1NC

The 1st Off is Effects T A. Interpretation: ‘reduce’ refers to a process, not an outcome --- the plan itself must decrease its restrictions on legal immigration --- it cannot simply lead to it

Public Law 87-253 (Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982, 97th US Congress, Sept 8, 1982, Lexis)

E) Prior to approving any application for a refund, the Secretary shall require evidence that such reduction in market- ings has taken place and

that such reduction is a net decrease in marketings of milk and has not been offset by expansion of production in other production facilities in which the person has an interest or by transfer of partial interest in the produc- tion facility or by the taking of any other action. which is a scheme or device to qualify for payment.

B. Violation: the plan does not directly decrease restrictions on legal immigration.

C. Standards

1. Limits- the aff completely explodes the limits of the resolution because they could take any number of steps to eventually get access to topical action.

2. Aff burden- It mixes burdens – to determine topicality through effect, you have to look to solvency, which is crossing the stock issues and is theoretically illegitimate.

3. Vacuum test- the only way to determine whether a plan is topical or not is to directly view the plan text through a vacuum. If the plan is proven not topical then the aff is not topical.

D. Voters

1. A Priori

2. Fairness

3. Education

Next Off is a Restrictions T

Interpretation

Restrictions means a (plural) collection of restrictions

Wordhippo 3/7/2019 https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-plural-of/restriction.html

However, in more specific contexts, the plural form can also be   restrictions  e.g. in reference to various types of restrictions or a collection of   restrictions .

Violation:

The affirmative team is not reducing a collection of restrictions, only reducing one or none

Standards:

A. Bright Line: Definition is better because it draws a clear distinction between what is topical and what is not whereas aff definition is vague.

B. Grammatical Context: Definition is better because it fits into the resolution and still works.

Voters:

A. Debatability: We can prepare for only those cases that fall under the resolution and should not be voted against because we could not debate a nontopical case.

B. Jurisdiction: It is not within your jurisdiction as judge to vote for a nontopical case.

Next Off is the Politics DA

A. Racism and nationalism are more present in America than ever – American politics no longer revolve around the Left vs the Right, but those who don’t support racism, vs those who do

(Zack Beauchamp, Feb 26 2019, Zack Beauchamp is a senior correspondent at Vox, where he covers global politics and ideology, and a host of Worldly, Vox's podcast on foreign policy and international relations. His work focuses on the rise of the populist right across the West, the role of identity in American politics, and how fringe ideologies shape the mainstream. Before coming to Vox, he edited TP Ideas, a section of Think Progress devoted to the ideas shaping our political world. He has an MSc from the London School of Economics in International Relations, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/26/18196429/trump-news-white-nationalism-hazony-kaufmann)

Why has President Trump gone to such extraordinary lengths to build a wall on the Mexican border?

It’s not just a campaign promise; he made a lot of promises during the campaign that remain unfulfilled. It’s something deeper than that. The wall is a physical embodiment of Trumpism’s core idea: an ethnonational political vision that holds America is the nation-state of native-born white Americans, and that policy should reflect, above all, the interests of this group.

This ethnonationalism is behind the wall and Trump’s overall immigration policy , as well as his approach to racialized

issues like civil rights and police violence. It explains his affinity with a host of powerful far-right European parties, like Germany’s Alternative for Deutschland and Italy’s Northern League. But while these ideas have a constituency in Western electorates, they have virtually none among Western intellectuals. Few scholars are interested in turning the scattered political proposals of Trump and the European far right into a coherent political program.

But recently, two new books shed light on what that could look like: Israeli scholar Yoram Hazony’s The Virtue of Nationalism and University of London professor Eric Kaufmann’s Whiteshift. One is a work of political philosophy, and the other a quantitative look at the demography and views of far-right supporters. One is written by an avowed conservative, the other by a self-described liberal. One is poorly reasoned (at best), the other tightly argued.

What the two books have in common is that they go beyond articulating part of the ethnonationalist worldview to actively defending core parts of it. Hazony’s book,

widely celebrated in elite conservative circles, is a full-throated defense of the “nationalism” component of ethnonationalism. Kaufmann’s focuses on the “ethno” part, arguing that mainstream politicians need to more openly cater to white concerns about cultural and demographic change if they wish to beat back the far-right tide.

These books are emblematic of two distinct strains of political ideology that together form a new reactionary coalition: conservative nationalism and anti-PC liberalism. The ethnonationalist ideas they articulate are at the heart of modern politics. In the era of Donald Trump and the European far right, politics no longer revolves around classic left-right divisions over policy, but around whether one defends ethnonationalism’s core premises or rejects them.

B. Link – Immigration policy shifts President’s focus away from the Voting Rights Advancement Act – Trump is hell-bent on getting funding for Border Wall.

Simmons ‘17 (Trump’s obsession with immigration is making the US more vulnerable to terrorism By Heather Timmons - December 18, 2017: https://qz.com/1151939/trumps-national-security-strategy-a-focus-on-immigration-makes-the-us-more-vulnerable-to-terror-threats/

For the “first time ever,” America has a serious plan to defend its homeland, Donald Trump said on Monday (Dec. 18), before pledging again to build a wall on the Mexico border and end visa

programs that have made the US a cultural melting pot. Rather than make the US more safe, though, Trump’s own

obsession with immigration threatens to do the opposite, US security experts say. The threat of terrorism in the US today is as high as it was in the 9/11 era. But America’s main agency for preventing terror attacks is being

misdirected, security experts, law enforcement professionals, and government officials tell Quartz. Since Trump took office, top jobs have been left unfilled at the Department of Homeland Security, and the agency is being pushed into a dangerous pattern of focusing on immigration while ignoring real threats. The issue is about to come to a head in Congress, which needs to approve

DHS’s $44 billion budget (pdf) in coming weeks. Trump has proposed that DHS trim counterterrorism spending in order to fund the wall on the Mexican border, and new head Kirstjen Nielsen, who was nominated by the White House in October, is pushing his controversial anti-immigrant agenda in her first days in office. She and the White House are ignoring the US’s real risk, critics say—domestic attackers. “Individuals who live in the US, and who become inspired by what they see through social media and on the internet” pose the country’s greatest danger, said John D. Cohen, former DHS acting undersecretary for intelligence and analysis, and counter-terrorism coordinator. “These people go on to commit mass attacks, but operate independently of any

terrorist group,” Cohen said. “From an ideological and resource perspective, the DHS has become overly focused, if not obsessed, with immigration and building a wall on the Southern border, to the detriment of other functions,” Cohen said, “particularly those that relate to the current terrorism threat the country faces.”

C. First world countries like the US and UK are destroying themselves from the inside, due to their hatred of immigrants – The aff is taking immigrants from one place of oppression to another, all while harming progress for them in America

(Annalisa Merelli, January 19, 2019, Annalisa is a reporter at Quartz. She hails from Bergamo (Italy) but has worked and lived in Paris and Delhi before settling in the US (for now). She was the founding editor of art, culture and lifestyle portal The India Tube and a writer and editor at Narratively, Global Voices, Timbuktu, Motherland, W+K Delhi, and Fabrica. She holds a master's degree in semiotics and a bachelor's degree in mass communication from the University of Bologna, https://qz.com/1528620/the-us-and-uk-have-let-xenophobia-bring-them-to-the-brink/)

Just how much are the UK and the US ready to sacrifice in order to keep their neighbors out? Both countries are ending another tense week of trying to answer this question.

In the UK, prime minister Theresa May barely survived a no-confidence vote, and the country still has no Brexit deal—nor any

clarity on whether it should continue with the process. So far, that process has contributed to the economy suffering a 2.1% contraction, and a no-deal Brexit could make the situation worse than it was in 2008.

Meanwhile, the US is enduring the longest-ever government shutdown, which has left 800,000 federal workers without pay and could

cost the economy more than $6 billion, as the president holds the budget hostage over his campaign promise of a “big, beautiful wall” on the southern border. Eventually, a prolonged shutdown could help push the US into a recession (paywall) as well.

Brexit, the border wall, the federal shutdown: These all stem from the same political pursuit to keep immigrants out. The issue has been sold as economic—people worried for their jobs, their savings, their welfare. But given the losses that supporters of

Brexit and the border wall are willing to accept, it’s increasingly clear that xenophobia is at the core of their efforts.

Xenophobia is a composite of two words from ancient Greek, one (φόβος) meaning “fear” and the other (ξένος) “stranger” or “enemy” (or even “guest,” which can

also be a way to describe an immigrant). But as we watch these two nations bend over backwards in order to keep out a relatively small number of foreigners, even if it harms their own people’s well-being, “fear” does not seem to be the right word.

“Hatred” does. A hatred of the foreigner portrayed as dangerous, ill-intentioned, and undeserving. And not just any foreigner: the poor, the jobless, the non-white. Also the non-Christian: Trump recently tweeted about “prayer rugs” allegedly found at the border—the ultimate sign of its dangerousness.

All that is ironic, given what these governments are hanging themselves up for: a hatred that’s quietly growing so large it’s destroying their stability from within, all for fear of someone coming from the outside to do the same.

D. Racism and racial oppression outweigh every impact – it’s the precondition to ethical political decision making.

Memmi 2k (Albert, Professor Emeritus of Sociology @ U of Paris, Naiteire, Racism, Translated by Steve Martinot, p. 163-165)

The struggle against racism will be long , difficult, without intermission, without remission, probably never achieved, yet for this very reason, it is a struggle to be undertaken without surcease and without concessions. One cannot be indulgent toward racism. One cannot even let the monster in the house, especially not in a mask. To give it merely a foothold means to augment the bestial part in us and in other people which is to diminish what is human. To accept the racist universe to the slightest degree is to endorse fear, injustice, and violence . It is to accept the persistence of the dark history in which we still largely live. It is to agree that the outsider will always be a possible victim (and

which [person] man is not [themself] himself an outsider relative to someone else?). Racism illustrates in sum, the inevitable negativity of the condition of the dominated; that is it illuminates in a certain sense the entire human condition. The anti-racist struggle, difficult though it is, and always in question, is nevertheless one of the prologues to the ultimate passage from animality to humanity. In that sense, we cannot fail to rise to the racist challenge. However, it remains true that one’s moral conduct only emerges from a choice: one has to want it. It is a choice among other choices, and always debatable in its foundations and its consequences. Let us say, broadly speaking,

that the choice to conduct oneself morally is the condition for the establishment of a human order for which racism is the very negation. This is almost a redundancy. One cannot found a moral order, let alone a legislative order, on racism because racism signifies the exclusion of the other and his or her subjection to violence and domination. From an ethical point of view, if one can deploy a little religious language, racism is “the truly capital sin . ”fn22 It is not an accident that almost all of humanity’s spiritual traditions counsel respect for the weak, for orphans, widows, or strangers. It is not just a question of theoretical counsel respect for the weak, for orphans, widows or strangers. It is not just a

question of theoretical morality and disinterested commandments. Such unanimity in the safeguarding of the other suggests the real utility of such sentiments. All things considered, we have an interest in banishing injustice, because injustice engenders violence and death . Of course, this is debatable. There are those who think that if one is strong enough, the assault on and oppression of others is permissible. But no one is ever sure of remaining the strongest. One day, perhaps, the roles will be reversed. All unjust society contains within itself the seeds of its own death. It is probably smarter to treat others with respect so that they treat you with respect. “Recall,” says the bible, “that you were once a stranger in

Egypt,” which means both that you ought to respect the stranger because you were a stranger yourself and that you risk becoming once again someday. It is an ethical and a practical appeal – indeed, it is a contract, however implicit it might be. In short, the refusal of racism is the condition for all theoretical and practical morality. Because, in the end, the ethical choice commands the political choice. A just society must be a society accepted by all. If this contractual principle is not accepted, then only conflict, violence, and destruction will be our lot. If it is accepted, we can hope someday to live in peace. True, it is a wager, but the stakes are irresistible.

Next Off is the Balkanization DA

A: Uniqueness - President Trump is striving to increase restrictions on immigration.

Hauslohner and Tran ’18 (Abigail, Andrew, “Trump is making inroads in reducing legal immigration”, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-legal-migration-steep-decrease-20180702-story.html)

As the national immigration debate swirls around the effort to discourage illegal immigration by separating families at the border, the Trump administration is making inroads into another longtime priority: reducing legal immigration. The number of people receiving visas to move permanently to the United States is on pace to drop 12 percent in President Donald Trump's first two years in office, according to a Washington Post analysis of State

Department data…. Trump has said he wants additional limits on immigration in part because he believes new arrivals create undue competition for American workers.

B: Link - Immigration increasing leads to further balkanization.Qiu ’18 (Linda, “Border Crossings Have Been Declining for Years, Despite Claims of a ‘Crisis of Illegal Immigration’”,

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/20/us/politics/fact-check-trump-border-crossings-declining-.html) Nowrasteh ’16 (Alex, “Balkanization and Immigration in America”, https://www.cato.org/blog/balkanization-immigration-america)

IT CERTAINLY looked like a “Trump effect.” Within weeks of Donald Trump’s arrival at the White House in January 2017, the number of people caught crossing America’s southern border illegally fell to a 17-year low of 11,127. John Kelly, then secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), attributed the drop to Mr Trump’s executive orders on immigration. Elaine Duke, the department’s deputy secretary, gave credit to better enforcement of immigration laws. Mr Trump hailed it as “a historic and unprecedented achievement”. If such an effect did exist, it appears to have

been short-lived. On April 5th, the DHS announced that Border Patrol agents apprehended 37,393 people in March, an increase of more than 200% on the previous year. The number of unaccompanied children caught entering illegally jumped by 300%, and the number of families detained while attempting the journey surged by nearly 700%. Permanently reducing such flows will require more than Mr Trump’s tough talk. The president’s vow to end what he calls “catch and release”—the practice of apprehending undocumented immigrants, and then releasing them while their court cases are being resolved—will be particularly difficult to implement. The DHS currently has the capacity to detain a maximum of 39,000 immigrants facing deportation; Mr Trump wants that figure raised to 48,000. Under a decades-old federal court ruling, immigration authorities can detain unaccompanied children for only 20 days before releasing them to family members or other sponsors living in the country. By law asylum-seekers with a “credible fear” of returning home must be released if they do not present a security risk. Despite these constraints, Mr Trump appears determined to proceed with his immigration crackdown. On April 4th he announced plans to deploy 2,000 to 4,000 National Guard troops to the Mexican border to support federal law enforcement. He has continued to tout his achievements. “We’re toughening up at the border” he told a crowd in West Virginia on April 5th. “We’re throwing them out by the hundreds.” Mr Trump may be disappointed to learn that the DHS deported 226,000

individuals in 2017, 14,000 fewer than the previous year. One common critique of immigration and multiculturalism is it will cause Balkanization in the United States.

C: Internal Link - Balkanization has already began, further immigration will worsen thisWoodridge ’18 (Frosty Woodridge, “Immigration Altering The Political DNA Of America”, https://theroperreportsite.wordpress.com/2017/04/15/the-balkanization-of-the-u-s-has-begun/)

In 2017, powerful interests push for blanket amnesty of 12 million and as high as 20 million illegal aliens. The journalist Ann Coulter, in her book Adios America,

counted 31 million illegal aliens residing within America by researching U.S. Census Bureau records. Since 1965, via legal immigration, birth rates and chain-migrated relatives, the United States added 100,000,000 (million) people from 196 countries around the world. If that trend continues on the same path, America expects to add 100,000,000 (million) more people from around the world by 2050. Not mentioned by politicians, those 100 million people from 196 different countries represent 190 different

worldviews, religions, language and cultures. America faces a complete altering of its political and cultural DNA toward millions of immigrants pulling in their own directions, rather than for the American way of life. Foremost among incompatible immigrants, Muslims number 3.3 million today within the United States, but they expect to reach as high as 20 million or more by 2050 at current immigration rates, birth rates and chain migration. A recent Fox News survey recorded that 51 percent of Muslim-Americans demand Sharia Law. As their numbers grow, so does their power to vote Sharia Law into their communities. They create parallel societies within our country, but in defiance of our country. “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any faith, but to become dominant. The Qur’an should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.” Omar Ahmed, director of Council on American Islamic Relations. If Congress allows an illegal alien worker amnesty, America shall suffer 20 million illegal aliens becoming U.S. citizens. That will change the DNA of America to resemble Mexico’s failed society. It will become our first step down toward becoming a Third World country. Mexicans will be able to ‘chain migrate’ entire villages into our country from the poorest, most uneducated peasants that can be exported to

America. They do not speak, act nor are they invested as American citizens. They represent the beachhead of an invading army of foreigners colonizing America. They’re commandeering our school systems across America. Sharon Barrett of Fort Collins, Colorado said, “We left California

because you can’t drive safely without danger of being hit by a Mexican. Our kids couldn’t learn anything in school because of so much language chaos and functional illiteracy. We were vulnerable to home break-ins seven days a week. They steal everything that’s not tied down. They’re bringing the lawlessness from Mexico into the United States. We had to get out.” Samuel Huntington, author of Clash of Civilizations, said, “It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation-states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The clash of civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.” What it means if the senate passes a mass amnesty—our country morphs into something other than the United States of America. It will become a ‘Fractured Colony of Mexico…or a Caliphate of the Middle East.” English cannot survive endless immigration. We will no longer remain a lawful sovereign nation. We will most certainly suffer the loss of law and order. Our citizenship will be degraded to the level of foreign people with no identification with our country. For example, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, an American politician works for Mexican interests and sanctuary city immunity for illegal aliens. The same continues in Chicago, Detroit, New York City and Denver. Do we want our country to turn into another third world? How about another China like what happened to Vancouver, British Columbia in Canada? Any American excited about the prospects of another Paris, France here in the USA? How about another Sydney, Australia? Or, will we keep degrading ourselves into slum conditions like Bombay, India? How about immigrating ourselves toward a billion people so we can catch up to China’s insane population of 1.35 billion? How many of us want America turned into 100 different languages and still pretend it’s America? Anyone thrilled about more gridlock auto congestion in our cities? How about more acid rain, air pollution and water shortages by adding millions of immigrants? How about higher prices for everything until we’re all reduced to the lower class? “Immigrants devoted to their own cultures and religions are not influenced by the secular politically correct façade that dominates academia, news-media, entertainment, education, religious and political thinking today,” said James Walsh,

former Associate General Counsel of the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service. “They claim the right not to assimilate, and the day is coming when the question will be how can the United States regulate the defiantly unassimilated cultures, religions and mores of foreign lands? Such immigrants say their traditions trump the U.S. legal system. Balkanization of the United States has begun.”

D: Impact - Balkanization is a leading cause of division of countries, even striking violenceBriney ’18 (Amanda, “What is Balkanization?” https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-balkanization-1435451)

In the 1950s and 1960s, balkanization began occurring outside of the Balkans and Europe when several British and French colonial empires

began fragmenting and breaking up in Africa. Balkanization was at its height in the early 1990s however when the Soviet Union collapsed and the former Yugoslavia disintegrated. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the countries of Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan,

Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania (and many others) were created. In the creation of

some of these countries, there was often extreme violence and hostility. For example, Armenia and Azerbaijan do experience periodic war over their borders and ethnic enclaves. In addition to violence in some, all of these newly created countries have experienced difficult periods of transition in their governments, economies, and societies. Yugoslavia was created out of a combination of over 20 different ethnic groups at the end of World War I. As a result of differences between these groups, there were friction and violence in the country. Following World War II, Yugoslavia began to gain more stability but by 1980 the different factions within the country began fighting for more independence. In the early 1990s, Yugoslavia finally disintegrated after around 250,000 people were killed by war. The countries eventually created out of the former Yugoslavia were Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Slovenia, Macedonia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Kosovo did not declare its independence until 2008 and it is still not recognized as fully independent by the entire world. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia are some of the most successful but also the most violent attempts at balkanization that have taken

place. There have also been attempts to balkanize in Kashmir, Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Kurdistan, and Iraq. In each of these areas, there are cultural and/or ethnic differences that have caused different factions to want to break away from the main country. In Kashmir, Muslims in Jammu and Kashmir are trying to break away from India, while in Sri Lanka the Tamil Tigers (a separatist organization for the Tamil people) want to break away from that country. People in the southeastern part of Nigeria declared themselves to be the state of Biafra and in Iraq, Sunni and Shiite Muslims fight to break away from Iraq. In addition, Kurdish people in Turkey, Iraq, and Iran have fought to create the State of Kurdistan. Kurdistan is currently not an independent state but it is rather a region with a mostly Kurdish population…In these instances, it describes potential divisions based political, economic and social differences. Some political commentators in the United States, for example, claim that balkanized or fragmented because it is special interests with elections in specific areas than with governing the entire country (West, 2012). Because of these differences, there have also been some discussions and separatist movements at the national and local levels.

Next to On-Case-Plan - Procedural

Read 1 – Not Both

1. Plan Does Not Specify 2. First Our Interpretation: implementation specification is crucial to affirmative

solvency; they don’t specify so this turns the case.

Janda, Berry, and Goldman 1999 NorthwesternThe Challenge of Democracy Sixth Edition, 1999 p. 434

The development of Policy in Washington is the end of one phase of the policy-making cycle and the beginning of another. After policies have been developed, they must be implemented. Implementation is the process of putting specifics into operation. Ultimately, bureaucrats must convert policies on paper into action. It is important to study implementation, because policies do not always do what they are designed to do. Implementation may be difficult because the details of the policy meant to be carried out have not been clearly stated.

3. Violation: The Affirmative has neglected to specify how the plan will be implemented. 4. As a Standard – This makes the Aff a Moving Target – By not specifying the

implementation the affirmative becomes a moving target because they can change and edit the way their plan is implemented due to neg attacks.

5. This makes this argument specifically a voter and turns solvency – Without specifying implementation then the affirmative cannot prove that the plan can or will be able to achieve its objectives

1. Plan Over Specifies 2. Our Interpretation: The affirmative must defend all 3 branches of the United States

Federal Government. We have definitional support – ‘the’ is a mass noun.American Heritage Dictionary 2000

3. The Violation: The affirmative specifies an agent. 4. Reasons to Prefer our argument is because of ground – specifying allows them to

choose tiny, unpredictable agents that we won’t be prepared to debate and they can strategically change. This allows them to spike out of generic da’s and cp’s because they aren’t even using the federal government anymore.

5. And this argument is a voter for fairness and competitive equity.

Next to Advantage 1Read 1 Card against their advantage 1 – should be able to find this in the case negative file

Next to Advantage 2Read 1 Card against their advantage 2 – should be able to find this in the case negative file

Next to SolvencyRead 1 Card against their solvency – should be able to find this in the case negative file

2NC

My partner and I will be splitting the negative block

I will be taking the Politics DA and Case. My partner will take the Effects T, Restrictions T and the Balkanization DA.

First Off is the Tix Disad

Answer the Aff arguments against the Tix DA first1. They said _______, but this is wrong because of ________2. They said _______, but this is wrong because of ________3. They said _______, but this is wrong because of ________

Extend the DA

1. Extend our uniqueness, that’s the Beauchamp 2/26/19 evidence, that states, current policy is about whether one defends ethnonationalism’s core premises or rejects them. This goes unrefuted by the affirmative

2. Extend our Link, that’s the Simmons ’17 evidence, that states The President has become focused, if not obsessed, with immigration and building a wall on the Southern border, to the detriment of other functions particularly those that relate specifically to the Voting Rights Advancement Act and the current discrimination against people of color and immigrants. The affirmative never disproves nor able to link out of this DA.

3. We must uphold human rights – the Voting Rights Advancement Act is key, Even under Trump

Brannen, 4/7/2018 (Kate, he deputy managing editor of Just Security and a nonresident senior fellow at the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council., “UNDER TRUMP, U.S. IS NO LONGER A CHAMPION OF HUMAN RIGHTS” Newsweek http://www.newsweek.com/under-trump-us-no-longer-champion-human-rights-579028)

Tyler Giannini, co-director of Harvard Law School’s Human Rights Program and its International Human Rights Clinic

Human rights and advocating for their protection is all the more important right now when the U.S. government will not be a leader on this front.

Human rights groups know very well what it is like to work without a government that is friendly to human rights. That is too often the norm and usually at the heart of their work.

It should not be a time to panic, but instead a time when human rights work is going to be even more relevant and needed.

James Silk, director of Orville H. Schell Jr. Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School

It would be dangerously negligent not to see this as an uncertain time for human rights and not to be especially vigilant. The Administration has not only shown no commitment to international law, international human rights or international cooperation, but its acts and rhetoric have shown a determination to neglect and even to affirmatively damage the most vulnerable, whether racial minorities, people of diverse religious beliefs, children, the disabled, or refugees.

Human rights remains a powerful tool, especially as a language for principled resistance to tyranny and barbarism and for building solidarity around seemingly disparate issues, as we saw so vividly in the Women’s March and have continued to see in many forms since.

I believe that we in human rights will stay the course, not turning our backs on the atrocities and poverty that already plagued the world and that will persist, but turning some of our attention toward using human rights to hold this government accountable, to build support for efforts to block its most egregious acts, to create pressure on it to live up to our legal and moral obligations.

4. Extend our Morelli 1/19/19 evidence that states, “the US continued hatred of the foreigner immigrant is dangerous, ill-intentioned, and undeserving – especially the hatred toward the poor, the jobless, the non-white and the non-Christian. BY allowing the affirmative to increase more immigrants into the country, the aff is increasing and expanding the hatred, discrimination and marginalization of immigrants. They aff is not helping immigrants, they are actually making their situation worse. The aff is destroying the United States stability from within due to the fear they are creating of someone coming from the outside

5. Extend our Impact, that’s the Memmi 2k evidence, that states the aff is accepting a racist universe and as a result is endorsing fear, injustice, and violence . Racism and racial oppression outweigh every impact

6. Racism structurally underpins all violence-- while racialized violence is still a daily reality for people caught in the position of the slave, the rhetoric of “oppression” or “exploitation” alone asks only how we might redeem this failed American experiment. There is no analogy for the structural suffering of the slave, meaning authentic engagement with social violence must begin with the anti-human void known as Blackness

Pak ’12 {Yumi; philosophy prof ; "Outside Relationality: Autobiographical Deformations and the Literary Lineage of Afro-Pessimism in 20th and 21st Century African American Literature.”; Accessed 7/13/15}AvP Because the four authors I examine focus intensively on untangling and retangling the nexus of race, gender, and sexuality in autobiographical narratives, this project originally relied most heavily on the frameworks provided by queer theory and performance studies, as the structural organization and methodology behind both disciplines offered the characteristic of being “‘inter’ – in between… intergenric [sic], interdisciplinary, intercultural – and therefore inherently unstable” (“What is Performance Studies Anyway?” 360). My abstract ideation of the dissertation was one which conceptualized the unloosening of the authors’ respective texts from the ways in which they have been read in particular genres. Yet the investigative progression of my research redirected me to question the despondency I found within Toomer, Himes, Baldwin and Jones’ novels, a despondency and sorrow that seemed to reach beyond the individual and collective purportedly represented in these works. What does it mean, they seem to speculate, to suffer beyond the individual, beyond the collective, and into the far reaches of paradigmatic structure? What does it mean to exist beyond “social oppression” and veer instead into what Frank B. Wilderson, III calls “structural suffering” (Red, White & Black 36)? Briefly, Wilderson utilizes what he calls Frantz Fanon’s splitting of “the hair[s] between social oppression and

structural suffering”; in other words, Wilderson refutes the possibility of analogizing blackness with any other positionality in the world. Others may be oppressed, indeed, may suffer experientially, but only the black, the paradigmatic slave, suffers structurally. Afro-pessimism, the theoretical means by which I attempt to answer this query, provides the integral term and parameters with which I bind together queer theory, performance studies, and autobiography studies in order to propose a re-examination of these authors and their texts. The structural suffering of

blackness seeps into all elements of American history, culture, and life , and thus I begin my discussion with an analysis of Hortense Spillers’

concept of an American grammar in “Mama’s Baby, Papa’s Maybe: An American Grammar Book.” To theorize blackness is to begin with the slave ship, in a space that is in actuality no place. 7 In discussing the transportation of human cargo across the Middle Passage, Spillers writes that

this physical theft of bodies was “a willful and violent (and unimaginable from this distance) severing of the captive body from its motive will , its active desire” (Spillers 67). She contends here that in this mass gathering and transportation, what becomes illuminated is not only the complete and total deracination of native from soil, but rather the evisceration of subjectivity from blackness , the

evacuation of will and desire from the body; in other words, we see that even before the black body there is flesh, “that zero degree of social conceptualization that does not escape concealment under the brush of discourse, or the reflexes of iconography” (67). Black flesh, which arrives in the United States to be manipulated and utilized as slave bodies , is “a primary narrative” with its “seared,

divided, ripped-apartness, riveted to the ship’s hole, fallen, or ‘escaped’ overboard ” (67). These markings – “lacerations, woundings, fissures, tears, scars, openings, ruptures, lesions, rendings, punctures of the flesh” – are indicative of the sheer scale of the structural violence amassed against blackness, and

from this beginning Spillers culls an “American grammar” that grounds itself in the “rupture and a radically different kind of cultural continuation,” a grammar that is the fabric

of blackness in the United States (67, 68). As Wilderson observes, “Africans went into the ships and came out as Blacks” (Red,

White & Black 38). In other words, in the same moment they are (re)born as blacks, they are doomed to death as slaves . This rupture, I argue, is evident in the definitions of slavery set forth by Orlando Patterson in his seminal volume, Slavery and Social Death: natal alienation, general dishonor and openness to gratuitous violence. The captive body, which is constructed with torn flesh, is laid bare to any and all, and it is critical to note here that Patterson, in

line with Afro-pessimists, does not align slavery with labor. The slave can – and did – work, but what defines him/her as such is that as a dishonored and violated

object, the master’s whims for him/her to work, or not work, can be carried out without ramifications . Rather, the slave’s powerlessness is heightened to the greatest possible capacity, wherein s/he is marked by social death and the “permanent, violent domination” of their selves (Patterson 13). Spillers’ “radically different kind of cultural continuation” finds an articulation of the object status of blackness in the United States, one which impugns the separation of “slave” and “black.” As Jared Sexton and Huey Copeland inquire, “[h]ow might it feel to be… a scandal to ontology, an outrage to every marker of the human? What, in the final analysis,

does it mean to suffer?” (Sexton and Copeland 53). Blackness functions as a scandal to ontology because, as Wilderson states, black suffering forms the

ethical backbone of civil society . He writes, [c] hattel slavery did not simply reterritorialize the ontology of the African. It also created the Human out of cultural disparate identities from Europe to the East… Put another way, through chattel slavery the world gave birth and

coherence to both its joys of domesticity and to its struggles of political discontent, and with these joys and struggles, the Human was born, but not before it murdered the Black, forging a symbiosis between the political ontology of Humanity and

the social death of Blacks. (Red, White & Black 20 – 21) Again, the African is made black, and in this murder both ontological and physical, humanity gains its coherence . It is not my intention (nor of other Afro-pessimists) to argue that

violence has only ever been committed against black individuals and communities in the United States, or in the world, but rather that the structural suffering that defines blackness , the violence enacted against blackness to maintain its positioning outside of civil society, that demarcates the black as slave, has no horizontal equivalent and ,

indeed, provides the logical ethos of existence for all othered subjectivities; by this I mean that all other subjects (and I use this word quite intentionally) retain a body and not the zero degree of flesh. As Sexton writes, “we might say of the colonized: you may lose your motherland, but you will not ‘lose your mother’ (Hartman 2007)” (“The Curtain of the Sky” 14). This is precisely why Sexton offers the

succinct definition of Afro - pessimism as “ a political ontology dividing the Slave from the world of the Human in a constitutive way ” (“The Social Life of Social Death” 23). Furthermore, Afro-pessimists contest the idea that the modern world is one wherein the price of labor determines the price of being equally for all people. In this capitalistic reading of the world, we summon blacks back into civil society by utilizing Marxism to assume “a subaltern structured by capital, not by white supremacy” (“Gramsci’s Black Marx” 1). While it is undeniable, of course, that black bodies and labor were

used to aid in the economic growth of the United States, we return again to the point that what defines enslavement is accumulation and fungibility, alongside natal alienation, general dishonor, and openness to gratuitous violence ; the slave , then, is not constituted as part of the class struggle . 8 While it is true “that labor power is exploited and

that the worker is alienated in it,” it is also true that “workers labor on the commodity, they are not the commodity itself, their labor power is” (Red, White & Black 50). The slave is, then, invisible within this matrix, and, to a more detrimental effect, invisible within the ontology of lived subjects entirely. The slave cannot be defined as loss – as can the postcolonial subject, the woman, or the immigrant – but can only be configured as lack, as there is no potential for synthesis within a rubric of antagonism. Wilderson sets up the phrase “rubric of antagonism” in opposition to “rubric of conflict” to clarify the positionality of blacks outside relationality. The former is “an irreconcilable struggle between entities, or positions, the resolution of which is not dialectical but entails the

obliteration of one of the positions,” whereas the latter is “a rubric of problems that can be posed and conceptually solved” (Red, White & Black 5). He continues, “[i]f a Black is the very antithesis of a Human subject… then his or her paradigmatic exile is not simply a function of repressive practices on the part of institutions” (9). Integrating Hegel and Marx, and returning to Spillers, Wilderson argues that within this grammar of suffering, the slave is not a laborer but what he calls

“antiHuman, against which Humanity establishes, maintains, and renews its coherence, its corporeal integrity” (11). In contrast to imagining the black other in opposition to whiteness, Wilderson and other Afro-pessimists theorize blackness as being absent in the dialectic, as

“ anti-Human.”

Next to Case

On the Plan Text - ProceduralRead one of the procedurals from the 1NC on the plan text only if your partner was

unable to get to it.

On Advantage 1:Make analytical arguments against advantage 1 here.Read 3 Cards against their advantage 1 – should be able to find this in the case negative file

On Advantage 2:Make analytical arguments against advantage 2 here.Read 3 Cards against their advantage 2 – should be able to find this in the case negative file

On Solvency:Use the remainder of your time to read as many cards against solvency as possible. Should be able to find this in the case negative file

1NR

My partner and I will be splitting the negative block

I will be taking the Effects T, Restrictions T and the Balkanization DA.

First Off if Effects T

1. Answer the arguments the affirmative said on the interpretation. (If affirmative never addressed Effects T say – “At the moment the affirmative drops topicality, you must sign your ballot for the negative – Topicality is an A-priority issue. Vote negative.”)

2. Extend our Interpretation that’s the Public Law 87-253 card that states reduction is a net decrease not offset by expansion .

3. Answer the arguments the affirmative said on the violation. 4. Extend our Violation: the plan does not directly decrease restrictions on legal

immigration.5. Answer the arguments the affirmative said on the violation. 6. Extend our standards of Limits, Aff burden and Vacuum Test. –Plan has been proven

non-topical because the plan is effects T thus the plan is untopical and must be voted against.

7. Extend our voters of A Priori, Fairness, and Education

Next off is the Restrictions T

1. Answer the arguments the affirmative said on the interpretation. (If affirmative never addressed Restrictions T say – “At the moment the affirmative drops topicality, you must sign your ballot for the negative – Topicality is an A-priority issue. Vote negative.”)

2. Extend our Interpretation - Restrictions means a (plural) collection of restrictions – that’s our Wordhippo 19 card – which states it means “a collection of restrictions – a plural form of restriction. ”

3. Answer the arguments the affirmative made on our violation. 4. Extend our violation - The affirmative team is not reducing a collection of

restrictions, only reducing one or none5. Answer the arguments the affirmative made on our violation. 6. Extend our standards of Bright Line and Grammatical Context – we must draw a clear

distinction between what is topical and what is not.

7. Extend our voters of Debatability ansd Jurisdiction

Next Off is the Balkanization DA

Answer the Aff arguments against the Balkanization DA first

1. They said _______, they are wrong because _________2. They said_______, they are wrong because _________3. They said_______, they are wrong because _________

Extend our 1NC evidence of the Balkanization DA that was never adequately answered by the affirmative. Please extend our Hauslohner and Tran ’18, Qui 18, Woodridge ’18, Briney ’18 evidence. This DA is saying that the affirmative plan will cause Balkanization in the United States. America is currently facing a complete altering of its political and cultural DNA toward millions of immigrants pulling things in their own directions, rather than promoting the American way of life. As a result of the affirmative plan, the division of America is imminent which will cause extreme violence and hostility

Latino and African American conflicts are proof of small scale balkanization, leading to go onto a larger scale. Immigrant minority groups, particularly between hispanic and african-americans sparks balknaization and conflict among the two. Boyle Heights

shows. Mather, ‘17 https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-ramona-hate-crime-20160707-snap-story.html

Seven Latino immigrants have been charged with firebombing the homes of black families living in a Boyle Heights

housing project, an attack that federal prosecutors allege was designed to drive African Americans out of the

neighborhood. A federal indictment unsealed Thursday describes how the the suspects allegedly planned and

carried out the May 12, 2014, attack, which came at time when black families were increasingly moving

back into the Ramona Gardens public housing complex after previous violence that prompted most African

Americans to flee.

Prosecutors allege that the men broke the apartment windows before hurling Molotov cocktails inside – a move designed

to "maximize damage" – and struck homes where families, including children, were inside. Three of the four

apartments were occupied by black families.

Balkanization resulted in New York due to large influxes of Irish and Italian immigrants.Moses 15 https://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/a-migration-marred-by-tension-rivalry-1.10580274

The Irish and Italian immigrants to New York had much in common despite differences in language and

custom. They were people of the periphery who suffered from poverty and exploitive governance. They shared a religion in Catholicism, and work experience

that consisted mostly of the heavy lifting needed for farm labor. Yet they clashed in New York. Construction sites, parish

churches, union halls, the police station, the waterfront: All became arenas for Irish-Italian conflict in

the late 19th century and well into the 20th century.

When the Italians arrived in large numbers in New York starting around 1880, the Irish were established. A sign of

that success was the election of William R. Grace as the city's first Irish-Catholic mayor in 1880. But many of the Irish remained

impoverished and tempers flared when Italians competed for jobs as laborers, willing to work longer days for less

money. The workers' fights became so common that the Brooklyn Eagle editorialized, "Can't they be

separated?" With that rivalry in the background, even the church became an arena for conflict. Rather than try to unify the

congregations, Irish-American pastors found it better to make the Italians worship in the church basement,

stirring resentment and even some pointed words from the Vatican.

Prosecutors allege that the men broke the apartment windows before hurling Molotov cocktails inside – a move designed

to "maximize damage" – and struck homes where families, including children, were inside. Three of the four

apartments were occupied by black families.

Balkanization kills disaster infrastructure- magnifies natural disastersToor ’13 (Toor joined The Verge in April 2012. He has also worked as a consultant at the OECD in Paris and at Miramax in Santa Monica. **Cites Sascha Meinrath, the director of the New America Foundation’s Open Technology Institute, and Allan Friedman, the Director of Cybersecurity Initiatives at National Telecommunications and Information Administration in the US Department of Commerce. “Will the global NSA backlash break the internet?” http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/8/5080554/nsa-backlash-brazil-germany-raises-fears-of-internet-balkanization)

"The network experience is key," says Leslie Daigle, chief technology officer at the Internet Society. "Increased Balkanization is typically correlated with less diversity of offerings, less diversity of support infrastructure, and fewer interconnects with other parts of the [internet]." Such interconnectedness, she adds, has proven particularly valuable in times of crisis. "When we've seen natural disasters hit countries, it's diversity of infrastructure that has meant those countries were not entirely wiped off the internet map , " Daigle says in an email to The Verge. "When there was an earthquake and tsunami in Japan, there was network damage but that meant slower connections, not complete lack of connection."

The biggest thing is to answer the affirmative arguments – extend evidence already read and provide an impact calculus.

Next to Impact Calculus - (Explain how the impacts of this Disadvantage outweigh the affirmative’s disadvantages) Prefer the negative impacts of the Balkinzation DA to the negative impacts. Our impacts outweigh the affirmative’s on: Probability – (explain in your own words), Time-Frame – (explain in your own words), Magnitude – (explain in your own words).

2NR

Note – Go for whatever you’re winning – But, typically here – you should go for Auctions CP, Wages DA and then two

major on-case category like Advantages or Solvency. Just make sure you tell the judge how you’re winning and what arguments

you’re winning. You shouldn’t be reading a lot of evidence here. Just going back over and summarizing the arguments you’re

winning.

Ext Effects T – If going for Effects T - Make sure you are extending the interpretation – violation – standards – voters and explain how you’re winning in your own words.

Ext Restrictions T – If going for Restrictions T - Make sure you are extending the interpretation – violation – standards – voters and explain how you’re winning in your own words.

Ext Counter PlanThe biggest thing to consider here is to answer the affirmative arguments and to extend arguments already made. Please extend the CP by saying in your own words how the CP captures the affirmative advantages before.

Economy – 2NC

CP achieves growth by guaranteeing a predictable supply. Jonathan G. Goodrich 8, (Assistant Counsel to the Inspector General at Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Homeland Security), 3-1-2008, "Help Wanted: Looking For A Visa System That Promotes The U.S. Economy And National Security,", University Of Richmond Law Review 42, No. 4 (March 2008): 975-1010, https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/urich42&id=986, TJ-TDEnhanced legal channels based on labor-market conditions would create many benefits. Legalization would provide vital sectors of the U.S. economy with the workers they demand. n205 It "would raise [immigrants'] wages, benefits and working conditions by giving them more bargaining power in the marketplace ... They would be more likely to qualify for health insurance ... . They could put their savings in the bank." n206 American employers would be more apt to invest in their workers, who in turn would [*1005] be more apt to invest in their American lives by learning English and integrating into mainstream society. n207 Because the system would be market-based, this would increase predictability, enabling businesses to invest and know that they will have legal workers when they need them. "The result is a more efficient economy that can achieve a higher rate of sustainable growth without encountering bottlenecks or stoking inflation ." n208 If those benefits fail to convert the disbelievers, here are the numbers: "Hispanic buying power totaled $ 798 billion in 2006 and is expected to increase to $ 1.2 trillion by 2011. Moreover, the U.S. Census Bureau estimates that in 2002, 1.6 million Hispanic-owned firms provided jobs to 1.5 million employees, had receipts of $ 222 billion, and generated payroll of $ 36.7 billion." n209 More specifically, Congress should consider an increased focus on permanent immigration. Unlike temporary workers, permanent immigrants "are far more likely to acquire new job skills, achieve upward mobility, ... buy homes, create businesses, [and] revitalize urban areas." n210 A stable immigrant work force would increase the production of goods and services, raise gross domestic product, enable private and public saving, reduce the federal deficit, and free more money for investment. n211 Permanent immigration will allow immigrants to fully realize their "economic potential as workers, taxpayers, entrepreneurs, and consumers." n212

H-1B Visas – 2NC

Market based caps better for H1-B visas than arbitrary system this makes the US more competitive Stuart Anderson, 06, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy, 2006, Regaining America’s Competitive Advantage: Making our Immigration System Work, LABOR, IMMIGRATION & EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, https://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/NAFSA_Home/Resource_Library_Assets/Public_Policy/100811_skilledvisastudy_full.pdfThere is ample evidence a market-based cap – rather than the current fixed caps – would work well for H-1B visas. By maintaining low annual ceilings, Congress has succeeded only in encouraging U.S. employers to either delay growth plans in the United States or push more hiring, as well as capital, outside the United States. The current fixed cap of 65,000 H-1B petitions, plus an additional 20,000 petitions for foreign nationals with a master’s degree or higher from a U.S. university, has not reflected the market demand for skilled labor. The labor market and economic conditions have determined the use of visas for high skilled foreign nationals. In the few years where Congress enacted a higher ceiling for H-1Bs, employers did not hire additional skilled foreign nationals simply because the annual cap was higher. As Table 7 illustrates, in FY 2002 and FY 2003, legislation set the H-1B annual cap at 195,000. However, approximately 230,000 visas in those two years went unused because economic conditions and employer needs lagged. Similarly, in FY 2010, the quota for H-1Bs remained unfilled at the start of the fiscal year (and for months into the fiscal year), even though in FY 2009 the demand was so high that the application process stopped months before the fiscal year started. In that year the immigration agency distributed the oversubscribed visas via a lottery system. 58 Congress can adopt a number of approaches to allow for the hiring of skilled foreign nationals to reflect labor market reality. One approach would be to eliminate the H-1B cap and allow the market to determine hiring decisions, rather than arbitrary caps. A second alternative is to raise the cap much higher to prevent it from interfering with the normal flow of hiring during the fiscal year. A third approach would be to eliminate the 20,000 limit on the exemption for those who receive a master’s degree or higher from a U.S. university and to expand that to recipients of advanced degrees from accredited foreign universities. Any of these approaches, either alone or in combination, would place U.S. employers in a more competitive situation in global markets than the current system, which can result either in no hiring of a needed skilled professional in the U.S. or delays of 6 to 12 months

High Skilled – 2NC

Auctioning visas boosts US competitiveness because it only gets top-tier immigrantsThe Economist, 10 (“The price of entry,” 6/26, factiva)NORTH AFRICANS risk their lives to try to cross the Mediterranean to southern Europe. Mexicans pay “mules” to get them across the border with the United States. Afghans camp outside Calais in filthy surroundings, waiting to cross into Britain. Everywhere, it seems, there are people trying to get into another country. Even those who seek to move legally in order to work face huge barriers to entry in certain countries. People on work visas account for 70% of legal migrants to Germany, for instance, but only 5.6% of those entering America, the original land of opportunity. Most of the rest get in because a member of their family is already in the country. America’s annual quota of visas for the highly skilled can run out in a matter of weeks. More people want to move to rich countries than are able to.In a lecture delivered on June 17th at the Institute of Economic Affairs, a think-tank in London, Gary Becker proposed a “radical solution” to this messy problem. Fittingly for a Nobel laureate who pioneered the application of economics to areas such as discrimination, crime and the family, his answers involved market mechanisms. Mr Becker argued that immigration was out of kilter because of the absence of a price that would match supply and demand. Governments, he suggested, could use economic principles to allocate visas, either by selling the right to migrate at a price that called forth a desired number of migrants, or by auctioning immigrant visas.As with any price, one for immigration would allocate the ability to migrate to those who desired it most. Successful migrants, Mr Becker argued, would still be better off, even after paying a hefty fee for the privilege. But the receiving country would benefit, too. Adjusting the price from year to year would allow governments to retain control over how many immigrants came while responding to changing labour-market conditions. And the revenue raised might go some way to assuaging the concerns of those who oppose immigration, especially now when clever thinking is needed about ways to improve public finances. Charging $50,000 for the right to immigrate would net America $50 billion if it let in 1m immigrants, roughly as many as it currently admits legally.More importantly, the immigrants most tempted by such a fee-based system would be those who would garner the biggest economic benefit from migrating, such as those whose wages would increase by the largest amount. Mr Becker reckons that such people would have other desirable qualities. They would be the kind of innovative, hard-working go-getters countries want to attract, such as the engineers of Indian or Chinese extraction who received 14% of the patents awarded in America between 2000 and 2004 , even though these ethnic groups make up less than 5% of the population. The young, he argues, would also be more interested than the old, because they would have more years to recoup the costs of the visa. An attractive idea, perhaps, in a rapidly ageing Europe.

Productivity – 2NC

Auctions create incentives to find the absolute top talent – maximizing productivityPeter H. Schuck 2008, (Peter H. Schuck is the Simeon E. Baldwin Professor of Law Emeritus at Yale University. His major fields of teaching and research are law and public policy; tort law; immigration, citizenship, and refugee law; groups, diversity, and law; and administrative law. He has written on a broad range of other public policy topics.), 1-1-2008, "The Morality of Immigration Policy", Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository 45 San Diego L. Rev. 870 2008, http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2653&context=fss_papers, TJ-TDB. Auctioning VisasA visa to the United States is the most valuable resource that mobile foreigners can ever hope to obtain - the right to permanent residence, citizenship, and further family migration here. Receiving a family-based or employment-based visa is a huge emotional or economic windfall, or both, to those who receive it. This is true, moreover, regardless of the immigrant's individual merit and regardless of the fact that the immigrant's receipt of the visa is also valuable to those family members or employers in the United States who petitioned for it. As Gary Becker, Julian Simon, and some other economists have proposed, the most straightforward, non-discretionary way to determine (1) which aliens would benefit most from the visas in the United States, and (2) which of them would be valued most highly by the people in the United States who want them here, is to auction off the visas to the highest bidder meeting the legally-specified eligibility requirements. n92 The current [*893] system eschews such targeting criteria in favor of very crude categories, which are administered in a notoriously inept fashion. n93No convincing conception of justice demands that this precious windfall should be distributed, as under the current system, to eligible aliens on a first-come, first-served basis rather than by willingness to pay for it at an auction - I will discuss the ability-to-pay consideration in a moment. Still less is there any justification for distributing 50,000 of these valuable visas by lottery, which is how the so-called "diversity" visa program works. n94 No other country allocates its visas by lottery. n95 Instead, those relatively few countries that accept permanent immigrants distribute their visas on the basis of national interest criteria, usually economic or ethnic. I put humanitarian admissions to one side here.Suppose, then, that the government decided to auction off some subset of its visa quotas to the highest eligible bidder. The most compelling case for this approach clearly is employment-based visas , where the would-be employer now petitions, at significant cost, to import certain workers who possess or can readily acquire the skills needed by the firm. The government would specify the criteria that bidders, for example firms that wish to employ immigrants, or perhaps the immigrants themselves, must satisfy in terms of job skills, language competency, years spent on a visa waiting list, or other desiderata, and then allow all eligibles to bid for the available visas - subject, of course, to the usual grounds of excludability applicable to all intending immigrants. In an auction, the enormous surplus value of a visa - its value in excess of the bidder's opportunity cost - would be captured not by the immigrant but by the government, which could then use the surplus to upgrade American workers' job skills or for other social purposes. It seems likely that these visas would be won by the most productive workers whose labor most helps the U.S. economy, as they would find it easiest to finance their bids. These arguments, moreover, are by no means confined to allocating permanent employment-based visas. Indeed, an auction might be even [*894] more desirable for temporary work visas, where time is of the essence and the number of visas has been severely limited. n96

Labor Shortages – 2NC

Puts the ball in employer’s court—only need based visas will be given out. Madeline Zavodny 10, (Madeline Zavodny is a professor of economics, has a Ph.D. in Economics, and is a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn and an adjunct scholar at AEI), 7-29-2010, "Beyond Arizona: An Immigration Approach That Can Work", AEI, https://www.aei.org/publication/beyond-arizona-an-immigration-approach-that-can-work/, TJ-TDImmigration reform also needs to create a way for some workers who otherwise would enter illegally to come legally. U.S. immigration policy should focus on admitting the workers employers want. Many of these are the high-skilled immigrants who work in labs and offices, but others are low-skilled immigrants who do jobs natives are not willing to do. The U.S. should auction off to employers the right to hire foreign workers and create a pathway to permanent residence and naturalized citizenship for people who are willing to work hard for the American dream.An auction system would maximize immigration’s benefits to the U.S. economy. Currently, employers get permission to hire foreign workers on a first-come, first-served (or a lottery) basis. Priority is not given to employers with the greatest need for foreign workers. As we explain in our book, auctioning off provisional work visas for skilled and unskilled workers would ensure that employers are able to bring in the workers who will add the most to the U.S. economy. And the revenue from the auctions can be used to help offset any costs immigration creates.

New policy would help employers get skilled workers which retains future innovators Stuart Anderson, 06, Executive Director of the National Foundation for American Policy, 2006, Regaining America’s Competitive Advantage: Making our Immigration System Work, LABOR, IMMIGRATION & EMPLOYEE BENEFITS DIVISION U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, https://www.nafsa.org/uploadedFiles/NAFSA_Home/Resource_Library_Assets/Public_Policy/100811_skilledvisastudy_full.pdfThe best policy for the United States is one that sides with freedom and innovation, not restriction. It is a policy where the H-1B cap is either eliminated or set high enough that we can let the market decide on the number of new skilled foreign nationals who work in America each year. The best policy would ease the way for employers to sponsor high skilled individuals for green cards by exempting from labor certification and current employment based immigrant quotas many who now languish in 6 to 20 year queues. Allowing top talent who graduate from U.S. universities to gain a green card directly will help U.S. employers retain the world’s leading future innovators. Keeping the door open for high skilled foreign nationals strengthens America. As is often the case, freedom, not restriction, is the right choice

AT: Auctions Bad

Transparency solvesPia Orrenius and Madeline Zavodny 10, (Orrenius is a labor economist. She is research fellow at the Tower Center for Political Studies at Southern Methodist University and at the IZA Institute of Labor in Bonn, Germany, as well as adjunct scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Orrenius was senior economist on the Council of Economic Advisers in the Executive Office of the President, Washington D.C. She holds a PhD in economics from the University of California at Los Angeles. Madeline Zavodny is a professor of economics, has a Ph.D. in Economics, and is a research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn and an adjunct scholar at AEI), 9-13-2010, "Foreign Stimulus", New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/opinion/14orrenius.html, TJ-TDIn place of our current system’s lotteries and “first-come, first-served” policies, the government should hold regular auctions where companies can bid for permits to bring in foreign workers. Employers would bid highest for the most-valued workers, creating a selection mechanism that wouldn’t rely on the judgment of bureaucrats or the paperwork skills of immigration lawyers. Separate auctions would be run for high- and low-skilled workers, because permit prices would depend on prospective wages. Bringing low-skilled workers into the program is vital to stemming illegal immigration, as the current system’s lack of sufficient visas for the low-skilled is a main reason that people cross the border illegally. These auctions would be more efficient than the current system because they would respond to changes in labor demand. When prices rose, the government could react by increasing the number of permits, better syncing immigration with the business cycle. Work-based immigration would rise with economic growth and fall with rising unemployment. Finally, the auctions would provide the government with new revenue in an era of huge deficits. Some of that money might be used to offset costs incurred by states or localities with large numbers of immigrants, or to retrain American workers displaced by immigration. For the past two decades, policy makers have tinkered on the margins of the immigration system, reacting to the latest crisis or political priority. Greater emphasis on work-based immigration as part of a coherent immigration process would go a long way to enhance our economy’s competitiveness and the nation’s well-being.

AT: Caps Bad

Can’t win any cap offense – average price would provide immediate transparent data about the state of the market – means cap is flexible and always the most efficientAmelie Constant and Klaus F. Zimmermann 05, (Professor Amelie F. Constant is a Visiting Research Scholar at Princeton University and the Woodrow Wilson School and the Office of Population Research. Klaus F. Zimmermann is President of the Global Labor Organization, Full Professor of Economics at Bonn University, Research Fellow of the Centre for Economic Policy Research and Founding Director at the Institute for the Study of Labor), August 2005, "Immigrant Performance and Selective Immigration Policy: A European Perspective", IZA Discussion Paper No. 1715, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b79f/74b59ab7cf3b302b274e7623e92777572285.pdf, TJ-TDUrgent needs for short-term skilled labour should be accommodated by establishing a non-bureaucratic system for temporary immigration. Unfortunately, it is very difficult if not impossible for a public administrator or an outside observer to identify the real short-term needs of the business community. Hence, an auction system operating among interested companies for the allocation of immigration certificates would appear to be the best choice to satisfy temporary immigration needs. These certificates would entitle the company to recruit an immigrant on the world market for a job for a defined period of time. Such an auction system translates relative labour market shortages into relative bid prices. Existing shortages would become transparent and excess demand would show where further policy response is necessary. Since companies 19 would have to pay for the right to hire a worker, a share of the immigration gains would be given to the public coffers. A European-wide quota on temporary migrants would allow fixing the number of temporary visas at the political level. An auction system is superior to alternatives such as a fee system where companies have to pay an amount which has been fixed according to political rules mainly as it matches supply and demand more efficiently. Companies will only be willing to purchase at an auction if they are unable to satisfy their demand on the regular local labour market. The objective of the auction can be underscored by a minimum bid requirement. There is no need to verify formally the non-availability of native labour. The certificates should be limited to a period of three years, and could be potentially renewable for the same person. Temporary immigrants should have the right to be accompanied by their family members, and spouses should be entitled to a work permit. During their employment under this programme, temporary immigrants should have the right to apply for permanent immigration under the point system. Such an arrangement would create an appropriate link between the temporary and the permanent immigration systems.

AT: Commission Fails

A Commission plus a quarterly auction solves – it generates price data that makes it possible to accurately set visa quotasGiovanni Peri 10, (Giovanni Peri is Professor of Economics at the University of California, Davis and a Research Associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, ), 6-1-2010, "The Impact of Immigrants in Recession and Economic Expansion", Migration Policy Institute, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/impact-immigrants-recession-and-economic-expansion, TJ-TDThese facts suggest that legal immigration should also be made to respond to labor market conditions. How can this be done? One principle would be to allow the number of employer visa applications to serve as the main indicator of how strong labor demand is under current economic conditions. This obviates the need for the government to undertake the very difficult task of determining labor demand through incomplete and insufficiently timely statistical sources. For instance, suppose firms were able to apply and bid one quarter in advance for foreign workers’ permits in programs such as the H-1B, in an auction. While the government could set the total number of permits, the relative bidding by employers would ensure that visas are allocated efficiently. Moreover a high winning price would signal high demand and could prompt a larger number of permits in the following quarter. In order to implement this policy, one would need to determine several details of the auction and some economists have spelled out how such a system could work.25 An independent government agency or commission could be called upon to determine the number of permits issued and the details of implementation.26

Commission is comparatively better – Congress is inflexible, slow, and lacks expertiseDemetrios G. Papademetriou et al. 09, (Demetrios G. Papademetriou, who co-founded MPI and founded MPI Europe, is a Distinguished Transatlantic Fellow at MPI. Doris Meissner, Marc R. Rosenblum, Madeleine Sumption), 5-1-2009, "Harnessing the Advantages of Immigration for a 21st-Century Economy: A Standing Commission on Labor Markets, Economic Competitiveness, and Migration", Migration Policy Institute, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/harnessing-advantages-immigration-21st-century-economy-standing-commission-labor-markets, TJ-TDThis paper focuses only on the system’s shortcomings with regard to labor market, economic growth, and competitiveness issues. It proposes an institutional solution to address what by now amounts to systemic failure: creating a permanent and independent body situated within the executive branch and charged with recommending adjustments to immigration laws to the president and the Congress — the Standing Commission on Labor Markets, Economic Competitiveness, and Immigration.The concept of a Standing Commission, first proposed by the MPI-convened Independent Task Force on Immigration and America’s Future in its final report in 2006, is gaining new attention from policymakers.If US firms and the broader US economy are to thrive in a completely unforgiving 21stcentury globalized economy, labor market immigration must be viewed as a strategic resource that if carefully managed can meet labor market needs while protecting US wages and working conditions, and support economic growth and competitiveness . Creation of the Standing Commission — an independent, bipartisan body staffed by a career professional cadre of economists, demographers, and other social scientists — would permit the US immigration system to adjust more rapidly and completely to changing economic and labor market circumstances, whether measured by responsiveness to the business cycle or to long-term shifts in US and global employment patterns.The Standing Commission would provide timely, evidence-based, and impartial analysis and recommendations that are not now available and that are vital for informed policymaking. Its findings and recommendations would facilitate regular reviews of labor market immigration levels and visa allocations and would form the basis for making adjustments to employment-based immigration levels as circumstances require — injecting much-needed flexibility into a system currently adjusted only every few decades.The Standing Commission would be required by statute to submit an annual report and recommendations simultaneously to the president and Congress. After a specified period for congressional consultation, unless Congress acted to maintain existing statutory baseline labor market immigration levels, the president would issue a

formal Determination of New Levels, adjusting employment-based green-card quotas and preferences and temporary worker visa limits for the coming fiscal year.

Commission solves better by being adaptable to economic needs and avoids ptxRay Marshall and Ross Eisenbrey 10, (Marshall, U.S. Secretary of Labor from 1977 to 1981, is professor emeritus at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. Eisenbrey is vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, D.C.), 6-10-2010, "Commission needed to solve immigration", TheHill, http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/102597-commission-needed-to-solve-immigration, TJ-TD

The outline for comprehensive immigration reform announced by Senate Democrats in late April included a proposal for the creation of a Commission on Employment-Based Immigration. Among other things, the proposed Commission would have the power to declare an immigration “emergency” and make recommendations to Congress for addressing it. According to the senators’ outline, an emergency occurs whenever the U.S. is permitting entry to either “substantially” too many immigrants (based on existing economic conditions) or too few. The senators took a strong step in the right direction by calling for the creation of an employment-based immigration commission. But the Commission’s ability to make recommendations that require Congressional action should not be limited to emergencies. We have proposed a much more robust commission which would constantly evaluate flows of immigrant workers into and out of the United States and make recommendations for adjusting those flows based on labor market conditions. Such a mechanism is crucial to ensuring that future immigration flows are based on true labor market needs and benefit workers and employers alike. Several bipartisan groups have agreed on the need for a commission. The Independent Task Force on Immigration and America’s Future, co-chaired by Lee Hamilton and Spencer Abraham; the Council on Foreign Relations’ Task Force on U.S. Immigration Policy, co-chaired by Jeb Bush and Thomas McLarty III; the Brookings-Duke Immigration Policy Roundtable; and the Migration Policy Institute have all called for an independent, standing commission on future immigration. Congressman Solomon Ortiz also proposed an independent commission with broad powers in the immigration reform bill he introduced last year. The Foreign Worker Adjustment Commission we propose is modeled after the International Trade Commission, with five professional members, no more than three from the same political party, appointed by the president with the consent of the Senate. The commission would report to the president and Congress at least once a year. It makes no sense to make the Commission wait until wage depression or job displacement is an emergency. A well-informed commission could make adjustments before large surpluses or shortages of labor become a crisis. Congress could approve, reject, or amend the commission’s recommendations. Specifically, the commission would fulfill five mandates. First, it would provide much better data, research and advice on foreign worker matters to Congress, the president, and the public. We currently lack basic reliable and timely data and analyses on this important subject. Without this information, the admission of migrants could do as much harm as good. With it, foreign workers could eliminate labor shortages, increase productivity, improve the conditions of foreign and domestic workers, and benefit employers and the overall economy. Second, the commission would recommend more rational and flexible flows of foreign workers. To change foreign worker quotas – some of which were established two decades ago – requires highly contentious and inflexible congressional action based on opaque political considerations. This process cannot meet the changing needs for foreign workers in dynamic labor markets. Third, the commission would provide greater visibility and transparency for foreign worker flows, which (because of the aging of the U.S. population) will be the main source of future workforce growth. Visibility and transparency would greatly improve the management of foreign worker flows, including better coordination with labor market, economic and social policies. Experience in other countries demonstrates that objective data, analyses, and transparency inspire greater public acceptance of immigration, based on the perception that governments are effectively protecting and promoting national interests. Our broken and opaque immigration system, by contrast, undermines public confidence in American governmental institutions and makes immigration policy much more controversial Fourth, the commission would assess – much more effectively than is now possible – the effects of proposed immigration reforms on future foreign worker flows. It would be extremely bad policy, for example, to launch a new temporary worker initiative before we fix the seriously flawed programs now in place, create a credible process to assess the labor market impact of pending immigration reforms, and develop effective processes to determine labor shortages. Given the strong probability of sustained high levels of recession-induced unemployment, now would be a particularly bad time to launch a new temporary worker program. Fifth, the commission would elevate the status of immigration policy on the national agenda. Immigration has important implications for America’s future. Yet, unlike in other migrant-importing countries, managing immigration flows is not the key responsibility of any high-level government agency. For most economic and social policymaking bodies, immigration is an afterthought, not an important part of basic administrative and planning functions. Employers often contend that they, not an appointed commission, are better suited to select foreign workers to meet their needs. We tend to agree; but broader decisions about immigration policy should not be delegated to employers, who cannot be relied upon to protect the best interests of workers or the nation. Proposals to determine visa levels based on the numbers of applications employers file serve only a single interest – that of employers. Instead, the task of adjusting immigration flows is a sovereign responsibility best left to Congress. A professionally staffed, properly resourced Foreign Worker Adjustment Commission would enable Congress to meet this responsibility in a way that maximizes benefits for workers, employers, and the economy, while easing the divisiveness that has marked this issue for far too long.

Immigration commission shields link and solves better – its implemented betterDarrell M. West 10, (Darrell M. West is vice president and director of Governance. He is founding director of the Center for Technology Innovation at Brookings and Editor-in-Chief of TechTank.), 6-15-2010, "Brain Gain : Rethinking U.S. Immigration Policy", Brookings Institution Press, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/northwestern/detail.action?docID=544439, TJ-TD

An important long-term goal in the immigration area is defusing political controversy. Long-standing concern in the general public about the number and type of people coming to America has put pressure on members of state legislatures and the U.S. Congress to adopt tough policies on immigration. Often these policies have gone too far, targeting specific nationalities for harsh, discriminatory treatment, or legislators have made decisions that are irrational from the standpoint of long-term national interests. To defuse political contentiousness, it is time to consider the creation of an independent immigration commission. This body would have the power to interpret and implement broad congressional decisions in the same way that the Environmental Protection Agency oversees environmental policy or the Federal Communications Commission supervises telecommunications policy. Members of Congress would retain the power to set policy, but the proposed immigration commission would have the authority to administer decisionmaking. The commission would consist of members appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. It would be staffed by knowledgeable experts in relevant fields, including demographers, economists, sociologists skilled in population analysis, and other social scientists with relevant skills. These researchers would study population and employment characteristics and issue periodic reports making recommendations about immigration policy. If employers had a need for more seasonal agricultural workers, skilled engineers, or other people with special talents, commission staff could document these requirements and give their expert view on what policy adjustments Congress should make. The virtue of such a commission is that it would professionalize immigration policy. Right now, decisions are spread across an unwieldy set of legislators, legislative staff members, and agency administrators. The basis on which decisions are made is not always clear, nor do policies always closely adhere to national objectives. A more professional body charged with administering immigration policy would help create the basis for more rational policymaking. Given the nation’s history of shortsighted and problematic congressional decisions on immigration, an independent commission would shield legislators from nativist political forces and encourage calmer deliberations. Members’ consistency in making poor decisions over a long period of time suggests the need for an institutional mechanism that will better serve the long-term interests of the American public

Commission is good – shields politics and provides expertiseThe Council on Foreign Relations 09, (Members were Edward Alden, Mary Boies, Robert C. Bonner, Jeb Bush, Allan E. Goodman, Gordon H. Hanson, Michael H. Jordan, Donald Kerwin, Richard D. Land, Elisa Massimino, Thomas F. McLarty III, Eliseo Medina, Steve Padilla, Robert D. Putnam, Andrew D. Selee, Margaret D. Stock, Frances Fragos Townsend, Kathleen Campbell Walker, Raul H. Yzaguirre ), 6-1-2010, " U.S. Immigration Policy ", Council for Foreign Relations, https://www.migrationpolicy.org/research/impact-immigrants-recession-and-economic-expansion, TJ-TD The Task Force recommends that Congress and the Obama administration establish a high-level independent commission to undertake a detailed examination of current U.S. immigration laws and regulations, and to make recommendations for simplifying the administration and improving the transparency of those rules. One commendable model is the 2006 report of the Migration Policy Institute (MPI) task force, Immigration and America’s Future: A New Chapter. It suggests the use of three broad categories of visas for those living and working in the United States. The temporary category would be used by short-term seasonal workers who return home each year. Provisional visas would allow U.S. companies to identify and recruit foreign workers at all skill levels. Those recruited would not be tied to a particular employer and would be eligible to seek permanent residence. Unlike the current system, the Task Force believes that this category must include a significant quota for low-skilled workers, reflecting the demand in the U.S. economy. The permanent category would mirror the current green card and be available both to those applying directly from abroad and for those here on provisional visas who wish to remain permanently. The MPI report envisions a somewhat more radical overhaul of the current immigrant visa system than this Task Force has contemplated, but the direction it sets is the correct one. Rather than continuing to add to the already hopeless complexity of the existing system, Congress and the administration should be looking for every opportunity to make the system simpler and easier to understand and use. The legal requirements for immigrating to the United States must be simplified and applied with consistency, predictability, and transparency. A second serious problem with the current system has been underscored by the current economic downturn. The system is relatively impervious to economic fluctuations, resulting in a shortage of immigrant workers in buoyant economic times and a surplus in recessions. Further, the United States has no ongoing institutional capacity for evaluating the need for immigrant labor, the effects of immigration on the economy, and other questions that are vital to the United States. Instead, Congress periodically adjusts the various immigration quotas, with no way of knowing whether they will be appropriate for the economic conditions of the future. The MPI report recommended the creation of a Standing Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets, whose responsibility would be to evaluate the economic impacts of immigration, and to make recommendations regarding the appropriate size and mix of immigrant inflows. The report argues persuasively that “managing immigration in the national interest requires a[n] . . . institutional capacity to monitor

and analyze information as the basis for making changes.”133 The comparison with trade policy is striking. Although immigration is every bit as important as trade for the U.S. economy, the institutional expertise on immigration policy is a fraction of that in the trade world. Trade policymakers can call on a staff of several hundred economists and other experts at the independent U.S. International Trade Commission for background investigations into the effects of trade on specific industries and segments of the economy. The proposed commission would be responsible for making recommendations to the president and Congress on levels and categories of immigration needed to support economic growth while maintaining low unemployment and preventing suppression of wages. Determining the mandate of such a commission, and its methodologies, would not be an easy task, and there is already some controversy over the possible terms of reference and the scope of its authority. 134 The Task Force believes that virtues of the U.S. immigration system—the priority given family reunification and its responsiveness to the actual needs of employers rather than to government evaluations of the labor market—must be kept intact. The MPI report calls for the commission to recommend adjustments in immigration levels every two years, but a truly flexible system would require adjustments over fairly short periods as economic conditions fluctuate. Overall levels for temporary and provisional visas in particular should be adjusted regularly. The government could consider innovative mechanisms such as an auction or another market-based system that would make immigration levels more responsive to market demand without exacerbating unemployment during recessions. Although the details need resolution, the United States must have a more reasoned and flexible system for setting immigration levels, and an unbiased expert commission is an important part of moving in that direction. The Task Force supports the recommendation in the MPI report that the United States establish a Standing Commission on Immigration and Labor Markets charged with making recommendations to the president on adjustments to levels and categories of immigration. The commission would carry out ongoing analyses of labor market conditions and trends, and would make recommendations for immigration levels aimed at maintaining strong economic growth and low unemployment while preventing wage suppression. Unless overridden by Congress, which would retain its existing authority to set immigration quotas, the president would adjust immigration levels periodically after receiving recommendations from the commission.

AT: Family Unification

Auction could be improvement over the status quo for family unification in some instancesNoah Millman 18, (Noah Millman is a senior editor and featured blogger at The American Conservative), 2-2-2018, "The case for auctioning visas", The Week, http://theweek.com/articles/752658/case-auctioning-visas, TJ-TDWhat about family unification? An auction system would not be an ideal solution in many instances — but it might be an improvement over the status quo in some situations . You want to bring your brother-in-law over from Tegucigalpa? If you have a spot for him in your contracting business, you can buy a visa and bring him over. Your grandmother is another matter, but any developed country with even a somewhat generous welfare system has to be conscious of the cost of bringing in dependents. Putting a price tag on it is probably necessary for a fully honest political conversation.

AT: Unpredictability

Clear standards for the counterplan create predictability and certaintyRodriguez 10 [Duke Law Journal, May, 2010, 59 Duke L.J. 1787, “Fortieth Annual Administrative Law Issue: Immigration Law and Adjudication: Constraint Through Delegation: The Case of Executive Control Over Immigration Policy”, Cristina M. Rodriguez, Professor of Law, NYU School of Law, Henry E. Stimson Visiting Professor of Law, Harvard Law School]

Predictability , on the other hand, requires avoiding dramatic fluctuations in rules . A predictable system will be somewhat insulated from day-to-day political pressures, whether in the form of interest group lobbying or the anti- immigrant, restrictionist shocks that occasionally arise from the electorate . Predictability not only allows employers and workers to manage their expectations, but also helps facilitate a stable and orderly flow of migration, which in turn helps secure public acceptance of immigration. 19 Predictability and responsiveness need not be mutually exclusive. A regime that adjusts in response to changed circumstances can also be predictable, if interested parties understand how the government anticipates and then adjusts to fluctuating conditions, or if clear standards, set out in advance of the actual decisionmaking, guide changes to the numbers of visas available from year to year. A goal of the decisionmaking structure, therefore , should be to determine how much predictability affected parties require to make decisions about their futures, and to be transparent about the mechanisms used to identify changed circumstances . 20

CP puts businesses in the driver’s seat – it’s their demand that determines the level of the capPeri 10 [Peri, Giovanni. 2010. Professor of Economics @ UC Davis. The Impact of Immigrants in Recession and Economic Expansion. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute]

A redesigned system could address this problem in several ways. First, it could allow employers' demand for work visas to play a stronger role in determining the actual number of visas issued. A basic thought experiment suggests that US workers across the skill spectrum would benefit if new entries were allowed to increase by about 300,000 in years of economic expansion, and remain constant in times of economic stress. In addition, a share of the visas should be allocated to less-skilled workers, especially those who perform primarily manual work that native workers increasingly shun. This would help to reduce the incentive for less-skilled workers to come to the United States illegally. Economics alone cannot be the only criterion to guide immigration policies. However, if the goal is to make immigration more responsive to US economic needs (on average and over the business cycle), shifting the balance of permanent immigration in favor of employment-based channels would also be one way to accomplish it.

Businesses and immigrants like the counterplan- it prioritizes best immigrantsOrrenius and Zavodny 10 [Pia, research officer and senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and adjunct professor at the Hankamer School of Business at Baylor University, and Madeline, professor of economics at Agnes Scott College, PHD Economics @ MIT, Beside The Golden Door, Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, MD, 2010, p. 85-86]

Permit Auctions Plan: Auctions are structured as a sealed-bid, single-price for-mat , much like auctions for Treasury securities. The federal government creates or encourages a resale market in permits. The federal government will hold auctions for new permits quarterly or semiannually. Frequent auctions are preferable, since they allow the number of permits and their prices to respond more quickly to economic conditions. As permits expire, they will either be auctioned off again or "retired" from the market if demand is relatively low. The government can increase the number of permits simply by making more permits available for sale at a given reserve price (or by lowering the reserve price for a given number of permits if the reserve price is binding). The auction's sealed-bid, single-price format works as follows. Employers submit bids indicating how many permits they would like to purchase and the price they are willing to pay. The bids are "sealed,'1 or secret, to reduce possibilities for collusion. Permits are then allocated from highest to lowest price until the total number of permits is filled or the reserve price hit, whichever happens first. Winners pay the price of the lowest filled bid, so there is a uniform, or single, price for all permits of the same type sold at a given auction. Most permit holders thus end up paying less than their actual bid. This auction structure helps reduce concerns about the "winner's curse." The fact that most bidders will pay less than their bid

makes them more willing to participate in the auction and to bid their true willingness to pay20 As we discuss below, moreover, the existence of a resale market also reduces bidders' risk, and should increase the number of participants and their willingness to pay.

Ext Wages DA -

The biggest thing is to answer the affirmative arguments – extend evidence already read and provide an impact calculus.

Next to Impact Calculus

(Explain how the impacts of this Disadvantage outweigh the affirmative’s disadvantages)

Prefer the negative impacts of the Wages DA to the negative impacts. Our impacts outweigh the affirmative’s on:

A. Probability – (explain in your own words)B. Time-Frame – (explain in your own words)C. Magnitude – (explain in your own words).

Ext Balkanization DA

The biggest thing is to answer the affirmative arguments – extend evidence already read and provide an impact calculus.

Next to Impact Calculus

(Explain how the impacts of this Disadvantage outweigh the affirmative’s disadvantages)

Prefer the negative impacts of the Balkinzation DA to the negative impacts. Our impacts outweigh the affirmative’s on:

A. Probability – (explain in your own words)B. Time-Frame – (explain in your own words)C. Magnitude – (explain in your own words).

Now to Case

Plan – Extend Procedural

Adv 1 - Extend Neg Args

Adv 2 - Extend Neg Args

Solvency – Extend Neg Args