Politics Core - Affirmative - UTNIF 2013

8/13/2019 Politics Core - Affirmative - UTNIF 2013

1/55

AFF Politics Core UTNIF 2013

University of Texas National Institute in Forensics Pg. 1

UTNIF Politics CoreAFF


2/55



Politics Link Answers


3/55



***Top Level***


4/55



PC Not Key 2 Immigration

PCs not key to immigration

Hirsh 2/7Michael, chief correspondent for National Journal, previously served as the senior editor and national

economics correspondent for Newsweek, has appeared many times as a commentator on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, andNational Public Radio, has written for the Associated Press, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Foreign Affairs,Harpers, and Washington Monthly, and authored two books, "There's No Such Thing as Political Capital", 2013,

www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207Meanwhile, the Republican members of the Senates so-called Gang of Eight are pushing hard fora new spirit of compromise on immigrationreform, a sharp change after an election year in which the GOP standard-bearer declared he would make life so miserable for the 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. that they would self-

deport. But this turnaround has very little to do with Obamas personal influencehis political mandate, as it were. It has almost entirely

to do with just two numbers: 71 and 27. Thats 71 percent for Obama, 27 percent for Mitt Romney, the breakdown of the Hispanic vote in the 2012 presidentialelection. Obama drove home his advantage by giving a speech on immigration reform on Jan. 29 at a Hispanic -dominated high school in Nevada, a swing state he won by a surpris ing 8percentage points in November. But the movement on immigration has mainly come out of the Republican Partys recent introspection,and the realization by its more thoughtful members, such as Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida and Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, that without such a shift the party may be facing demographic

death in a country where the 2010 census showed, for the first time, that white births have fallen into the minority.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207


5/55



PC Not Key/Winners Win

Political capital isnt key---unforseen events easily change the political calculus---specifically true

in the context of immigration---and,winners win

Hirsch 2/7 Michael Hirsch is a chief correspondent for the National Journal, 2013, Theres No Such Thing as PoliticalCapital http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207The real problem is that the idea of political capitalor mandates, or momentumis so poorly definedthat presidents and pundits often get itwrong. Presidents usually over-estimate it, says George Edwards, a presidential scholar at Texas A&M University. The best kind of political capitalsome sense of an electoral mandate to

do somethingis very rare. It almost never happens. In 1964, maybe. And to some degree in 1980. For that reason, political capital is a concept that misleads far

more than it enlightens. It is distortionary. It conveys the idea that we know more than we really do about the ever-elusiveconcept of political power, and it discounts the way unforeseen events can suddenly change everything . Instead, it suggests,erroneously, that a political figure has a concrete amount of political capital to invest, just as someone might have realinvestment capitalthat a particular leader can bank his gains, and the size of his account determines what he can do atany given moment in history. Naturally, any president has practical and electoral limits. Does he have a majority in both chambers of Congress and a cohesive coalition behindhim? Obama has neither at present. And unless a surge in the economyat the moment, still stuckor some other great victory gives him more momentum, it is inevitable that the closer

Obama gets to the 2014 election, the less he will be able to get done. Going into the midterms, Republicans will increasingly avoid any concessions that make him (and the Democrats)stronger. But the abrupt emergence of the immigration and gun-control issues illustrates how suddenly shifts in mood

can occur and how political interests can align in new ways just as suddenly . Indeed, the pseudo-concept of politicalcapital masks a larger truth about Washingtonthat is kindergarten simple: You just dont know what you can do until you try. Or asOrnsteinhimself once wrote years ago, Winning wins. In theory, and in practice, depending on Obamas handling of any particular issue,even in a polarized time, he could still deliver on a lot of his second-term goals, depending on his skill and the breaks. Unforeseencatalysts can appear, like Newtown.Epiphanies can dawn, such as when many Republican Party leaders suddenly woke upin panic to the huge disparity in the Hispanic vote.Some political scientists who study the elusive calculus of how to pass legislation and run successfulpresidencies say that political capital is, at best, an empty concept, and that almost nothing in the academic literature

successfully quantifies or even defines it.It can refer to a very abstract thing, l ike a presidents popularity, but theres no mechanism there. That makes itkind of useless, says Richard Bensel, a government professor at Cornell University. Even Ornstein concedes that the calculus is far more complex

than the term suggests. Winning on one issue often changes the calculation for the next issue; there is never any knownamount of capital. The idea here is, if an issue comes up where the conventional wisdom is that president is not going to getwhat he wants, and he gets it, then each time that happens, it changes the calculus of the other actors Ornstein says. If they thinkhes going to win, they may change positions to get on the winning side. Its a bandwagon effect.


6/55



1arBush Doesnt Prove

Bush doesnt prove PCs real

Hirsch 2/7 Michael Hirsch is a chief correspondent for the National Journal, 2013, Theres No Such Thing as Political

Capital http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207Bush failed utterly, of course.But the problem was not that he didnt have enough political capital. Yes, he may haveoverestimated his standing. Bushs margin over John Kerry was thinhelped along by a bumbling Kerry campaign that was almost the mirror image ofRomneys gaffe-filled failure this timebut that was not the real mistake. The problem was that whatever credibility or stature Bushthought he had earned as a newly reelected president did nothing to make Social Security privatization a better idea inmost peoples eyes.Voters didnt trust the plan, and four years later, at the end of Bushs term, the stock-market

collapse bore out the publics skepticism. Privatization just didnt have any momentum behind it, no matter who

was pushing it or how much capital Bush spent to sell it.The mistake that Bush made with Social Security, says John Sides, an associate professor of pol itical science at George Washington University and a well-followed political blogger, was that

just because he won an election, he thought he had a green light. But there was no sense of any kind of public urgency onSocial Security reform. Its like he went into the garage where various Republican policy ideas were hanging up and

picked one. I dont think Obamas going to make that mistake. Bush decided he wanted to push a rock up a hill.He didntunderstand how steep the hill was. I think Obama has more momentum on his side because of the Republican Partysconcerns about the Latino vote and the shooting at Newtown. Obama may also get his way on the debt ceiling, not because of his reelection, Sidessays, but because Republicans are beginning to doubt whether taking a hard line on fiscal policy is a good idea, as the party suffers in the polls.


7/55



1arWinners Win

Empirics prove winners win---LBJ

Hirsch 2/7 Michael Hirsch is a chief correspondent for the National Journal, 2013, Theres No Such Thing as Political

Capital http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/there-s-no-such-thing-as-political-capital-20130207ALL THE WAY WITH LBJ

Sometimes, a clever practitioner of power can get more done just because hes aggressive and knows the hallways of

Congress well.Texas A&Ms Edwards is right to say that the outcome of the 1964 election, Lyndon Johnsons landslide victory overBarryGoldwater, was one of the few that conveyed a mandate. But one of the main reasons for that mandate(in addition to Goldwaters ineptitude as acandidate) was President Johnsons masterful use of power leading up to that election , and his ability to get far more done thananyone thought possible, given his limited political capital. In the newest volume in his exhaustive study of LBJ, The Passage of Power, historian RobertCaro recalls Johnson getting cautionary advice after he assumed the presidency from the assassinated John F. Kennedy in late 1963. Dont focus on a long-stalled civil-rights bill, advisers told him, because it might jeopardize Southern lawmakers support for a tax cut and appropriations

bills the president needed. One of the wise, practicalpeople around the table[said that] the presidency has only a certain amountof coinage to expend, and you oughtnt to expend it on this,Caro writes. (Coinage, of course, was what political capital was called in those days.)

Johnson replied, Well, what the hells the presidency for?Johnson didnt worry about coinage, and he got the Civil Rights Act enacted, along with much else : Medicare, a tax

cut, antipoverty programs.He appeared tounderstand not just the ways of Congress but also the way to maximize the momentum he possessedin the lingering mood of national grief and determination by picking the right issues, as Caro records. Momentumis not a mysteriousmistress, LBJ said. It is a controllable fact of political life. Johnson had the skill and wherewithal to realize that, at thatmoment of history, he could have unlimited coinage if he handled the politics right. He did. (At least until Vietnam, that is.)

Action key to Obamas agendaPlan distracts from the scandals draining his political capital

Washington Times June 12th[2013 Sensational season for scandalThats a big problem for Mr. Obama. The more time that passes, the less political capital hell have to muscle through his priorities. Unless

he acts quickly, he could lose his chanceto make his presidency truly historic. He needs more accomplishmentsto distinguish himself.More practically, the media abhors a vacuum, and thats what persistent inaction is creating . Reporters have no choice but to fill their news

holes. As a result, minor kerfuffles and governmental failures, which would otherwise be relegated to the second tier, become front-page newsfor lack of competition.Scandals blossom in the absence of a serious agenda. Thats one reason the Obama administration has been battered by the terrible trifecta of thesnatching of reporters telephone logs, the continuing suspicions about the attacks in Benghazi and, most importantly, the targeting of conservative groups by theInternal Revenue Service. The recent news that the government has compelled telephone and Internet companies to fork over information about average citizens hasalso raised concerns because of the dearth of impactful actions otherwise in the nations capital.

Distractions take center stage when the main acts dont show up.


8/55



***Link Uniqueness*


9/55



Climate Thumper

Obama spending political capital on climate

The Guardian June 25th[2013 Obama and climate change: fresh air

There is no doubting that, for today, Mr Obamais not only leveraging the power of his office. Heisalso investing his political capitalinto the cause of cutting greenhouse gasemissions. This and immigration will be the defining domestic reforms of his second term. No cause could bettermerit this effort. With the US and China, the world's biggest emitters, making tangible efforts, no bigger signal could now be sent to the rest of the world.


10/55



Employer Mandate

Employer mandate delay undermines Obama credibility on immigration reform and debt ceiling

HotAir July 5th[2013 ObamaCare delay undermines entire White House agenda

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/05/obamacare-delay-undermines-entire-white-house-agenda/

ObamaCare delay undermines entire White House agendaThe White House wants to spin the delay in enforcing the employer mandate of ObamaCare as evidence that theyre listening to Americans and the business sector andattempting to be flexible on implementation. Rich Lowry isnt buying it. In an essay yesterday for Politico, Lowry explains that the delay comes from theincompetence of the White House more than three years after pushing an unworkable bill through Congress, combined with its clear intention to manipulate the law forits own political benefit:The administration can call it whatever it wants, but there is no hiding the embarrassment of a climbdown on a high-profile feature of President Barack Obamassignature initiativealthough the administration seemed determined to do all it could to hide it. If Bloomberg hadnt broken the news on Tuesday, the administrationwas apparently planning to announce it on July 3only because the day before Thanksgiving and Christmas Eve were too far off.The reason for the delay, were told, is incompetence. The administrations story is that it simply couldnt find a way to implement the insurance reporting requirementson employers within the time frame set out in the law. In this telling, the mandate was merely collateral damageit had to be put off, along with the accompanying$2,000-per-employee fine on firms with more than 50 employees who dont offer health coverage.This just happens to be the mandate that is causing howls of pain from businesses and creating perverse incentives for them to limit their hiring or to hire part- ratherthan full-time employees. And it just happens that 2015the new target year for implementationis after a midterm election year rather during one. It must all be alucky break. Obamacare was sold on two flagrantly false promises: that you could keep the insurance you have and that prices for insurance would drop. But employers will dumpsignificant numbers of employees onto the exchanges to save on their own health-care costs. And the latest indication of the laws price shock came via The Wall StreetJournal this week, which reported, healthy consumers could see insurance rates double or even triple when they look for individual coverage.That demonstrates the underlying incompetence of the ObamaCare project, from start to finish. It promises something that it not only couldnt deliver, but made all butimpossible from its very existence. On top of that, it created a huge top-down bureaucracy that makes everything more costly for all participants in the systemgovernment, providers, insurers, employers, and consumers. That also increased the likelihood of incompetence, capriciousness, and failure, which is a large part of thereason that the employer mandate had to be delayed the other part being the approaching 2014 midterm election cycle, of course.

This creates a bigger headache for Obama and his administration than merely the AffordableCare Act rollout, though. They facetwobig policy debatesin the coming monthsimmigration reformin the House, and thebudget and debt ceilingin both chambers of Congress. Bydeclaring the right toarbitrarily ignorestatutory law and defy Congressin this matter, just how is Congress supposed to negotiatewith the administration on anything else? Allahpundit blogged about the impact on border-security statutes earlier this week, butConnCarroll andMickey Kaus point out another component in the comprehensive bill that might be even more vulnerable to Obama administration capriciousness:
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/05/obamacare-delay-undermines-entire-white-house-agenda/http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/the-obamacare-mess-93732.htmlhttp://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/the-obamacare-mess-93732.htmlhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2532653#.UdQhaPtTbwA.twitterhttp://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2532653#.UdQhaPtTbwA.twitterhttp://dailycaller.com/2013/07/03/obama-will-ignore-e-verify-too/http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/03/obama-will-ignore-e-verify-too/http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2532653#.UdQhaPtTbwA.twitterhttp://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2532653#.UdQhaPtTbwA.twitterhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/03/if-obama-can-unilaterally-delay-obamacares-employer-mandate-can-he-delay-new-immigration-provisions-too/http://www.politico.com/story/2013/07/the-obamacare-mess-93732.htmlhttp://hotair.com/archives/2013/07/05/obamacare-delay-undermines-entire-white-house-agenda/


11/55



No Political Capital

Obamas agenda is crashing and burning

Newsday July 5th[2013 O'Reilly: Something needs to go right for Barack Obama

http://www.newsday.com/opinion/columnists/william-f-b-o-reilly/o-reilly-something-needs-to-go-right-for-barack-obama-1.5632691

There cannot be a crisis next week," Henry Kissinger oncequipped, "my schedule is already full." It's a line President Barack Obama ought to borrow right about now.

This hasn't been a good week for the nation's 44th president. The one before it wasn't so hot either, nor was the one before that. Come to think of it, Obama hasn'thad a really good week since being re-elected last November.It's hard to know where to begin: Implementing Obamacare is proving to be the train wreckSen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) warned it would be; ourclumsy efforts to snagcatch-me-if-you-can 29-year-old Edward Snowden are causing international incidentsfrom Beijing to Moscow to Sucresecularists in Egypt-- who should love America -- are furious at the administrationfor having backed the just-overthrown democratically electedSunni extremist regime; the president's "redline" over the use of chemical weapons in Syria was crossed,yet the president is hamstrung onwhat he can do about it; and, noting that, Iran is moving ever closer to realizing nuclear weapons and regional hegemony. The IRS and reporter hacking

scandals also continue to fester,and the unemployment rate isn't budging at 7.6 percent.Have I forgotten anything -- other than what Snowden actually revealed about the NSA, Benghazi, stalled immigration reform and the debt ceilingfight comingin September?Probably.

I realize I'm piling on. But not inaccurately. President Obama's second term is having real problems. Events are overtaking his capacityto lead,leaving his administration desperately needing to demonstrate competence -- at anything.

Obama is wasting his political capitalHe has no persuasive power

The Washington Post June 28th[2013 The Center Holds: Obama and His Enemies by Jonathan Alter

Perhaps the most interesting revelations come in Chapter 10, Missing the Schmooze Gene,in which Alter succeeds better than any other writer to

date in making sense of the paradox that has come to define Obama: a political figure who loves the real work but becomes impatient with

the trivial duties of modern-day political office, where schmoozing, fundraising, donor maintenance and false friendships

are the grist that keep the machine churning.Alter describes the president complaining to staffers during the 2011 debt-ceiling crisis as he

dutifully calls Democratic senators whom Majority Leader Harry Reid has placed on a list for special attention. Obama gripes: Why do these g uys need this?

Are they so insecure that they can function only if they get to tell people, Hey, the president called me!? One senior aide explains, Its not in his DNA.

According to friends, Obama would rather exercise or spend time with Michelle and the girls than chit-chat with needy members of

Congress.George H.W. Bush and other presidents were famous for dashing off personal notes of thanks to donors and political allies, but Obama has

generally rebuffed that practice. A former top adviser explained, He fundamentally doesnt relate to their impact because hewouldnt particularly care if he

got one. Yet Obama daily pens handwritten letters to average citizens who write to him, believing this to be a valuable use of his time. In assessing this

missing schmooze gene, Alter concludes that Obamas strong desire to be a normal person is a fine quality in an individualbut problematic for a president.

He concludes that Obama has squandered a valuable piece of political capital: His failure to use the trappings of the presidency more

often left him with one less tool in his toolbox, one less way to leverage his authority.

SCANDALS ARE HURTING OBAMAS CREDIBILITY

Young, 7/03/13 (J.t. Young conservative columnist and political commentator The Peril For President Obama In His

Negative Polling Numbers. 7/03/2013.online.)[http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/07/03/the-peril-for-president-obama-in-his-negative-polling-numbers/]


12/55



Recent scandals are driving President Obamas negative ratings perilously close to November 2010s. This deterioration isseen not just in the overall population, but even more pronouncedly in those with the most strongly held opinions. Withousignificant improvement in the variables influencing public opinion, Obama could be in for an even tougher upcomingmidterm election than his first. According to Rasmussens daily tracking poll, four years ago on July 1, 2009, Obama hada nine percentage point positive overall job approval rating (54% to 45%). Over the last four years, problems have had a

debilitating impact on Obamas poll numbers. The economy is still weak, unemployment still high, the budget deficit andfederal spending both still well above historical averages, and Obamacare continues unpopular. As a result, on May 11this yearthe day three scandal stories (about the Benghazi attack, IRS targeting of political groups, and HHS solicitationof private firms to help fund Obamacare implementation) dominated news coverage, but had not yet shaped publicopinionObama had just a three percentage point positive overall job approval rating (51% to 48%).


13/55


14/55


15/55



Public Link Turn

Public supports engagement

Angus-Reid, 12(Angus-Reid polling, Most Americans Willing to Re-establish Ties with Cuba 2/6/12, http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/44366/most-

americans-willing-to-re-establish-ties-with-cuba/)People in the United States are ready to change their countrys interaction with Cuba, a new Angus Reid Public Opinionpoll has found. In the online survey of a representative national sample of 1,008 American adults, three-in-fiverespondents (62%) agree with the U.S. re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba, while one-in-four (23%) disagree.Majorities of Independents (67%), Democrats (64%) and Republicans (56%) agree with re-instituting to bilateral ties. InMarch 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama eased travel restrictions to Cuba, and allowed U.S. citizens to travel to theisland for religious and cultural reasons. Most Americans (57%) believe it is time to lift the travel ban that prevents mostAmericans from visiting the island. Half of Americans (51%) would lift the trade embargo with Cuba that has been inplace since the 1960s, while three-in-ten (29%) disagree. Most Democrats (53%) and Independents (55%) support endingthe embargo, but Republicans are not as convinced (46%).


16/55



Leahy Supports

Leahy supports removal

Waterloo Region Record 13[Another view: Cross Cuba Off the U.S. Blacklist, March 18 th, Lexis Nexis] The

U.S. State Department says it has no plans to remove Cuba from the list. But Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, who recently led abipartisan congressional delegation to Havana, is urging President Barack Obama to consider a range of policy changestoward Cuba, including delisting it, which would not require congressional approval.Designation as a state sponsor ofterrorism carries heavy sanctions, including financial restrictions and a ban on defence exports and sales.


17/55



No Link

No perception

Smith,professor at John Hopkins University 9[Wayne, senior fellow at the Center for International Policy in

Washington, D.C. where he directs its Cuba Program and Cuba analyst for the US government since 1957, An Openingto Cuba?, Jan 8th, http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/01/08/an-opening-to-cuba/]That being the case, their presence, then, is not a cause to keep Cuba on the list. Removing Cuba from the list can beaccomplished without fanfare or policy statements. The State Department every spring prepares a report on the subject. Inyears past, those reports have concluded that Cuba should remain on the list, but have done so without any supportingevidence. This year, once the new leadership is in place in the State Department, it should give instructions to thosepreparing the report to come up with an honest conclusion. If there is no evidence that Cuba is involved in terroristactivities, the report should say so and recommend that it be removed from the list.


18/55



No Lobby/K of Backlash

The myth of political backlash is used to justify anti-Cuban policythe lobby is irrelevant

Nahem, coordinator of Cuba Solidarity New York, 12[Ike, Part I: The Myth of the Miami Lobby, June 22nd,

http://dissidentvoice.org/2012/06/washington-and-the-cuban-revolution-today-ballad-of-a-never-ending-policy-2/]This argument and explanation turns political reality on its head. It has never been true and, in todays world, it has never been less credible

It is a myth and an illusion that the Cuban-American community and Cuban-American office-holding politicians are thedriving, determining force behind US policies toward Cuba. US foreign policy in general, and Cuba policy in particular, isdriven by the interests of the US ruling capitalist classof bosses, bankers, and bondholders. It is primarily mediated through its twopolitical parties and state institutions and secondarily through its big-business media, think tanks, and academic minions.Cuban-American bourgeois politicians are part of that mix, prominent, but far from decisive. Washington has never, and does notnow, need the aging representatives of the ex-ruling powers of Cuba, or their descendants, to explain to them why they should oppose the Cuban Revolution and the

domestic and international policies of the revolutionary socialist Cuban government. The actual political affect of the Miami Lobby myth(which through endless repetition has become almost a mantra) is to take the political focus off the US government andplace it on the Cuban-American communityand a handful of Cuban-American elected officials. It puts the cart before the horse, the caboose at the head

of the train Such politicians of Cuban origin in the US Congress as Republican Florida representatives Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart, Democratic NewJersey Senator Robert Menendez, and Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio can be useful as a cover or a foil for a US policy that is so unpopular. Cuban-Americans

can be blamed and chided by those opposed to the policy and praised and defended by those in favor of the policy. But they do not make the policy. The myth ofthe Miami Lobby cuts across building a broad protest movement and the kind of effective action that can actually force

a change in the policy. By homogenizing(or worse, demonizing) the contradictory and increasingly polarized Cuban-Americancommunity, the myth of the Miami Lobby has become an obstacle to winning over more Cuban-Americans to opposeUS sanctions.


19/55



***Mexico***


20/55



Energy Independence

Energy independence is bipartisan

Kelly, 12 (Mike Kelly, Energy Acuity, Energy Policy's Impact on the 2012 Presidential Race 9/7/12, http://www.energyacuity.com/blog/bid/217770/Energy-

Policy-s-Impact-on-the-2012-Presidential-Race)A recent report by the Congressional Budget Office cites 70% of the nations oil and gas reserves as available for drillingalready, making it unclear as to the extent to which Romneys plan will increase actual energy yields (3). An emphasis in off-shore exploration is expected to bolsterour nations fuel production but we must remain mindful of the potential for disaster, as shownby the recent Deepwater Horizon tragedy. Romney notes that

exploration in the Mid-Atlantic, which is currently prohibited, has received continuous bipartisan support(4). Its worth notingthat this support is from Virginia State Senators, whose responsibility is primarily to their constituents. Sen. Jim Webb (D) mentions improvements to his

commonwealths economy as a primary reason to support development in the Mid-Atlantic. When discussing national energy policy, this inherentdanger of porkbarrel politics, the allocation of federal funds for use in largely localized projects, cannot be ignored. Evenstill, at our current pace of development, the EIA (Energy Information Administration) predicts the US can eliminate itsnet imports of natural gasand reduce imports of oil to 38% by 2020. A majority of the necessary oil imports remaining will besourced from Canada and Mexico, an idea that has continually attracted bipartisan support (5).If were going to be approaching

North American energy independence by 2020 anyways, than the question becomes whether the actions proposed by Romney to further accelerate domestic production

are worth the potential externalities.


21/55


22/55



Bipartisanship

Aff is popular

CNR, 13 (Committee on Natural Resources, House Committee Approves Legislation to Approve TransboundaryHydrocarbons Agreement with Mexico 5/15/13

http://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=334042)Today we took another step towards embracing an all-of-the-above approach to energy that safely develops our naturalresources to help achieve North American energy independence. This bipartisan bill will help lower energy costs whilecreating American jobs by safely opening up more than 1.5 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico for exploration andproduction. This is a common sense approach to work with our partners south of the border to make both countries moreenergy secure, while protecting our sovereignty. This legislation works out the vast majority of differences with theObama Administration, while also ensuring that those seeking to harvest these resources have the certainty they need tomove forward. Im optimistic that this legislation will pass the House of Representatives, and continu e on its path towards

becoming law, said Rep. Jeff Duncan (SC-03). Approval of this legislation by the Committee is important to finalizingthis agreement and expanding American energy production. This bill would create jobs, lower energy prices by increasingour domestic supply, generate new federal revenue to help lower the debt and strengthen our economy, and make America

more energy secure by opening up new areas in the Gulf of Mexico to exploration and development. In addition, thisimportant legislation would lay the framework for transboundary agreements with other nations that will allow America tofully utilize its shared natural energy reserves. said Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (WA-04). TheHouse Natural Resources Committee recently held anoversight hearing on H.R. 1613 where the Obama Administrationand expert witnesses both voiced their support of the Outer Continental Shelf Transboundary Hydrocarbon AgreementsAuthorization Act.
http://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=334042http://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=330029http://naturalresources.house.gov/calendar/eventsingle.aspx?EventID=330029http://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=334042


23/55



***Venezuela***


24/55



Link Non-Unique

Obama pursuing engagement now.

REYES THEIS June 07, 2013 (US expected to use dialogue to boost opening with Venezuela

http://english.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/130607/us-expected-to-use-dialogue-to-boost-opening-with-venezuela)Although the Venezuelan opposition expected Washington to take a hard-line stance vis--vis the Venezuelan Government, US Secretary of StateJohn Kerrymet with Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elas Jaua on Wednesday and agreed on making all possible efforts to keep good diplomatic relationsKenneth Ramrez, the president of the Venezuelan Council on Foreign Affairs(Covri),believes that this is "a new attempt of

Barack Obama's Administration to implement an engagement policy towards Venezuela. They seek to use dialogue andnegotiation to attain political depolarization and discourage somehow Venezuela's pugnacious foreign policy, which represents an obstacle for the US policy on the

region." He explained that the US aims "to restore ambassador-level relations; reactivate counter-narcotics cooperation, whichhas been frozen since 2005; and likely to get cooperation on energy back on track, as it has been on hold since 2003." Ramrez remindedthat in 2010, Washington was bolstering an engagement policy towards Venezuela. Such efforts were derailed when designated US Ambassador to Venezuela, LarryPalmer made some statements about Venezuela before the US Congress. Upon Palmer's remarks, Caracas denied his placet, and Washington responded by revoking

Venezuelan Ambassador Bernardo lvarez's visa. According to the analyst, President Obama understood that the confrontation policy has failed.

"He is giving (dialogue) a second chance, as he believes that Venezuela and Nicols Maduro , considering President (Hugo) Chvezdemise, the economic crisis and the narrow presidential vote, have no other choice but to change their policy and start an opening."

Obama committed to cooperation now.

Mark P. Sullivan April 9, 2013 (Specialist in Latin American Affairs April 9, 2013 Hugo Chvezs Death: Implicationsfor Venezuela and U.S. Relations Congressional Research Service)Despite tensions in relations, the Obama Administration maintains that it remains committed to seekingconstructive

engagement with Venezuela, focusing on such areas as anti-drug and counterterrorism efforts. In the aftermath of PresidentChvezs reelection in October 2012, the White House, while acknowledging differences with President Chvez, congratulated the Venezuelan people on the high level

of participation and the relatively peaceful election process. Subsequently, in November 2012, the State Departments Assistant Secretary of State

for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Roberta Jacobson, engaged in a conversation with Vice President Maduro about improving

bilateral relations, including greater cooperation on counternarcotics issues. In early January 2013, the State Departmentreiterated that the United States remained open to dialogue with Venezuela on a range of issues of mutual interest. In light ofthe setback in President Chvezs health, a State Department spokesman maintained on January 9, 2013, that regardless of what happens politically in Venezuela, if thVenezuelan government and if the Venezuelan people want to move forward with us, we think there is a path thats possible.11 In response to President Chvezsdeath, President Obama issued the following statement: At this challenging time of President Hugo Chvezs passing, the United States reaffirms its support for theVenezuelan people and its interest in developing a constructive relationship with the Venezuelan government. As Venezuela begins a new chapter in i ts history, theUnited States remains committed to policies that promote democratic principles, the rule of law, and respect for human rights.12 While the Presidents statement did nooffer traditional condolences, the State Department maintains that it expressed U.S. sympathy to Chvezs family and to the Venezuelan people.13 Many LatinAmerican and other foreign leaders have expressed their condolences to Venezuela on Chvezs passing. The White House statement focused on the U.S. interest ingetting cooperative bilateral relations back on track while at the same time reiterating that the United States is committed to promoting democratic practices and respect

for human rights. A number of other statements by Members of Congress also expressed hope for a new era in U.S.-Venezuelan relations.

Link InevitableObama seeking cooperation over oil in the next 6 months

Jared Metzker Jun 17 2013 (Analysts Say Oil Could Help Mend U.S.-Venezuela RelationsWASHINGTON, (IPS) - A shift in U.S. foreign policy towards Venezuela may be pending as a bilateral rapprochement suddenly appears morepossible than it has in years. On the sidelines of talks held earlier this month in Guatemala by the Organisation of American States (OAS), U.S. Secretary ofState John Kerry met with Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua, with Kerrys subsequent statements indicating that relations could be heading in a friendlier

direction. We agreed today both of us, Venezuela and the United Statesthat we would like to see our countries find a
http://english.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/130607/us-expected-to-use-dialogue-to-boost-opening-with-venezuelahttp://english.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/130607/us-expected-to-use-dialogue-to-boost-opening-with-venezuela


25/55



new way forward, establish a more constructive and positive relationship and find the ways to do that, Kerry said followingthe meeting with Jaua, which was reportedly requested by the Venezuelans. The meeting happened on the heels of the release of Timothy Tracy, a U.S. filmmakerwhom Venezuela had been holding on accusations of espionage. His release was interpreted by many as an olive branch being offered by the new Venezuelan

government of Nicholas Maduro, whose presidency Washington still has not formally recognised. Only months ago, before the death of Venezuelas

long-time socialist leader Hugo Chavez, any normalisation of relations between Venezuela and the United States seemedhighly unlikely. In 2002, Chavez was briefly removed from power by a military coup dtat that the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had known wasimminent. Chavez immediately accused the United States of having played a part in the event. After his suspicions were confirmed partly valid, his rhetoric grew morescathing. In 2006, he famously told the United Nations General Assembly that then-U.S. President George W. Bush was the devil himself. Following Chavezs deathfrom cancer in March, however, his hand-picked successor, Maduro, the former vice-president, has not been as vitriolic in his posturing vis--vis the United States.According to Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington-based think tank, Maduro has offered conflicting signals. Maduro has so farshifted in his position toward the U.S. between a moderate approach and a more hard-line one, Shifter told IPS. "Venezuela cannot confront its economic crisis and theUnited States at the same time." -- Diana Villiers Negroponte The new presidents waffling may be a reflection of his tenuous grip on power. By many accounts,Maduro lacks the political prowess and rabble-rousing charm of Chavez, who enjoyed military backing as well as fervent support from the lower classes. In addition toa strong anti-Chavista opposition that openly challenges the legitimacy of his narrowly won election, Maduro has had to deal with a split w ithin Chavezs own former

political base. Shifter pointed out that among the military, which was once a source of significant strength for Chavez, more support is given to Diosdado Cabello,currently head of Venezuelas parliament and whose supporters believe he was the rightful heir to the presidency. Maduros legitimacy stems largely from his perceived

ideological fidelity, the reason for his selection by Chavez to lead in the first place. Shifter said this leads him to emulate his predecessor and makes rapprochement

with the United States less probable. Still, ideological concerns may not ultimately decide the issue. Venezuela has inherited from Chavez an economy in difficultstraits, which continues to suffer from notorious shortages and high inflation. Oil economy Over half of Venezuelas federal budget revenues come from its oil industrywhich also accounts for 95 percent of the countrys exports. Estimated at 77 billion barrels, its proven reserves of black gold are the largest of any nation in the world.

Despite a troubled political relationship, its principal customer is the United States, which imports nearly a million barrelsa day from Venezuela. Venezuelas oil industry has been officially nationalised since the 1970s, and, as president, Chavez further tightened government controover its production. His government took a greater chunk of revenues and imposed quotas that ensured a certain percentage would always go directly towards aidingVenezuelans via social spending and fuel subsidies. While these measures may be popular with Venezuelans, who pay the lowest price for gasoline in the world, criticsargue such policies hampered growth and led to mismanagement of Petroleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PdVSA), the main state-run oil company. The same critics also point

to increasing debt levels, slowdowns in productions and accidents stemming from faulty infrastructure. In order to boost production, PdVSA agreed inMay to accept a number of major loans. This includes one from Chevron, one of the largest U.S. oil companies, which willwork with Venezuelans to develop new extraction sites. The oil sector is in deep trouble in Venezuela production is down and the economic situation isdeteriorating, explained Shifter. They know they need foreign investment to increase production, and this is in part what has motivated Maduro to reach out. If its

economy continues to falter, Venezuela may be further tempted to embrace the United States, which has the largest, mostsophisticated fossil fuel industry in the world. Kerrys recent words suggest that the administration of President Barack

Obama would be waiting with open arms. Venezuela cannot confront its economic crisis and the United States at the same time, Diana Villiers

Negroponte, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute,a Washington think tank, told IPS, and we are a pragmatic country which will deal withMaduro if it is in our interests. Indeed, Negroponte said she was optimistic about the possibility of rapprochement between the two

countries within the next six months. She notes a troika of issues on which the United States is looking for Venezuelancooperation: counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics and assistance in ridding Colombia of its FARC rebels.


26/55



Bipartisan

Plan is Bipartisan

JIM WYSS June 26, 2013 (Decade-old defunct group may be the key to better US-Venezuela ties

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/26/194987/decade-old-defunct-group-may-be.html#storylink=cpy)BOGOTA, ColombiaThe 2002 snapshot shows Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro standing on a New England tarmac with his arms draped around U.S.Secretary of State John Kerry and Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-NY. At the time they were all lawmakers. Everyone's smiling. Despite deep economic ties, the United Statesand Venezuela have been at odds for years. Maduro - like his late boss Hugo Chavez - has accused the Imperio of trying to kill him and destroy his socialist reforms.

The U.S. has yet to explicitly recognize that Maduro won April's contested election and it blasts his administration on its human rights and drug record. Butbehindthe scenes, relationships built a decade ago during legislative exchanges, which became known as the Boston Group, seemto be bearing fruit. And that's sparking talk of reviving the group, which has been defunct for seven years. On June 5, Venezuela releasedfilmmaker Tim Tracy, who had been detained for more than a month on espionage charges. The man credited with springing him is former U.S. Rep. William DelahuntD-Mass., one of the founders of the Boston Group. A few hours later that same day, Kerry and Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua announced they would begintalks to exchange ambassadors for the first time since 2010. The man charged with leading those talks? Calixto Garcia, the country's top diplomat to the United States,and also a Boston Group alumnus. Garcia and U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roberta Jacobson held their first meeting Tuesday, but

officials did not provide details. "It shows that relationships built and conversations that took place 10 or 15 years earlier can makea difference down the road," said Meeks, who founded the group with Delahunt and former Rep. Cass Ballinger, R-N.C."No one ever knowswho will become secretary of state or president of a country." The Boston Group brought together Democrats, Republicans, communists,socialists and capitalists and forced them to find common ground, said Pedro Diaz-Blum, a former Venezuelan lawmaker and the group'scoordinator. A conflict resolution expert was brought in to bring civility to the sometimes heated encounters. "A lot of people from both sides of the political spectrumthought that trying to engage in dialogue was naive," said Diaz-Blum, who has been trying to revive the group. "But today, I think our work was justified." The idea ofcloser Venezuela-U.S. ties is anathema to some. Factions within Venezuela's opposition have been lobbying the region not to recognize Maduro's presidency. WhenKerry and Jaua met this month - on the sidelines of an Organization of American States meeting in Guatemala - some saw it as betrayal. And the rhetoric has been

particularly divisive. Maduro has accused former U.S. diplomats of plotting to assassinate him and has suggested that the CIA "inoculated" Chavez with the cancer that

killed him in March. But the Boston Group was born amidjust such tensions, said Saul Ortega, a ruling-party deputy and a former member of the group.The initiative came together in the wake of a 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chavez, and which the socialist firebrand blamed on the opposition and the United States.

"It was, perhaps, the most difficult time for the relationship between our two countries," Ortega said. "But we managed tostart a dialogue and a debate about common interests ... we managed to do a lot of good things." Through those meetings, Venezuela offered subsidized

heating oil to poor families in the northeastern United States, and the U.S. promoted what it hoped would become Venezuela's answer to C-SPAN. But most of

the activity took place behind the scenes, Diaz-Blum said.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/26/194987/decade-old-defunct-group-may-be.html#storylink=cpyhttp://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/06/26/194987/decade-old-defunct-group-may-be.html#storylink=cpy


27/55



Immigration Answers


28/55



***Uniqueness***


29/55


30/55



WontPassHouse

House wont compromise

NYT 7-11. The New York Times July 11th [2013 G.O.P. In House Resists Overhaul For Immigration]

Meeting for the first time as a group to hash out their approach to immigration, House Republicans on Wednesdaycame down overwhelminglyagainst a comprehensive overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, putting in jeopardy the future of sweeping legislationthatincludes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Despite the resistance, SpeakerJohn A. Boehner warned about the steep price of inaction, telling HouseRepublicans that they would be in a weaker political position against a bipartisan Senate coalition and President Obama if they did nothing to answer the immigrationmeasure passed by the Senate last month. House Republicans huddled in a crucial two-and-a-half-hour session in the basement of the Capitol as their leaders tried to

devise some response to thedemand for immigrationlegislation, especially the Senate provision that would grant a path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumentedimmigrants already in the country. The bill also mandates tough border security provisions that must be in place before the immigrants can gain legal status. Thebottom line was clear: The Republican-controlled House does not plan to take up anything resembling the Senate bill, whichmany believe is bad policy and smacks of an amnesty strongly opposed by the conservatives who hold sway over much of the rank and file. The House alsodoes not intend to move very quickly, and some Republicans are wary of passing any measure at all that could lead tonegotiations with the Senate, talks that could add pressure to the House to consider a broader plan.

The threat of demographic death doesnt apply to the house

AP 7-11Associated Press July 11th [2013 Bush nudges GOP on immigration as lawmakers meet] Bush's campaign to overhaul immigration legislation while in the White House included the political calculation that Republicansneeded to take steps to appeal to Hispanic voterswho are an increasingly large part of the population, particularly in states like Texas, Florida,

Nevada and Colorado. At the same time, relatively few House Republicans represents districts with substantial Hispanicpopulations, and many say they fear primary election challenges from the right if they support citizenshipfor immigrants in theUnited States illegally.

Immigration reform wont passHouse Republicans

Fox News 6/24 Senators tout 70 votes for immigration reform as Paul predic ts bill already 'dead' in House,

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/24/staunch-immigration-reform-critic-sen-lee-thinks-bill-will-get-70-senate-votes/#ixzz2XAJyB3WtEven with one of the Senates strongest opponents to the chambers sweeping immigration-reform bill saying Sunday that the legislation willlikely pass this weekwith a resounding 70 votes, Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul predicted the legislation was doomed in the more conservativeHouse. Its dead on arrival in the House, said the Tea Party-backed Paul . The House is much closer to me. Paul made the remarks as Utah Sen. Mike Lee, amongthe most conservative Senate Republicans, told Fox News Sunday the bill is likely to pass with as many as 70 votes. Theirremarks comes as the Senate prepares for a preliminary but key vote on the bill Monday night or

Tuesday that should result in Senate passage by the Democratic leaderships goal of Jul y 4. PresidentObama isalso hosting a meetingMonday at the White House with eight CEOs,business owners and entrepreneurs to discuss immigration reform, and to push for support of the bill among the businesscommunity. Obama is expected to emphasize a report released by t he Congressional Budget Office last week that said the bill would increase the real GDP by up to 3.3% in 2023, and by 5.4% in 2033. The group osenators that crafted the legislation is trying to get 70 votes to show the bill has widespread bipartisan support in the Democrat-controlled chamber and to give it momentum as it heads into the Republican-controlled Housewith a more uncertain future. The Senate last week introduced a so-called Border Surge amendment, which included 70,000 additional U.S. border agents and 700 more miles of border fencing, to g arner support from

lawmakers who said the influx of illegal immigrants remains a problem and to put added political pressure on House conservatives. Still, Paul told CNNs State of the Union thatlawmakers in the Housethink border security has to come first before you get immigration reform.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/lnacui2api/search/XMLCrossLinkSearch.do?bct=A&risb=21_T17772686968&returnToId=20_T17772703183&csi=6742&A=0.5510792253538586&sourceCSI=9369&indexTerm=%23PE0009WM7%23&searchTerm=John%20A.%20Boehner%20&indexType=Phttp://www.lexisnexis.com/lnacui2api/search/XMLCrossLinkSearch.do?bct=A&risb=21_T17772686968&returnToId=20_T17772703183&csi=6742&A=0.5510792253538586&sourceCSI=9369&indexTerm=%23PE0009WM7%23&searchTerm=John%20A.%20Boehner%20&indexType=P


31/55



Wont PassDelay

Prolonged talks make bill failure inevitableour evidence assumes momentum in the Senate

Johnson, 6/24(Fawn Johnson, National Journal, Times Up. Immigration Wont Pass This Year 6/24/13,

http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/time-s-up-immigration-won-t-pass-this-year-20130623)Its not the Senates fault, not this time. The upper chamber is well on track to comfortably pass this week a sweeping bill that would legalize millions of undocumented

immigrants and dramatically boost troops on the border. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., a leader in the immigration effort, said on CNN'sState of the Unionthat two-thirds of the Senate is already in favor of the bill. But the House is slogging along on a piece-by-piece approach that doesnothing but stretch out the debate until all thats left are wisps of ideas on work visas, local police enforcement, and electronic verification of workers.Indeed, the House might not kill the bill outright, but the GOP players are passing the ball around until the clock runs out.Whats that clock look like? After senators get the bill doneprobably in time to make their weekend barbeques -- they have a weeklong July 4break.And then they get to wait for colleagues on the other side of the Capitol who will have four weeksfour weekstodeliberate beforeCongress takes off for an even lengthier recess in August. Once Washington meets autumn, immigration falls offthe priority track thanks to the reemergence of fiscal crisis. The House Judiciary Committee has yet to tackle the mostdifficult issues on immigrationwhat to do with the current undocumented population and how to handle the future flow

of low-skilled immigrants.There are no signs that the committee is working on any such bills. We don't know who would sponsor them or,on the off chance that someone actually puts pen to paper, that such measures could even get out of committee.What about thHouse floor? The best hope for the immigration legislation to continue moving forward would be an "immigration week" in the House in July, in which members voteon several different bills to set up a far more conservative proposal than the solution posed in the Senate. Under this theoretical "immigration week," the House wouldvote on a severe enforcement measure to give local police the authority to apprehend, investigate, and detain people suspected of residing in the country illegally.Members would vote to mandate electronic verification of employees. The House might vote on a decidedly anti-union agriculture bill to give temporary work visas toundocumented farm workers but not a path to citizenship. But last week's unexpected and embarrassing defeat of the farm bill, courtesy of 62 feisty tea partiers, maygive House GOP leaders pause before they bring up that one. Only one of the smaller immigration bills that the Judiciary Committee will have ready for the floor inearly July, on high-skill work visas, has the slightest chance of getting help from Democrats. The pro-business New Democrat Coalition has gone out of its way to

praise Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., for proposing to boost the number of H-1B visas available for tech firms,but there are parts of the bill they don't support. Yet even the moderate Democrats are lining up behind the Senate immigration bill instead of the House approach onhigh-skilled immigration. Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colo., who leads the immigration task force for the New Democrats, told National Journalthat he does not want a high-tech bill to be a "distraction" from the comprehensive legislation being embraced by the Senate. Somewhere in there, a bipartisan group of seven House members couldrelease their own comprehensive proposal on immigration reform. But none of the members of this "gang" can tell you what happens to it next. They have no

commitment from Goodlatte to push it through the Judiciary Committee, and all they know from House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is that Goodlatte calls the shotsThen comes August, the month in which legislation dies. The last time the Senate passed a major immigration billin 2006,House Republicans used the August recess to kill it by staging a series of hearings around the country that did nothing butrile up conservativesagainst it. Let's not forget the health care bill, which only passed after President Obama forced it through the Senate with Democratic votesusing a parliamentary tactic that isn't available on immigration. It was in August of 2009 that Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, then the ranking member of the FinanceCommittee, definitively announced his opposition to the health care bill, ensuring that GOP senators would line up behind him. And at that time, Democrats controlled

the House, which is how Obama pushed that bill over the finish line. When lawmakers return to the Capitol in September, they will be facinganother financial crisis as they debate raising the country's debt ceiling. The four- to six-week countdown toward extremelimitations on government paymentsto Social Security or military operations willdo two things: It will suck all the life out of anydeliberative legislative effort, immigration included, and it will polarize the political parties.It will be far from fertileground for the biggest immigration overhaul in 30 years. Proponents of the Senate's immigration package are hoping that a strong vote this week

among senators will push the more reluctant House Republicans to act, if only to get the emotional issue out of the way. "We know there's going to be hard-lineopponents. We know there's a number of people, [Rep.] Paul Ryan, [D-Wis.], and others, who are in favor of this and will be pitching it to their colleagues. That's

going to be the group that's interesting to watch," said America's Voice Executive Director Frank Sharry. But Sharry acknowledged the most problematichurdle to passing an immigration overhaulsupport from a majority of House Republicansstill eludes proponents. "TheHouse leadership will try to muster 120 votes for a path to citizenship. I find it hard to think they will get there," he said. IfHouse Republicans keep deliberating at their current pace, the bill will die from sheer talk.


32/55



Wont PassGOP

Republicans are uncooperativestymies passage

Fund, 6/24(John Fund, National Review, Immigration-Reform Scare Tactics 6/24/2013, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/351814/immigration-reform-

scare-tactics-john-fund)Speaker Boehner announced last week that he would not support any immigration bill that didnt accord with the Hastert

Rule, which holds that a majority of the majority party must support a measure for it to be brought to the House floor. Thevery real prospect that House Republicans wont pass the Senate bill without making major changes of their own has many in the news media warning that failure couldmean the very death of the GOP. Sunday, on CBSsFace the Nation, the first question that host Bob Schieffer asked Alabama senator Jim Sessions, the rankingRepublican on the Judiciary Committee and a critic of the Gang of Eight bill, was a blatantly political one: Do you think Republicans get it on immigration? Because

people like Lindsey Graham are saying if you dont do something, reaching out to Hispanics, you it might notyou might not need to run anybody for presidentnext time, because with the demographics changing in this country, its going to be impossible to elect a Republican president if you dont get substantial Hispanic support. Senator Sessions gamely pointed out that a new Congressional Budget Office study has found that the Gang of Eight bill would probably reduce illegal

immigration by only 25 percent. And CBO concludes that the legal immigration will be dramatically increased and well have inaddition to that, were going to have lower wages and higher unemployment according to the CBO analysis of this bill,

Sessions said. Why would any member of Congress want to vote for a bill at a time of high unemployment, falling wages, to

bring in a huge surge of new labor that can only hurt the poorest among us the most?


33/55



Climate Thumper

Obamas spending capital on warming regulations

Harder, 6/24(Amy Harder, National Journal, Obama Plans Marathon Sprint on Climate Change 6/24/2013, http://www.nationaljournal.com/daily/obama-

plans-marathon-sprint-on-climate-change-20130624)President Obama is ready to take one more shot at global warming with the last, least-popular, and messiest tool hes gotleft: regulations administered by the politically besieged Environmental Protection Agency. It wont be popular, it might notwork, and it could jeopardize his pick to head EPA. But the reality is that, three years after Congress killed a cap-and-trade bill, Obama is running out of time. If hedoesnt finalize EPA rules controlling greenhouse-gas emissions before he leaves the White House, a Republican president, or a GOP-controlled Senate, could undo the

rulesand his environmental legacy. He is serious about making it a second-term priority, Heather Zichal, Obamas top energy and climateadviser, said at an event last week. He knows this is a legacy issue.The effort amounts to both a marathon and a sprint, in whichObama must simultaneously navigate political, legal, and policy hurdles that could halt his efforts if he fails to map out a clear way forward.At issue is a pair of regulations controlling greenhouse-gas emissions from new and existing power plants, the latter of which account for nearly 40 percent of thecountrys heat-trapping emissions. EPA proposed rules for new plants last spring but missed its April deadline to finalize them. The agency has also put on ice parallelrules targeting almost 600 existing coal-fired power plants. The rules covering existing plants could have the greatest impact, both on cutting carbon emissions andraising the cost of electricity, because coal is the cheapest, most prevalent, and dirtiest way to produce electricity. In a speech at Georgetown University on Tuesday,

Obama will outline a timeline for EPA to move forward regulating carbon emissions at new and existing power plants.The time will go very quicklybecause regulations dont move quickly through the process, said Joe Kruger, who served as deputy associate director forenergy and climate change at the White House Council on Environmental Quality during Obamas first term. It will be a bit ofa time crunch to get it done by the endof the Obama second term. Kruger, who now directs energy and environmental policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center, predicted the administration will succeed

because Obama is putting his own political capital into the issue. They will figure out one way or another how to get itdone, he said.


34/55



Debt Thumper

Debt talks prevent immigration reform

McGregor, 6/24(Richard McGregor, Financial Times News, Weak Republican leadership endangers Obama agenda 6/24/2013,

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3a66c240-dc0f-11e2-8853-00144feab7de.html#axzz2XFqiKOcV)But the farm bills failure was evidence of the obstacles that John Boehner, the Republican House Speaker, faces to rally hismembers around any measure in alignment with a significant number of Democrats.The House is likely to debate immigration aroundthe same time the White House will ask i t to vote to increase the countrys borrowing limit, a fight that brought the US to the brink of default in August 2011. Thedebt ceiling debate will take place in a very different context this time, with theeconomy recovering and theUS budgetdeficit falling rapidlyafter earlier deals on tax rises and spending cuts. There is also a certain crisis fatigue,said Stan Collender, a formercongressional staffer, at Qorvis Communication, a Washington consultancy. The debt ceiling will probably be increased eventually, even if a prolonged stand-off has

the potential to damage confidence in the economy. This isnt 2011: if Republicans provoke a debt ceiling confrontation over demandsfor massive, offsetting spending cuts, the business community is going to come unglued, said John Lawrence, former chief of staff to

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic minority leader in the House. But the political capital needed to get the statutory debt ceiling raised has thepotential to drain the energy and spirit of compromise that both sides will need to forge a majority coalition for

immigration.
http://www.ft.com/intl/world/us/economyhttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3650dff4-baec-11e2-b289-00144feab7de.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3650dff4-baec-11e2-b289-00144feab7de.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3650dff4-baec-11e2-b289-00144feab7de.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3650dff4-baec-11e2-b289-00144feab7de.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/3650dff4-baec-11e2-b289-00144feab7de.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/intl/world/us/economy


35/55



***Impact***


36/55



Structural Violence Impact

The Senate Bill codifies xenophobic and draconian measurescant solve structural violence

their evidence assumes an idealistic version of CIR

Gonzalez 6-26[Antonio Gonzlez June 26, 2013 (president of the William C. Velsquez Institute in San AntonioAntonio Gonzlez: Senate's immigration bill is not worthyhttp://www.reporternews.com/news/2013/jun/26/antonio-gonz225lez-senates-immigration-bill-is/)]As the Senates comprehensive immigration reform bill, S744, continues its tortured transformationfrom an ostensibly well-intentioned reform concept to a punitive, national security bill, Hispanic leaders are increasingly questioning the worthiness of the measure. The internaldebate is being polarized by those who say the bill is the last chance to legalize the undocumented, even though S744, as written, contains fatal flawsthat will: Exclude most undocumented from legalization; Continue mass deportations; Create de facto immigrant workerindentured servitude; Fund billions in defense-industry pork for more drones, walls and guards on the U.S.-Mexicoborder; Enable massive racial profiling and discrimination by codifying E-Verify, the Internet-based system through which businessescan determine an individuals eligibility to work in the United States. But this is not the first time the immigrant and Latino movements centerpiece

reform bill has been overrun by xenophobic forces. History is repeating itself as S744 is being hijacked, just as was the 1982 legalization billadvocated by then-U.S. Rep. Edward Roybal, D-Calif. Legendary in Hispanic circles and affectionately referred to as the Old Man, Ed Roybal was the father ofHispanic empowerment in California as well as a founder of the nascent immigrant rights movement. He died in 2005. After years of trying to legalize undocumentedimmigrants, in 1982 Roybal championed the Simpson-Mazzoli legalization bill. But when it was amended to include measures that violated labor and human rights,Roybal introduced dozens of amendments of his own, effectively killing the bill he had earlier advocated. California Hispanic leaders, including Roybal, would try andfail again in 1984, this time walking out at the Democratic National Convention, shaming presidential nominee Walter Mondale after Democratic congressionalleadership allowed anti-immigrant forces to gut the Latino-supported reform bill. The walkout killed the hijacked bill. Persistence paid off as Roybal helped lead acoalition that in partnership with Republican President Reagan prodded Congress in 1986 to enact the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA). In effect, itlegalized 2.9 million people, an estimated 70 percent of the undocumented at that time. Contrary to the balderdash heard today in D.C., IRCA and its amnesty

provisions are sanctified among Hispanics as one of the best programs ever undertaken by the federal government. It had immensely positive socio-economic benefitsfor immigrant-heavy states such as California and Texas in ensuing years. How different Roybals 1982 and 1984 conclusions were to those of Democrats now, TodaysDemocratic legislators appear set to support comprehensive immigration reform no matter how punitive and/or ineffective itsprovisions are. Democrats want to claimvictory with Hispanic voters, who are spun daily by corporate media that hype the bill in lockstep with the liberal establishment. Theres too much pressure from thedonors and special interests to jump ship even if its the right thing to do, legislators and advocates complain. Indeed, President Barack Obama held a White Housemeeting with advocates in May, instructing them not to try to improve S744. Importantly, liberal foundations and interest groups supporting comprehensiveimmigration reform have donated tens of millions in recent years to mostly D.C.-based immigrant rights and Latino groups, in essence co-opting them. But enactingfederal legislation is not for the fainthearted. Those who purport to represent our countrys immigrants in the halls of Congress would do well to remember Roybal. TheOld Man wouldve scuttled this deal. He wisely knew that no bill is better than a bad bill. The new Hispanic experts who populate the cable networks should

believe their own words. Fifty million Hispanics today are more powerful than ever and need not accept bad legislation as if they were migajeros (beggars). This is notHispanics last chance, just as it wasnt in 1982 or 1984. Thanks to the ever-growing Hispanic vote, public opinion has pivoted from excluding immigrants to includingimmigrants. Polls clearly favor generous legalization. Now the Hispanic challenge is to get Congress to reflect that reality, with inclusive, non-punitive legislation,

whether in 2013, 2015 or 2017. S744 falls far short of that goal. It should be dramatically improved or rejected. Old Man Roybal would havedemanded nothing less.
http://www.reporternews.com/news/2013/jun/26/antonio-gonz225lez-senates-immigration-bill-is/http://www.reporternews.com/news/2013/jun/26/antonio-gonz225lez-senates-immigration-bill-is/http://www.reporternews.com/news/2013/jun/26/antonio-gonz225lez-senates-immigration-bill-is/http://www.reporternews.com/news/2013/jun/26/antonio-gonz225lez-senates-immigration-bill-is/


37/55



US India Relations Impact

No impact to visa fightsRelations are resilient

The Hindu 9-29-10- India conveys concerns to U.S. over a slew of issues,

http://www.hindu.com/2010/09/29/stories/2010092964211600.htmNEW YORK: India conveyed its concerns to the U.S. over the H-1B visa fee increase, export control restrictions and the banon outsourcing, at a meeting between External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton here on Monday. Our concerns have beenraised, and we have spoken our views about the risks inherent in protectionist trends that often detract from the positive impulses of cooperation in trade and economic

interaction between the two countries, Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao, who was present at the meeting, told reporters. I think that was also understood

by the U.S. administration , and they were agreeable to the fact that we need to discuss these issues and try to resolve

them,she said. However, Ms. Rao said the spat over the visa fee increase should be viewed only as a small part of a larger

relationship between the two countries. ...The sum of the relationship is greater than its parts, and what we have is

growing strategic dialogue and growing partnership between the two countries. The Americans also noted that in a large

and complicated relationship, there were bound to be some irritants. But I think what unites us is the fact that there is so

much good and so much superb cooperation that is taking place, so I think that good common cooperation will help

carry us through a lot of these irritants, Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia Robert Blake said.


38/55



India-Pakistan War Impact

No war Indo-Pak War

Enders, 2(David, Daily News Editor for the Michigan Daily, Experts say nuclear war still unlikely,

http://media.www.michigandaily.com/media/storage/paper851/news/2002/01/30/News/Experts.Say.Nuclear.War.Still.Unlikely-1404620.shtml)

University political science Prof. Ashutosh Varshney becomes animated when asked about the likelihood of nuclear war

between India and Pakistan. "Odds are close to zero ," Varshney said forcefully, standing up to pace a little bit in his office. "The assumption that India and Pakistan cannotmanage their nuclear arsenals as well as the U.S.S.R. and U.S. o r Russia and China concedes less to t he intellect of leaders in both India and Pakistan t han would be warranted." The world"s two youngest nuclear powers first

tested weapons in 1998, sparking fear of subcontinental nuclear war a fear Varshney finds ridiculous. "The decision makers are aware of what nuclear weapons are,even if

the masses are not," he said. "Watching t he evening news, CNN, I t hink they have vastly overstated the threat of nuclear war," political science Prof.Paul

Huth said. Varshney added that there are numerous factors working against the possibility of nuclear war. "India is committed to a no-first-strike policy," Varshney said. "It is

virtually impossible for Pakistan to go for a first strike, because the retaliation would be gravely dangerous." Political

science Prof. Kenneth Lieberthal, a former special assistant to President Clinton at the National Security Council, agreed."Usually a country that is in the position that Pakistan is in would not shift to a level that would ensure their totaldestruction,"Lieberthal said, making note of India"s cons iderably larger nuclear arsenal. "American intervention is another reason not to expect nuclear war,"Varshney said. "If anything has happened since September 11, it is that the command control system has strengthened.The triggeris in very safe hands." But the low probability o f nuclear war does not mean tensions between the two countries who have fought three wars since they were created in 1947 will not erupt. "Thepossibility of conventional war between the two is higher. Both sides are looking for ways out of the current tension,"Lieberthal said.


39/55



Hegemony Impact

No impact to hegemony

Fettweis 10(Chris Fettweis, Professor of national security affairs @ U.S. Naval War College, Georgetown University Press, Dangerous times?: the

international politics of great power peace Google Books)Simply stated, the hegemonic stability theory proposes that international peace is only possible when there is one country strong enough to make and enforce a set ofrules. At the height of Pax Romana between 27 BC and 180 AD, for example, Rome was able to bring unprecedented peace and security to the Mediterranean. The PaxBritannica of the nineteenth century brought a level of stability to the high seas. Perhaps the current era is peaceful because the United States has established a de factoPax Americana where no power is strong enough to challenge its dominance, and because it has established a set of rules that a generally in the interests of all countriesto follow. Without a benevolent hegemony, some strategists fear, instability may break out around the globe. Unchecked conflicts could cause humanitarian disasterand, in todays interconnected world economic turmoil that would ripple throughout global financial markets. If the United States were to abandon its commitmentsabroad, argued Art, the world would become a more dangerous place and, sooner or later, that would rebound to Americas detriment. If the massive spending that

the United States engages in actually produces stability in the international political and economic systems, then perhaps internationalism is worthwhile. There aregood theoretical and empirical reasons, however, the belief that U.S. hegemony is not the primary cause of the current eraof stability. First of all, the hegemonic stability argument overstatesthe role that the United States plays in the system. Nocountry is strong enough to police the world on its own. The only way there can be stability in the community of greatpowers is if self-policing occurs, ifs states have decided that their interest are served by peace. If no pacific normativeshift had occurredamong the great powers that was filtering down through the system, then no amount of international constabulary work bythe United States could maintain stability. Likewise, if it is true that such a shift has occurred, then most of what the hegemon spends to bring stabilitywould be wasted. The 5 percent of the worlds population that live in the United States simple could not force peace upon an

unwilling 95. At the risk of beating the metaphor to death, the United States may be patrolling a neighborhood that has already rid itselfof crime. Stability and unipolarity may be simply coincidental. In order for U.S. hegemony to be the reason for global stability, the rest of theworld would have to expect reward for good behavior and fear punishment for bad. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has not always proven to beespecially eager to engage in humanitarian interventions abroad. Even rather incontrovertible evidence of genocide has not been sufficient to inspire action.

Hegemonic stability can only take credit for influence those decisions that would have ended in war without the presence,whether physical or psychological, of the United States. Ethiopia and Eritrea are hardly the only states that could go to warwithout the slightest threat of U.S. intervention. Since most of the world today is free to fight without U.S. involvement,something else must be at work. Stability exists in many places where no hegemony is present. Second, the limited empirical

evidence we have suggests that there is little connection between the relative level of U.S. activism and internationalstability.During the 1990sthe United States cut back on its defense spending fairly substantially,By 1998 the United States wasspending $100 billion less on defense in real terms than it had in 1990. To internationalists, defense hawks, and other believers in hegemonic stability this irresponsible"peace dividend" endangered both national and global security "No serious analyst of American military capabilities," argued Kristol and Kagan, "doubts that the

defense budget has been cut much too far to meet Americas responsibilities to itself and to world peace."" Ifthepacific trends were due not to U.S.hegemony but a strengthening norm against interstate war, however, one would not have expected an increase in globalinstability and violence. The verdict from the past two decades is fairly plain: The world grew more peaceful while theUnited States cut its forces. No state seemed to believe that its security was endangered by a less-capable Pentagon, or atleast none took any action that would suggest such a belief.No militaries were enhanced to address power vacuums; no security dilemmasdrove mistrust and arms races; no regional balancing occurred once the stabilizing presence of the U.S. military wasdiminished.The rest of the world acted as if the threat ofinternational war was not a pressing concern, despite the reduction

in U.S. capabilities. The incidence and magnitude of global conflict declined while the United States cut its military spending under President Clinton, and itkept declining as the Bush Administration ramped spending back up.No complex statistical analysis should be necessary to reach theconclusion that the two are unrelated. It is also worth noting for our purposes that the United States was no less safe.

No high skilled worker shortage

Costa 11-19-12. Daniel Costa, 11/19/2012. Attorney and immigration policy analyst. His areas of research include awide range of labor migration issues, including the management of U.S. guest worker programs, both high- and less-


40/55



skilled migration, and immigrant workers rights. STEM labor shortages?Microsoft report distorts reality about

computing occupations, Economic Policy Institute,http://www.epi.org/publication/pm195-stem-labor-shortages-microsoft-report-distorts/.Microsoft Corporation recently published a report warning that there will not be enough American college graduates in computer science to fill all of the available job openings in computer-related occupations between now and 2020 (Microsoft 2012). Microsoft uses Bureau of Labor Statistics projections to claim that from 2010 to 2020 there will be an additional 1.2 million jobopenings in computing professions that require at least a bachelors degree (Microsoft 2012, 6). Microsoft warns that s ince only about 40,000 Americans graduate with a bachelors degree in

computer science each year, many of the 120,000 projected job openings in computing occupations each year will go unfilled. As further evidence to support its claim of present and futurelabor shortages in computer-related occupations, Microsoft points to the 6,000 job openings at the company, 3,400 of which are for researchers, developers and engineers (Microsoft 2012, 3)As part of its analysis, the Microsoft report asserts that the U.S. educational system is failing to produce enough graduates in the broader science, technology, engineering, and math disciplines(also known as the STEM fields). It recommends that Congress address the alleged shortage o f STEM workers between now and 2020 in part by making 20,000 new H-1B temporarynonimmigrant guest worker visas available each year for employers that hire foreign graduates with degrees in STEM fields from U.S. universities. In addition, the report suggests thatCongress recapture unused permanent immigrant visas (green cards) and make 20,000 of them available annually over t he next 10 years to foreign graduates in STEM fields. Microsoftclaims that the federal government could raise $5 billion over

Documents

Politics Core - Affirmative - UTNIF 2013