Policy debate (also called Cross-Examination or CX) is a two-on-two format focused on policy advocacy. It is one of the oldest and most academically rigorous competitive debate formats in the US. This guide covers the complete speech order, prep time rules, and how to time a Policy round.
All 12 speeches preloaded, 8-minute prep pool per team, two-device sync. No signup.
Open Policy timer →| # | Speech | Side | Time |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1st Affirmative Constructive (1AC) | AFF | 8:00 |
| 2 | Neg Cross-Examination of 1AC | CX | 3:00 |
| 3 | 1st Negative Constructive (1NC) | NEG | 8:00 |
| 4 | Aff Cross-Examination of 1NC | CX | 3:00 |
| 5 | 2nd Affirmative Constructive (2AC) | AFF | 8:00 |
| 6 | Neg Cross-Examination of 2AC | CX | 3:00 |
| 7 | 2nd Negative Constructive (2NC) | NEG | 8:00 |
| 8 | Aff Cross-Examination of 2NC | CX | 3:00 |
| 9 | 1st Negative Rebuttal (1NR) | NEG | 5:00 |
| 10 | 1st Affirmative Rebuttal (1AR) | AFF | 5:00 |
| 11 | 2nd Negative Rebuttal (2NR) | NEG | 5:00 |
| 12 | 2nd Affirmative Rebuttal (2AR) | AFF | 3:00 |
Prep time: 8 minutes per team, shared between both partners. Either partner may use prep at any time before their team's speeches.
Policy teams share a single 8-minute prep pool. Either partner can call prep before any of their team's speeches. The pool is cumulative — time used before the 2AC comes out of the same pool as time used before the 2NR. Once the pool is exhausted the team must begin speaking immediately when called.
The 2NC and 1NR together form the "negative block" — 13 consecutive minutes of negative speaking. This is the most powerful structural advantage in Policy debate. The 1AR must answer this entire block in only 5 minutes, making it arguably the hardest single speech in competitive debate.
Policy debate (also called CX or Cross-Examination debate) is a two-on-two team format where one team defends a policy proposal (the affirmative) and the other team argues against it (the negative). The affirmative team reads a prepared case advocating for a specific plan within the year's resolution. The negative team runs a variety of strategies to defeat the case.
Unlike Lincoln-Douglas debate, which focuses on philosophical values, Policy debate centers on evidence-based advocacy. Teams prepare large evidence files throughout the year and read cards (cited evidence) rapidly during speeches. Fast delivery — known as spreading — is common at competitive levels, allowing debaters to cover more arguments per speech.
Policy debate relies heavily on evidence. Teams cut cards — excerpts from academic papers, news articles, and government documents — and organize them into files. A typical Policy debater carries hundreds of cards to a tournament, organized by argument type.
The affirmative case typically includes:
The negative runs responses such as disadvantages (the plan causes harm), counterplans (an alternative to the affirmative plan), and kritiks (challenges to the affirmative's assumptions or framework).
The negative block consists of two consecutive negative speeches: the 2NC (8 minutes) and the 1NR (5 minutes), totaling 13 minutes of negative speech time with only the 1AR (5 minutes) in between. This is the negative's primary opportunity to extend their strongest arguments and collapse the debate to the issues most likely to win.
The 2AC must answer everything in the 1NC. The 1AR — at only 5 minutes — must respond to the entire negative block. The 1AR is widely considered the hardest speech in Policy debate for this reason.
Policy judges evaluate which team wins the flow — the structured tracking of arguments across all speeches. A dropped argument (one the opposing team never responded to) is typically conceded. Judges track whether arguments were extended, answered, or dropped across the round.
Practical judging notes for Policy:
Policy is the most evidence-intensive and team-oriented of the three major NSDA formats:
The National Speech and Debate Association (NSDA) releases one Policy resolution per year. Unlike LD (which changes every two months) or PF (which changes monthly), Policy teams research and debate the same resolution for the entire academic year. This allows for deep specialization and highly developed argumentation on both sides.
Policy resolutions typically propose a policy action by the US federal government, such as "The United States federal government should substantially increase its funding and/or regulation of..." Topics cover areas like energy policy, foreign policy, criminal justice, and economic policy.