PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
1
PTC Politics
–
TUDS
PTC Politics
–
TUDS
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.................
1
Summary
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
....
2
Glossary
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.....
3
Politics 1NC [1/4]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
4
Politics 1NC [2/4]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
5
Politics 1N
C [3/4]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
6
Politics 1NC [4/4]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
7
2NC Impact Overview
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...............
8
**Uniqueness**
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.........................
9
2NC PTC Will Pass [1/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.........
10
2NC PTC Will Pass [2/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.........
11
**Links**
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
12
Links Space
–
Tea Party
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..........
13
Links Space
–
Public
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................
14
Links Space
–
Republicans
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......
15
Links Space
–
Spending
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...........
16
Links Constellation
–
Spending
................................
................................
................................
................................
...............................
17
Links Moon Mining
–
Capital
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..
18
Links Moon Mining
–
Spending
................................
................................
................................
................................
..............................
19
Links SPS
–
Political Capital
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...
20
Links SPS
–
Public
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..................
21
Links SPS
–
Republicans
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.........
22
Links SPS
–
Alternative Energy
................................
................................
................................
................................
..............................
23
Links SPS
–
Spending
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..............
24
Links SPS
–
A2 DOD Supports
................................
................................
................................
................................
...............................
25
Links SPS
–
A2 Lobbies
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..........
26
**Internal Links**
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...................
27
2NC PTC Key to Econ [1/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
....
28
2NC PTC Key to Econ [2/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
....
29
Political Capital Key
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................
29
A2 Winners Win
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
31
A2 No Spillover [1/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..............
32
A2 No Spillover [2/2]
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..............
33
**Impacts**
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
.............................
34
Terminal Impact Extensions
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
....
35
US Economy Key To Global Economy
................................
................................
................................
................................
...................
36
Economy Turns Case
–
Generic
................................
................................
................................
................................
...............................
37
Economy Turns Case
–
China
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
..
38
Economy Turns Case
–
Environment
................................
................................
................................
................................
......................
39
Economy Turns Case
–
Hegemony
................................
................................
................................
................................
..........................
40
Econ Turns Case
--
Warming
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
...
41
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
2
Summary
Much like the first
-
semester SKFTA disadvantage, this
is a disadvantage about the political process.
Obama has cut taxes for people working now. This way, they don’t have to pay as much of their salary
back to the government. Obama wants to extend this tax cut, but some people in Congress really don’t
want to
. He’s going to need political capital (influence and favors) to do it.
This payroll tax cut is important because it increases the amount of money Americans have to spend on
goods (to consume things as consumers). If people have more money to spend, they
buy more things than
they otherwise would have. This is good because it stimulates the economy.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
3
Glossary
Consumer
–
Someone who buys (consumes) goods and services.
Consumer Spending
–
The amount of money consumers put back into the economy by spending
it on goods
and services.
DOD
–
Department of Defense.
Lobbies
–
Groups that use money and power to influence the president and Congress.
Payroll Tax Credit
–
Temporary suspension of the government taking money out of paychecks.
Political Capital
–
The power and influence that the president has to spend to get what he/she wants. Political
capital can be thought of much like money.
Tax
–
Money
owed to the government by citizens to pay for government programs.
Tea Party
–
A political movement devot
ed to decreasing taxes and government spending.
Winners Win
–
This is a political theory that political capital is gained, rather than lost, when a president does
something controversial. Essentially, the argument is that controversial policies make the pr
esident look
powerful and people side with him/her because they want to be on the winning team.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
4
Politics 1NC [1/4]
The payroll tax cut will be extended now
-
and Obama pol cap is key
Lee, 1/1
[Carol, Wall Street Journal, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100
01424052970204720204577131543017594740.html]
President Barack
Obama
heads into 2012
with a legislative
agenda
that
essentially
consists of just
a single item
--
a long
-
term
extension of
a
payroll tax
holiday
--
deferring a fight over deficit reduction and the
Bush
-
era tax cuts and all but giving
up on the remaining components of his jobs bill
as he pivots to an election
-
year strategy of attacking Congress. White House spokesman Josh
Earnest said
extending the payroll tax break through next year, a fight that wi
ll consume Congress after lawmakers return
to Washington in January, is "the last must
-
do item of business on the president's congressional agenda
." "
There are
certainly other things that the president would like to do," Mr. Earnest said, adding that Mr.
Obama will continue to
prod Congress to pass some of his jobs proposals. "But in terms of essential, must
-
do items, the payroll
-
tax
-
cut
extension is the last one
." Mr. Obama will also step up his use of his executive authority in the New Year, Mr. Earnest
said, by announcing at least
several new economic initiatives each week.
The president's
central focus
after he returns to Washington next week from a
vacation in Hawaii
will be on the payroll
-
tax cut
, which has
become a catalyst for his
2012
political
message
. The tax break
for 160 million workers was set to expire at the end of the year before Congress extended it in December for two months. Mr.
Obama called for a year
-
long
extension as part of the $447 billion jobs bill he unveiled in September and s
pent the month before Christmas pressuring congressional Republicans to pass it.
Many conservative House Republicans opposed the extension on policy grounds, but the GOP leadership saw it as inevitable and
tried to use the opportunity to
force the White H
ouse to swallow policy items favored by Republicans, such as the construction of the Keystone XL oil pipeline from Canada to
the Gulf
Coast. Once the parties could not resolve differences over how to pay for the tax break, the Senate agreed to the two
-
mont
h extension, catching rank
-
and
-
file
House members off guard and setting them up to be the obstacle to the tax cut, a politically untenable position for a party t
hat portrays itself as the champions
of low taxes. Seeking to regain their footing, congressio
nal Republicans are adopting their own 2012 strategy. Sen. Johnny Isakson of Georgia said Saturday
in the weekly Republican address that GOP lawmakers will push an ambitious economic agenda focused on a tax and regulation ov
erhaul and energy security.
He m
ade no mention of the payroll
-
tax cut. "As we enter into this New Year, many have predicted that Congress will be too consumed with the fall elections
to accomplish anything significant," Mr. Isakson said. "Americans cannot wait until after the November e
lection. They need us to do our job and do it right
now to create an economic climate that makes it easier to put people back to work. Republicans stand ready to do that."
The White House believes
the December payroll
-
tax
-
cut
debate afforded
Mr.
Obama,
wh
o initially proposed paying for the extension with a tax
increase on millionaires,
the political upper hand and momentum
heading into 2012.
The president's aides are
convinced
Congress will
ultimately
extend
to the end of 2012
the current 4.2% payroll tax
levied to fund Social
Security, rather than allowing it to return to 6.2%,
because all sides
have
now
made clear they
support
the idea,
leaving
no room for
a
reversal
.
But the extension won't happen without a fight between the two parties
, and Mr.
Obama w
ill
try
to
capitalize
on the moment
by deploying his
now
-
familiar
message
of being a champion
of the middle class
.
Mr.
Obama urged Congress
on Saturday
to "finish the job"
on the payroll tax break
in his weekly radio and Internet address. "
As I've
said be
fore, we are at a make
-
or
-
break moment for the middle class
," Mr.
Obama said.
"And in many ways, the actions we take in
the months ahead will help determine what kind of country we want to be, and what kind of world we want our children and gran
dchildren t
o grow up in."
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
5
Politics 1NC [2/4]
Plan spends political capital
---
Congress opposed to space spending
Powell 2009
(Stewart M., Washington Bureau
–
Houston Chronicle, “Potential Uphill Battle for NASA”, Houston Chronicle, 9
-
13,
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6615751.html)
NASA supporters are bracing for an uphill battle to get
the extra
funding
needed to take on missions more ambitious than visits to the
international space station
. A high
-
level panel told President B
arack Obama last week that the space program needs an infusion of about $3 billion more a year by 2014. That
may
be a tough sell, even though the amount could be considered spare change
in a fast
-
spending capital where the White House and
Congress are on t
rack to dole out nearly $4 trillion this year to finance federal operations
, including bailouts for Wall Street firms, banks and automakers.
“
The
congressional
agenda
over the next year
is going to be focused on cutting programs, not adding
to them
,” said
Scott Lilly, a scholar at the
Center for American Progress. Adding resources to the nation's $18.7 billion
-
a
-
year space program would require cuts in other areas, said Lilly, who doesn't think lawmakers are willing to
make those trades. Rep. Pete Olson, R
-
Sugar Land
, the ranking Republican on the House subcommittee that has jurisdiction over NASA, said
wrangling
the additional
$3 billion a year would be “an enormous challenge
—
but one I am prepared to win.” Added Olson, whose district includes Johnson Spac
e
Center: “NASA doesn't require bailout funds
—
it needs the promised level of investment that previous Congresses have endorsed.” The 10
-
member panel of space experts led by retired
aerospace executive Norman Augustine suggested extending U.S. participati
on in the $100 billion space station for five years, extending budgeting for the retiring shuttle fleet by six months,
delaying plans for a 2020 return to the moon and extending the timeline for the next generation of manned spacecraft by two y
ears at leas
t until 2017. But the experts warned in their 12
-
page
preliminary report to Obama on Tuesday that
“meaningful human
exploration” would be possible only under “a less constrained budget
ramping (up) to
approximately $3 billion per year” in additional spendi
ng by 2014. Former astronaut Sally Ride, a member of the committee, forecast $27.1 billion in additional funds would be neede
d over the
next decade
—
a 27 percent increase over the $99.1 billion currently planned. Even before Obama publicly reacts to Augus
tine's report to map the next steps in the nation's manned space
exploration, members of Congress are scrambling. “The immediate challenge goes beyond money to just getting NASA on the radar
screen when everyone is focused on health care reform,”
said a ke
y congressional staffer involved in NASA issues. Finding support NASA supporters initially are targeting the Democratic leade
rship of appropriations subcommittees in the House and
Senate with jurisdiction over NASA. Space advocates have an ally in Sen. Bar
bara Mikulski, D
-
Md., chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee panel that handles space agency
spending.
But
in the House, pro
-
NASA lawmakers expect a
fight
with Rep. Alan Mollohan, D
-
W.Va., chairman of the House Appropriations Committee panel tha
t cut
next year's NASA spending nearly $500 million below what Obama requested. Lawmakers are looking for a House
-
Senate conference committee to restore the funds that Mollohan cut before
the Augustine panel completed its work. Aides to Sen. Bill Nelson, D
-
Fla., chairman of a Senate subcommittee that oversees NASA, said they have already identified six potential sources of
additional NASA funding within the federal budget, including some of the $8 billion promised over the next decade to private
energy firm
s to research fossil fuels and deep drilling for oil and
gas. Lawmakers also are exploring the possibility of redirecting some of the two
-
year, $787 billion economic stimulus package from shovel
-
ready transportation construction projects and other
federall
y subsidized programs into the NASA budget. The administration so far has only paid out $160 billion of the total, according
to Vice President Joe Biden. “A lot of stimulus money has
not been spent,” said Sen. John Cornyn, R
-
San Antonio. “We should redirec
t some of those stimulus funds to pay for enhancements to the NASA budget because I believe human space flight is
so important.” Aerospace executives and veteran space experts are hoping for reliable year
-
to
-
year funding. “These are challenging economic ti
mes, but this is not the moment to turn away
from leading a global space exploration effort,” said Dean Acosta, head of the Houston
-
based Coalition for Space Exploration. President's influence Presidential leadership will be essential to
gaining an increas
e, emphasized John Logsdon, a space policy expert who served on the Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation Board.
“
The president has to use
some
portion of his
political capital to put forward an Obama space program
.”
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
6
Politics 1NC [3/
4]
Extending PTC
for a full year is key to prevent double dip recession.
Stewart, 12/28
[
Heather, The Guardian, “Extending Obama’s tax cuts should be new year’s resolution
for Republicans”,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/economics
-
blog/2011/dec/28/obama
-
tax
-
cuts
-
new
-
ye
ar
-
resolution?newsfeed=true
]
Republicans caved in at the last minute last week and agreed to a two
-
month extension of the tax cut package
that had
become the latest focus of toxic partisan wrangling on Capitol Hill. In signing up to the deal
–
under which
a bipartisan committee will now try to draft
legislation extending the tax
-
cuts through 2012
–
Republicans were thinking about their electoral prospects, as well as their chances of a Christmas break.
Fiscal prudence is all very well, but being dubbed the
party that stood between cash
-
strapped families and a tax
-
break is unlikely to be a winning formula in an
election year. However,
research from the non
-
partisan Council on Foreign Relations reveals that
extending the tax cuts is
not just a political deba
ting point, but one of the few factors
preventing the US sliding into a double
-
dip downturn
in
the new year
.
Personal consumption
–
spending, in other words
–
accounted for
91% of
the 1.2%
GDP growth
the US
economy achieved in the year to September, as Wa
shington cut back and exports were weak
. Using official figures, the CFR
shows that less than half of that crucial increase in consumption resulted from rising incomes, with the rest coming from wha
t they call "unsustainable items".
More than a third
–
36
%
–
came from reduced savings, as Americans dipped into their rainy
-
day funds to cope with unemployment and lacklustre wage
growth. And
another
20% came from the payroll tax
.
That shows that
the
emergency
tax
-
cut package
, which included a
2% cut in the pa
yroll tax
(similar to national insurance contributions in Britain)
was doing its job,
helping to prevent the economy
sliding into a renewed recession
in 2011. But when they were introduced a year ago, the cuts were meant to be a short
-
term boost to consump
tion, helping to prop up the economy until the good times returned
. Recent data from the US has been
relatively upbeat, including news that American firms created 120,000 jobs in November. But
unemployment remains well above normal, at
8.6%; the housing
market is still in the doldrums; and with America's trading partners in Asia and Europe heading for
hard times in 2012, the economic climate is about to get tougher
.
Reversing the tax cut in two months'
time could
reduce
workers'
take
-
home pay at the worst
possible
time
. Like the so
-
called "super
-
committee" that was meant to secure a cross
-
party agreement on
crucial public spending cuts and ended instead in a rancourous stand
-
off, the new committee meant to decide the future of the tax
-
cuts may fail; if so
, it won't
just be the Republicans' reputation that suffers.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
7
Politics 1NC [4/4]
Double dip causes prolonged downturn and depression
Isidore, 11
[Chris, CNN Money, “Recession 2.0 would hurt worse”,
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/10/news/economy/double_dip_r
ecession_economy/index.htm
]
The risk of double dip recession is rising. And while economists disagree on just how likely the U.S. economy is to fall int
o another downturn, they generally
agree on one thing
--
a new recession
would
be
worse than the last a
nd
very
difficult to pull out of
.
"
Going back into
recession now would be scary, because we don't have the resources or the will to respond, and our initial starting point
is such a point of weakness," said
Mark
Zandi, chief economist at Moody's
Analyti
cs. "
It won't feel like a new recession.
It
would
likely
feel like a depression
." Zandi said the recent sell
-
off in stocks have caused him to raise the odds of a new recession to 33% from 25%
only 10 days ago. Other economists surveyed by CNNMoney are al
so raising their recession risk estimates. The survey found an average chance of a new
recession to be about 25%, up from a 15% chance only three months ago. Of the 21 economists who responded to the survey, six
have joined Zandi in
increasing their estim
ates in just the last few days. The main reason: the huge slide in stocks. Standard & Poor's downgrade of the U.S. credit rat
ing is another
concern. "The correction in equity markets raises the risk of recession due to the negative hit to wealth and confi
dence," said Sal Guatieri, senior economist for
BMO Capital Markets. Even with a 430
-
point rebound in the Dow Jones industrial average Tuesday following the Federal Reserve meeting, major U.S. stock
indexes have lost more than 11% of their value over the
last 12 trading days. Recovery at risk A plunge in stocks doesn't necessarily mean a new recession.
The economy avoided a recession after the stock market crash of 1987. "Stock price declines are often misleading indicators
of future recessions," said Da
vid
Berson, chief economist of BMI Group.
But with the economy already so fragile, the shock of another stock market drop and
resulting loss of wealth could be the tipping point. "
It
really
does
matter where the economy is when it gets hit
by
these
shock
s
," said Zandi. "If we all pull back on spending, that's a prescription for a long, painful recession
," he said.
Most
economists say they aren't worried that S&P's downgrade makes recession more likely, although a few said any bad
news at this point incre
ases the risk.
"The downgrade has a psychological impact in terms of hurting consumer confidence," said Lawrence Yun,
chief economist with the National Association of Realtors. On shakier ground
Another recession could be even worse than the last one for
a few reasons. For starters, the economy is more vulnerable than it was in 2007 when the Great Recession began
.
In
fact, the economy would enter the new recession much weaker than the start of any other downturn since the end of
World War II.
Unemployme
nt currently stands at 9.1%. In November 2007, the month before the start of the Great Recession, it was just 4.7%. And the
large number of Americans who have stopped looking for work in the last few years has left the percentage of the population w
ith a
job at a 28
-
year low.
Various parts of the economy also have yet to recover from the last recession and would be at serious risk of lasting damage
in a new downturn.
Home
values continue to lose ground and are projected to continue their fall. While
manufacturing has had a nice rebound in
the last two years, industrial production is still 18% below pre
-
recession levels
. There are nearly 900 banks on the FDIC's list of
troubled institutions, the highest number since 1993. Only 76 banks were at risk as
the Great Recession took hold. 0:00 / 2:53 Roubini: Double dip more
likely But what has economists particularly worried is that the tools generally used to try to jumpstart an economy
teetering on the edge of recession aren't available this time around.
"
The reason we didn't go into a depression
three
years ago
is the policy response by Congress
and the Fed," said
Dan
Seiver, a finance professor at San Diego State
University. "
We won't see that this time
.
" Three times between 2008 and 2010, Congress app
roved massive spending or temporary tax cuts to try
to stimulate the economy. But fresh from the bruising debt ceiling battle and credit rating downgrade, and with elections loo
ming, the federal government has
shown little inclination to move in that direc
tion. So this new recession would likely have virtually no policy effort to counteract it
Extinction
Kerpen 8
(October 28, 2008 7:53 AM From Panic to Depression? The dangers of blaming free trade, low taxes, and flexible labor
markets for our current
troubles. By Phil Kerpen, Phil Kerpen is policy director for Americans for Prosperity.)
It’s important that we avoid
all these
policy errors
—
not just for the sake of our prosperity, but
for
our
survival
.
The Great
Depression
,
after all
,
didn’t end until
the advent of
World War II,
the most destructive war in the history of the planet.
In a world of nuclear and
bio
logical
weapons and
non
-
state
terrorist organizations that breed on poverty
and despair, another global
economic
breakdown
of such extended dur
ation
would
risk
armed
conflicts on
an
even greater scale.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
8
2NC Impact Overview
PTC full
-
year extension is key to prevent a double dip that leads to a sustained economic collapse because
it’s the internal link to the main driver of GDP growth
-
consumer
spending
-
That’s Stewart.
That causes a prolonged downturn that causes a depression, resulting in massive nuclear and CBW war
that draws in everyone
-
That’s Kerpen.
We win on timeframe and magnitude
-
economic collapse happens soon without the extension
Hill, 12/28
[Patrice, “Economists fear withdrawal symptoms if payroll
-
tax cut vanishes”,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/28/economists
-
fear
-
withdrawal
-
symptoms
-
if
-
payroll
-
tax/?page=1
]
It was the tax cut that nobody noticed when Congress enacte
d it a year ago
.
Now the question is,
can anyone live
without
it
?
The
$120 billion
payroll
-
tax cut
,
which was extended for two months until March
just before Congress left town last
week,
turned out to be
an addictive fix for consumers
this year, providin
g an extra $20 to $30 in extra cash in every paycheck that
-
while
nothing to write home about in any given week
-
provided a cumulative boost to consumer spending over the course of the year
. At
first, surveys showed that most Americans hadn’t even notic
ed that they received a tax cut increasing their take
-
home pay. For the early part of the year, the tax
cut served primarily to offset the fast
-
rising costs of food and fuel as gasoline prices approached record levels near $4 a gallon. But
the added spend
ing
power
and support for consumers
ended up paying off at a critical time
around midyear, when the economy seemed in
danger of falling into a double
-
dip recession.
As the year progressed, the tax cut helped fuel a more convincing return to the shopping ma
lls by
consumers that is still providing a bit of oomph to the economy in the Christmas season. “U.S. economy is accelerating,” tha
nks to the unleashing of a fresh
wave of consumer demand this fall, said Alan James, an analyst at Barclays Capital. “
The ex
tension of the payroll
-
tax cut is important to
maintaining the momentum
.
”
Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, was the best shopping day in years, and the prime Christmas sales season
from Dec. 1 to Dec. 24 clocked in with sales 4.7 percent higher than last year, research firm ShopperTrak reported Wednesday.
The day after
Christmas also
appears to have been one of the busiest shopping days of the season, the firm added.
While the consumer mood brightened considerably
thanks in part to the tax cut, economists remain concerned that Congress extended it only temporarily
and
did the same with
emergency unemployment benefits. The two parties remain at loggerheads over how to pay for a full
-
year extension that all sides say they want to enact early
next year. “
The consequences of not extending
these measures
through
the remaind
er of
2012 would be dramatic
,” said
Gregory Daco, an economist at IHS Global Insight
.
Expiration of the tax cut would shave 1 percentage point or more
off the economic growth rate for the year, and growth likely would disappear altogether in the first qua
rter after it is
withdrawn, analysts estimate
. While the tax cut remains in place for now, observers of Washington’s long
-
running political impasse are not entirely
confident that the parties will be able to overcome their entrenched differences in the ne
xt two months and extend programs that have a cumulative cost of
$200 billion. “The ongoing political feud could still turn into a breakdown of the political apparatus, and a lapse in the p
ayroll
-
tax cut and emergency
unemployment benefits payments,” Mr.
Daco said.
While the loss of the tax cut would affect the most people, an estimated 160
million households, the loss of unemployment benefits would cause the most hardship for an estimated 4 million to 5
million households that depend on the payments for
such basic needs as food and housing, he said
. “It would be disastrous for
families reliant on unemployment benefits” who have few other financial options, Mr. Daco said.
Allowing the tax cuts to lapse “would have a
tangible negative impact on the economy
”
and cause “a major strain on household incomes
,” said
Harm
Bandholz,
an
economist at Unicredit Markets.
Consumers
also w
o
uld
experience a blow to confidence from another failure of the political
parties
in Washington
to agree on essential matters
affect
ing the economy
, he said.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
9
**Uniqueness**
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
10
2NC PTC Will Pass [1/2]
PTC will pass now
-
That’s Lee
-
December debate over payroll gave Obama momentum and both sides
have come out in favor
-
Prefer our ev
-
It’s most conclusive and assumes divisive December
debates
-
PTC will pass
-
and it’s top of the agenda
Smith, 12/31
[Stephanie Z., ABC News, “Obama Maps Out ‘Warrior of Working Class’ Message”,
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/obama
-
maps
-
out
-
warrior
-
of
-
working
-
class
-
message/
]
The president will
continue to claim the mantle for “warrior of the working class” in 2012
in stark contrast to the public
perception that Republicans in Congress are backing millionaires, not the middle class, a senior White House official tells A
BC News. And that message
will
be carried through President Obama’s reelection campaign next year. “
We’re going to be doubling down on our commitment and our
message in terms of fighting for the middle class,
” Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters covering the presiden
t in Hawaii.
After
a heated battle between the White House and House Republicans,
the payroll tax
cut
was extended until
the end of
February
—
a battle the president ultimately won
albeit for just two months. It also delayed the president’s vacation here,
but
the White
House official noted that
it gave the president
and his senior advisers
time to work through
policy
proposal
s that
they
plan to roll out
in the new year
—
one being
to extend the payroll tax cut through
the end of
2012.
“The significance o
f
that fight is that it
gave the president an opportunity to establish his bona fides on an issue that
, at least in recent
history,
Democrats haven’
t necessarily
fared very well with
, which is the issue of taxes
,” Earnest noted. And
extending it
through t
he end of 2012 is a “must
-
do item of business” on the president’s Congressional agenda.
“
I think
the president
still has a strong hand on
the
payrol
l tax
,” observed Rick Klein, senior Washington editor for “World News with Diane Sawyer.”
”
It’s going
to be
hard not to extend it for a year, politically
.” ABC New Political Director Amy Walter added: ”
The Obama folks should take
some comfort in the fact that Obama’s numbers have improved in the wake of the payroll tax fight. Republicans looked
disorganized a
nd petty, which helped Obama look more presidential
.”
PTC will pass
Bolton, 1/2
[Alexander, The Hill, “McConnell, Bolton face tough job of smoothing tensions when they
return”,
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/201953
-
mcconnell
-
and
-
boehner
-
face
-
tough
-
job
-
of
-
smoothing
-
tensions
-
when
-
congress
-
returns
]
The GOP strategist said it will be difficult for
Republicans
to win additional concessions from Obama in exchange
for
extending the payroll tax holiday a full year
because
they showed
in December that
they
are not willing to let it expire
.
“
Taking that hostage isn’t going to get you anything two months from now.
Democrats are going to take a much harder
line
. I don’t think Republicans are going to get anything for it. At the end of the day they’re going to
have to eat,
” the
strategist said.
The silver lining of the December payroll tax meltdown is that
conservative Republican freshmen in the
House
may have
learned to trust Boehner’s political judgment
. They might be less likely to rebel, even if they believe
themselves to be on
the correct side of a policy argument, if they trust their leaders’ judgment about the political fallout. “The problem is th
e Republican House leadership wasn’t
in sync with its caucus,” said one GOP strategist.
A second strategist s
aid: “
The next time they do this, they’ll be much more
understanding of Boehner
when he says what the politics are. They’re freshmen, they haven’t dealt with the politics as
much.”
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
11
2NC PTC Will Pass [2/2]
Will pass
-
two
-
month extension provided capital an
d momentum
NYT, 12/31
[“Obama to Turn Up Attacks on Congress in Campaign”,
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/us/politics/obama
-
to
-
focus
-
on
-
congress
-
and
-
economy
-
in
-
2012
-
campaign.html?pagewanted=2&%20agewanted=1&_r=2
]
After a year in which the White House of
ten seemed a hostage to the Tea Party contingent in the Republican
-
controlled
House, the administration is savoring
Mr.
Obama’s victory in December in obtaining a two
-
month extension
to keep
most workers’ Social Security payroll tax at 4.2 percent, down fr
om 6.2 percent
.
“
The significance
of that fight
,” Mr.
Earnest said, “
is that it gave the president the opportunity to establish his bona fides on an issue that
, at least in recent
history,
Democrats haven’t fared very well with
, which is the issue of taxe
s.”
He pointed to polls that he said showed that
Mr.
Obama was now more trusted on taxes than Republicans
were
.
Winning a full
-
year extension
of the payroll tax
, Mr.
Earnest said,
will
still
be a top priority
. He noted that
House Republicans
were now
also
arguing that it should be extended for a
year
, after some initially opposed extending it at all. “There are certainly other things the president would like to do
,”
Mr. Earnest said, citing other provisions of the jobs bill. “
But
in terms of essential, mu
st
-
do items, the payroll tax cut extension is the
last one
.”
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
12
**Links**
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
13
Links Space
–
Tea Party
Tea Party hates the plan
–
spending and free market intrusion
Nelson 2011
[Steven, The Daily Caller, “Tea Party group launches into space policy debate”,
6/24, http://dailycaller.com/2011/06/24/tea
-
party
-
group
-
launches
-
into
-
space
-
policy
-
debate/]
Some members of the
Tea Party movement have zeroed in on
a multi
-
billion dollar area of government spending. This time, it isn’t health care or the public debt
-
–
but outer
space
. On Thursday,
TEA Party in Space
(TPIS)
unveiled its “TEA Party Space Platform.
” The group, which is affiliated with the
Tea Party
Patriots,
hopes
NASA will return “to its roots as [a research and development] agency
instead of serving as a
slush fund for a few influential members of Congress,” TPIS
President Andrew Gasser said in a Thursday press release
. Just like a political party’s platform, this agenda is made up of specific issues.
Among the fourteen
calls to action is for Congress to
pass legislation to cap liability for commercial human spaceflight.
Another
of the
tene
ts
calls for a “Zero
-
G means Zero
-
Tax”
arrangement
, which would establish tax exemptions for business activities related to human spaceflight.
Additionally, the group wa
nts for Congress to allow
NASA to cancel all existing Shuttle, Ares and Space Launch System contracts in order to force the termination of an $11 billi
on
earmark included in the 2010 NASA Authorization Law and for NASA to “competitively bid the development
of human exploration
transportation capabilities.”
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
14
Links
Space
–
Public
Public hates the plan
---
they’re strongly against space exploration
Rasmussen 2010
(Rasmussen Reports
–
National Polling, “59% Favor Cutting Back on Space Exploration”, 1
-
15,
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/lifestyle/general_lifestyle/january_2010/50_favor_cutting_back_on_space_explor
ation)
Fifty percent (50%) of Americans now say the United States should cut back on space exploration
given the current state of t
he economy, according to
a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Just 31% disagree with cutting the space program, and 19% more are not sur
e. The new findings mark a six
-
point increase in support
-
from 44% last July
-
for cutting back on space
exploration.
Still, Americans are almost evenly divided when asked if the space program should be
funded by the government or by the private sector
. Thirty
-
five percent (35%) believe the government should pay for space research, while 38% think private int
erests
should pick up the tab. Twenty
-
six percent (26%) aren’t sure which is best. (Want a free daily e
-
mail update ? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available
on Twitter or Facebook. Sixty
-
four percent (64%) of
adults have at least a somewhat favorable view of NASA, including 18% with a very favorable opinion of the government’s chief
space
agency. Just 20% have a somewhat or very unfavorable opinion of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, which cel
ebrated its 50th anniversary in 2008. But
that marks a
sizable drop in support for NASA from a survey last May
. At that time, 81% had a favorable view of NASA, including 24% with a very favorable opinion. The May
findings, however, were a 23
-
point rebound
for the space agency from July 2007 when just 58% had a favorable opinion. But, at that time, NASA was suffering some bad pub
licity, including
reports about drunken astronauts. In the budget President Obama proposes in early February, NASA is hoping for $2
2 billion for the coming fiscal year, up $3 billion over the current year. This
funding, according to news reports, will keep the agency on track for projects including landing on one of Mars’ moons in the
next 15 years and further exploring the Earth’s mo
on. Women
and Americans ages 18 to 29 are more strongly in support of cutting back on space exploration than are men and older adults.
Democrats are more likely to agree than are Republicans and
adults not affiliated with either party. Women also feel more
strongly that the space program should be funded by the private sector. But unaffiliated adults and those in both political p
arties are
narrowly divided over whether the space program is a government or private business responsibility. Investors are evenl
y divided on the question, while non
-
investors lean slightly more toward
private sector financing. Only 27% of Americans believe the current goals of the space program should include sending someone
to Mars. Fifty percent (50%) oppose such a mission, with
24%
undecided. The findings on this question are unchanged from last July. The feelings are virtually identical about sending som
eone to the moon. Twenty
-
six percent (26%
) like the idea, but
twice as ma
ny (52%) are opposed to sending someone to the moon as
one of the current goals of the space program.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
15
Links
Space
–
Republicans
Republicans want to decrease space funding
–
2011 appropriations prove debate insights partisanship
Klamper 2010
(Amy Klamper, Space News Staff WriterDate: 03 November 2010 A
fter Elections, Critics of Obama's NASA Plan Likely to Take Over 2 Key Committees http://www.space.com/9462
-
elections
-
critics
-
obama
-
nasa
-
plan
-
2
-
key
-
committees.html)
Although lawmakers are expected to reconvene for a lame
-
duck session Nov. 15, it remains un
clear whether new spending legislation will be approved before a stopgap measure intended to
keep the government running into the current budget year expires Dec. 3. That stopgap measure, called a continuing resolution
, funds the federal government at 2010
levels. In the meantime,
with incoming Republican leaders threatening to dial back discretionary spending across the federal government next year, the
$19
billion Congress authorized for NASA in 2011 could be in jeopardy
. House Minority Leader Rep. John
B
oehner
(R
-
Ohio), who is expected to become speaker
of the House in January,
voted against the recently enacted NASA legislation and more broadly has pledged to roll back spending in an effort
to reduce the federal deficit
.
In a weekly Republican address Oc
t. 30, Boehner criticized spending under Democratic leadership
and
outlined reforms in the governing agenda Republicans expect to implement in the 112th Congress. "
We're ready to cut spending to pre
-
'stimulus,' pre
-
bailout levels,
saving taxpayers $100 bil
lion almost immediately
," Boehner said. "And
we're ready to put in place strict budget caps that limit spending
from here on out, to ensure that Washington is no longer on this spending binge
."
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
16
Links
Space
–
Spending
NASA funding unpopular
Timmer 2011
( John Timmer Science Editor et Observatory moderator John got a Bachelor of Arts in Biochemistry from Columbia University, a
nd a Ph.D. in Molecular and Cell Biology from the
University of California, Berkeley, 4/25/11, “Bill introduced directing NASA to
establish a moon base” accessed 5/31/11 http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/04/bill
-
introduced
-
directing
-
nasa
-
to
-
establish
-
a
-
moon
-
base.ars)
Overall
, the bill is roughly in keeping with Obama's priorities
, which involve developing the ability to constr
uct and fuel a long
-
distance mission in orbit; those abilities
could apply equally to sending construction materials to the Moon. It would also avoid one of the problems with the lack of a
n obvious focus in Obama's plan, which could be viewed as
"maybe an
asteroid, some day."
Even assuming that the bill could clear the full House and Senate (and survive an Obama veto), the impact may
be much less than its supporters hope.
As its text notes, a return to the Moon has been a Congressional priority several time
s before;
that didn't stop Obama from
dismissing it with "We've been there
." And, more significantly, it clearly didn't ensure that the NASA budget was sufficient to actually accomplish that goal.
Simply
stating that NASA's budget will be "consistent" with
achieving it by 2020 leaves open a lot of room for different definitions of
consistent, and allows the current Congress to shift the burden of finding money onto future ones, which may not be inclined
to do so.
Thus, on its own, the bill would accomplish
nearly nothing and is sufficiently vague that it probably won't even be viewed as providing direction to NASA, at least withi
n NASA. And,
given
how contentious budget issues have been in the current Congress, any attempt to turn it into something concrete
would probably make
it a non
-
starter.
Budget concerns means partisanship
CSM 2011
(By Pete Spotts, Staff writer / May 16, 2011 After the space shuttle, astronaut corps awaits a new mission NASA's once
-
iconic astronaut corps will shrink but still play a
vital role as the space
shuttle era comes to an end. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2011/0516/After
-
the
-
space
-
shuttle
-
astronaut
-
corps
-
awaits
-
a
-
new
-
mission)
The current debates in Washington over the future of NASA's human
-
spaceflight enterprise and t
he increasingly loud cries for deep
budget cuts from deficit hawks in Congress have left NASA and the corps "without a clear definition of what we should be doin
g
," says
Whitson. "We're an action
-
oriented group. We like to take something and pound the deta
ils out to make it work.
The times when we don't have a clear direction are the
most difficult times. And it's an unclear time right now
."
NASA has been preparing for the end of the shuttle program and a downsized
astronaut corps since January 2004, nearly
a year after the Columbia disaster, when the orbiter broke up on reentr
y, killing its seven
-
member
crew. At the time, President George W.
Bush unveiled his vision for space exploration. It called for terminating the shuttle program in 2010, an
end to US i
nvolvement in the ISS in 2015, and the development of two rockets, one of which could deliver a crew of four to low
-
Earth
orbit by 2014.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
17
Links
Constellation
–
Spending
Even if congress wants it, they can’t have it
-
Constellation to unpopular
with the public
Zimbio 2010
(Zimbio, 6/26/10, “Tiny hope for Constellation”, http://www.zimbio.com/NASA/articles/r0mhzciaawM/Tiny+hope+for+Constellation,
SH)
Houston Congressman Culberson,
other
, still
trying to save Constellation
. A Houston Congressman.
John Culberson, warns that NASA’s manned flight program will be going on
“indefinite hiatus” if the moon/Mars program, Constellation, is canceled
–
as the president wants. Congress, which has doubts about the new plan for research and (eventual) return to ma
nned
flight, is trying to save the current program. I don’t believe Congress can pull lthis off, although I applaud the effort. In
any case, with our astronauts spending the last few decades in earth
orbit, the public is bored with it.
There’s no popular g
roundswell for manned spaceflight.
Because
of this,
even assuming NASA truly expects to send
astronauts to an asteroid, nobody’s going to provide the money.
Moon funding contentious in congress
Powell 2010
(Stewart M. Powell, NYT, Monday, October 11, 201
Obama signs new space law http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2010/10/obama_signs_new_space_law.html)
The Obama administration faces uncertainty over whether Congress will provide NASA the full $19 billion for the current fisca
l year
called for in
the law signed by Obama on Monday. Congress is scheduled to return to Capitol Hill after the Nov. 2 mid
-
term
congressional elections to approve spending for federal agencies through next Sept. 30
. Obama and NASA policy makers in the House and Senate have
a
pproved the policy framework contained in the legislation signed by Obama but
it remains up to congressional appropriators in November to actually vote the
money
. "
The 600 pound gorilla here is
the U.S. economy and the need for fiscal responsibility across
all the agencie
s," explained former
astronaut Sally Ride, a member of the White House panel that concluded
NASA's Bush
-
era back
-
to
-
the
-
moon Constellation program was behind schedule,
over budget and unachievable without $3 billion more a year. "The realit
ies are very clear."
Travel to moon requires horse trading
–
mars exploration proves
Powell 2010
( House OKs new course for manned spaceflight With Obama's signature, moon missions will give way to Mars By STEWART M. POWEL
L WASHINGTON BUREAU Sept. 29, 20
10 Read
more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/7224649.html#ixzz1NyXU2SWB )
The United States
on Wednesday officially
abandoned nearly 50 years of pursuing manned moon missions
—
the galvanizing symbol of space exploration
-
to lay down a new roa
dmap calling for NASA to catapult astronauts to distant asteroids and Mars. The course correction came in a
304
-
118 House vote
at 10:35 p.m. Wednesday adopting a 108
-
page White House
-
Senate compromise that officially scrapped the last vestiges of Bush
-
era
plans to return astronauts to
the moon by 2020.
The deal authorized $1.3 billion over the next three years for commercial spacecraft companies to begin ferrying cargo
and astronauts to the orbiting space station, freeing NASA to pour billions of dollars in
to developing heavy lift rockets and crew
capsules suitable for deep space exploratio
n.
The compromise, in the making for months
, was crafted by Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R
-
Dallas, and Bill
Nelson, D
-
Fla., and now heads to President Barack Obama's desk f
or signature into law. Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/7224649.html#ixzz1NyXBAd52
Constellation program unpopular with Congress
Moskowitz 2011
[Clara Moskowitz, Clara has a bachelor's degree in astronomy and physics from Wesleyan
University, and a graduate certificate in science writing from the University of California, Santa
Cruz. She writes for both SPACE.com and LiveScience, NASA Stuck in Limbo as New Congress Takes Over, 1/7/11, 6/25/11, AR]
Lawmakers in October passed
–
and P
resident
Obama signed
–
a NASA authorization bill that gave America's space agency the go
-
ahead to abandon
its previous moon
-
oriented human spaceflight program
and take aim at new targets: visiting an asteroid and Mars. That bill called for NASA to receive
$19 billion in
2011
–
a boost from the 2010 NASA budget of $18.3 billion. But that promised funding was not appropriated, since the outgoing lawmak
ers, along with the president, could not agree on a
federal budget. Instead they enacted a continuing resolu
tion
–
a kind of placeholder law until a full budget can be agreed upon
–
that froze the federal government, including NASA, at 2010
spending levels through March 4. "Clearly the big issue with NASA in this Congress is money," said Henry Hertzfeld, a profe
ssor of space policy and international affairs at George
Washington University in Washington, D.C. "
The details of the budget really hadn't been fully resolved with the old Congress, which left us with a
continuing resolution and nothing more. The question
is what happens when they begin to start debating NASA
." Based on claims by new
House Speaker John
Boehner
(R
–
Ohio), who
said his party will aim to cut non
-
military discretionary spending back to 2008 levels, the space
agency could be in for some serious
budget cutbacks
. "There's going to be a lot of hard negotiations," said space policy expert Roger Handberg, a political scientist at the
University of Central Florida. "
NASA's problem is it's not a priority. When they start slicing and dicing, NASA may be
the one that gets to
‘contribute to the cause.’ I think it could be a disaster for the government part of the program."
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
18
Links
Moon Mining
–
Capital
Moon mining unpopular
–
expensive and fusion isn’t proven
Whittington 2011
[Mark, author of Children of Apollo and The Last Moonwalker. He has written on space subjects for a variety of periodicals, i
ncluding The Houston Chronicle, The Washington Post, USA
Today, the L.A. Times and The Weekly, “Harrison Schmitt's Plan to Solve th
e Energy Problem by Mining the Moon”,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110504/us_ac/8419965_harrison_schmitts_plan_to_solve_
the_energy_problem_by_mining_the_moon
]
A
return to the moon was ruled out
over a year ago by President Barack Obama when he canceled the Constellation space exploration
program. However, there has recently been a resurgence in interest in sendi
ng astronauts back to the moon
,
especially in the Congress.
Schmitt's scheme has the virtue of connecting the desire to go back to the Moon with solving the long term energy needs of pl
anet
Earth. While there are abundant fossil fuels, the supply is finite and in any case using oil and
coal causes various forms of pollution.
Solar and wind have thus far proven inadequate as a means of replacing fossil fuels. Helium 3 fueled hydrogen provides a pote
ntial of
providing clean, virtually limitless energy for the foreseeable future.
Of course
, there are obstacles in the path of a helium 3 fusion future, both technical and
political. Developing a reactor that will create more energy than it consumes to create a helium 3 fusion reaction will be da
unting. Then there are the problems of developing
of lunar mining
techniques and a cost effective transportation infrastructure between Earth and the moon.
The political problem is almost as acute. The
Fusion Technology
Institute
is funded with private money, as the Energy Department thinks that space based helium 3 is a NASA problem and NASA
thinks fusion ener
gy is an Energy Department problem. It will take a leader of vision to sort out the turf battles and get Schmitt's plan
rolling.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
19
Links
Moon Mining
–
Spending
Current technology for colonization makes it unpopular
Roland and Brownback 2004
[Dr. K. Roland
, and SENATOR SAM BROWNBACK , NASA Ames Research Center, U.S. Senator, April 2, 2004, U.S. SENATOR SAM BROWNBACK (R
-
KS) HOLDS HEARING ON
THE FUTURE OF NASA, 6/25/11 JB]
BROWNBACK: Dr. Roland, give me your perspective on why we should or shouldn't go back
to the moon or to Mars? ROLAND:
If the moon were paved in diamonds, it'd
cost more to go get them than they're worth here on Earth. It's one of the reasons we haven't gone back to the moon is we dis
covered
there is nothing there worth going back for
. It is
proved that you could do some science fair and you could do some experiments, but nothing where the payoff is anywhere
near the cost. And I think the same thing is true within Mars. This notion that humans in C
-
2 do better research than machines I think i
s simply not true. And I don't know of any particular
activity that a human is going to do on Mars that a machine can't do. Remember, our machines are controlled from earth. We se
nd them out and we tell them what to do. We don't have to pre
-
program. We dir
ect them around. We have the get samples. 25 years ago, NASA could have sent an automated probe to Mars to take soil samples
and bring it back. We could have it down in
the Air and Space Museum now. And we haven't done those automated missions that we ough
t to be doing. I have no doubt that someday, humans will go to Mars. And we'll probably go back
to the moon. And we'll probably colonize the moon or Mars or some other place in space, but not with the technology that we h
ave now.
What we have now is the te
chnology
that allows us to do an enormous amount of scientific exploration. And that's being cut off while we float astronauts around
in near
earth orbit. It's just an imbalance of our priorities. I agree that the space program has to have some balance of
priorities, but throughout
NASA's history, it's been spending two
-
thirds of its money on manned space flight. And we get very little payoff from that.
Helium 3 mining is unpopular: is not a budgetary priority
Apollo Lunar Surface Journal ’95
Eric M. Jones , 1995, “Epilogue: When might we go back to the Moon?”, Apollo Lunar Surface Journal,
http://www.solarviews.com/eng/apoepi.htm
, ldg, Date of
Access 6/25/11, JK)
The space program and
its supporters have been on a financial and emotional roller coaster virtually from the beginning. The debate
over funding is sure to continue until
the time comes that most of our activities in space are self
-
supporting and public
funding is no longer re
quired
.
The issue
at the center of the debate
is
,
of course,
the relative value of the space program and
, as we have discussed,
the perception of space as a technology driver
-
coupled with the fact that plenty of people still want to rub elbows with astro
nauts and plenty of kids still want to grow up to be one
-
generates funding at a level of about one quarter of one
percent of the GDP. If the rules of the game were to change, of course, then increased levels of funding might well be in the
cards.
If
, for
example,
people began to think that
there was a real possibility of a substantial, near
-
term economic return, then new funding might well become available. The space
community talks
hopefully
about
asteroid mining, about solar power satellites, and about
Helium
-
3 mining on the Moon
but, unfortunately, they been
unable to convince anyone but the faithful that the technological risks are low enough
-
and the potential payoffs large enough and
soon enough
-
to warrant spending large sums of public or private
money
.
Alternatively, the development of significantly cheaper transportation systems would
make it possible to do more at the current levels of funding and, at the same time, would make a broader array of space activ
ities attractive. However, technical in
novation is only part of the
answer to cheaper transportation. Of even great importance is the ability to build many copies of a new vehicle and to fly th
em frequently and efficiently. That is, economies of scale are crucial
and, to achieve them, we will p
robably have to rely on increases in space activities to produce increases in demand and, therefore, decreases in unit costs.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
20
Links
SPS
–
Political Capital
Pushing SPS would cost Obama political capital
David 2008
[Leonard, Pentagon, May 15,
2008, Space
-
Based Solar Power
-
Harvesting Energy from Space, http://www.azocleantech.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=69, 6/23/11 JB]
Overall,
pushing forward on SBSP "is a complex problem and one that lends itself to a wide variety of competing solutions
," sai
d John
Mankins, President of Artemis Innovation Management Solutions, LLC, in Ashburn, Virginia.
"There's a whole range of science and technology challenges to be
pursued
. New knowledge and new systems concepts are needed in order to enable space based sol
ar power. But there does not appear, at least at present, that there are any fundamental
physical barriers," Mankins explained. Peter Teets, Distinguished Chair of the Eisenhower Center for Space and Defense Studie
s, said that SBSP must be economically via
ble with those
economics probably not there today. "But if we can find a way with continued technology development ... and smart moves in te
rms of development cycles to bring clean energy from space to
the Earth, it's a home run kind of situation," he told
attendees of the meeting. "It's a noble effort," Teets told Space News. There remain uncertainties in SBSP, including closure
on a business
case for the idea, he added. "I think the Air Force has a legitimate stake in starting it. But
the scale of this pr
oject is going to be enormous
. This could create a new agency
... who knows?
It's going to take the President and a lot of political will to go forward with this
," Teets said.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
21
Links
SPS
–
Public
Public opposes SPS
–
they’re scared about the health effec
ts
Linda
Shiner
, Air and Space Magazine, 7
-
1
-
2008
, “Where The Sun Does Shine,” http://www.airspacemag.com/space
-
exploration/Sun_Does_Shine.html
Perhaps
the biggest hurdle facing space solar power is public concern about how
low
-
level
microwave beams will a
ffect animals
and humans. Never mind that the fear remains unfounded
. Because of the widespread use of microwaves for communication, the Federal Communications
Commission has established a safety standard for human exposure. In all proposed space power sys
tems, the expected power density at the edges of the receiving antenna, where people
are most likely to be affected, meets the standard. But
explaining this to the public
, which hears “microwave” and thinks “oven,”
might require a large and
costly
education campaign
. Another worry, that microwave beams could scramble a passing airliner’s avionics or harm passengers, could be addressed by
restricting the
airspace around the beams, just as the Federal Aviation Administration restricts the airspace ove
r nuclear power plants.
Space power advocates may find it
instructive to study the political struggles of the nuclear power industry.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
22
Links
SPS
–
Republicans
Solar power is unpopular with republicans
–
growing partisanship
Las Vegas Review Journal 08
(“
Solar
-
power lobby's pressure has Ensign feeling alienated”, June 14, http://www.lvrj.com/business/19939644.html)
WASHINGTON
--
Breaking with an industry that is growing significant in Nevada,
Sen. John Ensign cried foul this week against a solar power lobb
ying
campaign
.
Ensign said an effort to pressure him on solar tax breaks has had the opposite effect of "personally alienating" him and
other senators
. In an outburst notable for its bluntness, the Republican sent a blistering letter Thursday to the nation
al membership of the Solar Energy Industry Association, and later
gave it to reporters. He said lobbyists threw away their goodwill when they carried out a strategy that included a statement
suggesting Ensign was favoring "billionaire hedge fund
managers"
over job creation in Nevada. "
It is rare to have such overwhelming bipartisan support in today's political climate but the solar
industry had it and your association's leadership squandered it
," Ensign wrote.
The episode exposed a fissure that had been wid
ening
since last year as Congress tries but fails to extend investment and production tax credits for solar
, wind, geothermal
and other
renewable sources that expire this year.
Nevada solar executives privately expressed unhappiness that Ensign was voting
against bills containing the tax credits along with
other expiring tax breaks. Ensign said he opposed the bills because they would have paid for the new tax breaks by raising ta
xes on the oil and gas industry and other business interests. He
argued the tra
de
-
off would blunt the overall benefit to the economy. Earlier this spring, Ensign sponsored an alternative with Sen. Maria Cant
well, D
-
Wash., that called for new renewable
energy tax breaks without cost offsets. It passed the Senate 88
-
8, but is stuck in
the House.
On Tuesday, the latest effort to move a tax bill was blocked by
Republicans 50
-
44.
A new vote is expected next week. In advance of Tuesday's vote, the solar industry said in a statement that Ensign "will have
to choose between job
-
creating
solar
power for Nevada or continuing a veto threat that protects the off
-
shore tax havens of billionaire hedge
-
fund managers." That set off Ensign, along with disclosure of a solar lobbying
plan targeting Republicans, including Sens. John McCain and Jon Kyl of
Arizona, Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Orrin Hatch and Robert Bennett of Utah and Wayne Allard of Colorado.
"Following a partisan playbook is not a proven or wise track," Ensign said in his letter to the solar industry. "Instead of c
apitalizing on this oppo
rtunity to achieve your goals, SEIA wasted
it." Rhone Resch, Solar Energy Industry Association president, said Friday the intent was not to alienate Ensign but to prod
Congress to find a way to pass the tax provisions. If they
expire, investment in solar w
ill come to a halt, he said.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
23
Links
SPS
–
Alternative Energy
Building SSP would be a massive political battle and anger fossil fuel lobbies
Darel
Preble
, President of Space Solar Power Institute, 12
-
15
-
2006
, “Introduction,” http://www.sspi.gatech.edu/su
nsatcorpfaq.pdf
Changing our nation
and our world’s baseload energy generation sources
to
introduce
SSP is a massive battle
. The
current oil, coal, and gas energy
providers, nuclear as well, are not eager to see their baseload investments face competition
from SSP
, which has zero fuel costs and
zero emissions and a billion years of steady supply projected.
This is why SSP has been unfunded since it was invented
in 1968. Carter pushed through the
SSP reference study in 1979
-
1980, but space transportation cos
ts were far too high, and they were forced to plan to use astronauts to bolt it together. This is too dangerous for astronaut
s
outside the protection of the Van Allen Radiation Belts. (The Space Station is inside the Van Allen Belts) People are also to
o ex
pensive to use for SSP construction. Telerobotics, the real
way to assemble SSP, did not exist in 1979. Now it is used in heart surgery every day worldwide and for a thousand other uses
. (
The fossil fuel industry has battled
environmentalists every inch
du
ring our struggle to understand climate change effects. That is their right. Perhaps half the studies are wrong. But half are
right.) Most
crucially, space transportation costs have stayed too high because there is no market large enough to support a Reusa
ble Launch Vehicle fleet. SSP IS just such a massive market. Robert
Zubrin mentions this battle and perspective in “Entering Space”, page 51. He quit space transportation and decided to work on
Mars, which has no possibility of commercialization this
centu
ry. This is detailed in the Space Transportation chapter on the SSPW website also. You can’t make an omelet without breaking
a few eggs.
Fossil fuel lobbies oppose SPS
Peter
Glaser
, PhD, inventor of SPS idea, Spring
2008
, “An Energy Pioneer,” Ad Astra, ht
tp://www.nss.org/adastra/AdAstra
-
SBSP
-
2008.pdf
No, because people can still get gas for their cars too easily. Those in the top levels of science and government know what i
s coming, but the average man on the street will not care unless
it impacts his wall
et. That is the biggest problem. The basic approach is unchanged from my initial concept. We could have built this system 30
years ago. The technology just keeps
getting better. The
design and implementation is a small problem compared to the much larger o
bstacle of getting people to
understand the potential benefits
. Building such a system could provide cheap and limitless power for the entire planet, yet
instead of trying to find a way
to make it work, most people shrug it off as being too expensive or to
o difficult
. Of course
existing energy providers will fight,
too. It only makes sense that coal and oil lobbies will continue to find plenty of reasons for our representatives in Congres
s
to reject limitless energy from the sun.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
24
Links
SPS
–
Spending
SPS is very controversial
–
pragmatics and economics
URSI
,
2008
, International Union of Radio Science, “White Paper,” http://www.ursi.org/WP/WP
-
SPS%20final.htm
There are
SPS
-
related issues that
are highly controversial
. Although several space agencies have pursued SPS studies and research (see the next section),
very critical
papers have been published that concluded that an SPS is impractical and will never go into operation
(e.g., [2]). A more pro
-
SPS
reply to this cr
iticism [3] was based on the economic issues raised in [2].
Among the controversial issues is
the question of the space
engineering
and technology
that are necessary for the launch, and the
assembly and
the
maintenance
of an SPS system, all of
which to a g
reat extent are not yet possible
.
Other
heavily debated issues are related to economic justifications
(in comparison with other power sources), are related to the question of whether an SPS can
provide a base
-
load “clean” power system on a global scale, ar
e related to military applications,
and
are related to
public acceptance
. All of these issues are beyond URSI’s
scientific domain and will therefore not be discussed in this white paper. Social issues of an SPS may perhaps be addressed b
y the International
Council for Science (ICSU).
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
25
Links
SPS
–
A2 DOD Supports
DOD won’t fight for SPS
Day 2008
(Dwayne A., Program Officer
–
Space Studies Board of the National Research Council, “Knights in Shining Armor”, The Space Review, 6
-
9, http://www.thespacereview
.com/article/1147/1)
If all this is true, why is the space activist community so excited about the NSSO study? That is not hard to understand. The
y all know that the economic case for space solar power is abysmal
.
The best estimates are that SSP will cost
at least three times the cost per kilowatt hour of even relatively expensive nuclear power.
But
the military wants to dramatically lower the cost of delivering fuel to distant locations, which could possibly change the co
st
-
benefit ratio. The military savi
or also theoretically solves some
other problems for SSP advocates. One is the need for deep pockets to foot the immense development costs. The other is an ins
titutional avatar
—
one of the persistent policy challenges for SSP
has been the fact that responsi
bility for it supposedly “falls through the cracks” because neither NASA nor the Department Of Energy wants responsibility
. If the military takes on
the SSP challenge, the mission will finally have a home. But there’s also another factor at work: naïveté.
Space activists tend to have
little understanding of military space
, coupled with an idealistic impression of its management compared to NASA, whom many space activists have come to despise. F
or
instance,
they fail to realize that the military space progra
m is currently in no better shape, and in many cases worse shape, than NASA.
The majority of large military space acquisition programs have experienced major problems, in many cases cost growth in exces
s of
100%. Although NASA has a bad public record for c
ost overruns, the DoD’s less
-
public record is far worse, and
Military space has a bad
reputation in congress, which would never allow such a big, expensive new program to be started. Again, this is not to insult
the fine work conducted by those who produce
d the NSSO space
solar power study. They accomplished an impressive amount of work without any actual resources. But it
is nonsensical for members of the space activist community
to claim that “the military supports space solar power” based solely on a stu
dy that had no money, produced by an organization that
has no clout.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
26
Links
SPS
–
A2 Lobbies
The link only goes one way
–
no lobbies support the plan
Rouge 2007
Joseph D., Acting director of National Security Space Office, 10
-
9, “Space
-
Based Solar Power,
” http://www.acq.osd.mil/nsso/solar/SBSPInterimAssesment0.1.pdf
The SBSP Study Group found that
SBSP
development over the past 30 years
has made little progress because it “falls between the cracks” of
currently
‐
defined responsibilities
of federal bureaucr
acies, and has lacked an organizational advocate
within the US Government. The current
bureaucratic lanes are drawn in such a way to exclude the likelihood of SBSP development. NASA’s charter and focus is
clearly on robotic and human exploration
to execute
-
25
-
the Moon
‐
Mars Vision for Space Exploration, and is cognizant that it is not America’s Department of
Energy (DOE).
DOE rightly recognizes that the hard challenges
to SBSP all
lie in spacefaring
activities such as space access, and space
‐
to
‐
Earth
pow
er
‐
beaming, none of which are its core competencies, and would make it dependent upon a space
‐
capable agency. The Office of Space Commercialization in the Department of
Commerce is not sufficiently resourced for this mission, and
no dedicated Space
Development Agency exists
as of yet. DoD has much of the necessary
development expertise in
‐
house, and clearly has a responsibility to look to the long term security of the United States, but it is also not the countr
y’s Department of Energy, and must
focu
s itself on war prevention and warfighting concerns.
A similar problem exists in the private sector
.
US space companies
are used to small launch
markets with the government as a primary customer and advocate, and
do not have a developed business model or s
peak in a common language
with
the energy companies. The energy companies have adequate capital and understand their market, but do not understand the aeros
pace sector. One requires a demonstrated market, while
the other requires a demonstrated technical c
apability.
Without a trusted
agent to mediate the collaboration and serve as an
advocate
for supportive policy,
progress is
likely to be slow.
Despite minor interest, the plan is unpopular
–
no advocates for SPS
[Frank, Jr, Aerospace Daily and Defense Rep
ort, 8
-
9, “Space solar power,” ln]
Economically viable technology for space solar power exists today and could be developed in fairly short order
if only it could find advocates in Congress and
the federal bureaucracy
, some experts say. Earth's climate, t
he world economy and U.S. energy security could benefit from putting photovoltaic cells or other solar
-
energy
converters into space and beaming the carbon
-
free renewable power they produce to the surface as microwaves or lasers, two experts in the field to
ld a Washington roundtable sponsored
by the George C. Marshall Institute Aug. 8. But unlike nuclear fusion
-
the only other untapped energy source with the potential to meet the projected energy needs of human civilization
-
space solar power (
SSP) has "f
allen through the cracks
," according to John C. Mankins, who led NASA's "Fresh Look" SSP study in 1995
-
2001 and is now chief
operating officer of Managed Energy Technologies LLC. Early days Mankins and Martin Hoffert, an emeritus physics professor
at New
York University who was chair of the
Department of Applied Science there, traced the SSP concept from its early days in the late 1970s, when a reference design de
veloped by NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy would
have cost $100 billion to generate th
e first watt of electricity and pushed the state of the art in aerospace and electrical engineering to the limits and beyond.
Since then, advances in
photovoltaic cell efficiencies, solid
-
state electronics, robotics and other technologies have drastically
cut startup costs, to the point that a profitable SSP system could be operating in the
2020s without a huge up
-
front government expenditure, Mankins and Hoffert say. But
the problem of gaining the necessary backing remains
. Both experts
said
the concept
enjoys "uncoordinated" support on Capitol Hill, with individual members of Congress intrigued by the idea
but without the broad support it would need to get under way
. Within the federal agencies with potential SSP roles, the Energy Department "culture" is
n't
conducive to large aerospace projects, Hoffert said, while NASA killed the SSP research effort Mankins was heading because "w
e don't do energy at NASA."
"Unless you have
a champion within a government agency who can push something
, which certainly fus
ion, for example, has,
it's not going to happen
,"
Hoffert said.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
27
**Internal Links**
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
28
2NC PTC Key to Econ [1/2]
PTC is key to consumer spending
-
that’s key to the economy
Hill, 12/28
[Patrice, “Economists fear withdrawal symptoms if payroll
-
tax cut vanishes”,
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/28/economists
-
fear
-
withdrawal
-
symptoms
-
if
-
payroll
-
tax/?page=1
]
A principal
reason
many
economists are concerned about the tax cut
expiring
is the slow growth
this year
of wages
,
which normally fuel consumer spending. At less than 2 percent, wage growth did not keep up with the 3.5 percent
inflation rate in the past year, so typical workers who rely almost exclusively on wages for inc
ome would have lost
considerable purchasing power without the tax cut
. The Council on Foreign Relations estimates that consumer spending fueled 91 percent of
economic growth this year, but less than half of that spending was driven by the usual source
-
i
ncreased incomes.
About a third of the spending
was paid for by consumers dipping into their savings, and about
a fifth was driven by the payroll
-
tax
cut, the group
estimated
. “
U
.S. consumers are maintaining surprisingly brisk personal consumption
and ret
ail spending despite low
real wage growth
,” said iShares Global Chief Investment Strategist Russ Koesterich. “While consumers can maintain spending by reducing saving
for a
while longer, it is not sustainable over the long term.” With wages growing at the
slowest rate since February 2004, Americans also have become heavily
dependent on government transfer programs such as Social Security and unemployment benefits for their income, he said, includ
ing the benefits for the long
-
term unemployed that Congress c
oupled with the temporary tax
-
cut extension. “Such transfer payments have accounted for approximately 60 percent of all
income growth over the past 45 months and now constitute 20 percent of disposable income,” Mr. Koesterich said. “
Any cutbacks in transf
er
payments could have a significant
and immediate
impact on consumers’ ability to sustain
their relatively brisk
spending.”
Avoids double dip, Obama pushing
Lisa
Mascaro
and Christi Parsons, “Senate Blocks Obama Jobs Plan,” LOS ANGELES TIMES,
10
—
12
—
11,
LN.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York, the architect of the Democratic message operation in the Senate, was to argue at a Washi
ngton forum Wednesday that
the
proposals are desperately needed to help the
country avoid a double
-
dip r
ecession. The
payroll
tax break
would provide
workers with an average of $1,500 annually. An existing payroll tax reduction, which is worth about an average of $1,000 a ye
ar,
is set to expire in
December
. Obama has proposed extending and increasing that tax break for 2012. "
We
are struggling now to avoid a recession
," said Mark
Zandi, chief economist of Moodys.com, who has estimated Obama's jobs package would shave a percentage point off the unemploym
ent rate. "
If we allow
that to expire ... we face a significant risk of going b
ack into recession.
"
Other elements of Obama's measure are expected to come
before the Senate, including ones that would provide $35 billion to states to prevent layoffs of teachers, firefighters and f
irst responders and $25 billion for
school modernizatio
n. Schumer is preparing legislation that would combine Obama's proposal for a $10
-
billion infrastructure bank to spur road and highway
improvements with a GOP
-
backed proposal for a tax break for companies that repatriate overseas profits. He hopes the matc
hup would generate bipartisan
support. Advisors to the president argue that Americans are rallying around his call to pass the job
-
creation plan. The more he talks about it, they say, the more
support swells. In a memo to campaign staff Tuesday, Obama stra
tegist David Axelrod said "support has grown by nearly 10%" over the last three weeks as
the president has barnstormed for the bill. When
Obama
travels to Michigan on Friday, he will slightly adjust his message. Rather than urge crowds to tell
Congress to
"pass this bill," as he has done for the last month, he
will
talk about
passi
ng
it piece by piece
, according to one senior administration
official who expects that
the payroll tax is likely to be the first provision to come before Congress
.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
29
2NC PTC Key
to Econ [2/2]
Payroll tax cuts are key to the economy
Chris
Isidore
, CNN Money, 9/9/
11
, “Jobs plan may create 1 million jobs
–
economists”,
http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/09/news/economy/obama_jobs_plan_impact/, umn
-
rks
NEW YORK (CNNMoney)
--
Economists gave
generally
positive reviews to
President
Obama's jobs plan
Friday, with some
estimating
that
at least 1 million jobs could be added
in the next year if Congress passes the package.
The payroll tax holiday for workers and
small businesses was cited specific
ally for having
a relatively
good "bang for the buck
." And that part of the plan may have the most
bipartisan support.
"
This additional spending capacity
in the hands of consumers
should continue to foster improvements
in
aggregate domestic demand. And ult
imately, it is demand and demand alone that will lead to more business hiring,"
said
Russell Price, senior economist for Ameriprise Financial Services. Price estimates
the
increased
payroll tax holiday
for workers
by itself is
likely to add
between 750,000
to
1 million jobs
, and that
the new break on payroll taxes
for employers
could add an
additional 100,000
to 200,000 jobs.
He added that
g
ross
d
omestic
p
roduct,
the broadest measure of
the nation's
economic
activity
,
could get a
1.5 percentage point
boost
as well. Macroeconomic Advisors, a St. Louis research firm, estimates that payrolls would grow
by 1.3 million by the end of 2012 and another 800,000 by the end of 2013, if the package passed as proposed. It is looking fo
r a 1.3% rise in GDP. Joel
Prakken,
chairman of Macroeconomic Advisors, said even if the impact to the economy is short lived, the jobs plan should be passed.
"
Given the
elevated risk of recession
the U.S. faces today,
additional near
-
term stimulus reduces that risk
," said Prakken. "Given th
e
deleterious effects of long
-
term unemployment on an individual's skills and long
-
term employment prospects,
speeding a return to employment is
both individually and socially beneficial
." Mark Zandi, chief economist for Moody's Analytics, is even more bul
lish, forecasting a 1.9 million job
boost and a 2% lift for GDP if the package is passed as proposed. Zandi said
while
pushing more money into the economy is
the
key
,
passing the jobs package could
also
provide a much needed boost of confidence at a time w
hen the economy teeters on
the edge of a new recession
due to so much uncertainty. "
Investors, consumers and businesses appear shell
-
shocked by recent
events,
" he said. "
Confidence normally reflects economic conditions; it does not shape them
.
Yet
at times
, particularly
during economic turning points, cause and effect can shift
."
"Sentiment can be so harmed that businesses,
consumers and investors
freeze up, turning a gloomy outlook into a self
-
fulfilling prophecy. This is one of those times
," he added.
Failure to extend the tax cut guts economy
Patrick
Temple
-
West
, “Payroll Tax Cut Needed to Avoid Recession: Zandi,” REUTERS,
10
—
6
—
11,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/06/us
-
usa
-
tax
-
payroll
-
idUSTRE7955SU20111006
(Reuters)
-
Failure to extend a payroll
tax holiday
into 2012
could trigger another recession, noted U.S. economist
Mark
Zandi
said on Thursday, as Democrats called the extension a top priority needing quick action. Expiration at year
-
end of the tax holiday, emergency unemployment
benefits and
other stimulus efforts could shave up to 1.7 percentage points from gross domestic product in 2012, said Zandi, chief economi
st at Moody's
Analytics. "The economy is struggling to avoid another recession," Zandi said at a congressional roundtable on tax in
centives and the economy. He called the
situation "a dramatic reversal from the beginning of the year."
Without the tax holiday extension
, he said,
"
We will be back in a
recession
."
Under the tax holiday, the payroll tax
--
which funds the Social Security
retirement system
--
was reduced to 4.2 percent for employees at the
beginning of 2011. The rate is due to revert to 6.2 percent at the end of this year. President Barack Obama's jobs package in
troduced last month would extend
and expand the employee payro
ll tax holiday, dropping the rate further to 3.1 percent for 2012. The rate for employers, which has remained at 6.2 percent
this
year, would fall to 3.1 percent on the first $5 million in payroll. Obama's plan also would exempt businesses from payroll ta
x
es if they increase their payrolls
by $50 million from the previous year. Businesses can add new workers or raise salaries for their existing employees. The ext
ension would cost $245 billion
and is the largest spending part of the president's jobs bill, ac
cording to the Congressional Research Service.
For small businesses, the holiday
extension will "encourage real hiring
,"
said Todd McCracken, president of the National Small Business Association. He said ultimately Congress
needs to pass a long
-
term defici
t reduction and tax reform package. One key attribute of the payroll holiday is that it "is incredibly straight
-
forward" and helps
businesses without complicated direct
-
assistance tax credits, Zandi said. Additional spending for emergency unemployment insu
rance will not have significant
stimulative effect, Zandi said. Democratic Senator Robert Casey, chairman of the Senate Joint Economic Committee, which held
the roundtable, emphasized
urgency in implementing the payroll tax holiday
.
"
If (Zandi) is right
--
that we are too close to another dip
--
then we need to act
soon,"
Casey told Reuters
.
Political Capital Key
Capital key and its critical to the economy
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
30
PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER
, “Don’t Expect Miracles on Job Growth,”
9
—
8
—
11,
http://articles.philly.com/2011
-
09
-
08/news/30130709_1_jobs
-
plan
-
american
-
economy
-
rare
-
tax
The fundamental problem
in the American economy
is simple
: With so many people unemployed and underemployed
-
some 24 million
-
there
is not enough demand
for what th
e U.S. economy can produce.
The solution is to pump more money into the economy to get it
going
, just as if priming a pump to get water flowing again. Republicans and the president should be able to find common ground on
some significant steps
toward that
end.
Extending
or even expanding this year's
payroll tax cut would put more than $100 billion into the hands of people
who will actually spend it
, instead of merely padding the investment accounts of wealthy taxpayers. Paying for roads, bridges, schools an
d other
construction projects is the kind of investment for which long
-
term borrowing is justified, because it produces long
-
term benefits, as well as creating short
-
term
jobs. Sending more aid to state and local governments would help keep their taxes dow
n while maintaining existing jobs and vital public services. Yet
Republicans say that job
-
creating efforts along those lines would have to be offset by cuts elsewhere. That would just shift money around, totally neg
ating any
net benefit to the economy as a
whole. It's true, the country would have to pay for a lot of the new recovery efforts with borrowed money. Much of the new
borrowing, though, will come from cash that would otherwise stay idle or go elsewhere. U.S. companies are sitting on $2 trill
ion of
idle money, and federal
borrowing helps recycle dollars that were spent on our gaping trade deficit with China. Given Republican opposition
,
Obama will
probably be
forced
to use all his political capital just to take steps that should be no
-
brainers: exten
ding the payroll tax cut
and continuing
unemployment insurance.
Republican
s
have
questioned the
payroll
tax cut
-
a rare tax cut they don't automatically embrace
-
professing concern
for keeping Social Security financially sound. It's an ironic argument, c
oming from a party that made a major effort to privatize Social Security.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
31
A2 Winners Win
Can’t get a win
–
resources are more important than popularity
Boulie ‘11
[Jamelle Bouie, BA, Political & Social Thought, Writing Fellow of The American Prospect,”
Political Capital”, 5/5/11, 6/24/11]
Indeed,
for liberals who want to see Obama use his political capital, it’s worth noting that approval
-
spikes aren’t necessarily related to
policy success
. George H.W. Bush’s major domestic initiatives came before his ma
ssive post
-
Gulf War approval bump, and his final year in office saw little policy success. George W.
Bush was able to secure No Child Left Behind, the Homeland Security Act, and the Authorization to Use Military Force in the y
ear following 9/11, but the fo
rmer two either came with pre
-
9/11 Democratic support or were Democratic initiatives to begin with. To repeat an oft
-
made point,
when it comes to domestic policy, the presidency is a limited
office with limited resources. Popularity with the public is a ne
cessary part of presidential success in Congress, but it’s far from
sufficient.
Political capital is drained long before it is renewed
Lashof
20
10
(Dan Lashof “Lessons from Senate climate fail” 28 JUL 2010
http://www.grist.org/article/2010
-
07
-
28
-
lessons
-
from
-
senate
-
climate
-
fail/
)
Lesson 2:
Political capital is not
necessarily
a renewable resource
Perhaps
the most fateful decision the Obama administration
made
early o
n
was to move healthcare reform before energy and climate legislation
. I'm sure this seemed like a good idea at the time. Healthcare reform was
popular, was seen as an issue that the public cared about on a personal level, and was expected to unite Democra
ts from all regions.
White House officials and
Congressional leaders reassured environmentalists with their theory that success breeds success.
A quick victory on healthcare reform would
renew Obama's political capital, some of which had to be spent early
on to push the economic stimulus bill through Congress with no Republican help.
Healthcare reform was
eventually enacted, but only after an exhausting battle that eroded public support, drained political capital, and created th
e Tea
Party movement
.
Public
support for healthcare reform is slowly rebounding
as some of the early benefits kick in and people realize that the forecasted
Armageddon is not happening.
But this is occurring too slowly to rebuild Obama's political capital in time to help push climate
legislation
across the finish line.
Political capital finite.
Feehery 200
9
(July 21, http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/21/feehery.obama.matrix/)
A president enters office with the highest popularity ratings he will ever get
(barring a war or some other calamity that brings the country together),
which
is why most presidents try to pass as much as possible as early as possible in their administrations.
The most famous example of that was Franklin
Roosevelt's Hundred Days. But
there are other examples. Ronald Reagan moved his agenda very early in his administration, George Bush passed his tax proposa
ls and the No Child Left
Behind law very early in his White House. They understood the principle that it is important to strike wh
ile the iron is hot. President
Bush famously misunderstood this
principle when he said that he was going to use the "political capital" gained in his re
-
election to pass Social Security reform. What he
failed to understand was that as soon as he won re
-
el
ection, he was a lame duck in the eyes of the Congress, and he had no political
capital.
President Obama believes he has a lot of political capital, and perhaps he does.
But each day he is in office, his political capital reserve is declining.
And each ti
me he goes to the well to pass things like "cap and trade" makes it more difficult for him to pass his more important
priorities like health care.
Here’s our political theory card
–
winners
-
lose.
Andres et al, '2k
(Dutko Group, Griffin
--
Griffin, Johnso
n, Dover and Stewart, and Thurber
--
American University, Presidential Studies Quarterly, 30:3)
Designing a legislative road map to success would be much less daunting if powerful presidents only had to build winning coal
itions.
Unfortunately,
most preside
ntial actions cause reactions in peculiar places
, in the world of trade
-
offs.
Winning in one arena may cause a major
loss in another.
Presidents Bush and Clinton, for example, faced divided party government conditions during most
—
or in the case of Bush, th
roughout
—
their administrations. Each
could have offered legislation aimed at the median legislators’ policy position and bargained or offered other inducements to
win a simple majority. Yet, that model was unrealistic because of
the trade
-
offs facing both
presidents. The most obvious example of this is the trade
-
off between forging majority coalitions and party building and winning elections. This was a constant
struggle for President Bush and his team. Throughout his administration, legislation such as the
Clean Air Act Amendments, the Savings and Loan Recapitalization Act, and “fast
-
track” trade
legislation required bipartisan support from Democratic Party committee chairs and rank
-
and
-
file members to generate majority support for his policies. Bush’s own
party members often met
discussions with the Democratic Party leadership with apprehension and suspicion. The White House’s task during these exercis
es was to balance the needs of the president’s party members
for consultation and attention with the demand
s of the majority to compromise and move legislation forward. Although President Bush could have negotiated with Democratic P
arty members
in furthering his legislative agenda,
the need to build and promote his own party’s particular policies and preference
s were limiting factors.
President
Clinton faced similar trade
-
offs
during the last six years of his administration, confronting a Republican majority in Congress.
Trade
-
off problems for a
president are not isolated to his own party,
however. The trade
-
off
issue faced the Bush administration when he advocated legislation that was more ideologically
conservative and attempted to build coalitions with the more moderate Republicans and conservative Southern Democrats. The Wh
ite House targeted many U.S. House d
istricts represented by
conservative Democrats as the best places to pick up additional seats. On several occasions during the height of a White Hous
e lobbying push on legislation, conservative Democrats routinely
noted to presidential aides as represented
in the following quote from one House member: I’ll consider voting with you on this bill, but you need to talk to (an adminis
tration political
representative) and tell him that he can’t come down to my district and campaign against me this weekend. You gu
ys have got to understand that you can’t ask me for my vote today and then
try to beat my brains in politically tomorrow.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
32
A2 No Spillover [1/2]
Obama thinks our link is true even if it is false.
O'Neill 2009
(President
--
O'Neill Associates, http://ww
w.mytwocensus.com/tag/michael
-
j
-
oneil/)
I think this says something very revealing, but far more about the Obama administration than about Bob Groves. I have no doub
t whatsoever what Bob’s private counsel would be if asked
about whether applying estimation
principles to the Census would increase its accuracy. Indeed, his scientific judgment on this matter is already a matter of p
ublic record. But what is
interesting here is how
this new position mirrors the Obama administration’s approach to dealing with ma
ny controversial matters
. There is a
pattern: President
Obama does not want the political distraction of Republicans screaming that the Democrats have “fixed”
the Census
to
produce a partisan result.
It would not matter that as a matter of scientific certa
inty, such claims would be wrong; they could score political points in making the charge. (This is the
type of technical issue that is difficult to explain to a statistically lay audience; many intelligent people simply won’t un
derstand it.) Obama looks wi
lling to forgo the congressional seats,
perhaps a dozen or so, Democrats would gain in order to avoid this political distraction and pursue higher priorities. He has
bigger fish to fry.
This strategic retreat resembles the
back
-
burnering of issues such as
gun control and gays in the military.
Each has been delayed out of a fear that it could be divisive and
derail his core agenda,
especially the economy and health care reform.
To pursue key objectives, he has been willing to delay action on other issues
tha
t could distract or dilute his mandate
.
While he has pursued many initiatives, he has carefully avoided those with the explosive
potential
to
blow
up
the
broader
agenda
.
And an attempt to use estimation for reapportionment has that potential
. While
the sci
entific merits are indisputable, getting the public to understand such arcane statistical principles is a lost cause.
The Obama administration has concluded that it is
simply not worth the political capital to try
.
Political capital key to agenda and spil
ls
-
over
–
107
th
Congress proves.
Lee 2005
The Rose Institute of State & Local Government
–
Claremont McKenna College
–
Presented at the Georgia Political Science Association 2005 Conference [Andrew, “Invest or
Spend?:Political capital and Statements of
Administration Policy in the First Term of the George W. Bush Presidency,” http://a
-
s.clayton.edu/trachtenberg/2005%20Proceedings%20Lee.pdf]
The idea of investing political capital also supports the notion that the chief executive specializes in foreign an
d defense policy. The
president may increase
his
domestic capital by cooperating on domestic legislation and then spend it implementing foreign policies
. In
executing foreign policy, the president will not issue SAPs on his own foreign policy. For example,
if the president signs a treaty, Congress may or may not ratify it, but there is no opportunity
for veto. Therefore, the president’s use of foreign policy is a spend maneuver, whereas his domestic policy is an invest mane
uver.
The 107th Congress, during w
hich the wars
in Afghanistan and Iraq began, supports this theory.
President
Bush may have spent his political capital towards executing
those
wars and
attempted to invest his capital by cooperating on domestic legislation
.
Issues are zero
-
sum
--
Press en
sures it.
Fitts 1996
(Law Prof
--
Penn, 144 U. Pa. L. Rev. 827)
While the president's singularity may give
him the formal ability to exercise
agenda control
, which public choice scholars see as an advantage of presidential power, his
visibility and the in
fluence of the media may also make it more difficult for
him
to exercise it.
When public scrutiny is brought to bear on the White
House, surrounding such issues as gays in the military or affirmative action, the president must often take a position and ac
t
. 128 This can deprive him of the ability to choose when or whether
to address issues. Finally, the unitary president may be less able to rely on preexisting congressional or agency processes t
o resolve disputes. At least in theory, true unitariness means
that he
has the authority to reverse the decisions or non
-
decisions of others
-
the buck stops [*866] with the president. 129 In this environment, "no politician can endure opposition from a wide range
of opponents in numerous contests without alienating a
significant proportion of voters." 130 Two types of tactics illustrate this phenomenon. First, presidents in recent years hav
e often sought
to deemphasize
-
at least politically
-
their unitariness by allocating responsibility for different agencies to di
fferent political constituencies. President Clinton, for example, reportedly "gave"
the Department of Justice to the liberal wing of the Democratic party and the Department of the Treasury and the OMB to the c
onservatives. 131 Presidents Bush and Reagan tr
ied a similar
technique of giving control over different agencies to different political constituencies. 132 Second, by invoking vague abst
ract principles or "talking out of both sides of their mouth,"
presidents have attempted to create the division withi
n their person. Eisenhower is widely reported to be the best exemplar of this "bumbling" technique. 133 Reagan's widely publi
cized verbal
"incoherence" and detachment from government affairs probably served a similar function. 134 Unfortunately, the visibi
lity and singularity of the modern presidency can undermine both
informal techniques. To the extent that the modern president is subject to heightened visibility about what he says and does
and is led to make increasingly specific statements about who shou
ld
win and who should lose on an issue, his ability to mediate conflict and control the agenda can be undermined. The modern pre
sident is supposed to have a position [*867] on such matters as
affirmative action, the war in Bosnia, the baseballstrike, and t
he newest EPA regulations
-
the list is infinite. Perhapsin response to these pressures, each modern president has made more
speeches and taken more positions than his predecessors, with Bill Clinton giving three times as many speeches as Reagan duri
ng the
same period. 135 In such circumstances, the president is
far less able to exercise agenda control, refuse to take symbolic stands, or take inconsistent positions.
The well
-
documented tendency of the press to emphasize the
strategic implications of politic
s exacerbates this process by turning issues into
zero
-
sum
games.
136 Thus, in contrast to Congress,
the
modern president's attempt to avoid or mediate issues can often undermine
him
personally and politically
.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
33
A2 No Spillover [2/2]
Vote switching is rea
l
–
ideology is minimal.
Bond & Fleisher 1996
Professor in Political Science
-
Texas A&M & Professor in Political Science
-
Fordham (Jon R. and Richard
The President in Legislation
) pg 54
Minority presidents, on the other hand, can frequently build working
majorities composed of their partisan base and like
-
minded members of the opposition. While political values shared
between the president and members of Con
gress provide an important linkage source,
the effects of ideology are limited for several reason
s.
First,
most members
of Congress are pragmatic poli
ticians who do not have views and preferences at the extremes of a liberal
-
conservative continuum
.
Because the typical American voter is not strongly ideological, most representatives' electoral self
-
in
terest is probably best served by avoiding ideological extremes. As noted above, ideology is
a less impor
tant voting cue for moderates than it is for ideological extremists (Kingdon 1981, 268). Second,
many votes that may be important to the president do
not
involve ideological issues
. Distributive or "porkbarrel" programs, for example, typi
cally do not produce ideological divisions. Even conservatives who want to cut domestic spending
and liberals who want to reduce defense spending work to protect dome
stic and defense programs in their districts. Presidents who attempt to tamper with these programs are likely to find few
friends in Con
gress, as President Carter discovered when he opposed several water projects in 1977, and as President Reagan discovere
d when he vetoed the highway bill in 1987. Finally,
ideological voting blocs are relatively informal coalitions com
posed of individuals who have similar values
. The "conservative coalition" of
Republicans and southern Democrats, for example, appears on c
ertain votes and sometimes has a significant influence on the outcome of floor votes (Shelley 1983; Brady and Bullock 1980;
Manley 1973). But this coalition of conservatives has no formal organization with elected leaders to serve as a communication
and in
formation center. Although there are several ideologies.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
34
**Impacts**
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
35
Terminal Impact Extensions
Econ collapse causes extinction
Friedberg
and Schoenfeld 8
(professor of politics and international relations at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School)
and
Mr.
Schoenfeld
(senior editor of Commentary, is a visiting scholar at the Witherspoon Institute in Princeton)
2008
“The
Dangers of a Diminished America
”, 10
-
21, WSJ,
http://online.wsj.vom/articles/SB122455074012352571.html
Pressures to cut defense spending
, and to dodge the cost of waging two wars, already intense before this crisis
, are
likely to mount
. Despite the
success of the surge, the war in Iraq remains deeply unpopular. Precipitous withdrawal
--
attractive to a sizable swath of the electorate before the financial implosion
--
might well become even more popular with annual w
ar bills running in the hundreds of billions.
Protectionist sentiments
are sure to
grow stronger
as jobs disappear in the coming slowdown. Even before our current woes, calls to save jobs by restricting imports had begun t
o gather support among many Democ
rats
and some Republicans.
In a prolonged recession
, gale
-
force
winds of protectionism will blow
. Then there are the dolorous consequences of a
potential collapse of the world's financial architecture. For decades now, Americans have enjoyed the advantage
s of being at the center of that system. The worldwide
use of the dollar, and the stability of our economy, among other things, made it easier for us to run huge budget deficits, a
s we counted on foreigners to pick up the tab
by buying dollar
-
denominated a
ssets as a safe haven. Will this be possible in the future? Meanwhile, traditional
foreign
-
policy
challenges are
multiplying
. The threat from
al Qaeda
and Islamic terrorist affiliates
has not been extinguished. Iran and North Korea are
continuing on
their
bellicose
paths, while
Pakistan and Afghanistan are progressing
smartly
down the road to chaos. Russia's
new
militancy and
China's
seemingly
relentless rise also give cause for concern.
If America
now
tries to pull back
from the world stage,
it will leave
a dangerous power vacuum. The
stabilizing effects of our presence
in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and
our position as defender of last resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines
could
all
be
placed at risk
. In such
a
scenario there are shades of the 1930s, when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peaceful democracies faile
d
to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics who rose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited
the
ir divisions. Today
we run the risk that rogue states may choose to become
ever more
reckless with their nuclear toys
, just
at our moment of maximum vulnerability
. The aftershocks of the financial crisis will almost certainly rock our principal strategic
competitors
even harder than they will rock us. The dramatic free fall of the Russian stock market has demonstrated the fragility of a st
ate whose economic performance hinges on
high oil prices, now driven down by the global slowdown.
China is
perhaps
even
more
fragile
,
its economic growth depending heavily on
foreign investment and access to foreign markets
.
Both will now be constricted, inflicting economic pain and perhaps even
sparking unrest
in a country where political legitimacy rests on progress in t
he long march to prosperity. None of this is good news if the authoritarian leaders of
these countries seek to divert attention from internal travails with external adventures.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
36
US Econ
omy Key To
Global Econ
omy
The US Economy is key to the world econo
my.
Kevin
Hall, 2010
. (staff writer). April 30, 2010. “U.S. economy grew briskly in first quarter, government says.” Online.
Internet. Accessed May 1, 2010 at
http://www.miamiherald.com/2
010/04/30/1606734/
us
-
economy
-
grew
-
briskly
-
in
-
first.html
If sustained, the upturn in U.S. consumption would be good news for the whole world, since
the U
nited
S
tates
remains
the key global economic
engine
.
"What was particularly encouraging about today's GDP numbers is that U.S. consumption appears to be on a strong
recovery path,"
said Frederic Neumann, co
-
head of Asian Economic Research for the global Hong Kong bank HSBC. Friday's GDP numbers were in li
ne with a
revised forecast from the International Monetary Fund, which predicted earlier in April that the world's economy would grow a
t a rate above 4 percent this year,
significantly better than its initial 1.9 percent forecast.
US economic declines und
ermine the world economy.
David
Kampf, 2009
(former communications director for PEPFAR. May 7, 2009. Online. Internet. Accessed May 7, 2009 at
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/ar
ticle.aspx?id=3717
)
The
worldwide economic turmoil underlines the importance of the United States
--
for better or worse
--
to the global market
. As the
U.S. goes, so goes the world. When the American bubble burst, the speed with which the contagion spread
beyond its borders is an
illustration.
The US is key to the global economy.
David
McCormick, 2008
(former under secretary for International Affairs in the U. S. Treasury Department, May 12, 2008,
Newsweek. Online. Lexis/Nexis. Accessed, May 4, 2009).
Our friends around the world should gain confidence from the fact that
U.S. policymakers and their international counterparts are
taking aggressive, targeted actions to stabilize the financial markets
,
to reduce their impact on the economy and the individu
als negatively affected by
the turmoil and to protect against the same mistakes' being repeated. There are already some early indicators that these acti
ons are beginning to have the desired effect,
as markets appear to be gaining confidence and the availab
ility of credit has improved modestly. Flexibility and resilience in the face of such unexpected financial
-
market turmoil and economic hardship are among America's greatest strengths. Our objective is to help individuals and markets
recover as quickly as
possible, while
avoiding actions that cause new problems that would hurt our economy in the long run.
This storm, too, shall pass, and
the United States will emerge,
as
it always has,
as a
driver of growth and innovation for the global economy
.
The US eco
nomy is vital to the Asian economy.
Associated Press, 2009
(May 4, 2009. Online. Internet. Accessed at
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jXPJmkJdyKGBu_J5HvhnfYCkYAzgD97VBSE80
)
Asian stock markets soared
Monday
,
led by gains of 5 percent or more in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and India,
amid upbeat economic signs
from China and the United St
ates.
European markets opened higher, too. Investors were cheered by a survey of purchasing managers at Chinese manufacturers
that rose for a second month in April.
U.S. manufacturing activity in April also posted its best showing since September, suggesti
ng that
American economy
—
a vital export market for Asia
—
might be stabilizing
.
Futures pointed to a higher open on Wall Street
Monday.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
37
Econ
omy Turns Case
–
G
eneric
Economic decline causes nuclear war
–
turns every 1AC impact
–
democracy, terrorism,
hegemony, ME
war, resource war
Mathew
Harris
(PhD European History @ Cambridge, counselor of the U.S. National Intelligence Council)
and
Jennifer
Burrows
(member of the NIC’s Long Range Analysis Unit)
2009
“Revisiting the Future: Geopolitical Effects of t
he Financial
Crisis”
http://www.ciaonet.org/journals/twq/v32i2/f_0016178_13952.pdf
Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is likely
to be the result of a number of intersecting and interlocking forces. With
so many possible permutations of outcomes, each with ample opportunity for unintended consequences,
there is a growing sense of insecurity
. Even so, history
may be more instructive than ever.
While we
continue to
believe
that
the Great Depression
is not likely to be repeated, the
lessons
to be drawn from
that period
include
the
harmful effects on
fledgling
democracies
and multiethnic societi
es (think Central Europe in 1920s and 1930s)
and
on
the sustainability of multilateral institutions
(think League of Nations in the same period).
There is
no reason
to think that this would not be
true in the twenty
-
first
as much as in the twentieth
centur
y
. For that reason,
the ways in which
the
potential for greater
conflict
could
grow
would
seem
to be
even
more apt
in a
constantly
volatile economic environment
as they would be if change would be steadier. In surveying
those risks,
the report stressed the
likelihood that terrorism
and nonproliferation
will remain priorities
even as resource issues move up on the
international agenda. Terrorism’s appeal will decline if economic growth continues in the Middle East and youth unemployment
is reduced.
For
those
terrorist
groups
that remain active in 2025, however,
the diffusion of technologies and scientific knowledge will place
some of
the world’s
most
dangerous capabilities within their reach
.
Terrorist groups
in 2025
will
likely
be
a combination of descendant
s of long established groups
inherit
ing organizational structures, command and control processes, and training procedures necessary to conduct sophisticated
attacks
and
newly emergent collections of the
angry and
disenfranchised that become self
-
radicalize
d,
particularly
in the absence of
economic outlets
that would become narrower in an economic downturn.
The most dangerous casualty of a
ny
economically
-
induced
drawdown
of U.S. military presence
would
almost certainly
be the Middle East
. Although Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons is not inevitable,
worries about
a nuclear
-
armed
Iran could lead states
in the region
to
develop new security arrangements with external powers, acquire
additional weapons, and consider
pursuing their own nu
clear ambitions
.
It is not clear that the
type of
stable deterrent
relationship that existed between the great powers for
most of
the Cold War would emerge naturally in the Middle East with a nuclear
Iran
. Episodes of low intensity conflict and
terrorism
t
aking place
under a nuclear umbrella could lead to an
unintended escalation
and
broader conflict
if clear red lines between those states involved are not well established.
The close proximity of potential nuclear rivals
combined
with underdeveloped surveil
lance capabilities and mobile dual
-
capable Iranian missile systems also
will produce
inherent difficulties
in achieving
reliable indications and warning of an impending nuclear attack
.
The lack of strategic depth in neighboring states
like Israel,
short
wa
rning and missile flight times, and uncertainty of Iranian intentions may place more focus on preemption rather than defense,
potentially
lead
ing to escalating crises
.
Types of
conflict
that the world continues to experience, such as
over resources, could
reemerge
, particularly if
protectionism grows and there is a resort to neo
-
mercantilist practices.
Perceptions
of renewed energy scarcity will drive countries to take actions
to assure
their future
access
to energy supplies
. In the worst case,
this could r
esult in interstate conflicts
if government leaders deem
assured access to energy resources,
for example, to
be essential for
maintaining domestic stability and the
survival
of their regime.
Even actions
short of war
,
however,
will have important geopoliti
cal implications. Maritime security concerns are providing a rationale for
naval
buildups
and
modernization efforts
,
such as China’s and India’s development of blue water naval capabilities.
If the fiscal stimulus focus
for
these countries indeed
turns
inward
, one of the most
obvious
funding
targets may be military
.
Buildup
of regional naval capabilities
could lead to
increased tensions
, rivalries, and counterbalancing moves
, but it also will create opportunities for multinational
cooperation in protecti
ng critical sea lanes.
With water
also
becoming scarcer
in Asia and the Middle East,
cooperation to manage changing water
resources is likely to be increasingly difficult
both within and between states
in a more dog
-
eat
-
dog world.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
38
Econ
omy Turns Case
–
C
hina
Turns US
-
China cooperation/conflict
Mead ‘9
-
Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations [Walter Russell Mead, , “Only Makes You
Stronger,” Feb 4, The New Republic, http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=571cbbb9
-
28
87
-
4d81
-
8542
-
92e83915f5f8&p=2]
The
greatest danger
both
to
U.S.
-
China
relations
and to American power itself
is
probably not that China will rise too far, too fast; it is
that
the
current
crisis might end China's growth
miracle. In the worst
-
case scenario,
the turmoil
in the international economy
will plunge China
into
a major
economic
downturn
. The Chinese financial system will implode as loans to both state and private enterprises go bad. Millions or even
tens
of
millions
of Chinese
will be unemployed
in a country without an effective social safety net. The collapse of asset bubbles in the stock and property
markets will wipe out the savings of a generation of the Chinese middle class. The political
consequences could include dangerous unrest
--
and a
bi
tter climate of anti
-
foreign feeling that blames others
for China's woes. (
Think of Weimar Germany
, when both Nazi and communist
politicians blamed the West for Germany's economic travails.) Worse,
instability could lead to a vicious cycle
,
as nervous inve
stors moved their
money out of the country,
further
slowing growth and
, in turn,
fomenting
ever
-
greater
bitterness
. Thanks to a generation of rapid economic
growth, China has so far been able to manage the stresses and conflicts of modernization and change
; nobody knows what will happen if the growth stops.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
39
Econ
omy Turns Case
–
E
nvironment
Growth
key to the environment
Goklany ‘7
–
PhD, science and tech policy analyst for the US Dept of the Interior
Indur M, M.S. and Ph.D are from Michigan State
University, “the improving state of the world”, page number below in [brackets]
Yet another view, formalized as the environmental transition hypothesis, is that for any specific country, the forces of
technological change and
economic growth
, acting in con
junction, can initially cause environmental degradation, but
eventually an "environmental transition" takes place after which those forces
become necessary for reversing
that
degradation
.38
This view, however, acknowledges that because economic growth and
technological change are not inevitable, environmental cleanup is, likewise,
not a foregone conclusion. So in this regard, the environmental transition hypothesis provides a reason to be hopeful, withou
t necessarily being optimistic. Basic
assumptions unde
rlying the environmental transition hypothesis are that society is always trying to improve its quality of life and that ther
e is a mechanism for
converting that desire into action. At relatively low levels of economic development, a society may justifiabl
y conclude that its quality of life would be advanced
through economic development, because such development provides the means for reducing poverty and the numerous problems that
follow in its wake, for example,
hunger, malnutrition, lack of access to saf
e water and sanitation, malaria, lack of education, and lack of public health services, to name just a few. Thus, in the earl
y
stages of development, a society would likely emphasize economic development over the environment.
However, over time,
as the soc
iety gets
wealthier, it solves
—
or starts to solve
—
its most urgent public health
problems
. Even as other aspects of environmental quality
deteriorate, it
begins to realize
that
poor environmental quality detracts from
its quality of
life
. Accordingly, it be
gins to give
greater emphasis to environmental quality. Over time, society goes through a transition during which
environmental
deterioration
, which had initially been growing,
is
first
halted, and
then
reversed
. Hence the term, the "environmental
transiti
on."
During this transition, economic growth and technology go from being causes of environmental problems to solutions for those
very problems.
However, it should also be kept in mind that, at all times
—
before, during, and after the environmental transit
ion
—
the focus of society is to improve its quality of life. It
just so happens that at low levels of economic development, quality of life is approximated by such development, while at hig
her levels of development, it's
environmental quality that's a bette
r surrogate.<page 10
-
11>
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
40
Econ
omy Turns Case
–
H
egemony
Collapse of growth kills hegemony
–
biggest internal link
Khalilzad 11
Zalmay Khalilzad was the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations during the
presidency of George W. Bush and the director of policy planning at the Defense Department from 1990 to 1992, “ The Economy a
nd
National Security”, 2
-
8
-
11,
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/259024
Today,
economic
and fiscal
trends pose the most severe
long
-
term
threat to the U
nited
S
tates’
position as global leader
.
While th
e
United States suffers from fiscal imbalances and low economic growth, the economies of rival powers are developing rapidly. T
he continuation of these two trends
could lead to a shift from American primacy toward a multi
-
polar global system, leading in tu
rn to increased geopolitical rivalry and even war among the great powers.
The current recession is the result of a deep financial crisis, not a mere fluctuation in the business cycle. Recovery is lik
ely to be protracted. The crisis was preceded by
the buil
dup over two decades of enormous amounts of debt throughout the U.S. economy
—
ultimately totaling almost 350 percent of GDP
—
and the development of
credit
-
fueled asset bubbles, particularly in the housing sector. When the bubbles burst, huge amounts of w
ealth were destroyed, and unemployment rose to over 10
percent. The decline of tax revenues and massive countercyclical spending put the U.S. government on an unsustainable fiscal
path. Publicly held national debt rose
from 38 to over 60 percent of GDP in
three years. Without faster economic growth and actions to reduce deficits, publicly held national debt is projected to reach
dangerous proportions. If interest rates were to rise significantly, annual interest payments
—
which already are larger than the
defense budget
—
would crowd out
other spending or require substantial tax increases that would undercut economic growth.
Even worse, if unanticipated events trigger what
economists call a “sudden stop” in credit markets for U.S. debt,
the U
nited
S
tates
wo
uld be unable to roll over its
outstanding
obligations, precipitating a
sovereign
-
debt
crisis that would
almost
certainly
compel a
radical retrenchment
of the United
States internationally.
Such scenarios would reshape the international order. It was the e
conomic devastation of Britain and France during World War II, as well
as the rise of other powers, that led both countries to relinquish their empires. In the late 1960s, British leaders conclude
d that they lacked the economic capacity to
maintain a prese
nce “east of Suez.” Soviet economic weakness, which crystallized under Gorbachev, contributed to their decisions to withdraw
from Afghanistan,
abandon Communist regimes in Eastern Europe, and allow the Soviet Union to fragment. If the U.S. debt problem goe
s critical, the United States would be compelled
to retrench, reducing its military spending and shedding international commitments. We face this domestic challenge while oth
er major powers are experiencing rapid
economic growth.
Even though
countries
such
as China, India, and Brazil have profound political, social, demographic, and
economic problems, their
economies are growing faster
than ours,
and this could alter
the global
distribution of power
. These
trends could in the long term produce a multi
-
polar
world. If U.S. policymakers fail to act and other powers continue to grow,
it is not a question of whether but when
a new international order will emerge
.
The closing of the gap between the United States and its rivals
could intensify geopolitical competi
tion among major powers, increase incentives for local powers to play major powers against one another, and undercut our will
to
preclude or respond to international crises because of the higher risk of escalation. The stakes are high. In modern history,
t
he longest period of peace among the great
powers has been the era of U.S. leadership. By contrast, multi
-
polar systems have been unstable, with their competitive dynamics resulting in frequent crises and major
wars among the great powers. Failures of mult
i
-
polar international systems produced both world wars. American retrenchment could have devastating consequences.
Without an American security blanket, regional powers could rearm in an attempt to balance against emerging threats. Under th
is scenario, the
re would be a heightened
possibility of arms races, miscalculation, or other crises spiraling into all
-
out conflict. Alternatively, in seeking to accommodate the stronger powers, weaker powers
may shift their geopolitical posture away from the United State
s. Either way, hostile states would be emboldened to make aggressive moves in their regions
.
PO Box 670564
Dallas, TX 753
67
Tel. 972
-
926
-
3832
www.dallasurbandebate.org
Last printed
11/
14/2013 4:52:00 PM
41
Econ Turns Case
--
Warming
Economic collapse would kill support for climate treaties
Haass 8
[
Richard. President of the Council on Foreign Relations. 11/8/
,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122611110847810599.html
]
There will be
other policy
consequences of recession. It will be more difficult to negotiate an accord on climate change
as coun
tries
such as China and India
will resist anything that could be an impediment to growth
. High unemployment will
make it even tougher to build a majority here at home for immigration reform.
We will
likely
see new outbreaks of resistance
to the ability of
foreigners to buy U.S. assets despite a clear need for their dollars.
- Home
- Browse
- All Categories
- AI and Robotics
- Biotechnology
- Clean Technology
- Data Management
- Electronics - Devices
- Enterprise Applications
- Entertainment
- Internet and Web Development
- Management
- Mechanics
- Mobile - Wireless
- Networking and Communications
- Oil and Offshore
- Security
- Semiconductor
- Servers
- Software and s/w Development
- Storage
- Telecommunications
- Urban and Civil
- Community
- Upload
Comments 0
Log in to post a comment