] the diet problem by ordering everyone to buy vegetables.3
During the past century, substantial resources have been invested in the politics and scholarship of
regulation (see Figure 1).4 Nonetheless, the term regulation appears to escape a clear definition. 5
Although regulation has been one of the most controversial topics in law and politics, it has also been
one of the most misunderstood concepts in modern legal thinking.
The evasive nature of the term regulation is largely a product of confusion between two unrelated
mattersthe abstract concept of regulation and opinions about the desirable scope of regulatory
powers or desirable regulatory policies. People intuitively understand the word regulation to mean
government intervention in liberty and choicesthrough legal rules that define the legally available
options and through legal rules that manipulate incentives. But too often, ideologies and preexisting
beliefs dictate perceptions as to what intervention means and whether intervention is needed. This
pattern results in inconsistent preferences for regulation and obscures the understanding of the term.
It is not uncommon that individuals who express contempt of government regulation are proponents of
intrusive regulation that serves their values,8 while individuals who advocate for government regulation
reject notions of regulatory tradeoffs.9 The Supreme Courts debate over the meaning of the phrase to
regulate in NFIB illuminates the phenomenon.10 Scholars who grappled with the meaning of the term
regulation produced various definitions for the meaning of intervention or followed the path of using
their own personal beliefs to explain the concept, indirectly creating informal definitions.
A few examples of the confusion between perceptions of regulation and the understanding of the
concept as government intervention may be helpful.
*** ELEMENTARY / SECONDARY
EDUCATION
Elementary Education---Grades/Years
Elementary education is K-8

Education Degree 17 Elementary Education Programs,
http://www.educationdegree.com/programs/elementary-education/
Elementary Education Degrees Online
Are you a generalist or a specialist?
The term "elementary education" broadly refers to the teaching of students in grades K-8. But, within
the field, there is opportunity for a wide variety of specialization in areas such as reading, special
education, English as a second language and more.
First 6-8 years of education

Collins 17 Collins English Dictionary, elementary education,
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/elementary-education
noun
education
the first six to eight years of a child's education

Elementary Education---Excludes Early Childhood
It excludes early childhood education

Flavin 16 Brianna Flavin, MFA, Freelance Writer for Collegis Education, Early Childhood Education
vs. Elementary Education: Which Environment is Right for You?, Rasmussen 5-23,
http://www.rasmussen.edu/degrees/education/blog/early-childhood-education-vs-elementary-
education/
Early childhood education (ECE) focuses on the academic, social and cognitive skills that develop in
children from birth through preschool. Elementary education refers to the primary education that
comes after preschool but before middle school (typically kindergarten through fifth or sixth grade.)
There are definite distinctions between the two sectors that are important to understand. Were here
to help you make an informed decision about early childhood education versus elementary education.
We combined government information, real-time job market data and expert insight to provide you a
side-by-side comparison below.
Maintaining a strict distinction is key to precision and topic education

MEG 17 Master of Education Degree Guide, What Grades Can You Teach With an Early Childhood
Education Degree?, http://www.master-of-education.org/faq/what-grades-can-you-teach-with-an-
early-childhood-education-degree/
What is the Primary Focus of an Early Childhood Education Program?
It is very important to understand the distinctions between the focus of an Early Childhood Education
program and an Elementary Education program. While each program has some subject area overlap, the
focus of each program is very different. When you study for an Elementary Education degree, the
primary focus will be on primary education that is needed after preschool and before middle school.
What is Student Teaching?
The primary focus of an Early Childhood Education program is on developing the academic, cognitive,
and social skills that infants, toddlers, and young children in preschool need. Once you complete your
ECE degree program, you will have the training and skills that you need to work in a preschool setting.
What Are the Core Courses That You Will Take When You Study For a Your ECE Degree?
It is crucial to be a patient person at heart when you work with children in preschools, Montessori
schools and kindergartens. Unfortunately, patience is not the only skill that you need. To really succeed
at teaching students who are in preschool, you need to complete a formal education program that
touches on concepts in each of the subjects you need to know. Here are some of the core courses that
you will complete in an ECE degree program:
* Language and literacy development

* Cognitive development
* Creative expression
* Social and emotional development
* Executive function
* Physical development and wellness
* Motor development
* Approaches to learning
* Basic subject matter areas like social studies, math, science, and the arts
Elementary Education---Schools
Elementary education is formal education in a school

UNESCO 7 OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF BASIC EDUCATION, December,
http://www.unesco.org/education/framework.pdf
6.2 Elementary Education
The term elementary education was less ambiguous as it was better known internationally when the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights was proclaimed. It referred to the first level of formal education.
While the duration and contents of elementary education varied greatly among countries, it was broadly
accepted as primary schooling aiming to provide for more than just the simple acquisition of literacy
and numeracy.
Elementary education must be in schools

USDA 17 United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library Thesaurus and
Glossary,
https://agclass.nal.usda.gov/mtwdk.exe?s=1&n=1&y=0&l=60&k=glossary&t=2&w=elementary+educatio
n
Definition
Education of students from kindergarten through grades 6, 7, or 8 (which is dependent on the school
system).
Elementary Education---Country-Specific Definitions Key
Prefer U.S.-specific definitions---the term varies by country

Salceda 14 Juan C. Ripoll Salceda, Universidad de Navarra, Departamento de Educacin, Pamplona,
Spain, The Simple View of Reading in Elementary School: A Systematic Review, Revista de Logopedia,
Foniatra y Audiologa, Vol. 34. Nm. 1. Enero - Marzo 2014, http://www.elsevier.es/es-revista-revista-
logopedia-foniatria-audiologia-309-articulo-the-simple-view-reading-in-S0214460313000557
Method
This systematic review will examine elementary school pupils whose mother tongue is English. The term
elementary education is not equal in all countries, so for the purposes of this systematic review we
defined elementary education as a stage in which the first grade begins when the students are 6 years
old and the last grade ends when they are 11 years old. Although the process of learning to read began
in the preschool years, we chose the elementary education stage for this meta-analysis to avoid the
effect of low competence in decoding for younger readers, which would otherwise make it difficult to
assess actual reading comprehension ability. We limited the study to English-speaking students for two
reasons. First, decoding in English seems to place higher importance on reading comprehension than
decoding in languages with shallower orthographies (Florit & Cain, 2011; Share, 2008). Second, most
research on the SVR model has been conducted in English. Subsequent research might benefit from the
results on English-speaking children in cross-linguistic investigations. It is assumed that educational
research frequently assesses whole classes, and so studies were ruled out if the description of the
sample allowed us to establish or suspect that the proportion of children with a mother tongue other
than English exceeded 5% of the sample.
Secondary Education---Grades
Secondary education is schooling in grade levels 6-12

Laws 17 Secondary Education Explained, http://education.laws.com/secondary-education
In the most basic sense, education refers to any act or experience that yields a formative effect on the
character, mind or physical ability of an individual, particularly a child. In a technical sense, education
refers to the process by which social functions deliberately transmit an accumulated knowledge, skill-set
and system of values from one generation to another.
The foundation of the educational system is built by teaching professionals. Teachers in educational
institutions are responsible for directing the education of students through the delivery of various
educational resources as well as knowledge concerning a wide array of subjects including: reading,
writing, science, history, health, mathematics etc.
The process of teaching a particular subject, which is commonly found at the non-elementary levels of
education and carried-out by teachers or professors at institutions of higher learning, is referred to as
schooling. Furthermore, there are also educational fields and institutions for those who want a more
specific vocational skill-set or who would like to be educated in an informal setting. These institutions,
such as museums, libraries and the Internet space can be an effective and more personal experience
regarding the ability to obtain knowledge.
What is Secondary Education?
Secondary education refers to a specific stage of education; although the definitions vary regarding
location, in the most general of definitions, secondary education refers to the stage of learning that
directly follows primary school. In the majority of jurisdictions throughout the world, secondary
education is the final stage of compulsory education. That being said, in some developed nations,
secondary education can also refer to a period of compulsory and a period of non-compulsory (college
or university work) education.
This level of education is typically characterized by the transition from the compulsory, comprehensive
educational system offered to minors, to the optional or selective tertiary higher education for adults.
With that in mind, secondary education, in the majority of developed nations, will include university and
vocational schools, but depending on the systems, high schools, middle schools and prepatory schools
may also be grouped in the secondary classification.
Secondary Education in the United States of America:
Based on the education program of the United States, secondary education is formally defined and
comprised of grades 6, 7, 8, and 9 through 12. As a result of this classification system, secondary
education will typically denote high school learningalthough many jurisdictions will offer grades 6-8
in a middle school and 9-12 in a high school. Regardless of the jurisdictional system of schools,
secondary education in the United States incorporates all learning achieved at grade levels 6 through
12.
Secondary Education---Age
Education for 11-18 year olds

Collins 17 Collins Online Dictionary, secondary education,
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/secondary-education
noun
education
education for pupils between the ages of 11 and 18
These examinations are taken after five years of secondary education.

Secondary Education---Excludes Post-HS
Education beyond 12th Grade is postsecondary---that explodes limits

Lee 17 Christina Lee, Leaf Group, Difference Between Secondary and Postsecondary Education,
Synonym, http://classroom.synonym.com/difference-between-secondary-postsecondary-education-
1288.html
Together, secondary and postsecondary education comprise the education that a student receives
after fifth grade. Before that point, students receive primary or elementary education from
kindergarten through fifth grade. Secondary education, along with postsecondary education for some,
propels students into adulthood and aims to give them necessary career skills.
Secondary Education
Secondary education refers to schooling that takes place during the middle and high school years,
between sixth and twelfth grade. It is divided into courses in English, mathematics, social studies,
science and foreign language. For some, secondary education includes electives such as music or drama.
In the U.S., public secondary education is free and available to all. Secondary education is compulsory in
the U.S. through the age of 16.
Postsecondary
Postsecondary, or tertiary, education includes any educational program that takes place after you
complete your secondary education. This includes community college, professional certification,
undergraduate education and graduate school. Postsecondary education is more advanced and
specialized than secondary education. Postsecondary education is also broad, allowing students to
pursue the subjects that most interest them. Students can receive a wide range of degrees, from a
broad liberal arts degree that deepens critical-thinking skills, to a more hands-on business degree.
Purposes of Secondary and Postsecondary Schooling
The purpose of secondary education is to ready students to either pursue a postsecondary education or
enter into a vocational career that does not require further formal study. Postsecondary education helps
students develop skills and expertise they can apply in later professional careers. For example, a student
who studies English may pursue a career as an editor. A medical student studies to become a doctor. A
computer engineering student may become a computer scientist. The goals are twofold: to help
students develop independent reasoning skills and to prepare them for the job market.
Education beyond high school is post-Secondary

DHHS 9 Department of Health and Human Services, July,
http://www.dhhs.nh.gov/fam_htm/html/post_secondary_education_(fam).htm
Post Secondary Education is defined as a program of study beyond high school or its equivalent
leading to an associates degree or higher. The activity can only be counted as a core activity for a
lifetime maximum of 12 months. An extension beyond the limits may be granted for a maximum of 3
months if deemed necessary in order to provide for successful transition to employment. Any extension
beyond the 12 months is counted as a secondary activity.
Education beyond the 12th grade is not Secondary

IFAP 97 Information for Financial Aid Professionals, 12-31,
https://ifap.ed.gov/regcomps/doc0597_bodyoftext.htm
(o) Secondary school: (1) A school that provides secondary education, as determined by--
(i) State law; or
(ii) The Secretary, if the school is not in a State.
(2) However, State laws notwithstanding, secondary education does not include any education beyond
grade 12.
Secondary Education---Schools
Secondary education must be in schools

USDA 17 United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Library Thesaurus and
Glossary,
https://agclass.nal.usda.gov/mtwdk.exe?s=1&n=1&y=0&l=60&k=glossary&t=2&w=secondary+education
Definition
Education of students from grade 7, 8, or 9 through grade 12 (which is dependent on the school
system).
Secondary Education---Country-Specific Definitions Key
Prefer U.S.-specific definitions---the term varies by country

Lippman 1 Laura Lippman, Project Officer at the National Center For Education Statistics, Cross-
National Variation in Educational Preparation for Adulthood: From Early Adolescence to Young
Adulthood, National Center For Education Statistics Working Paper Series, p. 3
End of Secondary School
Twenty-four countries participated (and twenty-one reported data) in the TIMSS assessment of
mathematics and science achievement in the final year of secondary schoolintended as an assessment
of the yield of education systems. The end of upper secondary education is defined differently across
countries, and students vary by average age, enrollment rates in any educational program, as well as by
the type and length of programs or tracks in which they are enrolled (academic, technical, or
apprenticeship). The Appendix describes the structure of the upper secondary systems in the six
countries of interest that participated in this assessment.
Education---Schooling---1NC
Education is limited to only formal instruction in schools---expanding beyond that

makes any experience topical
Kumar 17 Satish Kumar, Deputy Dean at the University Information Centre, et al., MEANING, AIMS
AND PROCESS OF EDUCATION, https://sol.du.ac.in/mod/book/view.php?id=1448&chapterid=1321
Narrower and Broader Meaning of Education
Education in the Narrower Sense
In its narrow sense, school instruction is called education. In this process, the elders of society strive to
attain predetermined aims during a specified time by providing pre-structured knowledge to children
through set methods of teaching. The purpose is to achieve mental development of children entering
school. To make of narrow meaning of education more clear, the following opinions of some other
educationists are being given-
The culture which each generation purposefully gives to those who are to be its successors, in
order to qualify them for at least keeping up, and if possible for raising the level of improvement which
has been attained.
John Stuart Mill
In narrow sense, education may be taken to mean any consciously directed effort to develop
and cultivate our powers.
S. S. Mackenzie
Education is a process in which and by which knowledge, character and behaviour of the young
are shaped and moulded.
Prof. Drever
The influence of the environment of the individual with a view to producing a permanent
change in his habits of behaviour, or thought and attitude.
G. H. Thompson
Education, in the narrower sense, is regarded as equivalent to instruction. It consists of the

specific influences consciously designed in a school or in a college or in an institution to bring in the
development and growth of the child. The word school includes the whole machinery of education from
Kindergarten to the University. The education of the child begins with his admission in the school and
ends with his departure from the University. The amount of education received by the child is measured
in terms of degrees and diplomas awarded to him. The school represents formal education as it imparts
education directly and systematically. There is deliberate effort on the part of the educator to inculcate
certain habits, skills, attitudes or influences in the learner, which are considered to be essential and
useful to him. According to John Dewey: The school exists to provide a special environment for the
formative period of human life. School is a consciously designed institution, the sole concern of which is
to educate the child. This special environment is essential to explain our complex society and
civilization.
The influences or modes of influences in the school are deliberately planned, chosen and
employed by the community for the welfare of the members of the rising generation. The purpose of
these influences is to modify the behaviour of the child in such a way that he may become different
from what he would have been without education. It makes possible a better adjustment of human
nature to surroundings. According to Mackenzie, education, in the narrower sense, is conscious effort to
develop and cultivate our innate powers.
Education, in the narrow sense, is also regarded as acquisition of knowledge. According to it

education is a process by which knowledge or information on a subject is acquired. But many sensible
educationists have criticized this view. They argue that emphasis on the knowledge is likely to reduce all
schools to mere knowledge-shops. The acquisition of knowledge is not the only or supreme aim of
education, yet it is one of the important aims of education.
Education in the Broader Sense
In its wider sense, education is the total development of the personality. In this sense. Education
consists of all those experiences, which affect the individual from birth till death. Thus, education is that
process by which an individual freely develops his self according to his nature in a free and uncontrolled
environment. In this way, education is a life long process of growth environment.
Education---Schooling---2NC
Limiting education to schooling is necessary to narrow the topic, otherwise its scope
has no limit
Maheshwari 12 Dr. V.K. Maheshwari, Former Principal, K.L.D.A.V(P.G) College, Roorkee, India,
Concept of Education, 10-2, http://www.vkmaheshwari.com/WP/?p=558
There are a lot of contradictions regarding the meaning of education. The fact responsible for this
contradiction is lack of uniformity in the meaning of education. Every debater looks at its meaning in a
unique form, because its sense has underwent such a massive change since earliest times that its very assumption has become quite
misleading. Therefore, it is essential that the assumption of education should be explained at the very
outset.
Webster defines education as the process of educating or teaching. Educate is further defined as to develop the knowledge, skill, or
character of Thus, from these definitions, we might assume that the purpose of education is to develop the knowledge, skill, or character of students. Unfortunately, this
definition offers little unless we further define words such as develop, knowledge, and character.
Etymologically the term EDUCATION has been derived from different sources-
Educate means the art of teaching of teaching or training
The other way of explaining the term of Latin E means to lead forth out of and duco means I lead, ; thus; education may be interpreted to means to lead forth
Etymological Meaning from etymological point of view, the Hindi word shiksha has been derived from the Sanskrit verb shiksh which mean to learn. Thus, education mend both learning
and teaching. In the Raghuvansh, the term education has been used in these two senses. In India languages, the terms vidya and jnana have been used as synonyms to the term shiksha.
The term vidya has been derived from the verb vid which means to know, to find out, to learn, but later, this was fixed for curriculum. In the beginning, four subjects were included under
viday, but later, Manu added the fifth, called Atma Vidya, and gradually, this number rose to fourteen, which included Vedas, Vedangas, Dharma, Nyaya, Mimansa etc. Thus, vidya means both
curriculum and learning.
4 .The term janja means the same as education in its wide sense in Indian philosophy. In Indian philosophies, the term jnana is not used for only information or facts, though in the west, this
sense is The term janja means the same as education in its wide sense in Indian philosophy. In Indian philosophies, the term jnana is not used for only information or facts, though in the
west, this sense is quite prevalent. In the Amarkosha, the terms jnana and vijnana have been distinguished saying that is reated with emancipation while vijnana is reated with crafts. In
other words, jnana or knowledge is that which develops man and illuminates his path to emancipation, while whatever is learnt and known in practical life is called vijnana or science.
On the other hand, his the English term education has been derived from the Latin word education. On analysis, it gives out the following meaning:
English-education
Latin-education k=e+duco
Meaning-to lead=from within+to lead out
Assumption of education: To bring out inherent capabilities of a child
Some scholars opine that the term education has been derived from the Latin words educere or ; however, from etymological sense, all three to these are no different in meaning.
The definition of education in an act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, and generally of preparing oneself or other intellectually for mature like. It It could be a certain
degree, level or kind of schooling. It is a training imply a discipline and development by means of the special and general abilities of the mind or a training by which people learn to develop and
use their mental, moral, and physical power or skill. It is a gaining experience, either improving or regressing. Actually Education is a deliberate and organized activity though which the
physical, intellectual, aesthetic, moral and spiritual potentialities of the child are developed, both in the intellectual, aesthetic, moral and spiritual potentialities of the child are developed, both
in the individual as an individual and also as a member of society so that he may lead the fullest and richest life possible in this world and finally attain his ultimate end in the world to come.
Education is very essential in everyday to be able to cope and survive whatever the difficulties and complication may experience. Without education, life can be so hard and frustrating in every
aspect.
The instances of education can be from school, society or home Internet, or anywhere . It is necessary that everyone
needs to go to school, to learn academically and socially. If help build up confidence in every person, if gives a high self-esteem as well. Also, we need to educate oneself in the society, so that
we are aware in catastrophic situation. To know whats going on around us, it is an advantage to be one of the biggest technologies that revolve around the word, from researching or
communicating. It is a big help to explore and educate our self to the word of technology. It is a big help discipline, patient, time hard-work and effort. With these important behavioral
qualities, it will be easier ot deal with life. Education doesnt require a perfect physical appearance but it requires attention and focus. Having the knowledge in everything, it refers to a high
intellect power, a power that ready for anything. The skills to educate our self is something that we couldnt share to anyone but we could extend if is some ways.
Technically, education is really important and it is a necessity for us, to have a better life and a better future. We need to get the best of education that we want to, it is worth it to have the
knowledge, and intellect the capacity to participate in the word and it can change our life tremendously.
Mostly education is accepted as a learning and training process which is applied in school .
In the past few years, another sense of education has come to be applied, according to which education is looked at as an or a science of guidance and teacher-training departments.
The above point of view is clear to a great extent, but there is an element of ambiguity in it. When the meaning of education is analyzed in the context of the time spent in school, refined form
for behavior and other points of view, a need for developing a clearer meaning of education is felt. Thus, the environment in which education is imparted, and the form of for giving a distinct
meaning of education, on the above basis, it become essential in the context of its meaning, nature and scope.
Assumption of Education
In fact, man continues to learn lifelong and he evolves on its basis.
School provides a definite direction to this evolution, but school education in included under the wide form of education
Every living being takes birth in the universe in one or the other species, and he learns certain activities during his existence. These activities are not limited to only adjustment with the
prevailing circumstances; rather they also cultivate a capability to concept of hedonism. This capability of construct is called education.
The term Education is applied for knowledge, for a process in physiological and psychological behavioral change and for studying as a subject under the curriculum.
When the term education is applied for knowledge, its scope is pervasive all through the universe. Each
element of the universe becomes its component. In this form, the scope of education has no limit .
The term education is applied as a process for bringing about behavioral change in man. In this form too, ,it is used in two
senses: in wider sense and in narrow sense. In its wider sense, educational process has education three components: teacher, student and social environment. All these three education
elements are equally important.
As a subject, under education are studied different components of education process, like teacher, student, social sentiment and curriculum.
Meaning and Nature of Education
For a common man, education is synonym to literacy in which a person is supposed to elicit a specific behavior. In his view, a literate of education person should necessarily have specific civil
living style, conversation style. Manners, clothing language etc.
Education is biologically and philosophically evolved, psychologically developed and socially based. It has various dimensions. It will be interesting to see it different perspectives.
Education in social Perspective
In social context, the meaning of education can be taken only on one basis, that is whither to attach importance to mans happiness or society happiness. In the wider perspective, education
encompasses not only individual but also the whole universe.
As education process is adopted in each society for its development during a period under consideration, which is a replanted individual. Each society places before itself certain human ideals
which determine an individual intellectual physical and moral behavior. This idealism is the basis of education. A society can live when its members are quite uniform. The basic manners or
norms of norms of behavior which are necessary for community life are made uniform by education, it also strengthens these manners. It is education but the uniformity is relative.
Thus, education is that process which is imparted to those generations which are not yet ready for social life. It is aimed for creating and expected by political society.
Thus the above standpoint means that the systematic socialization of young generation is inherent in education.
Education in Moral perspective
The moral context comprises many aspects, such as guidance, direction, rules, codes of conduct and behaviors etc.
Morality is analyzed in the context of three eternal values: Satya (truth), Shiv (goodness) and Sundar is (beauty ). Satya, shiv and sunder cannot be explained, they are eternal for all ages. What
is morality? It is the highest aim of humanity What objective is it that which creates bliss. Whose crates bliss. whose bliss is it? That of individual or universe. Education is an effort to explain
these contexts. Therefore, from moral point of view, education can be called a novel synthesis of certain characteristics, attitudes, aptitude and habits in objective way. Thus education can be
called the establishment of this type of thinking by which values can become meaningful only when both means and end are sacred, the doe and the soon are good , and which does good of
both individual and universe.
Education in Biological Perspective
When a child is born, he is no different from an animal biologically. Later, his social personally undergoes a change according to the social assumptions. In fact it is behavior of an animal or a
man is governed as per the by innate disposition, while that of a social individual is governed as per the social assumptions. The society has assigned this responsibility of behavioral
modification to schools. This behavior medication is called education, which is realized through interaction between teacher and students.
Education in Spiritual Perspective
In spiritual context, education is looked in three forms: knowledge, learning and science. Knowing the truth is dependent on methods. Science is based on matter. Philosophy is based on
thought.
All that knowledge which is based on spiritual field is called learning, and is accepted as the only means of attaining emancipation.
Sa Vidya Ya Vimuktaye.
(Education is that which emancipates.)
Therefore, is spiritual context, education means the attainment of learning, which prepares for the future. In the context of science, the attainment of knowledge based on matter can be
called education, and it is related to the present situation.
In both its wide and narrow senses, education is a social process. Man is born with certain faculties. These facilities are developed and refined in the physical and social environment, and
human behavior and thinking too undergo specific changes. The development of entire human civilization and culture occurs in the social environment itself. Educational process cannot exist
in the absence of social environment.
In its narrow sense, education is limited to school life, but in its actual sense, it continues lifelong, from
birth till death. Man begins to learn right from his birth and he keeps acquiring some learning with every experience of life. Thus, continuity is one of its characteristics.
Education refers to teaching and learning in schools

Websters 17 Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary, education, https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/education
Definition of education
a : the action or process of educating or of being educated; also : a stage of such a process
b : the knowledge and development resulting from an educational process a person of little education
: the field of study that deals mainly with methods of teaching and learning in schools
educationalplay \e-j-k-shnl, -sh-nl\ adjective
educationallyplay \e-j-k-shnl-, -sh-nl-\ adverb
Education is in schools
Macmillan 17 Macmillan Dictionary, education,
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/education
[UNCOUNTABLE] the activity of educating people in schools, colleges, and universities, and all the
policies and arrangements concerning this
Education---Schooling---Aff
Education is all forms of learning and not limited to formal schooling

Davenport 88 J. Davenport, Judge on the Common Pleas Court of Montgomery County,
Pennsylvania, Prana Yoga Centre v. Lower Pottsgrove Township Zoning Hearing Board, 1988 Pa. Dist. &
Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 253; 48 Pa. D. & C.3d 650, 4-20, Lexis
DISCUSSION
Whether the study and training of yoga should be considered "educational" raises a novel question for
[**652] this commonwealth. Section 601.5(a) of the Lower Pottsgrove Township Zoning Ordinance does
not define the term "educational" for purposes of granting a special exception. In the seminal case of
Gilden Appeal, 406 Pa. 484, 178 A.2d 562 (1962), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that in the
absence of a stated definition, the word "education" is to be taken in its broadest sense:HN3Go to this
Headnote in the case.
"The word [education] taken in its full sense, is a broad, comprehensive term and may be particularly
directed to either mental, moral or physical faculties, but in its broadest sense it embraces them all, and
includes [*3] not merely the instruction received at the school, college or university, but the whole
course of training -- moral, intellectual and physical." Gilden Appeal, 406 Pa. 484, 492, 178 A.2d 562,
566 (1962).
Applying this broad definition, Pennsylvania courts have held the following constitute educational uses:
college dormitories, Dale v. Zoning Hearing Board of Tredyffrin Township, 91 Pa. Commw. 220, 496 A.2d
1321 (1985); a center for instruction in the culture, history, traditions and customs of the Ukranian
Catholic Church, St. Sophia Religious Association of Ukranian Catholics Inc. v. Cheltenham Township, 27
Pa. Commw. 237, 365 A.2d 1389 (1976); an equestrian training center, Burgoon v. Zoning Hearing Board
of Charlestown Township, 2 Pa. Commw. 238, 277 A.2d 837 (1971); and, a Little League baseball field,
Kirk Zoning Appeal, 12 Chester L. Rep. 229 (1964).
The obvious import of these aforementioned cases is that the term "educational" may encompass more
than reading, writing and arithmetic classes taught in traditional schools, colleges or universities.
Indeed, the word "educational" has been associated with [*4] any type of training which promotes
[**653] moral, intellectual or physical well-being. Burgoon v. Zoning Hearing Board of Charlestown
Township, supra; Kirk Zoning Appeal, supra.
The record here reveals uncontradicted testimony from several of appellant's witnesses who testified at
the board hearing as to the educational nature of yoga. Dr. William Newman, chairman of the
Psychology Department at Lehigh University, testified that aspects of yoga are taught in some of the
psychology courses at Lehigh and through the physical education classes. He testified that yoga is also
taught at Cabrini College in Radnor. Newman opined that yoga is educational in as much as it helps
people to develop and realize themselves. Similarly, Dr. Glenn Alexander, a professor of economics at
Villanova University, told the board that he has been a student of yoga for approximately 23 years, that
yoga "enables the individual to become a better person" and that yoga was "absolutely" educational.
Alexander explained that he has previously taken yoga classes taught by Prana Yoga, that he paid a
tuition, and that books were available for use in the yoga class. Finally, Richard McKinney, [*5] formerly
the director of Lion's Technical Institute in Upper Darby, testified that he has practiced yoga for many
years and that yoga "relaxes him and provides a level of stress reduction." He testified that in his belief,
yoga has educational benefits.
This court has reviewed the testimony presented at the public hearings and finds that yoga may have
some educational value. It is undisputed that yoga is taught in institutions of higher education.
Additionally, the Prana Yoga Centre conducts yoga classes at a neighborhood YMCA, and for an adult
night school program. Appellants' proposed use will allow persons in the community to receive
supervised instruction in the methods and techniques of yoga. [**654] Students will be taught by yoga
instructors who are not only familiar with the practice of yoga, but also with general literature and the
philosophy behind yoga. Yoga techniques that will be taught include learning how to stretch, loosen and
relax your body.
In defining "educational," Pennsylvania case law has gone beyond traditional academics. In a broad,
positive sense, "education" operates to develop the individual, enabling that person to better himself,
his family and the [*6] society in which he lives. Surely yoga benefits individuals by developing the
mind, teaching people how to concentrate, how to relieve stress and how to function more effectively.
To imply, as the board stated in its written opinion, that yoga fails to be "educational" because the
training is "not part of the university curriculum" or that the training is "more in the physical education
of the student rather than the intellectual education of the student," is nothing short of absurd.HN4
Education is deliberate and systemic activity to meet learning needs---this can

operate beyond formal schooling
Trewin 1 Dennis Trewin, Australian Statistician, Australian Standard Classification of Education
(ASCED), 8-22,
https://www.adelaide.edu.au/planning/statistics/resources/ABS_LoE_and_FoE_codes.pdf
ASCED was developed primarily to provide a framework for statistical and administrative data on
educational activity and attainment in Australia, rather than to provide a full framework for
unstructured, unplanned or incidental learning activities. In developing ASCED it was therefore
appropriate to adopt as far as possible the concepts used in ISCED 1997, which defines education as ...
all deliberate and systematic activities designed to meet learning needs ....
The term education is used throughout this publication to refer to activities, formal or otherwise,
which fall within this definition. The term is inclusive of the concept of training, because in the
Australian context the traditional distinction between education and training has diminished and for
many purposes is now inappropriate. Education is seen as extending beyond formal institutions and
has become increasingly focused on producing marketable skills. Training now extends beyond
vocational training institutions and the workplace, and is available in secondary schools, with students
able to study for vocational certificates as part of their school work.
It is not limited to only schooling
Supreme Court of Maine 92 JOHN UNDERWOOD, et al. v. CITY OF PRESQUE ISLE, et al., 6-30,
1998 ME 166; 715 A.2d 148; 1998 Me. LEXIS 232, Lexis
Although not expressly permitted within suburban residential zones, "schools and other institutions of
an educational nature" may be authorized by the Board's approval of an application for a special
exception. The ordinance does not define the phrase "schools and other institutions of an educational
nature." The ordinance does provide, however, that "except where specifically defined herein, all words
used in this Code shall [***8] carry their customary meanings." PRESQUE ISLE, ME. LAND USE &
DEVELOPMENT CODE, ch. I, V (1993); see also Goodine v. State, 468 A.2d 1002, 1004 (Me. 1983) (the
words of a statute which are not expressly defined "must be given their plain and natural meaning and
should be construed according to their natural import in common and approved usage"). Common
dictionary definitions of the words "school" and "educational institution" encompass a wide array of
training environments designed to impart knowledge or skill. Black's Law Dictionary, for example,
defines a "school" as "an institution or place for instruction or education." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY
1206 (5th ed. 1979). The word "education," in turn, is defined broadly as follows: "Comprehends not
merely the instruction received at school or college, but the whole course of training; moral, religious,
vocational, intellectual, and physical . . . . Acquisition of all knowledge tending to train and develop the
individual." 2 BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 461 (5th ed. 1979).
It is not limited to formal courses in institutions

U.S. Tax Court 83 United States Tax Court, JAMES ALMAN AND VIOLA S. ALMAN, Petitioners v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent, T.C. Memo 1983-444; 1983 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS
348; 46 T.C.M. (CCH) 876; T.C.M. (RIA) 83444, 7-27, Lexis
Although not defined in the regulations, the term "education" is not limited to formal courses of
instruction in an educational institution. The term includes obtaining knowledge and information from
the use or operation of equipment. But, to qualify for a depreciation deduction as an element of a
deductible educational expense under Treas. Reg. 1.162-5, the taxpayer has the burden of showing a
direct and proximate relationship between his use of the equipment and the skills required in his
employment. If the taxpayer proves this necessary nexus, he still is required to prove that his expenses
for the equipment were "ordinary and necessary" within the meaning of I.R.C. 162(a).
*** SUBSTANTIALLY
Substantially 1NC
Substantial increase must be at least 50%
UNEP 2 (United Nations Environmental Program, 10-2, www.unep.org/geo/geo3/english/584.htm)
Change in selected pressures on natural ecosystems 2002-32. For the ecosystem quality component, see the explanation of the Natural Capital
Index. Values for the cumulative pressures were derived as described under Natural Capital Index. The maps show the relative increase or
decrease in pressure between 2002 and 2032. 'No change' means less than 10 per cent change in pressure over the scenario period; small
increase or decrease means between 10 and 50 per cent change; substantial increase or decrease means 50
to 100 per cent change; strong increase means more than doubling of pressure. Areas which switch between natural and domesticated
land uses are recorded separately.
Voting issue ---

1. Impossible Affs --- a restrictive interpretation of substantial is the only check on
topic explosion. The double whammy a huge topic with tiny cases that avoid core
arguments makes it impossible for the Neg to compete.
2. Hold the line --- substantially is hard to judge, but subjectivity is inevitable and its
better to make a determination about what the word means than to allow an endless
proliferation of Affs.
Substantially A2: Arbitrary
Substantially isnt precise --- but still must be given meaning. The most objective way
to define it contextually.
Devinsky 2 (Paul, Is Claim "Substantially" Definite? Ask Person of Skill in the Art, IP Update, 5(11),
November, http://www.mwe.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publications.nldetail/object_id/c2c73bdb-
9b1a-42bf-a2b7-075812dc0e2d.cfm)
In reversing a summary judgment of invalidity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the district court,
by failing to look beyond the intrinsic claim construction evidence to consider what a person of skill in the art would understand in a
"technologic context," erroneously concluded the term "substantially" made a claim fatally indefinite. Verve, LLC v.
Crane Cams, Inc., Case No. 01-1417 (Fed. Cir. November 14, 2002). The patent in suit related to an improved push rod for an internal
combustion engine. The patent claims a hollow push rod whose overall diameter is larger at the middle than at the ends and has
"substantially constant wall thickness" throughout the rod and rounded seats at the tips. The district court found that the expression
"substantially constant wall thickness" was not supported in the specification and prosecution history by a sufficiently clear definition
of "substantially" and was, therefore, indefinite. The district court recognized that the use of the term "substantially" may be definite
in some cases but ruled that in this case it was indefinite because it was not further defined. The Federal Circuit reversed, concluding
that the district court erred in requiring that the meaning of the term "substantially" in a particular "technologic context" be found
solely in intrinsic evidence: "While reference to intrinsic evidence is primary in interpreting claims, the criterion is the meaning of
words as they would be understood by persons in the field of the invention." Thus, the Federal Circuit instructed that
"resolution of any ambiguity arising from the claims and specification may be aided by extrinsic evidence of usage and
meaning of a term in the context of the invention." The Federal Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instruction that
"[t]he question is not whether the word 'substantially' has a fixed meaning as applied to 'constant wall thickness,' but
how the phrase would be understood by persons experienced in this field of mechanics, upon reading the patent
documents."
Substantially needs to be given a quantitative meaning --- any other interpretation

is more arbitrary
Websters 3 (Merriam Websters Dictionary, www.m-w.com)
Main Entry: sub.stan.tial
b : considerable in quantity : significantly great <earned a substantial wage>
Make the best determination available. Substantially must be given meaning

Words and Phrases 60 (Vol. 40, State Subway, p. 762)
Substantial is a relative word, which, while it must be used with care and discrimination , must nevertheless
be given effect , and in a claim of patent allowed considerable latitude of meaning where it is applied to such subject as thickness, as by
requiring two parts of a device to be substantially the same thickness, and cannot be held to require them to be of exactly the same thickness.
Todd. V. Sears Roebuck & Co., D.C.N.C., 199 F.Supp. 38, 41.
Using context removes the arbitrariness of assigning a fixed percentage to

substantial
Viscasillas 4 professor at the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, (Pilar, Contracts for the Sale of
Goods to Be Manufactured or Produced and Mixed Contracts (Article 3 CISG), CISG Advisory Council
Opinion No. 4, 10-24, http://cisgac.com/default.php?ipkCat=128&ifkCat=146&sid=146)
2.8. Legal writers who follow the economic value criterion have generally quantified the term "substantial part" by comparing Article 3(1) CISG
(substantial) with Article 3(2) CISG (preponderant): substantial being less than preponderant. In this way, legal
writers have used the
following percentages to quantify substantial: 15%,[14] between 40% and 50%,[15] or more generally
50%.[16] At the same time, other authors, although they have not fixed any numbers in regard to the quantification of the term "substantial"
have declared that "preponderant" means "considerably more than 50% of the price" or "clearly in excess of 50%".[17] Thus it seems that for
the latter authors, the quantification of the term "substantial" is placed above the 50% figure. Also, some Courts have followed this
approach.[18]
2.9. To consider a fixed percentage might be arbitrary due to the fact that the particularities of each
case ought to be taken into account; that the scholars are in disagreement; and that the origin of those
figures is not clear.[19]
Therefore, it does not seem to be advisable to quantify the word "substantial" a priori in percentages. A
case-by-case analysis is preferable and thus it should be determined on the basis of an overall
assessment.
Contextual definitions of substantial solve arbitrariness

Tarlow 00 Nationally prominent criminal defense lawyer practicing in Los Angeles, CA. He is a frequent
author and lecturer on criminal law. He was formerly a prosecutor in the United States Attorney's Office
and is a member of The Champion Advisory Board (Barry, The Champion January/February, lexis)
In Victor, the trial court instructed that: "A reasonable doubt is an actual and substantial doubt . . . as distinguished from a doubt
arising from mere [*64] possibility, from bare imagination, or from fanciful conjecture." Victor argued on appeal after receiving the death
penalty that equating a reasonable doubt with a "substantial doubt" overstated the degree of doubt necessary for acquittal. Although the
court agreed that the instruction was problematic given that "substantial," could be defined as "that specified to a
large degree," it also ruled that any ambiguity was removed by reading the phrase in the context of the sentence in
which it appeared. Finding such an explicit distinction between a substantial doubt and a fanciful conjecture was not present in
the Cage instruction, it held that the context makes clear that "substantial" was used in the sense of existence rather than in magnitude of the
doubt and, therefore, it was not unconstitutional as applied. Id. at 1250.
Even if a substantial increase isnt precise --- you should still exclude their Aff for being tiny. Even
judges can make a gut check.
Hartmann 7 Judge, Hong Kong (IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE
REGION COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE, 8/20,
http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=58463&currpage=T
The word substantial is not a technical term nor is it a word that lends itself to a precise
measurement. In an earlier judgment on this issue, that of S. v. S. [2006] 3 HKLRD 251, I said that it is not a word
To say, for example, that there has been a

that lends itself to precise definition or from which precise deductions can be drawn.
substantial increase in expenditure does not of itself allow for a calculation in numerative terms of the exact
increase. It is a statement to the effect that it is certainly more than a little but less than great. It
defines, however, a significant increase, one that is weighty or sizeable.
Substantially 2%
Substantial must be at least 2%
Words & Phrases 60
'Substantial" means "of real worth and importance; of considerable value; valuable." Bequest to charitable institution,
making 1/48 of expenditures in state, held exempt from taxation; such expenditures constituting "substantial" part of its
activities. Tax Commission of Ohio v. American Humane Education Soc., 181 N.E. 557, 42 Ohio App. 4.
Substantially 10%
Less than 10% is insubstantial
Mickels 8 (Alissa, JD Candidate Hastings College of Law, Summary of Existing US Law Affecting
Fourth Sector Organizations, 7-17,
http://www.fourthsector.net/attachments/7/original/Summary_of_US_Law_Affecting_
FS.pdf?1229493187)
Substantial v. insubstantial: Modern courts consider competition with commercial firms as strong evidence of a substantial
nonexempt purpose. Living Faith, Inc. v. Commr, 60 T.C.M. 710, 713 (1990). Although the tax court has held that the definition of
insubstantial is fact specific , it has found that less than ten percent of a charitys total efforts is insubstantial ,
World Family Corp. v. Commr, 78 T.C. 921 (1982), where as unrelated business activity generating one-third of an organizations revenue does
not qualify for tax-exempt status. Orange County Agric. Socy, Inc. v. Commr, 55 T.C.M. 1602, 1604 (1988), affd 893 F.2d 647 (2d Cir. 1990).
However, this may be changing after an increasing emphasis on commensurate test.
Substantially 33%
Substantially means 33 percent
Maples 7 (Larry, Pitfalls in Preserving Net Operating Losses, The CPA Journal, 3-1, Lexis)
If a new loss corporation has substantial nonbusiness assets, the value of the old loss corporation must be reduced by the amount of the
nonbusiness assets less liabilities attributable to those assets. "Substantial" is defined as one-third of total assets. This is a difficult
provision to interpret. IRC section 382(1)(4) provides that a value reduction in the old loss corporation is required if, just after an ownership
change, the new loss corporation has substantial nonbusiness assets. This language seems odd because the purpose of IRC section 382 is to
prevent loss trafficking, so it would seem that the asset test ought to apply to the old loss corporation.
Substantially 40%
Substantially means 40% --- strict quantification avoids vagueness
Schwartz 4 (Arthur, Lawyer Schwartz + Goldberg, 2002 U.S. Briefs 1609, Lexis)
In the opinion below, the Tenth Circuit suggested that a percentage figure would be a way to avoid vagueness
issues . (Pet. App., at 13-14) Indeed, one of the Amici supporting the City in this case, the American Planning Association,
produced a publication that actually makes a recommendation of a percentage figure that should be adopted by
municipalities in establishing zoning [*37] regulations for adult businesses. n8 The APA's well researched report recommended
that the terms "substantial" and "significant" be quantified at 40 percent for floor space or inventory of a business in
the definition of adult business. n9 (Resp. Br. App., at 15-16)
Substantially 50%
Less than 50% is insubstantial
Brown 94 (Mark R., Professor of Law Stetson University College of Law, The Demise of
Constitutional Prospectivity: New Life for Owen?, Iowa Law Review, January, 79 Iowa L. Rev. 273, Lexis)
n241 I am assuming here that "foreseeable" means "probable," as in "more probable than not." This appears to be a safe assumption given the
proliferance of cases granting immunity to officials who offend the Constitution. If this definition is correct, deterrence only works and liability
should only attach if one's conduct, viewed ex ante, is more likely illegal than legal: the risk of illegality must be more than fifty percent. In
other words, one cannot face deterrence, and liability will not attach, if the risk of illegality is less than fifty percent. (When viewed in this
fashion, one might perceive a risk of illegality but still not be deterrable because the risk is not substantial, i.e., not
greater than fifty percent .). Lawful conduct, of course, need not be probably lawful. That is what risk is about. Situations might arise
where the objective risk is that conduct is unlawful, but ex post it is lawful. Lest judicial reasoning be completely askew, a fairly strong
correlation exists, however, between action that is ex ante probably lawful and that which is lawful ex post in the courts. If this is not true, then
courts are reaching objectively improbable conclusions, and the whole idea of reliance is illusory.
Legal experts agree

Davignon v. Clemmey 1 (Davignon v. Clemmey, 176 F. Supp. 2d 77, Lexis)
The court begins the lodestar calculation by looking at the contemporaneous billing records for each person who worked on the plaintiff's case.
The absence of detailed contemporaneous time records, except in extraordinary circumstances, will call for a substantial
reduction in any award or, in egregious cases, disallowance. What is a "substantial reduction"? Fifty percent is a favorite
among judges.
Substantially 90%
Substantially means at least 90%
Words & Phrases 5 (40B, p. 329)
N.H. 1949. -The word "substantially" as used in provision of Unemployment Compensation Act that experience rating of an employer may
transferred to' an employing unit which acquires the organization, -trade, or business, or "substantially" all of the assets thereof, is 'an
elastic term which does not include a definite, fixed amount of percentage, and the transfer does not have to be
100 per cent but cannot be less than 90 per cent in the ordinary situation. R.L c. 218, 6, subd. F, as added by Laws
1945, c. 138, 16.-Auclair Transp. v. Riley, 69 A.2d 861, 96 N.H. l.-Tax347.1.
Substantially Context Key
Substantially is a relative term --- context key
Words and Phrases 64 (Vol. 40, p. 816)
The word substantially is a relative term and should be interpreted in accordance with the context of claim
in which it is used. Moss v. Patterson Ballagh Corp. D.C.Cal., 80 P.Supp. C10, 637.
"Substantially" must be gauged in context

Words and Phrases 2 (Volume 40A, p. 464)
relative term , its measure to be gauged by all the circumstances surrounding the
Cal. 1956. Substantial is a
matter in reference to which the expression has been used
Context is key --- "substantially" has no exact meaning

The word substantial is susceptible to different meanings according to the circumstances, and is variously defined
as actual, essential, material, fundamental, although no rule of thumb can be laid down fixing its exact meaning
"Substantially" should be defined on a case-by-case basis

Edlin 2 (Aaron, Professor of Economics and Law University of California Berkeley School of Law,
January, 111 Yale L.J. 941)
Might price reductions of less than twenty percent qualify as substantial? In some markets they should, and it
would be reasonable to decide substantiality on a case-by-case basis . One advantage of a bright-line rule is that it would
let incumbents know where they stand. Monopolies that price only slightly above their average cost would be insulated from the entry of
higher-cost entrants if they could credibly convey a willingness to price below the entrants' cost after entry, as illustrated in Part III. However,
these monopolies do consumers little harm and may enhance market efficiency.
Substantially Impact
Substantially must be given meaning
Words and Phrases 60 (Vol. 40, State Subway, p. 762)
Substantial is a relative word, which, while it must be used with care and discrimination, must nevertheless be
given effect , and in a claim of patent allowed considerable latitude of meaning where it is applied to such subject as thickness, as by
requiring two parts of a device to be substantially the same thickness, and cannot be held to require them to be of exactly the same thickness.
Todd. V. Sears Roebuck & Co., D.C.N.C., 199 F.Supp. 38, 41.
Substantially Considerable
"Substantial" means of real worth or considerable value --- this is the USUAL and
CUSTOMARY meaning of the term
D.S.C. 1966. The word substantial within Civil Rights Act providing that a place is a public accommodation if a
substantial portion of food which is served has moved in commerce must be construed in light of its usual and
customary meaning , that is, something of real worth and importance; of considerable value; valuable, something
worthwhile as distinguished from something without value or merely nominal
Substantial means considerable or to a large degree --- this common meaning is

preferable because the word is not a term of art
Arkush 2 (David, JD Candidate Harvard University, Preserving "Catalyst" Attorneys' Fees Under the
Freedom of Information Act in the Wake of Buckhannon Board and Care Home v. West Virginia
Department of Health and Human Resources, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, Winter,
37 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 131)
Plaintiffs should argue that the term "substantially prevail" is not a term of art because if considered a term of art, resort to Black's 7th
produces a definition of "prevail" that could be interpreted adversely to plaintiffs. 99 It is commonly accepted that words that are not legal
terms of art should be accorded their ordinary, not their legal, meaning , 100 and ordinary-usage dictionaries provide FOIA fee
claimants with helpful arguments. The Supreme Court has already found favorable , temporally relevant definitions of the word
"substantially" in ordinary dictionaries: "Substantially" suggests "considerable" or "specified to a large degree." See
Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2280 (1976) (defining "substantially" as "in a substantial manner" and "substantial" as
"considerable in amount, value, or worth" and "being that specified to a large degree or in the main"); see also 17 Oxford English Dictionary 66-
67 (2d ed. 1989) ("substantial": "relating to or proceeding from the essence of a thing; essential"; "of ample or considerable amount, quantity
or dimensions"). 101
Substantial means of considerable amount not some contrived percentage

Prost 4 (Judge United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Committee For Fairly Traded
Venezuelan Cement v. United States, 6-18,
http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/04opinions/04-1016.html)
The URAA and the SAA neither amend nor refine the language of 1677(4)(C). In fact, they merely suggest, without disqualifying other
alternatives, a clearly higher/substantial proportion approach. Indeed, the SAA specifically mentions that no precise mathematical formula
or benchmark proportion is to be used for a dumping concentration analysis. SAA at 860 (citations omitted); see also Venez. Cement, 279 F.
Supp. 2d at 1329-30. Furthermore, as the Court of International Trade noted, the SAA emphasizes that the Commission retains the discretion
to determine concentration of imports on a case-by-case basis. SAA at 860. Finally, the definition of the word substantial
undercuts the CFTVCs argument. The word substantial generally means considerable in amount, value or
It does not imply a specific number or cut-off . What
worth. Websters Third New International Dictionary 2280 (1993).
may be substantial in one situation may not be in another situation. The very breadth of the term substantial undercuts the
CFTVCs argument that Congress spoke clearly in establishing a standard for the Commissions regional antidumping and countervailing duty
analyses. It therefore supports the conclusion that the Commission is owed deference in its interpretation of substantial proportion. The
Commission clearly embarked on its analysis having been given considerable leeway to interpret a particularly broad term.
Substantially Considerable
"Substantial" means considerable in amount or value
Words and Phrases 2 (Volume 40A) p. 453
N.D.Ala. 1957. The word substantial means considerable in amount, value, or the like, large, as a substantial gain
Substantial means having worth or value

Ballentine's 95 (Legal Dictionary and Thesaurus, p. 644)
having worth or value
Substantially Real
"Substantial" means actually existing, real, or belonging to substance
Words and Phrases 2 (Volume 40A) p. 460
Ala. 1909. Substantial means belonging to substance; actually existing; real; *** not seeming or
imaginary; not elusive; real; solid; true; veritable
"Substantial" means having substance or considerable

having substance; considerable
Substantially In the Main
"Substantial" means in the main
Ill.App.2 Dist. 1923 Substantial means in substance, in the main, essential, including material or essential parts
Substantially Without Material Qualification
Substantially is without material qualification
Blacks Law 91 (Dictionary, p. 1024)
Substantially - means essentially; without material qualification.

Substantially Durable
Substantial means durable
Ballantines 94 (Thesaurus for Legal Research and Writing, p. 173)
substantial [sub . stan . shel] adj. abundant, consequential, durable, extraordinary, heavyweight, plentiful (a substantial supply); actual,
concrete, existent, physical, righteous, sensible, tangible (substantial problem); affluent, comfortable, easy, opulent, prosperous, solvent.
Substantially Mandate
Substantial requires a certain mandate
Words and Phrases 64 (40W&P 759)
The words" outward, open, actual, visible, substantial, and exclusive," in connection with a change of possession, mean substantially the
same thing. They mean not concealed; not hidden; exposed to view; free from concealment, dissimulation, reserve, or disguise; in full
existence; denoting that which not merely can be, but is opposed to potential , apparent, constructive, and imaginary;
veritable; genuine; certain : absolute: real at present time , as a matter of fact, not merely nominal; opposed to form; actually
existing; true; not including, admitting, or pertaining to any others; undivided; sole; opposed to inclusive.
Substantially Not Covert
Substantially means not covert
Words & Phrases 64 (40 W&P 759)
The words outward, open, actual, visible, substantial, and exclusive, in connection with a change of possession, mean substantially the
same thing. They mean not concealed ; not hidden ; exposed to view ; free from concealment , dissimulation,
reserve, or disguise; in full existence; denoting that which not merely can be, but is opposed to potential, apparent, constructive, and
imaginary; veritable; genuine; certain; absolute; real at present time, as a matter of fact, not merely nominal; opposed to form; actually
existing; true; not including admitting, or pertaining to any others; undivided; sole; opposed to inclusive.
*** INCREASE
Increase Excludes Creation 1NC
Increase means to make greater and requires pre-existence

Buckley 6 (Jeremiah, Attorney, Amicus Curiae Brief, Safeco Ins. Co. of America et al v. Charles Burr et al,
http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/briefs/06-84/06-84.mer.ami.mica.pdf)
First, the court said that the ordinary meaning of the word increase is to make something greater, which it believed should not be limited
to cases in which a company raises the rate that an individual has previously been charged. 435 F.3d at 1091. Yet the definition offered by the
Ninth Circuit compels the opposite conclusion. Because increase means to make something greater, there must
necessarily have been an existing premium, to which Edos actual premium may be compared, to determine whether
an increase occurred. Congress could have provided that ad-verse action in the insurance context means charging an amount
greater than the optimal premium, but instead chose to define adverse action in terms of an increase. That def-initional choice must be
respected, not ignored. See Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U.S. 379, 392-93 n.10 (1979) ([a] defin-ition which declares what a term means . . .
excludes any meaning that is not stated). Next, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that because the Insurance Prong includes the words existing or
applied for, Congress intended that an increase in any charge for insurance must apply to all insurance transactions from an initial policy
of insurance to a renewal of a long-held policy. 435 F.3d at 1091. This interpretation reads the words exist-ing or applied for in isolation.
Other types of adverse action described in the Insurance Prong apply only to situations where a consumer had an existing policy of insurance,
such as a cancellation, reduction, or change in insurance. Each of these forms of adverse action presupposes an already-existing policy,
and under usual canons of statutory construction the term increase also should be construed to apply
to increases of an already-existing policy. See Hibbs v. Winn, 542 U.S. 88, 101 (2004) (a phrase gathers meaning from the
words around it) (citation omitted).
Plan creates new policy--- voting issue:

1. Limits --- they can create any form, the entire range of possible forms of regulation
or funding become topical --- overstretches Neg research burdens --- we allow a fair
number of existing types like ______________.
2. Ground --- best links assume existing policies, they change the debate from
improving current policy to creating new forms --- undermines core ground and
fairness
Increase Excludes Creation
Increase requires pre-existence

Brown 3 US Federal Judge District Court of Oregon (Elena Mark and Paul Gustafson, Plaintiffs, v.
Valley Insurance Company and Valley Property and Casualty, Defendants, 7-17, Lexis)
FCRA does not define the term "increase." The plain and ordinary meaning of the verb "to increase" is to make
something greater or larger. 4 Merriam-Webster's [**22] Collegiate Dictionary 589 (10th ed. 1998). The "something" that is increased
in the statute is the "charge for any insurance." The plain and common meaning of the noun "charge" is "the price demanded for something."
Id. at 192. Thus, the statute plainly means an insurer takes adverse action if the insurer makes greater (i.e., larger) the price demanded for
insurance.
An insurer cannot "make greater" something that did not exist previously. The statutory definition of adverse action,
therefore, clearly anticipates an insurer must have made an initial charge or demand for payment before the insurer can increase that charge.
In other words, an insurer cannot increase the charge for insurance unless the insurer previously set and demanded payment of the premium
for that insured's insurance [**23] coverage at a lower price.
Increase Excludes Creation Statutory Construction Impact
Accurate application of statutory canons is the biggest impact --- its the only way to
determine the purpose and intent of writing
Sentell 91 (R. Perry Jr., Talmadge Professor of Law University of Georgia and LLM Harvard
University, The Canons of Construction in Georgia: "Anachronisms" in Action, Georgia Law Review,
Winter, 25 Ga. L. Rev. 365, Lexis)
CONCLUSION
Because the consideration of written communication is the cornerstone of the judicial process, the technique involved in that consideration has
intrigued the ages. That technique, judicial interpretation, [*434] attempts a highly delicate balance. On the one hand, it
acknowledges the legendary imprecision of language. On the other hand, it seeks to glean from that language the
elusive signals of purpose, meaning and intent. A "science" so inexact incessantly craves a semblance of constants --
conventions assisting to impose order upon understanding.
Roman law, and subsequently the English common-law system, sought to appease this insatiable desire by offering up the canons of
construction. The canons, fundamental maxims of compositional meaning , have proved both vulnerable and venerable.
Their existence has provided an irresistible historic target for a labyrinth of denigrating commentary. Yet the courts, the construers
themselves, have claimed the canons as their own, affording them a determinative role in judicial decisionmaking which
transverses the spectrum of litigation. Accordingly, the critics are left with little choice but to concede the canons' existence and
shaping influence, while pleading for caution in their invocation.
From the canonical mass, the most popular and powerful maxims of meaning are perhaps the three here selected for treatment: Noscitur a
sociis, Ejusdem generis and Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. Although different, the three precepts are also similar -- they counsel an
analysis of associating what is present with what is to be determined. The writer, they presume, meant something by what he
expressed; that expression, or at least a portion of it, they insist, offers the best hope for resolving the ambiguity at hand. As
they occasionally broaden, frequently constrict and sometimes exclude, the maxims operate to propel the interpreter toward an intent,
meaning or purpose that will decide the controversy.
Increase Net
Increase means a net increase

Rogers 5 (Judge New York, et al., Petitioners v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Respondent,
NSR Manufacturers Roundtable, et al., Intervenors, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 12378, **; 60 ERC (BNA) 1791,
6/24, Lexis)
[**48] Statutory Interpretation. HN16While the CAA defines a "modification" as any physical or operational change that "increases" emissions,
it is silent on how to calculate such "increases" in emissions. 42 U.S.C. 7411(a)(4). According to government petitioners, the lack of a statutory
definition does not render the term "increases" ambiguous, but merely compels the court to give the term its "ordinary meaning." See Engine
Mfrs.Ass'nv.S.Coast AirQualityMgmt.Dist., 541 U.S. 246, 124 S. Ct. 1756, 1761, 158 L. Ed. 2d 529(2004); Bluewater Network, 370 F.3d at 13; Am.
Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Glickman, 342 U.S. App. D.C. 7, 215 F.3d 7, 10 [*23] (D.C. Cir. 2000). Relying on two "real world" analogies,
government petitioners contend that the ordinary meaning of "increases" requires the baseline to be calculated from a
period immediately preceding the change. They maintain, for example, that in determining whether a high-pressure weather system
"increases" the local temperature, the relevant baseline is the temperature immediately preceding the arrival of the weather system, not the
temperature five or ten years ago. Similarly, [**49] in determining whether a new engine "increases" the value of a car, the relevant baseline
is the value of the car immediately preceding the replacement of the engine, not the value of the car five or ten years ago when the engine was
in perfect condition.
Increase means net increase

Words and Phrases 8 (v. 20a, p. 264-265)
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991. Term increase, as used in statute giving the Energy Commission modification jurisdiction over any alteration,
replacement, or improvement of equipment that results in increase of 50 megawatts or more in electric generating capacity of existing
thermal power plant, refers to net increase in power plants total generating capacity; in deciding whether there has
been the requisite 50-megawatt increase as a result of new units being incorporated into a plant, Energy Commission cannot
ignore decreases in capacity caused by retirement or deactivation of other units at plant. Wests
Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code 25123.
Increase requires evidence of the preexisting condition to determine a net increase

Ripple 87 (Circuit Judge, Emmlee K. Cameron, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Frances Slocum Bank & Trust
Company, State Automobile Insurance Association, and Glassley Agency of Whitley, Indiana,
Defendants-Appellees, 824 F.2d 570; 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 9816, 9/24, lexis)
Also related to the waiver issue is appellees' defense relying on a provision of the insurance policy that suspends coverage where the risk is
increased by any means within the knowledge or control of the insured. However, the
term "increase" connotes change. To
show change, appellees would have been required to present evidence of the condition of the building
at the time the policy was issued. See 5 J. Appleman & J. Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, 2941 at 4-5 (1970). Because
no such evidence was presented, this court cannot determine, on this record, whether the risk has, in fact,
been increased. Indeed, the answer to this question may depend on Mr. Glassley's knowledge of the condition of the building at the time
the policy was issued, see 17 J. Appleman & J. Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, 9602 at 515-16 (1981), since the fundamental issue is
whether the appellees contemplated insuring the risk which incurred the loss.
Increase Make Greater
Increase means to become larger or greater in quantity
Encarta 6 Encarta Online Dictionary. 2006. ("Increase"
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861620741)
increase [ in kr ss ]
transitive and intransitive verb (past and past participle increased, present participle increasing, 3rd person present singular
increases)Definition: make or become larger or greater: to become, or make something become, larger in number, quantity,
or degree
noun (plural increases)
Increase does not mean to decrease

Websters 13 Websters Dictionary. 1913 ("Increase", http://machaut.uchicago.edu/cgi-
bin/WEBSTER.sh?WORD=increase)
In*crease" (?), v. i.
To become greater or more in size, quantity, number, degree, value, intensity, power, authority, reputation, wealth; to
grow; to augment; to advance; -- opposed to decrease.
Increase is the opposite of decrease

Cambridge 8 Cambridge Dictionary, 8 (increase, 2008,
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=increase*1+0&dict=A)
increase
[Show phonetics]
verb [I/T]
to become or make (something) larger or greater
The opposite of increase is decrease.
Increase means to make greater

Websters 9 Merriam Webster, 9 (Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, Increase,
http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/increase[1])
intransitive verb1: to become progressively greater (as in size, amount, number, or intensity)2: to multiply by the
production of youngtransitive verb1: to make greater : AUGMENT2obsolete : ENRICH
Increase Quantitative
Increase means to become bigger or larger in quantity
Encarta 7 Encarta World English Dictionary, 7 (Increase, 2007,
Increase
transitive and intransitive verb (past and past participle increased, present participle increasing, 3rd person present singular increases)
Definition:
make or become larger or greater: to become, or make something become, larger in number, quantity, or degree
Increase Progressive Growth
Increase means progressive growth
Philips 2 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE (Louis, IN RE LAWRENCE D. GOLDBERG, DEBTOR;
DWAYNE M. MURRAY, TRUSTEE, PLAINTIFF VERSUS MAE M. STACY TRUST AND F. EUGENE
RICHARDSON, DEFENDANTS, 5/1, lexis) (emphasis in the original)
In determining the plain meaning of the phrase "increases the obligor's insolvency," the Court initially notes that this phrase makes no
reference whatsoever [**50] to a "reasonably equivalent value" test 26 or even to the "fair consideration" test of the Section 3 of the UFCA. 27
Instead, Article 2036 of the Civil Code merely uses the word "increases," and the absence of "reasonably equivalent value" language or "fair
consideration" language rings loudly in the Court's judicial ear. Accordingly, the
Court will focus on the plain meaning of the
term "increases." Taking note from one of the dictionaries of choice of the United States Supreme Court,
28 the Court finds that the definition of the word "increase" in Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary reads as follows:
[*270] To become progressively greater (as in size, amount, number, or intensity). . . . to make greater: AUGMENT. . . .
INCREASE, ENLARGE, AUGMENT, MULTIPLY mean to make or become greater. INCREASE used intransitively implies progressive growth in size,
amount, intensity; used transitively it may imply simple not necessarily progressive addition. . . the act or process of increasing : as .
. . addition or enlargement in size, extent, quantity.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 611 (1990) (emphasis added).
As Webster's Dictionary states, the word "increase" means a progressive growth, that is, an incremental [**52] growth. Such
progressive and incremental growth implies that when Article 2036 was drafted, the codifiers used the simple and easily-understood word
"increase" because they meant to imply a "dollar-for-dollar" increase in the obligor's insolvency, rather than a "reasonably equivalent value"
increase. Otherwise, the codifiers would not have chosen to use the word "increase" with no obvious limitation on its meaning. Moreover, since
Article 2036 was crafted in 1984, well after the UFCA, which was enacted in 1918, the drafters of Article 2036 must have been well aware of the
"fair consideration" requirement in Section 3 of the UFCA, and chose not to adopt such a limitation. Therefore, the Court may reasonably
conclude that HN19Go to this Headnote in the case.the plain meaning of "increases the obligor's insolvency" means a "dollar-for-dollar,"
incremental growth, rather than insolvency as measured by a "reasonably equivalent value" standard.
As of this stopping place, the Court has performed its task under the Louisiana Civil Code: to ferret out the plain meaning of Article 2036 of the
Louisiana Civil Code from the words of the article, itself, if possible. However, the Court will resort to other modes of statutory construction
[**53] in support of its "plain meaning" analysis, primarily to assure ourselves that the apparently groundless arguments of the defendants
really are so.. Positing for argument purposes only (of course) that the phrase "increases the obligor's insolvency" is susceptible of more than
one meaning (i.e., a "reasonably equivalent value" meaning), analysis of the purpose of the Louisiana revocatory action and of its legislative
history is now offered.
Other Increase Definitions
Increase includes an extension of duration
Word and Phrases 8 (Vol. 20B, p. 265)
Me. 1922. Within Workmens Compensation Act, 36, providing for review of any agreement, award, findings, or decree, and that member of
Commission may increase, diminish, or discontinue compensation, an increase may include an extension of the time of the
award. Graneys Case, 118 A. 369, 121 Me.500.Work Comp 2049.
Increasing duration is the equivalent of increasing monetary support

Word and Phrases 8 (Vol. 20B, p. 265)
Minn.App. 2004. A durational modification of child support is as much an increase as monetary modification,
and the needs of subsequent children must be considered when determining the indefinite extension of the support obligation pursuant to
statute providing that, when a party moves to increase child support, the circumstances change and the adjudicator is obligated to consder
the needs of after-born children. M.S.A. 518.551.State ex rel. Jarvela v. Burke, 678 N.W.2d 68, review denied.Child S 255, 350.
Increase doesnt require preexistence

Words and Phrases 8 (Words and Phrases Permanent Edition, Increase, Volume 20B, p. 263-267
March 2008, Thomson West)
Wahs. 1942. Thegranting of compensation to any officer after he has commenced to serve the term for which he has been
chosen, when no compensation was provided by law before he assumed the duties of his office, is an increase in
salary or compensation within the constitutional provision prohibiting an increase of the compensation of a public officer during his term
of office. Const. art, 2, 25; art. 11, 8. State ex rel. Jaspers v. West 125 P.2d 694, 13 Wash.2d 514. Offic 100(1).
Increase doesnt require pre-existence

Reinhardt 5 U.S. Judge for the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT (Stephen,
JASON RAY REYNOLDS; MATTHEW RAUSCH, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES
GROUP, INC.; HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees., lexis)
Specifically, we must decide whether charging a higher price for initial insurance than the insured would otherwise have been charged because
of information in a consumer credit report constitutes an "increase in any charge" within the meaning of FCRA. First, we examine the
definitions of "increase" and "charge." Hartford Fire contends that, limited to their ordinary definitions, these words apply only when a
consumer has previously been charged for insurance and that charge has thereafter been increased by the insurer. The phrase, "has previously
been charged," as used by Hartford, refers not only to a rate that the consumer has previously paid for insurance but also to a rate that the
consumer has previously been quoted, even if that rate was increased [**23] before the consumer made any payment. Reynolds disagrees,
asserting that, under [*1091] the ordinary definition of the term, an increase in a charge also occurs
whenever an insurer charges a higher rate than it would otherwise have charged because of any factor--
such as adverse credit information, age, or driving record 8 --regardless of whether the customer was previously charged
some other rate. According to Reynolds, he was charged an increased rate because of his credit rating when he was compelled to pay a
rate higher than the premium rate because he failed to obtain a high insurance score. Thus, he argues, the definitions of "increase" and
"charge" encompass the insurance companies' practice. Reynolds is correct.
Increase" means to make something greater. See, e.g., OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (2d ed. 1989) ("The action, process, or
fact of becoming or making greater; augmentation, growth, enlargement, extension."); WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN
ENGLISH (3d college ed. 1988) (defining "increase" as "growth, enlargement, etc[.]"). "Charge" means the price demanded for goods or services.
See, e.g., OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY (2d ed. 1989) ("The price required or demanded for service rendered, or (less usually) for goods
supplied."); WEBSTER'S NEW WORLD DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN ENGLISH (3d college ed. 1988) ("The cost or price of an article, service, etc.").
Nothing in the definition of these words implies that the term "increase in any charge for" should be limited to cases in
which a company raises the rate that an individual has previously been charged.
One can increase from zero
Words and Phrases 7 (Cumulative Supplementary Pamphlet, 2007 vol. 20a, 07, 76)
Increase: Salary
change of from zero to $12,000 and $1,200 annually for mayor and councilmen
respectively was an increase in salary and not merely the fixing of salary. King v. Herron, 243 S.E.2d36, 241 Ga. 5.
*** OTHER DEFINITIONS
Resolved:
Resolved means to enact a policy by law

Words and Phrases 64 (Permanent Edition)
Definition of the word resolve, given by Webster is to express an opinion or determination by resolution or vote; as it was resolved
by the legislature; It is of similar force to the word enact, which is defined by Bouvier as meaning to establish by law.
Determination reached by voting

Websters 98 (Revised Unabridged, Dictionary.com)
Resolved: 5. To express, as an opinion or determination, by resolution and vote ; to declare or decide by a formal vote; --
followed by a clause; as, the house resolved (or, it was resolved by the house) that no money should be apropriated (or, to appropriate no
money).
Firm decision
AHD 6 (American Heritage Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resolved)
Resolve TRANSITIVE VERB:1. To make a firm decision about. 2. To cause (a person) to reach a decision. See synonyms at decide. 3. To
decide or express by formal vote.
Specific course of action

AHD 6 (American Heritage Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resolved)
INTRANSITIVE VERB:1. To reach a decision or make a determination: resolve on a course of action. 2. To become separated or
reduced to constituents. 3. Music To undergo resolution.
Resolved implies immediacy

Random House 6 (Unabridged Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/resolve)
resolve Audio Help /rzlv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ri-zolv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -
solved, -solving, noun
verb (used with object)
1. to come to a definite or earnest decision about; determine (to do something): I have resolved that I shall live to the full.
Resolved: Aff Competition
Resolved doesnt require certainty

Websters 9 Merriam Webster 2009
(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/resolved)
# Main Entry: 1resolve # Pronunciation: \ri-zlv, -zolv also -zv or -zov\ # Function: verb # Inflected Form(s): resolved; resolving 1 : to
become separated into component parts; also : to become reduced by dissolving or analysis 2 : to form a resolution : determine 3 : consult,
deliberate
Or immediacy
PTE 9 Online Plain Text English Dictionary 2009

(http://www.onelook.com/?other=web1913&w=Resolve)
Resolve: To form a purpose; to make a decision; especially, to determine after reflection; as, to resolve on a better course of life.
Colon
Colon is meaningless --- everything after it is whats important

Websters 00 (Guide to Grammar and Writing, http://ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/colon.htm)
Use of a colon before a list or an explanation that is preceded by a clause that can stand by itself. Think of the colon as a gate, inviting one to go
on Ifthe introductory phrase preceding the colon is very brief and the clause following the colon
represents the real business of the sentence, begin the clause after the colon with a capital letter.
The colon just elaborates on what the community was resolved to debate
Encarta 7 (World Dictionary, colon,
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861 598666)
colon (plural colons)
noun
Definition:
1. punctuation mark: the punctuation mark (:) used to divide distinct but related sentence components such as clauses in
which the second elaborates on the first, or to introduce a list, quotation, or speech. A colon is sometimes used in U.S. business
letters after the salutation. Colons are also used between numbers in statements of proportion or time and Biblical or literary references.
The
The indicates reference to a noun as a whole

Websters 5 (Merriam Websters Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary)
4 -- used as a function word before a noun or a substantivized adjective to indicate reference to a group as a whole <the elite>
Requires specification
Random House 6 (Unabridged Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the)
(used, esp. before a noun, with a specifying or particularizing effect, as opposed to the indefinite or generalizing force of the
indefinite article a or an): the book you gave me; Come into the house.
Indicates a proper noun

Random House 6 (Unabridged Dictionary, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/the)
(used to mark a proper noun, natural phenomenon, ship, building, time, point of the compass, branch of endeavor, or field of study as
something well-known or unique): the sun; the
Alps; the Queen Elizabeth; the past; the West.
The means all parts

Encarta 9 (World English Dictionary, The,
2. indicating generic class: used to refer to a person or thing considered generically or universally
Exercise is good for the heart.
She played the violin.
The dog is a loyal pet.
Means the noun must be interpreted generically

Websters 9 (Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary, The, http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/the)
3 aused as a function word before a singular noun to indicate that the noun is to be understood generically
<the dog is a domestic animal> bused as a function word before a singular substantivized adjective to indicate an abstract idea <an
essay on the sublime>
United States
United States refers to the country as a whole
AHD 9 American Heritage Dictionary, United States,
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/United+States
United States or United States of America Abbr. U.S. or US or U.S.A. or USA
A country of central and northwest North America with coastlines on the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. It includes the
noncontiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii and various island territories in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. The area now occupied by the contiguous 48 states
was originally inhabited by numerous Native American peoples and was colonized beginning in the 16th century by Spain, France, the Netherlands, and England.
Great Britain eventually controlled most of the Atlantic coast and, after the French and Indian Wars (1754-1763), the Northwest Territory and Canada. The original
Thirteen Colonies declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776 and formed a government under the Articles of Confederation in 1781, adopting (1787) a
new constitution that went into effect after 1789. The nation soon began to expand westward. Growing tensions over the issue of Black slavery divided the country
along geographic lines, sparking the secession of the South and the Civil War (1861-1865). The remainder of the 19th century was marked by increased westward
expansion, industrialization, and the influx of millions of immigrants. The United States entered World War II after the Japanese attack (1941) on Pearl Harbor and
emerged after the war as a world power. Washington, D.C., is the capital and New York the largest city. Population: 302,000,000.
Federal Government
Federal Government means the United States government

Blacks Law 99 (Dictionary, Seventh Edition, p.703)
The U.S. governmentalso termed national government
National government, not states or localities

Blacks Law 99 (Dictionary, Seventh Edition, p.703)
A national government that exercises some degree of control over smaller political units that have
surrendered some degree of power in exchange for the right to participate in national political matters
Government of the USA

the government of the United States of America
Not states
OED 89 (Oxford English Dictionary, 2ed. XIX, p. 795)
b. Of or pertaining to the political unity so constituted, as distinguished from the separate states composing it.
Central government
AHD 92 (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, p. 647)
federal3. Of or relating to the central government of a federation as distinct from the governments of its member units.
Federal refers to a government in which states form a central government

AHD 92 (American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, p. 647)
federal1. Of, relating to, or being a form of government in which a union of states recognizes the
sovereignty of a central authority while retaining certain residual powers of government.
Government is all three branches

Blacks Law 90 (Dictionary, p. 695)
[Government] In the U nited S tates, government consists of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches in addition to
administrative agencies. In a broader sense, includes the federal government and all its agencies and bureaus, state and county governments,
and city and township governments.
Includes agencies
Words & Phrases 4 (Cumulative Supplementary Pamphlet, v. 16A, p. 42)
N.D.Ga. 1986. Action against the Postal Service, although an independent establishment of the executive branch of the
federal government, is an action against the Federal Government for purposes of rule that plaintiff in action against government
has right to jury trial only where right is one of terms of governments consent to be sued; declining to follow Algernon Blair Industrial
Contractors, Inc. v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 552 F.Supp. 972 (M.D.Ala.). 39 U.S.C.A. 201; U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 7.Griffin v. U.S. Postal
Service, 635 F.Supp. 190.Jury 12(1.2).
Should
Should refers to what should be NOT what should have been

OED, Oxford English Dictionary, 1989 (2ed. XIX), pg. 344
Should An utterance of the word should. Also, what should be.
Should means an obligation or duty

AHD 92 AHD, American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1992 (4ed); Pg. 1612
Should1. Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
Should expresses an expectation of something

Should2. Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
Should expresses conditionality or contingency

Should3. Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
Should expresses duty, obligation, or necessity

Websters 61 Websters Third New International Dictionary 1961 p. 2104
Used in auxiliary function to express duty, obligation, necessity, propriety, or expediency
Should Desirable
Should means desirable --- this does not have to be a mandate

AC 99 (Atlas Collaboration, Use of Shall, Should, May Can,
http://rd13doc.cern.ch/Atlas/DaqSoft/sde/inspect/shall.html)
shall
'shall' describes something that is mandatory. If a requirement uses 'shall', then that requirement _will_ be satisfied without fail.
Noncompliance is not allowed. Failure to comply with one single 'shall' is sufficient reason to reject the entire product. Indeed, it must be
rejected under these circumstances. Examples: # "Requirements shall make use of the word 'shall' only where compliance is mandatory." This
is a good example. # "C++ code shall have comments every 5th line." This is a bad example. Using 'shall' here is too strong.
should
'should' is weaker. It describes something that might not be satisfied in the final product, but that is desirable
enough that any noncompliance shall be explicitly justified. Any use of 'should' should be examined carefully, as it probably means that
something is not being stated clearly. If a 'should' can be replaced by a 'shall', or can be discarded entirely, so much the better. Examples: #
"C++ code should be ANSI compliant." A good example. It may not be possible to be ANSI compliant on all platforms, but we should try. #
"Code should be tested thoroughly." Bad example. This 'should' shall be replaced with 'shall' if this requirement is to be stated anywhere (to
say nothing of defining what 'thoroughly' means).
Should doesnt require certainty

Blacks Law 79 (Blacks Law Dictionary Fifth Edition, p. 1237)
Should. The past tense of shall; ordinarily implying duty or obligation; although usually no more than an obligation of propriety or expediency,
or a moral obligation, thereby distinguishing it from ought. It is not normally synonymous with may, and although often interchangeable
with the word would, it does not ordinarily express certainty as will sometimes does.
Should Mandatory
Should is mandatory
Nieto 9 Judge Henry Nieto, Colorado Court of Appeals, 8-20-2009 People v. Munoz, 240 P.3d 311
(Colo. Ct. App. 2009)
"Should" is "used . . . to express duty, obligation, propriety, or expediency." Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2104
(2002). Courts [**15] interpreting the word in various contexts have drawn conflicting conclusions, although the weight of authority
appears to favor interpreting "should" in an imperative, obligatory sense . HN7A number of courts, confronted with
the question of whether using the word "should" in jury instructions conforms with the Fifth and Sixth Amendment protections governing the
reasonable doubt standard, have upheld instructions using the word. In the courts of other states in which a defendant has argued
that the word "should" in the reasonable doubt instruction does not sufficiently inform the jury that it is bound to find the defendant not guilty
if insufficient proof is submitted at trial, the courts have squarely rejected the argument. They reasoned that the
word "conveys a
sense of duty and obligation and could not be misunderstood by a jury." See State v. McCloud, 257 Kan. 1, 891 P.2d 324,
335 (Kan. 1995); see also Tyson v. State, 217 Ga. App. 428, 457 S.E.2d 690, 691-92 (Ga. Ct. App. 1995) (finding argument that "should" is
directional but not instructional to be without merit); Commonwealth v. Hammond, 350 Pa. Super. 477, 504 A.2d 940, 941-42 (Pa. Super. Ct.
1986). Notably, courts interpreting the word "should" in other types of jury instructions [**16] have also found that the
word conveys to the jury a sense of duty or obligation and not discretion . In Little v. State, 261 Ark. 859, 554 S.W.2d 312,
324 (Ark. 1977), the Arkansas Supreme Court interpreted the word "should" in an instruction on circumstantial evidence as
synonymous with the word "must" and rejected the defendant's argument that the jury may have been misled by the court's
use of the word in the instruction. Similarly, the Missouri Supreme Court rejected a defendant's argument that the
court erred by not using the word "should" in an instruction on witness credibility which used the word "must"
because the two words have the same meaning . State v. Rack, 318 S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958). [*318] In applying a child
support statute, the Arizona Court of Appeals concluded that a legislature's or commission's use of the word
"should" is meant to convey duty or obligation . McNutt v. McNutt, 203 Ariz. 28, 49 P.3d 300, 306 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2002)
(finding a statute stating that child support expenditures "should" be allocated for the purpose of parents' federal tax exemption to be
mandatory).
Should means must its mandatory

Foresi 32 (Remo Foresi v. Hudson Coal Co., Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 106 Pa. Super. 307; 161 A.
910; 1932 Pa. Super. LEXIS 239, 7-14, Lexis)
As regards the mandatory character of the rule, the word 'should' is not only an auxiliary verb, it is also the preterite of
the verb, 'shall' and has for one of its meanings as defined in the Century Dictionary: "Obliged or compelled (to); would
have (to); must; ought (to); used with an infinitive (without to) to express obligation, necessity or duty in connection
with some act yet to be carried out." We think it clear that it is in that sense that the word 'should' is used in this rule, not merely
advisory. When the judge in charging the jury tells them that, unless they find from all the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the
'should' is not used in an advisory sense but has
defendant is guilty of the offense charged, they should acquit, the word
the force or meaning of 'must', or 'ought to' and carries [***8] with it the sense of [*313] obligation and duty
equivalent to compulsion . A natural sense of sympathy for a few unfortunate claimants who have been injured while doing something
in direct violation of law must not be so indulged as to fritter away, or nullify, provisions which have been enacted to safeguard and protect the
welfare of thousands who are engaged in the hazardous occupation of mining.
Should means must
Words & Phrases 6 (Permanent Edition 39, p. 369)
C.D.Cal. 2005.Should, as used in the Social Security Administrations ruling stating that an ALJ should call on the services of a medical
advisor when onset must be inferred, means must.Herrera v. Barnhart, 379 F.Supp.2d 1103.Social S 142.5.
Should Not Mandatory
Should isnt mandatory

Words & Phrases 6 (Permanent Edition 39, p. 369)
C.A.6 (Tenn.) 2001. Word should, in most contexts, is precatory, not mandatory . U.S. v. Rogers, 14 Fed.Appx. 303. Statut 227.
Strong admonition --- not mandatory

Taylor and Howard 5 (Michael, Resources for the Future and Julie, Partnership to Cut Hunger and
Poverty in Africa, Investing in Africa's future: U.S. Agricultural development assistance for Sub-Saharan
Africa, 9-12, http://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0001784/5-US-agric_Sept2005_Chap2.pdf)
Other legislated DA earmarks in the FY2005 appropriations bill are smaller and more targeted: plant biotechnology research and development
($25 million), the American Schools and Hospitals Abroad program ($20 million), womens leadership capacity ($15 million), the International
Fertilizer Development Center ($2.3 million), and clean water treatment ($2 million). Interestingly, in the wording of the bill, Congress uses the
term shall in connection with only two of these eight earmarks; the others say that USAID should make the prescribed amount available. The
difference between shall and should may have legal significance one is clearly mandatory while the other is
a strong admonition but it makes little practical difference in USAIDs need to comply with the congressional directive to
the best of its ability.
Permissive
Words and Phrases 2 (Vol. 39, p. 370)
Cal.App. 5 Dist. 1976. Term should, as used in statutory provision that motion to suppress search warrant should first be heard by
magistrate who issued warrant, is used in regular, persuasive sense, as recommendation , and is thus not mandatory
but permissive . Wests Ann.Pen Code, 1538.5(b).---Cuevas v. Superior Court, 130 Cal. Rptr. 238, 58 Cal.App.3d 406 ----Searches 191.
Desirable or recommended
Words and Phrases 2 (Vol. 39, p. 372-373)
Or. 1952. Where safety regulation for sawmill industry providing that a two by two inch guard rail should be installed at extreme outer edge of
walkways adjacent to sorting tables was immediately preceded by other regulations in which word shall instead of should was used, and
word should did not appear to be result of inadvertent use in particular regulation, use of word should was intended to convey
idea that particular precaution involved was desirable and recommended, but not mandatory . ORS 654.005 et seq.----
Baldassarre v. West Oregon Lumber Co., 239 P.2d 839, 193 Or. 556.---Labor & Emp. 2857
Should Immediate
Should means must and requires immediate legal effect

Summers 94 (Justice Oklahoma Supreme Court, Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant,
1994 OK 123, 11-8,
http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn13)
4 The legal question to be resolved by the court is whether the word "should" 13 in the May 18 order connotes futurity or
may be deemed a ruling in praesenti.14 The answer to this query is not to be divined from rules of grammar;15 it must be governed by
the age-old practice culture of legal professionals and its immemorial language usage. To determine if the omission (from the critical May 18
entry) of the turgid phrase, "and the same hereby is", (1) makes it an in futuro ruling - i.e., an expression of what the judge will or would do at a
later stage - or (2) constitutes an in in praesenti resolution of a disputed law issue, the trial judge's intent must be garnered from the four
corners of the entire record.16
[CONTINUES TO FOOTNOTE]
13 "Should" not only is used as a "present indicative" synonymous with ought but also is the past tense of "shall" with various shades of
meaning not always easy to analyze. See 57 C.J. Shall 9, Judgments 121 (1932). O. JESPERSEN, GROWTH AND STRUCTURE OF THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE (1984); St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. Brown, 45 Okl. 143, 144 P. 1075, 1080-81 (1914). For a more detailed explanation, see the Partridge
quotation infra note 15. Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as more than merely indicating
preference or desirability. Brown, supra at 1080-81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in
proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v.
California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring that a party "should
devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the
requested segment); State v. Rack, 318 S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used
in an instruction to the jury which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony"). 14 In praesenti means literally "at the
present time." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 792 (6th Ed. 1990). In legal parlance the phrase denotes that which in law is presently or
immediately effective , as opposed to something that will or would become effective in the future [in futurol]. See
Van Wyck v. Knevals, 106 U.S. 360, 365, 1 S.Ct. 336, 337, 27 L.Ed. 201 (1882).
Should No Immediate
Should doesnt mean immediate

Dictionary.com Copyright 2010 http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/should
should /d/ Show Spelled[shood] Show IPA auxiliary verb 1. pt. of shall. 2. (used to express condition): Were he to arrive, I
should be pleased. 3. must; ought (used to indicate duty, propriety, or expediency): You should not do that. 4. would (used to make a statement
less direct or blunt): I should think you would apologize. Use should in a Sentence See images of should Search should on the Web Origin: ME
sholde, OE sc ( e ) olde; see shall Can be confused: could, should, would (see usage note at this entry ). Synonyms 3. See must1 .
Usage note Rules similar to those for choosing between shall and will have long been advanced for should and would, but again the rules
have had little effect on usage. In most constructions, would is the auxiliary chosen regardless of the person of the subject: If our allies would
support the move, we would abandon any claim to sovereignty. You would be surprised at the complexity of the directions. Because the main
function of should in modern American English is to express duty, necessity, etc. ( You should get your flu shot before winter comes ), its use
for other purposes, as to form a subjunctive, can produce ambiguity, at least initially: I should get my flu shot if I were you. Furthermore,
should seems an affectation to many Americans when used in certain constructions quite common in British English: Had I been informed, I
should (American would ) have called immediately. I should (American would ) really prefer a different arrangement. As with shall and will,
most educated native speakers of American English do not follow the textbook rule in making a choice between should and would. See also
shall. Shall auxiliary verb, present singular 1st person shall, 2nd shall or ( Archaic ) shalt, 3rd shall, present plural shall; past singular 1st
person should, 2nd should or ( Archaic ) shouldst or shouldest, 3rd should, past plural should; imperative, infinitive, and participles lacking. 1.
plan to, intend to, or expect to: I shall go later.
Should Not Past Tense 2AC
-- We meet plan says should. This just changes the meaning of the plan doesnt
prove it isnt topical.
-- Ungrammatical their interpretation assumes should is followed by have but

its not. Grammar is key: it defines ground.
-- Kills neg ground hindsight is 20/20, Affs would always pick unbeatable cases
-- Should means future action
American Heritage 00
should ( P ) Pronunciation Key (shd)
aux.v. Past tense of shall
Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
-- Prefer our interpretation theirs is outdated

American Heritage 00
Usage Note: Like the rules governing the use of shall and will on which they are based, the traditional rules
governing the use of should and would are largely ignored in modern American practice. Either should or would
can now be used in the first person to express conditional futurity: If I had known that, I would (or somewhat more formally,
should) have answered differently. But in the second and third persons only would is used: If he had known that, he would (not should) have
answered differently. Would cannot always be substituted for should, however. Should is used in all three persons in a conditional clause: if I
(or you or he) should decide to go. Should is also used in all three persons to express duty or obligation (the equivalent of
ought to): I (or you or he) should go. On the other hand, would is used to express volition or promise: I agreed that I would do it. Either would
or should is possible as an auxiliary with like, be inclined, be glad, prefer, and related verbs: I would (or should) like to call your attention to an
oversight. Here would was acceptable on all levels to a large majority of the Usage Panel in an earlier survey and is more common in American
usage than should. Should have is sometimes incorrectly written should of by writers who have mistaken the source of the spoken contraction
should've. See Usage Note at if. See Usage Note at rather. See Usage Note at shall.
-- Key to Aff ground best literature supports prescriptive future action
-- Neg ground all disads assume future action, otherwise theyre non-unique.
-- No offense future-oriented genealogical Affs can explore history.
-- Potential abuse isnt a voter dont punish for what we didnt do

Its
Belonging to or associated with

Oxford Dictionary 10 (Of, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/its?view=uk)
Pronunciation:/ts/
possessive determiner
belonging to or associated with a thing previously mentioned or easily identified:turn the camera on its side he chose the area
for its atmosphere
Of or relating to
Websters 10 (Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary, its, http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/its)
Main Entry: its
Pronunciation: \its, ts\
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1507
: of or relating to it or itself especially as possessor, agent, or object of an action <going to its kennel> <a child proud of its
first drawings> <its final enactment into law>
Its Possessive
Its refers to the United States Federal Government and is possessive

Updegrave 91 (W.C., Explanation of ZIP Code Address Purpose, 8-19,
http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/zipcode/updegrav.htm)
More specifically, looking at the map on page 11 of the National ZIP Code Directory, e.g. at a local post office, one will see that the first digit of
a ZIP Code defines an area that includes more than one State. The first sentence of the explanatory paragraph begins: "A ZIP Code is a
numerical code that identifies areas within the United States and its territories for purposes of ..." [cf. 26 CFR 1.1-1(c)]. Note the singular
possessive pronoun "its", not "their", therefore carrying the implication that it relates to the " U nited S tates" as a
corporation domiciled in the D istrict of C olumbia (in the singular sense), not in the sense of being the 50 States of
the Union (in the plural sense). The map shows all the States of the Union, but it also shows D.C., Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands,
making the explanatory statement literally correct.
Its is possessive
English Grammar 5 (Glossary of English Grammar Terms,
http://www.usingenglish.com/glossary/possessive-pronoun.html)
Mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs are the possessive pronouns used to substitute a noun and to show possession or
ownership. EG. This is your disk and that's mine. (Mine substitutes the word disk and shows that it belongs to me.)
Grammatically, this refers solely to U.S. investment

Manderino 73 (Justice Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Sigal, Appellant, v. Manufacturers Light and
Heat Co., No. 26, Jan. T., 1972, Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 450 Pa. 228; 299 A.2d 646; 1973 Pa.
LEXIS 600; 44 Oil & Gas Rep. 214, Lexis)
On its face, the written instrument granting easement rights in this case is ambiguous. The same sentence which refers to the right to lay a 14
inch pipeline (singular) has a later reference to "said lines" (plural). The use of the plural "lines" makes no sense because the only previous
reference has been to a "line" (singular). The writing is additionally ambiguous because other key words which are "also may change
the size of its pipes" are dangling in that the possessive pronoun "its" before the word "pipes" does not have any subject
preceding, to which the possessive pronoun refers. The dangling phrase is the beginning of a sentence, the first word of which
does not begin with a capital letter as is customary in normal English [***10] usage. Immediately preceding the "sentence" which does not
begin with a capital letter, there appears a dangling [*236] semicolon which makes no sense at the beginning of a sentence and can hardly
relate to the preceding sentence which is already properly punctuated by a closing period. The above deviations from accepted
grammatical usage make difficult, if not impossible, a clear understanding of the words used or the
intention of the parties. This is particularly true concerning the meaning of a disputed phrase in the instrument which states that the
grantee is to pay damages from ". . . the relaying, maintaining and operating said pipeline. . . ." The instrument is ambiguous as to what the
words ". . . relaying . . . said pipeline . . ." were intended to mean.
And its a term of exclusion

Frey 28 (Judge Supreme Court of Missouri, Supreme Court of Missouri,
320 Mo. 1058; 10 S.W.2d 47; 1928 Mo. LEXIS 834, Lexis)
In support of this contention appellant again argues that when any ambiguity exists in a will it is the duty of the court to construe the will under
guidance of the presumption that the testatrix intended her property to go to her next of kin, unless there is a strong intention to the contrary.
Again we say, there is intrinsic proof of a [*1074] strong intention to the contrary. In the first place, testatrix only named two of her blood
relatives in the will and had she desired [***37] them to take the residuary estate she doubtless would have mentioned them by name in the
residuary clause. In the second place, if she used the word "heirs" in the sense of blood relatives she certainly would have dispelled all
ambiguity by stating whose blood relatives were intended. Not only had [**53] she taken pains in the will to identify her own two blood
relatives but she had also identified certain blood relatives of her deceased husband. Had it been her intention to vest the residuary
estate in her blood relatives solely , she would certainly have used the possessive pronoun "my" instead of the
indefinite article "the" in the clause, "the above heirs."its is geographical.
Of---Definitions
-- Related to an object
Oxford Dictionary 10 (Of, http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/of?view=uk)
Pronunciation:/v, ()v/
preposition
1 expressing the relationship between a part and a whole:
with the word denoting the part functioning as the head of the phrase:the sleeve of his coat in the back
of the car the days of the week
-- Associated with
AHD 10 (American Heritage Dictionary, of,
http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/of)
of ( v, v; v when unstressed) KEY

PREPOSITION:
Derived or coming from; originating at or from: customs of the South.
Caused by; resulting from: a death of tuberculosis.
Away from; at a distance from: a mile east of here.
So as to be separated or relieved from: robbed of one's dignity; cured of distemper.
From the total or group comprising: give of one's time; two of my friends; most of the cases.
Composed or made from: a dress of silk.
Associated with or adhering to: people of your religion.
-- Belonging to
Collins 10 (Collins English Dictionary, of,
http://www.collinslanguage.com/results.aspx?context=3&reversed= False&action=define&homonym=-
1&text=of)
of prep
1. belonging to, situated in or coming from, because of, the inhabitants of former East Germany, I saw
five people die of chronic hepatitis,
Of Specification
Of requires specification
Macmillan 10 (Dictionary, of, http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/of)
saying which specific thing
a. used for saying which specific thing belonging to a more general type you are referring to
I had a feeling of duty toward him.
She seemed to like the idea of having children.
the month of April
the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul
Todd has the annoying habit of questioning everything I say.
Synonyms or related words for this meaning of of: more
b. used for giving a specific age, amount, value, etc.
She met Charles at the age of 20.
She was a young girl of no more than 13.
Lynn earns a salary of thirty thousand dollars a year.
Teachers have been asking for a pay raise of 4 percent.
Synonyms or related words for this meaning of of: more

Of Whole
Of means whole
CJS 78 (Corpus Juris Secundum, 67, p. 200)
Of: The word "of" is a preposition. It is a word of different meanings, and susceptible of numerous different connotations. It may be used
in its possessive sense to denote possession or ownership. It may also be used as a word of identification and relation, rather than as a word of
proprietorship or possession. "Of" may denote source, origin, existence, descent, or location, or it may denote that from which something
issues, proceeds, or is derived. The term may indicate the aggregate or whole of which the limited word or words denote a
part, or of which a part is referred to, thought of, affected, etc.
Of Specified Origin
Of means derived from

AHD 9 (American Heritage Dictionary, Of, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/of)
of (v, v; v when unstressed )

prep.
Derived or coming from; originating at or from: customs of the South.
This is a term of exclusion

Nelson 9 (Dorothy W., Circuit Judge Ninth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals, Doe 1, Doe 2,
and Kasadore Ramkissoon, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs-
Appellants, v. AOL LLC, Defendant-Appellee, 552 F.3d 1077; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 875, 1-16, Lexis)
OVERVIEW: The ISP made publicly available the internet search records of more than 650,000 of its
members. Under a service agreement, all customers agreed to a forum selection clause that designated
the "courts of Virginia" as the fora for disputes between the ISP and its customers. The ISP contended,
and the district court agreed, that the clause permitted plaintiffs to refile their consumer class action in
state or federal court in Virginia, but the customers contended the forum selection clause limited them
to Virginia state court, where a class action remedy was unavailable; this violated California public policy
favoring consumer class actions and rendered the forum selection clause unenforceable. The court held
that the use of the preposition "of"--rather than "in"--was determinative and that the forum selection
clause referred to the state courts of Virginia only, not the federal courts in Virginia. California had
declared by judicial decision the same forum selection clause contravened a strong public policy of
California--as applied to California residents who brought claims under California statutory consumer
law in California state court.
Of means of specified origin

Random House 10 (Unabridged Dictionary, Of, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/of)
of
1
Show Spelled[uhv, ov; unstressed uh v or, especially before consonants, uh] Show IPA
preposition
1. (used to indicate distance or direction from, separation, deprivation, etc.): within a mile of the church;
south of Omaha; to be robbed of one's money.
2. (used to indicate derivation, origin, or source): a man of good family; the plays of Shakespeare; a
piece of cake.
Of Term of Exclusion
Of is a term of limitation
Ellis 53 (Judge Advocate United States Army, United States. v. Private Frank Taylor, Jr., United States
Army Board of Review, 11 C.M.R. 428; 1953 CMR LEXIS 1428, 7-31, Lexis)
Appellate defense counsel argued orally that many facts indicated the United States was not at war, for
example: there has been no declaration of war; the Coast Guard is still under the supervision of the
Treasury Department instead of the Navy Department as it usually is during war; here in the United
States, Armed Forces personnel are allowed to wear civilian clothes during off-duty hours; it is not the
policy to try Department of the Army civilians serving with the Army in the field in the United States by
courts-martial; the various Army posts throughout the United States are still open to public visitation;
many reservists and National Guard units are not on active service; and the Table of Maximum
Punishments had not been suspended for offenses committed in the United States. He contended that
the ratio of the cases cited in support of the war status of the United States was limited to the locale of
the hostilities, Korea and its adjacent [**6] waters, and was inoperative on offenses committed in the
United States. Finally, he anchored his argument on the interpretation to be given the language in
Article 43f(1) (post) of the Code. He conceded arguendo that the offense at bar fell within the purview
of this language, being a fraud against a United States agency, the Army, but reasoned that the subject
language contemplated and embraced only "hostilities as proclaimed by the President or by a Joint
Resolution of Congress." With this interpretation the board of review cannot agree. The preposition "of"
before the word "hostilities" shows plainly that the phrase "of hostilities" is adjectival, qualifying and
limiting the word "termination". The phrase "termination of hostilities" is in turn modified by the
participial phrase "as proclaimed." In our interpretation it is the "termination of hostilities" that must be
proclaimed, and such proclamation provides the initial date of a three-year period in which the
suspension of the statute of limitations continues to operate rather than determines the date of the
beginning of the original suspension (emphasis supplied).
Of is exclusive
Words and Phrases 74 (v. 29)

Word of Exclusion
A deed describing a line as running within four rods of a brook excludes the stread, and means from the side of the stream, and not from the center of it. The
word of, as well as the word from, is used as a term of exclusion. Haight v. Hamor, 22 A. 369, 372, 83 Me. 453.
And/Or
One or the other or both

Words and Phrases 7 (3A W&P, p. 220)
C.A.1 (Mass.) 1981. Words and/or, for contract purposes, commonly mean the one or the other or both .Local Division 589,
Amalgameted Transit Union, AFL-CIO, CLC v. Com. Of Mass., 666 F.2d 618, certiorari denied Local Div. 589, Amalgamated Transit Union AFL-CIO
v. Massachusetts, 102 S.Ct. 2928, 457 U.S. 1117, 73 L.Ed.2d 1329.Contracts 159.
And/or means one or the other or both

Pullum 8 (Geoffrey K., Professor of General Linguistics University of Edinburgh, And/or: "and AND or",
or "and OR or"?, Language Log, 4-14, http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=35)
Does and/or mean "and and or", or "and or or"? That is, if I say I am interested in A and/or B, do I mean I'm interested in A and B
and I'm interested in A or B, or do I mean that I'm interested in A and B or I'm interested in A or B? (You may want to say that it means I'm
interested in A and B and/or I'm interested in A or B; but in that case I repeat my question.) Having reflected on it for a little while, I am
convinced that the answer has to be that A and/or B must mean "A and B or A or B". That is, if an entity A is claimed to
have the property of being F and/or G, the claim amounts to saying that either (i) A has the property of being both F and G or (ii) A has the
property of being either F or G. And to claim that F is a property of entities A and/or B is to claim that either (i) F holds for A and B or (ii) F holds
for A or B. However, in that case and/or is effectively identical in meaning with or, so it is at first rather hard to see why and/or
exists at all. But I do have a guess. The right theory of what or means in English is that it is in general inclusive but that sometimes the exclusive
special case is conveyed as a conversational implicature. I'm going to study linguistics at either York or Edinburgh would often be taken to have
the exclusive sense: since you typically go to a single university to take a single degree, and during the degree course you have no time to study
elsewhere, a decision to choose York would normally exclude choosing Edinburgh as well. The exclusive sense is thus conveyed: one or the
other of York and Edinburgh will be chosen, and if it is York it will not be Edinburgh, and if it is Edinburgh it will not be York. But of course if you
think about it, someone who says she is choosing between those two universities does not commit herself for life to never studying at the
other. When the two alternatives exclude each other, then the exclusive meaning is the only one that makes sense. If you are asked whether
you want to sit in the stalls or in the balcony, it's one or the other but not both, because you can only be in one place at one time. When they
don't exclude each other, it's always understood that or allows for both: obviously someone whose ambition is to
win either an Oscar or an Olympic medal wouldn't feel a failure if they won both. Winning both would satisfy the ambition in
spades. So my guess would be that and/or is a way of underlining the point that the or is to be understood in its inclusive sense rather than its
exclusive sense. Sometimes you want to explicitly indicate "or more than one of the above", and and/or does that. Take the first example of
and/or in the Wall Street Journal corpus of 1987-1989 (a 44-million-word collection of random articles that linguists often use as a source for
real-life examples because the Linguistic Data Consortium the host for the giant Language Log servers made it available in 1993 nice and
cheap). The example (which actually happens to be a quotation from the Washington Post) is this: Too many of his attitudes, claims and
complaints are careless, conflicting, dubious, inaccurate, mean, petty, simplistic, superficial, uninformed and/or pointlessly biased. I take it as
obvious that if one hundred percent of the hapless man's attitudes, claims and complaints had all ten properties every single one was
careless and conflicting and dubious and inaccurate and mean and petty and simplistic and superficial and uninformed and pointlessly biased
then the quoted claim would be regarded as true, not false. An or would have done the job here, but the and/or injects a
(logically redundant) reminder that it may well be the case that more than one of the list of ten properties applies to the miserable
individual in question.
X or Y or both
Wood 1 (Diane P., Circuit Judge United States Court of Appeals, Susan E. Hess, Plaintiff-Appellee, v.
Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Company, 12-13, http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-
bin/getcase.pl?court=7th&navby=case&no=002043)
Having determined that Hess's 1996 employment contract is properly a part of the administrative record the district court was entitled to
consider, we must next decide whether Hartford could reasonably have determined that Hess's benefits as of April 19, 1996, should have been
based only on her 1995 draw amount. Like the district court, we cannot read the contract that way. Hess's 1996 contract clearly states that the
draw system was to be phased out as of April 5. The contract also specifies that her benefits, including long-term disability benefits, would be
calculated based on her "base salary and/or draw." (We note in passing that the phrase "and/or" has its critics. Bryan A. Garner reports
in A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage 56 (2d ed. 1995), that "and/or has been vilified for most of its life-- and rightly so." He goes on to say,
however, that the expression, while "undeniably clumsy, does have a specific meaning (x and/or y = x or y or both)." Id.)
Here, this would mean that Hess could have her benefits calculated on the basis of her base salary, or her draw, or
both. In the context of Fleet's transition away from a draw system, the only reasonable interpretation of this provision was that the benefits
would be based on the draw while it was in effect and on the base salary thereafter. As of April 5, Hess was thus contractually entitled to a
benefits package based on her base salary--that is, based on the average of her previous two years' commissions. The fact that Fleet may have
breached the contract (or been slow in implementing its details) by failing to move from the draw system to the base salary system until June 1
does not change the package of compensation and benefits to which Hess was contractually entitled. Nor could the fact that Fleet failed to
inform Hartford about the date the change-over was to have occurred affect Hess's benefit amount. The Hartford policy states that "[i]f [Fleet]
gives The Hartford any incorrect information, the relevant facts will be determined" to establish the correct benefit amount. Once informed by
Hess's attorney that Hess believed the information Fleet provided Hartford was incorrect, it was incumbent on the examiner to refer to Hess's
employment contract to determine her actual regular monthly pay. Had he done so, he would have seen that Hess became entitled to the
higher level of benefits on April 5, two weeks before her disability. The district court therefore did not err when it concluded that Hartford's
failure to consider the contract was arbitrary and capricious.
And/or can mean either defer to general community practice

N.D. 1964. And/or as used in contract may mean either and or or, and interpretation should be one which will
best effect purpose of parties as determined in light of equities of the case .Hummel v. Kranz, 126 N.W.2d 786Contracts
159.
And/or means or
Or. 1942. As used in the constitutional amendment and statue relating to the creation of public utility districts, the hybrid phrase
and/or may be construed as meaning or.Ollilo v. Clatskanie Peoples Utility Dist., 132 P.2d 416, 170 Or. 173.
And
In addition
Ansell 00 (Mary, Chapter 28: Conjunctions, English Grammar: Explanations and Exercises,
http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/durrus/153/gramch28.html)
Coordinate conjunctions are used to join two similar grammatical constructions; for instance, two words, two phrases or two
clauses. e.g. My friend and I will attend the meeting. Austria is famous for the beauty of its landscape and the hospitality of its people. The sun
rose and the birds began to sing. In these examples, the coordinate conjunction and is used to join the two words friend and I, the two phrases
the beauty of its landscape and the hospitality of its people, and the two clauses the sun rose and the birds began to sing. The most commonly
used coordinate conjunctions are and, but and or. In addition, the words nor and yet may be used as coordinate conjunctions. In the following
table, each coordinate conjunction is followed by its meaning and an example of its use. Note the use of inverted word order in the clause
beginning with nor. Coordinate Conjunctions and: in addition She tried and succeeded.
Requires both
C.A.Fed. 2001. Inclusion of conjunctive and in regulation indicated that all three of the enumerated criteria had to be
demonstrated.Watson v. Department of Navy, 262 F. 3d 1292, certiorari denied 122 S.Ct. 817, 534 U.S. 1083, 151 L.Ed.2d 700.Admin
Law 412.1.
Not or
C.A.5 (Tex.) 1988. The word and is to be accepted for its conjunctive connotation rather than as a word
interchangeable with or except where strict grammatical construction would frustrate clear legislative intent.Bruce v. First Federal
Sav. And Loan Assn of Conroe, Inc., 837 F.2d 712Statut 197.
Or
Or can be one does not have to be both

Websters 96 (Revised Unabridged Dictionary, Or, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/or)
1. One of two; the one or the other; -- properly used of two things, but sometimes of a larger number, for
any one.
Exclusive evidence or means only one

Quirk 93 (Randolph, Professor of Linguistics University of Durham, and Sidney Greenbaum, A
University Grammar of English, http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conjunctions.htm)
OR To suggest that only one possibility can be realized, excluding one or the other: "You can study hard for this exam or
you can fail." To suggest the inclusive combination of alternatives: "We can broil chicken on the grill tonight, or we can just eat leftovers. To
suggest a refinement of the first clause: "Smith College is the premier all-women's college in the country, or so it seems to most Smith College
alumnae." To suggest a restatement or "correction" of the first part of the sentence: "There are no rattlesnakes in this canyon, or so our guide
tells us." To suggest a negative condition: "The New Hampshire state motto is the rather grim "Live free or die." To suggest a negative
alternative without the use of an imperative (see use of and above): "They must approve his political style or they wouldn't keep electing him
mayor."
Or does not mean and

Ct.Cl. 1878. The word or in a contract will not be construed to mean and, where it connects propositions reasonably
in the alternative. Thus, the word in a contract which binds the contractor to supply so many pounds, more or less, as may be
required for the wants of certain government stations between a certain time, cannot be construed to mean and, and does not
entitle the constractor to furnish all the oats which may be needed at the station.Merriam v. U.S., 14 Ct.Cl. 289, affirmed 2 S.Ct. 536,
107 U.S. 437, 17 Otto 437, 27 L.Ed. 531.
Or Means And
Or means and
C.A.2 (Conn.) 1958. Where words in will are placed in the disjunctive, and intent of testator is clear, word or is often construed as
and.Hight v. U.S., 256 F.2d 795.Wills 466.
In Within
In means within --- this is the core meaning

Encarta 7 Encarta World English Dictionary, 7 (In (1), 2007,
in [ in ] CORE MEANING : a grammatical word indicating that something or somebody is within or inside
something.
1. preposition indicates place : indicates that something happens or is situated somewhere
He spent a whole year in Russia.

2. preposition indicates state: indicates a state or condition that something or somebody is experiencing
The banking industry is in a state of flux.
3. preposition after: after a period of time that will pass before something happens
She should be well enough to leave in a week or two.
4. preposition during: indicates that something happens during a period of time
He crossed the desert in 39 days.
5. preposition indicates how something is expressed: indicates the means of communication used to express something
I managed to write the whole speech in French.
6. preposition indicates subject area: indicates a subject or field of activity
She graduated with a degree in biology.
7. preposition as consequence of: while doing something or as a consequence of something
In reaching for a glass he knocked over the ashtray.
8. preposition covered by: indicates that something is wrapped or covered by something
The floor was covered in balloons and toys.
9. preposition indicates how somebody is dressed: indicates that somebody is dressed in a particular way
She was dressed in a beautiful suit.
10. preposition pregnant with: pregnant with offspring
The cows were in calf.
11. adjective fashionable: fashionable or popular
always knew which clubs were in
12. adjective holding power or office: indicates that a party or group has achieved or will achieve power or authority
voted in overwhelmingly
In means within the limits of

Websters 6 Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, 06 (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-
bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=in)
Main Entry: 1in
Pronunciation: 'in, &n, &n
Function: preposition
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to Old High German in in, Latin in, Greek en
1 a -- used as a function word to indicate inclusion, location, or position within limits <in the lake> <wounded in the leg> <in the
summer>
Being enclosed by
OED 8 Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 8 (in, 2008,
http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/inxx?view=uk)
in
preposition 1 expressing the situation of being enclosed or surrounded. 2 expressing motion that results in being within or
surrounded by something. 3 expressing a period of time during which an event takes place or a situation remains the case. 4 expressing the
length of time before a future event is expected to take place. 5 expressing a state, condition, or quality. 6 expressing inclusion or involvement.
7 indicating a persons occupation or profession. 8 indicating the language or medium used. 9 expressing a value as a proportion of (a whole).
adverb 1 expressing movement that results in being enclosed or surrounded. 2 expressing the situation of being enclosed or surrounded. 3
present at ones home or office. 4 expressing arrival at a destination. 5 (of the tide) rising or at its highest level.
Inclusion within a place

Dictionary.com 6 (in, 2006, http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=in&r=66)
1. (used to indicate inclusion within space, a place, or limits): walking in the park.
2. (used to indicate inclusion within something abstract or immaterial): in politics; in the autumn.
3. (used to indicate inclusion within or occurrence during a period or limit of time): in ancient times; a task done in ten minutes.
4. (used to indicate limitation or qualification, as of situation, condition, relation, manner, action, etc.): to speak in a whisper; to be similar in appearance.
5. (used to indicate means): sketched in ink; spoken in French.
6. (used to indicate motion or direction from outside to a point within) into: Let's go in the house.
7. (used to indicate transition from one state to another): to break in half.
8. (used to indicate object or purpose): speaking in honor of the event.

In Not Throughout
In means within, not throughout

Cullen 52 Cullen, Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 52, Commissioner, Court of Appeals of Kentucky,
November 13, 1952 Riehl et al. V. Kentucky unemployment compensation commission; the judgment is
affirmed. Rehearing denied; COMBS, J., and SIMS, C. J., dissenting.
http://ky.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19521113_0040095.KY.htm/qx
We do not find any ambiguity in KRS 341.070(1). It is our opinion that the key word in the statute is the
word 'in,' preceding the words 'each of three calendar quarters', and if the word is accorded its ordinary
and common meaning, the statute does not require simultaneous employment. According to Webster's
New International Dictionary, the word 'in,' used with relation to a period of time, means 'during the
course of.' The same meaning, expressed in another way, would be 'within the limits or duration of.'
Employing this meaning, the statute says that an employer is subject to the Act if, during the course of,
or within the limits or duration of each of three calendar quarters, he had in covered employment four
or more workers, to each of whom the required amount of wages was paid. This clearly means that the
employment need not be simultaneous. Obviously, the word 'in' does not mean 'throughout' or
'for the entire period of,' because then there would be no point in adding the requirement of the
payment of a minimum of $50 in wages. In these times, no worker employed for a full calendar quarter
would be paid less than $50 in wages. The appellant seeks to read into the statute the words 'at the
same time,' following the words 'had in covered employment'. There is no justification for this, unless
the word 'in' means 'during any one period of time in.' We are not aware of any authority for
ascribing such a meaning to the word 'in'.
*** SUBSETS
Throughout---1NC
United States means all of the states

EPA 6 EPA, US Environmental Protection Agency Terminology Reference System, 2-1-2006,
http://iaspub.epa.gov/trs/trs_proc_qry.alphabet?p_term_nm=U
United States
When used in the geographic sense, means all of the States. Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics :
Commercial Chemical Control Rules Term Detail
The refers to a group as a whole

Websters 5 (Merriam Websters Online Dictionary, http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary)
4 -- used as a function word before a noun or a substantivized adjective to indicate reference to a group as a whole <the elite>
In means throughout
Words and Phrases 8 (Permanent Edition, vol. 20a, p. 207)
Colo. 1887. In the Act of 1861 providing that justices of the peace shall have jurisdiction in their respective counties to hear and determine all
complaints, the word in should be construed to mean throughout such counties. Reynolds v. Larkin, 14, p. 114, 117, 10 Colo.
126.
Voting issue for limits and ground---they devolve into single states or localities, which
multiples every aff by hundreds and dodges core DAs to national-level change---makes
preparation impossible
Throughout---Limits Evidence
There are over 89,000 local governments

Katsuyama 12 Byron Katsuyama, Public Policy Consultant with Municipal Research and Service
Center, Do We Have Too Many Local Governments in Washington?, MRSC Insight, 10-1,
http://insight.mrsc.org/2012/10/01/do-we-have-too-many-local-governments-in-washington/
How Do We Compare with the Rest of the Country?
To see how Washington compares with other states, I looked at the state rankings provided by the
Census Bureaus 2007 Census of Governments. They havent provided these yet for the 2012 census. Im
guessing, though, that the overall rankings have not shifted that much in the last five years. In 2007,
Washington State ranked 19th in the country with respect to overall numbers of general and special
purpose governments (1,845), 33rd in the number of counties (39), 28th in the number of cities and
towns (281), and 10th in the number of special purpose districts (1,229). By the way, in 2007,
Washington ranked 14th overall in population.
Among the more interesting findings from the 2012 Census of Governments preliminary counts:
There are 89,004 local governments in the U.S., down from 89,476 in 2007
Illinois leads the country in overall units of local government (6,968)
Illinois has the most special purpose districts (4,137)
Illinois also has the most municipal and township governments (2,729)
Texas has the most county governments (254)
Texas also has the most school districts (1,079)
Hawaii has the fewest local governments of any state (21) with three county governments, 17 special
districts, and one municipal government
16 territories
Brain 9 Marshall Brain, How Many U.S. Territories Exist, And How Do Their Governments Work?,
HowStuffWorks, 6-4, http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/keep-asking/how-many-u-s-territories-exist-and-
how-do-their-governments-work/
You Asked:
How many U.S. territories exist, and how do their governments work? Darcy, Rosenberg, Texas
Marshall Answered:
Everyone knows that the United States has 50 states. But the U.S. also has a number of territories that have
various relationships with the United States.
Puerto Rico is probably the best known of these territories.
View Larger Map
It is not a state, in that it does not have any voting representation in the U.S. house or senate. But
residents of Puerto Rico are United States citizens. They do participate in United States payroll taxes like
social security, but they dont have to pay United States income tax. Instead, they pay Peurto Rican
income tax. Most U.S. laws apply in Puerto Rico, but Puerto Rico also has its own laws. For more info on
the government see: this article. See also: Puerto Rico.
The other U.S. territories are: The U.S. Virgin Islands , American Somoa , Guam , the Northern Mariana
Islands and eleven other small islands in the pacific ocean. Many of these small islands have not fared so
well under U.S. sovereignty. For example, the Johnson Atoll has been the site of twelve thermonuclear
bomb blasts.
Throughout---Grammar---2NC
Grammar---
United States is capitalized---referring to the collective, not individual states

Chicago 10 Chicago Manual of Style Online, Capitalization, Titles,
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/data/faq/topics/CapitalizationTitles.html
Q. Should I capitalize the states when used alone (referring to the United States)? Im copyediting a novel in
which the author capitalizes the States when used alone. I think it would be lowercased.
A. Actually, the States is capped when it means the United States. Its only when referring to individual states
collectively that you should lowercase: Each of the states elects two senators, as opposed to Im going
back to the States.
Its a singular noun

Zimmer 9 Ben Zimmer, Executive Producer of the Visual Thesaurus and Vocabulary.com and
Language Columnist for The Wall Street Journal and Former Language Columnist for The Boston Globe
and The New York Times Magazine, The United States Is... Or Are?, Visual Thesaurus, 7-3,
http://www.visualthesaurus.com/cm/wordroutes/the-united-states-is-or-are/
We're coming up on the Fourth of July, when the United States is full of barbecues, fireworks, parades,
and competitive hot dog eating. But why do we say "the United States is full of..." instead of "the United States
are"? On Independence Day, there's no better time to reflect on how the rise of America's national unity
was mirrored by its grammatical unity , as "the United States" turned into a singular noun.
The late historian Shelby Foote repeated an oft-told tale for the popular documentary series The Civil War (first broadcast on PBS in 1990):
Before the war, it was said "the United States are." Grammatically, it was spoken that way and thought of as a collection of independent states. And after the war, it
was always "the United States is," as we say today without being self-conscious at all. And that sums up what the war accomplished. It made us an "is."
Foote's tidy narrative is just a little too tidy, reiterating conventional wisdom that has been floating around since a couple of decades after the end of the Civil War.
In 1887, a Washington Post writer declared that the Civil War "settled forever the question of grammar... The surrender of Mr. Davis and Gen. Lee meant a
transition from the plural to the singular." Four years later, clergyman G. H. Emerson wrote that "the change from the plural to the singular was vital, though it has
taken a War of Rebellion to make the difference unmistakable." And in 1909, classics scholar and former Confederate soldier Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve stated, in a
widely quoted lecture, "It was a point of grammatical concord which was at the bottom of the Civil War 'United States are,' said one, 'United States is,' said
another."
Rather than just accepting such sweeping claims, one writer sought to track the actual shift in usage from "the United States are" to "the United States is." In 1901,
former secretary of state John W. Foster contributed an article to the New York Times finding that the transformation from plural to singular was a slow and messy
one. In the Constitution, for instance, "the United States" is treated as plural, but so is "the House of Representatives," "the Senate," and "Congress." Over time,
usage changed in American English, so that these collective nouns became construed as singular. (In British English, collective nouns can still take plural verb forms.)
"The United States" also went the singular route, but its path was complicated by the plural ending -s at the end of "States."
Foster shoots down the popular notion that the Civil War was wholly responsible for the change in thinking. Before the war, there were writers and statesmen who
preferred the singular, and afterwards there were still many who held on to the old plural usage. You can see the persistence of the traditional plural treatment of
"the United States" in the 13th Amendment, ratified at war's end in 1865:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or
any place subject to their jurisdiction.
In fact, the "United States is/are" debate raged for decades and was hardly settled by the surrender of the Confederacy. An 1895 column in the Indianapolis Journal
defended the usage of Secretary of State Richard Olney, who preferred "the United States are." The writer insisted that this was correct usage on grammatical
grounds: "Thoroughly as one may believe in the idea of nationality, one cannot ignore the structural principles of the English language." As late as 1909, Ambrose
Bierce was clinging to this grammatical defense of "the United States" as plural. In his peevish compendium Write it Right, Bierce griped, "Grammar has not a
speaking acquaintance with politics, and patriotic pride is not schoolmaster to syntax."
But Bierce was on the losing side of that argument. Already, as a result of Secretary Foster's careful historical
research on the subject, the House of Representative's Committee on Revision of the Laws had ruled in 1902 that
"the United States" should be treated as singular, not plural. The tide had finally turned four decades
after the Civil War.
Grammar outweighs --- it determines meaning, making it a pre-requisite to predictable

ground and limits and, without it, debate is impossible
Allen 93 (Robert, Editor and Director The Chambers Dictionary, Does Grammar Matter?)
Grammar matters , then, because it is the accepted way of using language, whatever ones exact interpretation of the term.
Incorrect grammar hampers communication, which is the whole purpose of language. The grammar of standard English
matters because it is a codification of the way using English that most people will find acceptable.
More Definitions---The
The means all parts

Encarta 9 (World English Dictionary, The,
2. indicating generic class: used to refer to a person or thing considered generically or universally
Exercise is good for the heart.
She played the violin.
The dog is a loyal pet.
More Definitions---United States
All of the states

U.S. Code 6 United States Code, 2006, V. 3, Title 7, Sections 701-End, p. 1227
(20) UNITED STATES.The term United States means all of the States.
United States refers to all areas of U.S. jurisdiction

Rainey, 95 - US District Judge (John, DONALD RAY LOOPER, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF HIS
FIRM'S CLIENTS, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM C. MORGAN, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY UNITED STATES
CUSTOMS SERVICE, AND ALL UNKNOWN INDIVIDUALS AND AGENCIES INVOLVED IN THE SEARCH OF A
BRIEFCASE AT INTER-CONTINENTAL AIRPORT IN HOUSTON, TEXAS, Defendants.
1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10241, lexis)
The term "United States" means the United States and all areas under the jurisdiction or authority thereof.
More Definitions---In
In means throughout
Oxoden 1866
(Ashton, Reverend and Honorary Canon of Canterbury, Our Church and Her Services, p. 67, Google
Books)
Thirdly, that His will may be done by us here on earth, as it is done by saints and angels in the
world above. We say "in earth," and not on earth; for the word in means throughoutthat is to say, in
every part of the earth.

Topicality - HSS 2017

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Topicality - HSS 2017

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Topicality HSS 2017

Funding refers solely to money

Violation---the plan provides non-monetary resources

Limiting it to only money solves this

Funding means money or cash

Funding means money

1 Money provided, especially by an organization or government, for a particular purpose.

1.1 The action or practice of providing money for a particular purpose.

Funding refers only to money or financial resources

Funding refers to money in hand

Funding includes tax credits

Funding includes both money and services

1.1.1 Funding Sources

It includes money or other resources

2 : an available quantity of material or intangible resources : supply

3 funds plural : available pecuniary resources

4 : an organization administering a special fund

Funding includes single payments

Regulation is direct, binding control---broadening it makes the entire field of law

According to Noll, however, such a

Restriction means binding control---expanding it to all government influence

Regulations must control by rule or restriction

B. Responses to Information Imperfections

It must be legally binding

The test is whether theres explicit punishment for non-compliance

Expanding regulation beyond control to anything that influences behavior makes

A. Difficulties in Defining Regulation

Our interpretation is most predictable---scholarly consensus agrees that binding

Regulation is delegated lawmaking where agencies act on a prior statutory basis

2 Searching for Platonic essences

Intra-agency memoranda arent regulations

II. CHOICE OF REGULATORY INSTRUMENT

Regulation is only intentional control---other definitions are so broad as to be

This is the #1 core element that distinguishes regulation

Regulation must involve agency action

The most significant difference between the independent agencies and

the executive agencies is that executive agencies are supposed to operate

within rules laid out in executive orders. Democratic and Republican

traditionally been subject to that kind of oversight by the White House.

Regulations are made through an organized process. There must be

authorization in legislation for a regulatory agency to enact a piece of

comment, and it will take comments on the proposed regulation for an

of proposals and revisions. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

reviews regulation produced by executive agencies, both before it is released

publishes a regulation, Congress is able to review that regulation. Although

Act allows Congress the power to quickly veto a proposed regulation or to

veto a final regulation after it is published by the passage of a joint

resolution by a simple majority.5 The Congressional Review Act has only

been invoked once in history.

Regulation refers to agency actions

Letter of the Law

Regulation is delegated legislation made pursuant to statute

Regulations only refer to rules created by government

1.4 Key Terms and Basic Concepts

Regulations require state action

Regulation includes guidance documents

Regulation includes internal agency guidance

Regulations can be created internally without notice-and-comment

Regulation includes non-state self-regulation

2.3 Nature of the regulator

2.4 Nature of the regulated activity

Regulation are standards that influence conduct

Regulation is the setting standards---it doesnt have to be binding

Regulation of transnational business has become a dynamic area of international governance. n1