THE NATIONAL DEBATE TOURNAMENT: A TEST OF THE AFA'S PROFESSIONALISM.

• Author: Ziegelmueller, George
• Position: American Forensic Association

On December 27, 1966 the American Forensic Association voted to assume sponsorship of the National Debate Tournament (NDT). For the next two decades, issues related to the NDT consumed major portions of the association's annual business meetings, generated intense feelings, and even created severe divisions within the AFA's membership. This essay has three objectives: first, to review the circumstances leading to the American Forensic Association's vote to sponsor the NDT; second, to examine the association's role in overseeing the NDT, the nature of the issues debated, the underlying value conflicts, and the ways in which the AFA attempted to respond to these concerns; and, finally, to judge the significance of the relationship between the AFA and the NDT.

TRANSFER OF NDT SPONSORSHIP TO THE AFA

The National Debate Tournament was established in 1947 by the United States Military Academy at West Point. As originally conceived, its purpose was to bring together the best debate teams from across the nation. Except for tournaments held by honorary societies, which were, of course, limited to society members, West Point was the first debate tournament that was national in scope. The West Point tournament was accompanied by considerable military pomp, so invitations involved not only prestige but also a certain glamour. Twenty-nine teams participated in the first NDT (30 were invited, but one withdrew at the last moment). In 1950, the number of teams increased to 34 and later to 38. Initially, after consultation with well-known coaches from different sections of the country, the Military Academy's staff and debaters selected the teams to invite to West Point (Sanders, 1996).

The participating schools quickly came to view the winners of the West Point tournament as the national chammpions. To give greater legitimacy to this claim, more formal procedures for selecting participating teams evolved. The authority to name the teams that represented the various sections of the country was turned over to committees of debate coaches from each district. By the mid-1960s, most districts had settled upon qualifying tournaments as the fairest way to select district representatives to the West Point nationals.

On the first day of the 1966 NDT, an unscheduled meeting of the district committees' chairpersons was called, and the West Point director unexpectedly announced that the Military Academy would no longer host the National Debate Tournament. Budget constraints and the size of classes, which had expanded because of the Vietnam War, necessitated the discontinuation of West Point's sponsorship. The director, expressing the hope that a different sponsor for the tournament could be found, offered to free district chairs from some of their judging obligations so that they could meet to consider future plans.

Interim Planning. The district chairs asked Annabel Hagood of the University of Alabama, Herb James of Dartmouth College, William Reynolds of Georgetown University, and George Ziegelmueller of Wayne State University to form a subcommittee to meet with William Westmoreland, the superintendent of the Military Academy. The subcommittee was charged with exploring two issues: (1) the financial costs associated with hosting the NDT, and (2) determining whether West Point would be willing to host the tournament at least one more year to allow more time for future planning (Ziegelmueller, 1996, p. 145). At first, the committee of district chairs believed that the superintendent's projected costs were unrealistically high. Upon closer examination, however, the committee realized that the figures were undoubtedly accurate. General Westmoreland refused the committee's request to host the tournament an additional year.

At the conclusion of the meeting, an interim committee consisting of the immediate past and current district chairs was formed under the leadership of AFA President Ziegelmueller. The committee undertook two tasks. First, it prepared a proposal to ask the AFA to assume sponsorship of all future NDTs. West Point had brought unique stature and resources to the hosting of the NDT, which no other single institution was likely to match. The interim committee thus considered long-term MA sponsorship of the tournament essential. Moreover, the AFA would provide institutional continuity even if host schools changed from year to year. It also offered an unbiased, professional framework for policy making.

The second task before the interim committee was to begin planning for a 1967 National Debate Tournament. The committee could not wait nine months until the AFA business meeting to plan the 1967 tournament, so the 1967 NDT was an ad hoc event. The University of Chicago offered to host the tournament, and Northwestern University provided substantial financial support.

AFA Action. The next business meeting of the MA was held in conjunction with the SCA (now the NCA) convention in Chicago in late December, 1966. Since the sponsorship of the national tournament required an amendment to the American Forensic Association's constitution, members of the forensic community had been notified of the proposed amendment by mail many weeks before the Chicago meeting. MA sponsorship of the NDT had, in fact, been informally debated by advocates on both sides of the question for months. Although many MA members had no personal interest in the NDT (since they were either retired coaches or directors of less competitive programs) they were nevertheless aware of the broad influence of the tournament and concerned about its possible effects upon the mission of the association.

Those who opposed MA sponsorship argued that the NDT placed too much emphasis on competition, that it encouraged practices such as rapid delivery and switch-sides debating, and that the association should remain a strictly professional organization. Advocates for the amendment responded that it was inevitable that some end-of-the-season championship debate competition would occur and that it was better to have such an event under the sponsorship of the national professional organization. They also argued that the National Debate Tournament increased interest in debating and that MA oversight could be used in positive...