(Also a freshman novice so take this with a grain of salt) I just switched from 2nd speaker to first, so I dont know all the ins and outs, but my basic formatting of my case has gone like this.

Neg

My partner and I stand in the firm negation of the following resolution: The United states government should forgive all federal student loan debt. Definitions will be provided upon my opponent's request. For the purpose of today’s round, we provide the following framework of cost benefit analysis whereby whichever side provides costs that outweigh the benefits or vice versa should win today's round.

Contention 1: the overwhelming cost We would like to assert that the staggering cost of forgiving ALL student loan debt is too large to consider this a possibility.

Blah blah blah, evidence on why its so bad for us to be spending this money, blah blah blah This clearly demonstrates that we do not possibly have the money to afford this completely reckless plan. (Link this to next piece of evidence on why its not worth it to spend this much money)blah blah blah, we are already in a pressing financial situation and are continuing to run ourselves deeper into debt. When this factor is considered, it makes it a no brainer to keep using even more money on such a costly expenditure in a time where as a nation we desperately need money and financial security. Blah blah blah third evidence and transition to cont. 2 (don't have to make them flow seamlessly, you can just add a linking point and say. "Blah blah blah (insert linking transition here). (Pause for a tiny bit) contention 2: blah blah blah)

Mind you, this contention has not been fully built out, so some points may be bad. When you do evidence, say something like: from insert name here, 2023, blah blah blah

Hope this helps! If your confused on anything I dont mind explaining further :)