John Mueller Interview - Public Forum Debate Nov.

John Mueller Interview - Public Forum Debate Nov. - Dec. 2020

John Mueller is an Adjunct Professor of Political Science and Senior Research Scientist at the Mershon Center for International Security Studies. Among his books are Retreat From Doomsday: The Obsolescence of Major War and Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al-Qaeda. I interview Dr. Mueller on the 2020 November-December NSDA Public Forum Debate Resolution:

"Resolved: The United States should adopt a declaratory nuclear policy of no first use."

Dr. Mueller was very short but clear in his responses. The short of it? Such a policy will not have a significant impact on US foreign policy or the International System. Prof. Muller elaborates on the inconsequentiality of the policy in the following Q&A:

A.J.: Camacho Are there any plausible circumstances, through the lens of realism, liberalism, constructivism, or any theory of IR, in which the United States ought to start a nuclear war?

John Mueller, Ohio State University: None that are plausible.

A.J.: If at all, how might a US policy of no first use directly or indirectly affect the chances of terrorists obtaining nuclear capabilities?

Mueller: None whatever; there is no connection at all

A.J.: In your estimation, what is the most probable scenario for nuclear war (Where might it start? Would it mean the end of humanity?), and would a no first use policy from the US significantly affect that scenario?

Mueller: There are no plausible scenarios, nor were there during the Cold War (see p. 41 of Atomic Obsession)

A.J.: In your opinion, should the United States adopt a declaratory nuclear policy of no first use?

Mueller: It is of little consequence one way or another.

A.J.: Is there anything else you think debaters should know before heading to their tournaments?

Mueller: Not that I can think of.

Comments

Charles Blahous Interview - Public Forum Debate Sep. - Oct. 2020

Charles Blahous of George Mason's Mercatus Center specializes in domestic economic policy and retirement security (with an emphasis on Social Security), as well as federal fiscal policy, entitlements, and health care programs. Blahous’s research The Costs of a National Single-Payer Healthcare System has been used by both proponents and opponents of Medicare-for-All . I interview Dr. Blahous on the 2020 September-October NSDA Public Forum Debate Resolution: "Resolved: The United States federal government should enact the Medicare-For-All Act of 2019." Dr. Blahous made clear that he does not view himself professionally as an advocate or opponent of the bill, but rather as a humble data analyst. With that being established, that he is neither for or against the resolution professionally, here are some key findings from his aforementioned estimates: "Actual federal cost increases under M4A are likely to be substantially higher than the estimated $32.6 trillion over i

Stephen Breyer - Policy Debate 2020-2021

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer has spent more than two decades as a Supreme Court justice, and during that time he has cultivated a reputation for pragmatism, optimism, and cooperation with both political parties. On a September 17 event hosted by my own George Washington University, Justice Breyer answered questions from students. Among them was a question on criminal justice reform I thought appropriate for this year's Policy Debate Resolution: "Resolved: The United States federal government should enact substantial criminal justice reform in the United States in one or more of the following: forensic science, policing, sentencing." Justice Breyer proposes potential reforms, but many of them are arguably not "substantial." Among his recommendations are training for prosecutors either in the form of training to be a judge or practicing as a defense lawyer as well as a prosecutor. He also indicates his dislike of mandatory minimums, suggesting it w

Robin Olsen Interview - Policy Debate 2020-2021

Robin Olsen is a senior policy associate in the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute, where she works on criminal and juvenile justice reform. She is leading a project on examining data availability and improvements to prosecutorial decisionmaking. Olsen’s research interests focus on using data and evidence and collaborative work across stakeholders to improve criminal and juvenile justice system outcomes. I interview Ms. Olsen on the 2020-2021 NSDA Policy Debate Resolution: "Resolved: The United States federal government should enact substantial criminal justice reform in the United States in one or more of the following: forensic science, policing, sentencing." While previous experts interviewed on Blazer Briefs have focused on specific policies often related to policing, Ms. Olsen points to broader problems, mainly a lack of transparency and data in criminal justice. She discusses a lack of progress on the federal level and areas for improvement in the following Q&

Blazer Briefs

Search This Blog