Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

download Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

of 39

Transcript of Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    1/39

    POLITICS DA -- MICHIGAN CAMP PACKET

    Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet.......................................................................................1***NEG***................................................................................................................................21NC ........................................................................................................................................42NC UQ Exts ...........................................................................................................................8

    2NC AT UQ O/W Link...........................................................................................................112NC Link Exts .......................................................................................................................122NC AT Link Turns...............................................................................................................16Political Capital Links ............................................................................................................172NC AT We Trade Off/Not New Appropriation ....................................................................182NC Exts Kills Econ ............................................................................................................192NC AT Default Doesnt Last...............................................................................................222NC AT Raising Ceiling Bad.................................................................................................231NC/2NC Food Prices Impact..............................................................................................241NC/2NC Heg Impact..........................................................................................................261NC/2NC Shutdown Impact (Cyberwar) .............................................................................27***AFF***...............................................................................................................................312AC/1AR UQ .......................................................................................................................33

    2AC/1AR AT Pol Cap ...........................................................................................................352AC/1AR UQ O/W Link ........................................................................................................362AC/1AR Impact D..............................................................................................................38

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    2/39

    ***NEG***

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    3/39

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    4/39

    1NC

    Debt ceiling deal building momentum, but its contingent on spending cuts.Mascaro, 6-14-2011[Lisa, LA Times, With clock ticking, debt talks resume on Capitol Hill,http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/14/news/la-pn-congress-debt-20110614]

    Vice President Joe Biden will convene congressional negotiators Tuesday for a stepped-up round ofdebt reduction talks as the impasse over raising the nations $14.3 trillion debt limit enters acrucial period and both sides seek to avoid an unprecedented federal default. With theHouse and Senate calendars aligned, the next two weeks could offer a productive momentto move closer toward a deal. Democrats and Republicans have indicated an interest inresolving the issue before Aug. 2, when the Treasury Department has said it can no longer pay itsobligations. But finding more than $2 trillion in spending cuts to appease the GOP has becomea difficult task. Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), the majority leader, reiterated that Republicans want theamount of the cuts to be greater than the amount of new borrowing, estimated at $2.5trillion, to continue paying the governments bills through next year. "I think we canaccomplish that if parties are willing to make the tough decisions," Cantor said Monday.Republicans oppose new tax revenue. Cantor also all but ruled out an intermediary vote on a short-term increase inthe debt ceiling to avert the default while negotiations continue, as some conservative groups have suggested.Debt-ceiling votes can be politically perilous, and leaders want to limit the exercise. "It's my desire to have onedebt-ceiling vote," Cantor said. President Obama, who will be traveling to Puerto Rico on Tuesday, told NBC that the

    sides are making progress. "There is a way of solving this problem that doesn't require any big,radical changes. What it does require is everybody makes some sacrifices," he said. "And wemake these changes in a balanced way." House Speaker John A. Boehner said Monday that Republicanswanted trillions in budget cuts in exchange for their vote to increase the nation's borrowinglimit and avoid default, adopting a hard line on the party's position in a speech before majorplayers on Wall Street.

    Expanding space exploration is perceived as controversial new spending --guarantees backlash.

    Handberg, 11 - Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science at the Universityof Central Florida (Rodger, Small ball or home runs: the changing ethos of US humanspaceflight policy, The Space Review, 1/17, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1)

    The US space program remained focused, not on duplicating Apollo, but on achieving another difficult goal such asgoing to Mars, a logical extension truly of the Apollo effort. Twice, the presidents Bush provided the presidential

    rationale, if not support, for achieving great things.The Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) in 1989 and theVision for Space Exploration (VSE) in 2004 were announced with great fanfare but neithersurvived the realities of congressional and presidential budgeting. The VSE appeared on papermore realistic about funding, but its choices were draconian: the ISS and space shuttle were both to be sacrificed on

    the altar of the new program. The earlier SEI died quickly, so hard choices were not required, while the VSE inthe form of the Constellation Program lingers on although its effective demise appearscertain. The Obama Administration prefers another approach while the new Congress islikely more hostile to big ticket discretionary spending. If the Tea Party faction in theRepublican House caucus means what it says, the future for Constellation or any othersimilar program is a dim one. The reality is that the Apollo program, the SEI, and the VSE are examples inspace terms of the home run approach. Such efforts confront the cruel but obvious reality that the humanspaceflight program is considered by the public and most of Congress to be a nice to have,

    but not a necessity when compared to other programs or national priorities. Congressionalsupport is narrow and constituency-driven (i.e. protect local jobs), which means most in Congress onlysupport the space program in the abstract. Big ticket items or programs are not a priority formost, given other priorities. What happens is what can be loosely termed normal politics: a situation wherehuman spaceflight remains a low priority on the national agenda. Funding for bold new initiatives is goingto be hard to come by even when the economy recovers and deficits are under control.Thehome run approach has run its course at least for a time; now the small ball approach becomes your mantra.

    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1
  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    5/39

    Debt ceiling freeze wrecks the global economy.Min, 2010[David, Associate Director for Financial Markets Policy -- Center for American Progress, TheBig Freeze, 10-28, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/10/big_freeze.html]In short, the economic consequences of such a large and precipitous drop in spending wouldbe crushing, and almost certainly result in a severe drop in economic growth and employment

    at a time when we can least afford it. Moreover, such a move could lead to a panic in theinternational financial markets. Following the 2008 financial crisis, we have seen debt crises hit Ireland,Greece, and Italy, with fears that this could spread further and cause a global economic downturn. The financialmarkets are on edge today, with U.S. Treasury bonds being the safe haven for mostinvestment capital. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would recklessly disrupt the sale andpurchase of new Treasury bonds, and could potentially cause a run on outstanding Treasurysas well, as investors sought other investments. This could have catastrophic consequencesfor our economy as well as the economic stability of the rest of the world. Refusing to raise thedebt ceiling would also exacerbate the problems with our long-term budget outlook. The budget deficit right now isthe result of two distinct sets of changes since 2001, when we last had a budget surplus. First, a series of long-termpolicies enacted by the Bush administrationmost notably the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, the decision tofight two major wars without raising taxes, and the passage of an unfunded Medicare Part D prescription drugprogramcreated permanent structural budget deficits that will remain with us over the long term unless they areaddressed. Second, the poor economy caused a drop in tax receipts alongside higher countercyclical spending,

    such as for unemployment insurance and food stamps. Implementing a debt ceiling freeze ignores thefirst set of issues and makes the second set of issues worse by forcing a massive multitrilliondollar hit to an already struggling economy and threatening to take us into a second GreatDepression. This is hardly responsible policymaking. So lets delve a little deeper into the consequences of suchconservative folly. As we will demonstrate, the results of a replay of 1995 in 2011 would be theheight of recklessness for our economy and global financial markets. A replay of 1995 The mostrecent pledge to freeze the federal debt ceiling is notable because congressional Republicans tried the same thingfollowing their takeover of Congress in 1995. That fall, Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless then-President Bill Clinton agreed to enact major planks of the radical Contract with America proposed by theRepublican Party, such as a $270 billion cut to Medicare, steep cuts to education funding, and massive deregulationmeasures. Indeed, then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich at one point threatened to force a default on thenational debt if Republicans did not get their way. This standoff, which lasted until March 1996, ended with theRepublicans backing down as the public increasingly became turned off by the government shutdowns thatresulted. The 1995-96 debt ceiling crisis, as it is known, caused significant turmoil for our economy, forcing theDepartment of Treasury to suspend all new debt issuances and causing two temporary shutdowns of allnonessential federal government activities, including a cessation of toxic waste cleanups, disease control

    activities, and a suspension of many law enforcement and drug control operations, among many others. Ultimately,this episode cost the American taxpayer over $800 million, and rattled the confidence of international investors inU.S. government bonds. Indeed, it was only through the use of some fairly extraordinary measures by PresidentClintons Treasury Department, including a temporary use of retirement funds for former government employees,that the United States managed to avoid defaulting on its national debt during this period. Unfortunately, suchmeasures would not be as effective today, as analysts at Deutsche Bank found. They worry that if it happenedtoday the federal government would not be able to stave off a government shutdown (or possible suspension ofbond payments) for long. The precarious budget situation Conservatives call for a debt ceiling freeze looks evenmore senseless when one considers that our economy is struggling to recover from a severe recession. Becauseeconomic growth remains anemic, tax receipts are flat after falling sharply, which makes it particularly difficult tobalance the budget. Refusing to raise the debt ceiling would essentially force the federal government to balancethe budget immediately, at a time of cyclically low revenues. While this may sound appealing to deficit hawks anddeficit peacocks alike, it would actually have catastrophic consequences, both in the short term and the long term.A $1.3 trillion deficit is projected for FY 2011, on a total budget of $3.8 trillion. If we assume that the Obamaadministration did not want to default on the national debt, and thus continued to make interest payments onoutstanding U.S. Treasury obligations ($244 billion), then being forced to balance the budget next year would mean

    cutting over 40 percent of all other expenditures. But some federal spending is more important than others, right?Lets assume that we keep certain sacrosanct programs whole, not cutting Social Security ($728 billion), defensespending during a time of war ($701 billion), Medicare ($507 billion), Medicaid ($262 billion), and benefits formilitary veterans ($126.5 billion). If we did that and then eliminated spending on all other government programs,we would still be looking at a small deficit. Yet such a move would mean no FBI, no Department of Justice, noHomeland Security, no border security, no education funding, no unemployment insurance, no school lunches, nonational parks, no food stamps, no student loan funding, no air transportation safety, no drug enforcement, no foodand drug safety, etc. etc. etc., ad nauseum. Such severe expenditure cuts would be devastating in two ways. First,they would eviscerate the basic services and protections offered by our federal government, leaving our country inperilous danger from a myriad of threats and many of its most vulnerable citizens without a safety net. Americanswould be vulnerable to increased crime, drugs, terrorism, food safety, and air traffic safety, to name just a few. Andthese spending cuts would slash the social obligations we have promised to military veterans, the elderly, and

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    6/39

    students, among others. Such large spending cuts couldnt simply be confined to nonessential services. They wouldcut to the very core of the protections and core benefits provided by the federal government. Second, these largespending cuts would increase unemployment and severely dampen economic growth, destroying any prospects of asustained economic recovery. The resulting job loses and the steep cuts to unemployment insurance, food stamps,and other federal safety net expenditures would create a reverse multiplier effect that would cause a large dip in

    economic growth. The precarious state of the global financial marketsThe conservative pledge to freezethe debt ceiling would also lead to some fairly momentous problems in the worlds financial

    markets. Following the financial crisis of 2008-2009, which exposed problems with many privatefinancial instruments that were previously thought to be safe, such as money market funds and AAA-rated asset-backed securities, investors sought safe haven by investing in sovereign debt. Unfortunately, sovereigndebt crises in Greece and Ireland have caused significant uncertainty in European financial markets, and as a result,

    investors have flocked to the perceived safety of sovereign debt issued by the United States,which has never defaulted in its history. A freeze on the debt ceiling could erode confidencein U.S. Treasury bonds in a number of ways, creating further and wider panic in financialmarkets. First, by causing a disruption in the issuance of Treasury debt, as happened in 1995-96, afreeze would cause investors to seek alternative financial investments, even perhapscausing a run on Treasurys. Such a run would cause the cost of U.S. debt to soar, puttingeven more stress on our budget, and the resulting enormous capital flows would likely behighly destabilizing to global financial markets, potentially creating more asset bubbles andbusts throughout the world. Second, the massive withdrawal of public spending that wouldoccur would cause significant concern among institutional investors worldwide that the U.S.

    would swiftly enter a second, very deep, recession, raising concerns about the ability of theUnited States to repay its debt. Finally, the sheer recklessness of a debt freeze during thesetenuous times would signal to already nervous investors that there was a significant amountof political risk, which could cause them to shy away from investing in the United Statesgenerally.Taken together, these factors would almost certainly result in a significant increase inthe interest rates we currently pay on our national debt, currently just above 2.5 percent for a 10-year

    Treasury note. If in the near term these rates moved even to 5.9 percent, the long-term rate predicted by theCongressional Budget Office, then our interest payments would increase by more than double, to nearly $600 billion

    a year.These rates could climb even higher, if investors began to price in a default risk intoTreasuryssomething that reckless actions by Congress could potentially sparkthus greatly exacerbatingour budget problems.The U.S. dollar, of course, is the worlds reserve currency in large partbecause of the depth and liquidity of the U.S. Treasury bond market. If this market isseverely disrupted, and investors lost confidence in U.S. Treasurys, then it is unclear where

    nervous investors might go next. A sharp and swift move by investors out of U.S. Treasurybonds could be highly destabilizing, straining the already delicate global economy. Imagine, forexample, if investors moved from sovereign debt into commodities, most of which are priced and traded in dollars.

    This could have the catastrophic impact of weakening the worlds largest economies while also raising the prices ofthe basic inputs (such as metals or food) that are necessary for economic growth. In short, a freeze on the debtceiling would cause our interest payments to spike, making our budget situation even more problematic, whilepotentially triggering greater global instabilityperhaps even a global economic depression. The very idea of afederal debt freeze among the radical right in our country, while they continue to ignore responsible deficitreduction measures and continue to focus on the wrong policy solutions, exemplifies their obstinacy as much as

    their short-sightedness. A freeze on the debt ceiling, or shutting down the federal government will notreduce the federal budget deficit and will in fact increase it over the long run by tipping theglobal economy into depression. Voters may assume that conservative candidates will not live up to theirpledge of recklessness once they understand the consequences.This is a risky gamble, particularly giventhe precedent already set by conservatives in 1995.

    Nuclear war.Friedberg and Schoenfeld, 2008[Aaron, Prof. Politics. And IR @ Princetons Woodrow Wilson School and Visiting Scholar @Witherspoon Institute, and Gabriel, Senior Editor of Commentary and Wall Street Journal,The Dangers of a Diminished America, 10-28,http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455074012352571.html]

    Then there are the dolorous consequences of a potential collapse of the world's financialarchitecture. For decades now, Americans have enjoyed the advantages of being at thecenter of that system. The worldwide use of the dollar, and the stability of our economy, among other

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    7/39

    things, made it easier for us to run huge budget deficits, as we counted on foreigners to pick upthe tab by buying dollar-denominated assets as a safe haven. Will this be possible in the future?Meanwhile, traditional foreign-policy challenges are multiplying. The threat from al Qaeda andIslamic terrorist affiliates has not been extinguished. Iran and North Korea are continuing on theirbellicose paths, while Pakistan and Afghanistan are progressing smartly down the road tochaos. Russia's new militancy and China's seemingly relentless rise also give cause for

    concern. If America now tries to pull back from the world stage, it will leave a dangerous power vacuum. Thestabilizing effects of our presence in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and our position as defender oflast resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines could all be placed at risk. In such a scenario there areshades of the 1930s, when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peacefuldemocracies failed to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics whorose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited their divisions. Today we run the riskthat rogue states may choose to become ever more reckless with their nuclear toys, just at ourmoment of maximum vulnerability. The aftershocks of the financial crisis will almostcertainly rock our principal strategic competitors even harder than they will rock us. The dramatic freefall of the Russian stock market has demonstrated the fragility of a state whose economicperformance hinges on high oil prices, now driven down by the global slowdown. China is perhapseven more fragile, its economic growth depending heavily on foreign investment and access toforeign markets. Both will now be constricted, inflicting economic pain and perhaps even sparking unrest in acountry where political legitimacy rests on progress in the long march to prosperity. None of

    this is good news if the authoritarian leaders of these countries seek to divert attention frominternal travails with external adventures.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    8/39

    2NC UQ EXTS

    Debt ceiling compromise coming -- meetings providing momentum.Chaddock, 6-13-2011[Gail Russell, CSM, A glint of compromise in Congress's debt limit stalemate?http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0613/A-glint-of-compromise-in-Congress-s-

    debt-limit-stalemate]Two bipartisan groups of lawmakers are stepping up efforts this week to reach a deal onraising the nations $14.3 trillion debt limit, now set to expire on Aug. 2. So far, neither has been ableto make any significant headway on the fundamental ideological difference that divides them whether to raisetaxes or cut spending but a vote scheduled for Tuesday could offer at least a glimpse of compromise. Vice

    President Joe Biden and a half dozen negotiators tapped by House and Senate leaders from both parties will meetthree times this week starting Tuesday an increase from biweekly meetings. The group says it willkeep up the new pace until a deal is reached. On a parallel track, five members of the bipartisan Gangof Six, minus Sen. Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma, are pushing to complete their own plan, which aims to cut $4.7trillion in deficits during the next 10 years. But if they dont come to terms soon, their efforts will be irrelevant,says Sen. Kent Conrad (D) of North Dakota, a member of the Gang of Six and chair of the Senate BudgetCommittee. Both teams are struggling because their Democratic and Republican negotiators disagree about howthe economy works. The pressures of the coming presidential campaign season, which tend to impose a partisantemplate on all decisions, are only exacerbating the problem. The Republicans think that cutting taxes is the wayto improve the economy and the Democrats believe that spending is the way to improve the economy, says Peter

    Wallison, a former White House counsel in the Reagan administration, now at the American Enterprise Institute.These are differences that need to be bridged, and they are black and white, he adds. Offsetting the debt-limitincrease but how? The debate over the debt limit is framed by House Speaker John Boehner (R) of Ohio'sinsistence that any increase in the debt limit must be counterbalanced by by an equal amount of spending cuts.

    Estimates suggest adding $2.4 trillion to the debt ceiling would carry Congress to the end of 2012. Sen. Jon Kyl (R)of Arizona, a member of the Biden group, says his party will insist on $2.4 trillion in "real savings," but suggeststhat he is open to some flexibility on the timing of those spending cuts. Spendingreductions could play out over a decade or more, Senator Kyl told reporters on June 7. Anothermember of the Biden talks, House majority leader Eric Cantor (R) of Virginia, says that theres a chancethis week to build momentum toward a deal. He credits Vice President Biden with a willingness to putall issues on the table. He is conducting these meetings in a way that has kept the ball rolling, hesaid, adding that the group is well in sight of over $1 trillion in spending cuts.

    GOP getting on board -- Cantor pushing compromise, but controlling

    spendings key.Berman, 6-13-2011[Russell, The Hill, House GOP leader warns economy will sink if debt-ceiling deal isn'treached, http://thehill.com/homenews/house/166099-gop-leader-economy-will-sink-if-debt-deal-isnt-reached-soon]House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) on Monday warned of an urgent need to strike a deal toraise the debt ceiling, telling reporters that we dont want the markets to make thisdecision for us.Cantor, who is representing House Republicans in talks led by Vice President Biden,acknowledged there is a growing concern that financial markets will rattle and interest rateswill spike if congressional leaders cannot reach an agreement before Aug. 2, the deadline the

    Treasury Department has set for lifting the nations $14.3 trillion debt limit. The majority leader reiterated,however, that spending cuts and reforms are an essential requirement to a deal that the markets, and the public,find credible. We dont want the markets to make this decision for us, because thats exactly what were trying to

    avoid in saying weve got to reduce spending," Cantor said. "Youve got to implement reform." He said theurgency of the looming deadline is something everybody assumes. Cantor said ifCongress simply raises the debt ceiling without spending cuts, which the House has alreadyrejected, tax hikes would be on the horizon. If you dont, if you just check the box and raise the debtceiling, the markets take care of it for you. Interest rates will skyrocket, and there will be no way for us to see anyreturn to growth anytime soon. Well have to raise taxes and the rest. Republicans have pointed to warnings frommajor credit rating agencies that U.S. debt will be downgraded if the debt ceiling isnt raised and if a long-termdeficit reduction plan isnt put in place. The Biden group will meet three times this week as lawmakers try to arriveat a framework for an agreement for raising the debt limit before July 4. Cantor acknowledged the Aug. 2 deadlinebut refused to set a firm deadline for striking a deal within the Biden group. It is about getting right, he said. Its

    about making sure you get the necessary amount of spending cuts and reforms. In a rarity for a GOP leader,

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    9/39

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    10/39

    More ev -- debt agreement picking up momentum but could be derailed.Taylor, 6-7-2011[Andrew, Staff Writer AP, GOP leader 'cautiously optimistic' on debt talks,http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i_F8LOxfw2EZMUds79G53Uwqxljw?docId=e786c97adacc4ded9885660fa4e30869]WASHINGTON (AP) A key GOP negotiator in talks on lifting the government's borrowing cap

    said Tuesday that it may take more than a decade to accumulate savings to pay off theapproximately $2.4 trillion in new debt needed to keep the government afloat for about ayear and a half. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., also said that he believes any agreement to raise the so-called debt ceiling and avoid a market-rattling, first-ever default on U.S. obligations should beenacted sometime next month, before an Aug. 2 deadline. Kyl is a participant in top-leveltalks aimed at producing spending cuts to pass in concert with the debt limit increase. "Adebt ceiling increase is only over roughly an 18-month period of time. The savings couldplay out (over) more than a decade," Kyl told reporters. The time frame is important becausespreading the cuts over a longer period means that they would be less severe than if they were imposed over a

    decade, as is typical for legislation considered by Congress. Kyl's comments came as House Majority LeaderEric Cantor, R-Va., told his GOP colleagues that he's "cautiously optimistic" that ongoingbudget talks led by Vice President Joe Biden will produce an agreement on budget cuts at least aslarge as the accompanying increase in the government's ability to borrow. Cantor, R-Va.,representing the Republican-controlled House, told fellow lawmakers in an email Monday that the Biden-ledgroup is scrubbing all of the major spending programs of the federal budget for potentialsavings, including health care programs for the elderly and the poor. Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, has put fortha marker that any increase in the so-called debt limit should be matched by spending cuts at least equaling the newlevel of permitted borrowing. The national debt has reached the current $14.3 trillion cap, but the TreasuryDepartment is juggling government accounts to free up enough money to prevent the government from defaulting

    on its obligations until Aug. 2. "I am cautiously optimistic we can find sufficient common groundwith the administration to enact spending cuts that meet the goal outlined by the speaker,"Cantor wrote. He didn't say over what time period the cuts would be measured. Biden said last month thatthe group, which includes top lawmakers from both parties, is on pace to generate savings exceeding$1 trillion. At the White House last week, President Barack Obama predicted to House Democrats that theBiden group would come up with perhaps 60 to 70 percent of the requisite budget cuts andthat he and Boehner would negotiate the remainder.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    11/39

    2NC AT UQ O/W LINK

    Defaults possible -- GOP cares more about politics -- spending levels key totheir calculus.

    Farry, 1-19-2011[Yanira, Junior Editor Veterans Today, Military & Foreign Affairs Journal, GOP-Tea Party

    Play Chicken With U.S. Credit, Courting Catastrophe,http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/01/19/gop-tea-party-play-chicken-with-u-s-credit-courting-catastrophe/]Earlier this month, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner warned Congress that the U.S. will, in the comingmonths, reach its legal debt limit unless members vote to raise the debt ceiling. Never in ourhistory has Congress failed to increase the debt limit when necessary, Geithner wrote. Failure toincrease the limit would be deeply irresponsible. For these reasons, I am requesting that Congress act to increase

    the limit early this year, well before the threat of default becomes imminent. Geithners predecessor, HenryPaulson, agreed with the necessity of raising the debt limit long before this political controversy, saying that itis vital to protect Americas creditworthiness, and therefore Im confident Congress will act to increasethe debt limit well before it is reached. The U.S. Congress first imposed a debt ceiling in 1917, and hasraised the debt limit 74 times since March 1962, according to the Congressional Research Service, with ten raises

    occurring after 2001. However, a growing number of Republicans have made it clear that they

    intend to play chicken with the debt ceiling, risking the credit worthiness of the UnitedStates in order to score political points or extract demands from the Obama administration. TheAmerican people will not stand for such an increase unless it is accompanied by meaningfulaction by the president and Congress to cut spending, said House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH).But by playing games with the debt ceiling, the GOP is inviting a variety of harmfulconsequences that come with even hints that the U.S. might default on its debt.

    1995 proves the GOP is willing to.Min, 2010[David, Associate Director for Financial Markets Policy -- Center for American Progress, TheBig Freeze, 10-28, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/10/big_freeze.html]By law, a statutory limit restricts the total amount of debt the federal government can accumulate. Only Congress

    can raise this limit. On the heels of the worst recession since the Great Depression, this debtceiling is projected to be reached sometime early next year. Increasingly, conservatives arepledging to vote against any increases to the debt ceilingeven if this means shutting downthe federal government. This reckless pledge would have disastrous consequences for theU.S. economy and the global financial markets, and would severely worsen the long-termbudget situation to boot. This conservative pledge has historical antecedents. In the fall of1995, congressional Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling for a period of about six months,until they reversed course in March 1996 in response to plummeting poll numbers. This original debt ceiling crisis,as its become known, was extraordinarily costly, roiling the financial markets and forcing two governmentshutdowns. The consequences of refusing to raise the debt ceiling would be even more costly today, given the

    precarious state of the U.S. economy and global financial markets, and potentially could be disastrous. Unlike in1995, when our economic outlook was good, we are currently fighting our way out of theGreat Recession and coming off of the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. Nonetheless, ledby the advice of Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker who was the architect of the 1995-96 debt ceiling crisis,

    many conservatives are clamoring for a repeat of this past episode in recklessness.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    12/39

    2NC LINK EXTS

    Debt ceiling deal now but any related fight derails it.Marty, 6-11-2011[Robin, Are We Anywhere Near A Compromise On Debt?http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/are-we-anywhere-near-a-compromise-on-debt/]

    The White House is pushing to have a deal on the debt ceiling put in place by the fourth of July,but is anything really workable on the horizon? Based on the new timeline, the administration should have

    just enough time to push the deal through Congress and get it in place before the August2nd default deadline, but all it would take is one component throwing up a roadblock to putthe country back on route to disaster. One large holdup? Republicans really don't have any public interestin making a deal. A potential new recession and continuing stagnation in the job market would benefit many in theparty who want to run against Obama's economic record, so how do you negotiate with a party who actually

    benefits from a failure?The Gang of Six (minus one) is claiming to be close to an agreement andhave begun bringing others in to go over their master plan. Meanwhile, the bipartisan groupbeing lead by Vice President Biden is accelerating their meetings and dickering over how long the debtwill be extended in exchange for how many cuts they will get in return.

    New GOP Congress shifts the political wind against NASA.Logsdon, 11 - Space Policy Institute, Elliott School of International Affairs, GeorgeWashington University (John, A new US approach to human spaceflight?, Space Policy,February, Science Direct)

    To complicate matters even further, the November elections resulted in a shift of party control toRepublican leadership in the House of Representatives and a reduced Democrat majority in the Senate.Many Republicans are making reduction in government spending a top priority issue. If theNASA appropriation is not approved until the new Congress convenes in January 2011, NASA could facebudget reductions below what the Congress has authorized, making it even more difficult tomove forward with what remains of the new human spaceflight strategy.

    The plan guarantees backlash against raising the ceiling -- fundingcontroversy.

    Rufer, 6-12-2011

    [Amelia, US Election News, Independence Day: The New Debt Deal Deadline,http://uselectionnews.org/independence-day-the-new-debt-deal-deadline/853982/]The White House has asked Congress to meet three times a week for the rest of June in aneffort to reach an agreement on the U.S. deficit by recess on July 4th. The new date wouldgive lawmakers enough time to pass bills concerning federal program changes and a debtceiling raise by August 2nd, the deadline given by the Treasury Department. According to House MajorityLeader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), The news economically on the jobs front in the last several days underscored theimportance of this meeting that we just came out of. Theres a commitment for next week that we will be engaging,once again, in a robust series of meetings to see if we can achieve a result. We believe that many of the problemssurrounding the lack of job creation and growth in this country have to do with the fact that there isnt a credibleplan to manage down the debt and deficit in this country. Thats what were trying to produce here and we hadmuch substantive discussion today and look forward to more next week. Cantor saw the increased pressure behindthe prospective deficit bill as a positive reinforcement that he hoped would serve to relieve some of the stress inthe market, something he believes to be responsible for the downward job slope. Aside from the nations revenue,discretionary/appropriations spending, changes to the budgeting process, and mandatory spending are all topicsthat need to be covered in the upcoming meetings. 2012 fiscal spending bills have already started their rounds inthe House under the Appropriations Committee Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) while a much-talked-about 2-year

    budget plan will be pushed by Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) Democrat representativeshave attributed the prolonged process to a Republican refusal to negotiate, an accusationthat the GOP gladly welcomes as it reminds Congress that the Party votes for raising thedebt ceiling will be given in exchange for a comparable value in spending cuts, estimated toapproximate $2 trillion. A bipartisan Senate group is meeting to design its own deficit reduction plan as a last-ditch effort should Congress fail to come to any agreement.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    13/39

    Plan sparks huge NASA budget fights.Powell, 2009[Stewart M., Washington Bureau Houston Chronicle, Potential Uphill Battle for NASA, 9-13, http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6615751.html]NASA supporters are bracing for an uphill battle to get the extra funding needed to take onmissions more ambitious than visits to the international space station. A high-level panel told President

    Barack Obama last week that the space program needs an infusion of about $3 billion more a year by2014.That may be a tough sell, even though the amount could be considered spare change ina fast-spending capital where the White House and Congress are on track to dole out nearly $4 trillion this year to

    finance federal operations, including bailouts for Wall Street firms, banks and automakers. The congressionalagenda over the next year is going to be focused on cutting programs, not adding to them, saidScott Lilly, a scholar at the Center for American Progress. Adding resources to the nation's $18.7 billion-a-yearspace program would require cuts in other areas, said Lilly, who doesn't think lawmakers arewilling to make those trades. Rep. Pete Olson, R-Sugar Land, the ranking Republican on the Housesubcommittee that has jurisdiction over NASA, said wrangling the additional $3 billion a year would bean enormous challenge but one I am prepared to win. Added Olson, whose district includes JohnsonSpace Center: NASA doesn't require bailout funds it needs the promised level of investment that previousCongresses have endorsed. The 10-member panel of space experts led by retired aerospace executive NormanAugustine suggested extending U.S. participation in the $100 billion space station for five years, extendingbudgeting for the retiring shuttle fleet by six months, delaying plans for a 2020 return to the moon and extendingthe timeline for the next generation of manned spacecraft by two years at least until 2017. But the experts warnedin their 12-page preliminary report to Obama on Tuesday that meaningful human exploration would be possibleonly under a less constrained budget ramping (up) to approximately $3 billion per year in additional spending by2014. Former astronaut Sally Ride, a member of the committee, forecast $27.1 billion in additional funds would beneeded over the next decade a 27 percent increase over the $99.1 billion currently planned. Even before Obama

    publicly reacts to Augustine's report to map the next steps in the nation's manned space exploration, membersof Congress are scrambling. The immediate challenge goes beyond money to just getting NASA on the radarscreen when everyone is focused on health care reform, said a key congressional staffer involved in NASA issues.Finding supportNASA supporters initially are targeting the Democratic leadership of appropriations subcommitteesin the House and Senate with jurisdiction over NASA. Space advocates have an ally in Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md.,

    chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee panel that handles space agency spending. But in theHouse, pro-NASA lawmakers expect a fight with Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., chairman of theHouse Appropriations Committee panel that cut next year's NASA spending nearly $500 million belowwhat Obama requested. Lawmakers are looking for a House-Senate conference committee to restore the funds thatMollohan cut before the Augustine panel completed its work. Aides to Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., chairman of a Senatesubcommittee that oversees NASA, said they have already identified six potential sources of additional NASA

    funding within the federal budget, including some of the $8 billion promised over the next decade to private energyfirms to research fossil fuels and deep drilling for oil and gas. Lawmakers also are exploring the possibility ofredirecting some of the two-year, $787 billion economic stimulus package from shovel-ready transportationconstruction projects and other federally subsidized programs into the NASA budget. The administration so far hasonly paid out $160 billion of the total, according to Vice President Joe Biden. A lot of stimulus money has not beenspent, said Sen. John Cornyn, R-San Antonio. We should redirect some of those stimulus funds to pay forenhancements to the NASA budget because I believe human space flight is so important. Aerospace executivesand veteran space experts are hoping for reliable year-to-year funding. These are challenging economic times, butthis is not the moment to turn away from leading a global space exploration effort, said Dean Acosta, head of the

    Houston-based Coalition for Space Exploration. President's influence Presidential leadership will beessential to gaining an increase, emphasized John Logsdon, a space policy expert who served on theShuttle Columbia Accident Investigation Board. The president has to use some portion of his politicalcapital to put forward an Obama space program.

    Debt ceiling is a key bargaining chip for the GOP.Dayen, 2010[David, Could a Debt Limit Increase Get Held Hostage By Republicans? 11-1,http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/11/01/could-a-debt-limit-increase-get-held-hostage-by-republicans/]David Waldman considers that Democrats might move this one up to the lame duck, to clear it out before moreRepublicans come to Washington. But surely they wouldnt have the political chops to extend it to the level wed

    need for the next two years. At some point, the next Congress will have to vote on this. And theres anon-trivial segment of the Republican caucus who will want to trigger a catastrophic event,as if they can bathe the nation in the fire and come out of it with some kind of 18th-century

    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6615751.htmlhttp://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/nation/6615751.html
  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    14/39

    American ideal. Maybe cooler heads will prevail, but that debt limit bill is a giantbargaining chip, and you can bet that Republicans will try to cash it, at least by forcing someunpalatable option on the Democrats as a condition for their vote.

    The plan destroys the debt deal GOP will backlash against spending.Gibson, 5-9-2011[Kate, Staff Writer, Boehner: Cuts must outweigh debt-ceiling increase,

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/boehner-cuts-must-outweigh-debt-ceiling-increase-2011-05-09]In his speech, Boehner reiterated his opposition to any tax increases while calling the current debt-limit debate an

    opportunity to take a different approach to spending and borrowing habits that have driven up the countrys red

    ink. With the GOP threatening to block hiking the federal debt ceiling this summer withoutmajor new spending cuts and other budget restrictions, the speaker was asked if he would considertemporarily raising the ceiling should negotiations stall into a scenario like the budget standoff that nearly shut the

    government down in April. Not increasing the debt ceiling would be irresponsible, said Boehner,who then added that unlike the prior budget impasse, there is no hard date on the debt ceiling.TheObama administration has set an August deadline to raise the $14.3 trillion ceiling on U.S. borrowing, which will hit

    its legal limit in the next two weeks. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has said he can pay thegovernments bills through Aug. 2, at which point the U.S. would risk defaulting on itsobligations. In is speech, Boehner declared that without significant spending cuts and reformsto reduce our debt, there will be no debt-limit increase. And the cuts should be greater thanthe accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given. Given that the U.S. borrowsroughly $125 billion each month, a deal to have the debt ceiling lifted to a level where another increase isntneeded before the next presidential election would imply spending cuts on the order of $2 trillion.

    More ev.Mascaro & Hennessey, 5-9-2011[Lisa, Kathleen, Washington Bureau, Boehner demands trillions in cuts in exchange for debtvote, http://articles.latimes.com/print/2011/may/09/nation/la-na-budget-20110510]House Speaker John A. Boehner said Monday that Republicans wanted trillions in budget cuts inexchange for their vote to increase the nation's borrowing limit and avoid default, adopting ahard line on the party's position in a speech before major players on Wall Street. Boehner told the Economic Club ofNew York that his party wanted specific spending cuts not future targets that would trigger spending reductionsor revenue increases, as President Obama has proposed. Laying down a marker on the eve of new budgetnegotiations, the Ohio Republican also said he wanted the amount of the cuts to exceed any increase in the

    nation's borrowing limit, a demand that probably would mean new spending reductions of $2 trillion or more many times higher than the $38 billion in cuts approved last month in the 2011 budget. "It's true that allowingAmerica to default would be irresponsible. But it would be more irresponsible to raise thedebt ceiling without simultaneously taking dramatic steps to reduce spending and reformthe budget process," Boehner said. His address before the New York audience came as Obama calledlawmakers to the White House for several days of talks this week over raising the nation's $14.3-trillion debt limit.Boehner has been increasingly caught in a political squeeze. On one side, the Obama administration and its allieshave demanded that GOP officials reassure markets that they won't gamble with U.S. debt obligations. On theother, "tea party" activists charged Monday that GOP leaders were selling out the nation's conservatives. Lastweek, GOP leaders backed away from the party's controversial proposal to overhaul and eventually privatizeMedicare. "I wish our tearful House speaker would just show some compassion for American taxpayers and ourchildren," said the Rev. William Temple, a tea party activist from Georgia, speaking at the National Press Club. "It'sa cowardly act of treason against coming generations, and we may be able to give Mr. Boehner something to reallycry about in 2012." Boehner notably did not fully embrace the party's Medicare plan, beyond saying there must be"honest conversations" about the program. The Treasury Department has estimated that without raising the debt

    ceiling, the country would default on its obligations by Aug. 2. Top Democrats warn against prolonging the debatepast mid-July for fear of roiling jittery financial markets and risking the nation's economic recovery. ManyRepublicans won their seats in Congress after campaigning against the debt limit increase, and Temple said the teaparty groups would be grading lawmakers on the debt ceiling vote alone. "If you vote to raise the debt ceiling, youget a '0' for the year from the tea party," he said. "If you don't vote to raise the debt ceiling, you get a '100' andyou're a hero." Bob Vander Plaats, an influential Christian leader in Iowa, called default concerns "a myth," and saidthe debt limit vote provided "the perfect opportunity to substantially reduce the size and scope of government." Atthe same time, rank-and-file lawmakers are pushing Republican leaders to use the debt ceiling vote as leverage.Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said Monday that any debt ceiling vote "must include a vote to fully defund"Obama's healthcare law. In the Senate, Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.) chastised Democrats for raising what hecalled the "false specter of default." The debate offers a measure of the difficulty of deficit politics as the nationborrows at a rate of $125 billion a month. At that rate, it would take a $2-trillion increase in the debt limit to get

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    15/39

    beyond the 2012 election. Democrats warned Boehner not to prolong the debate. "This is playing with fire," saidSen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.). "Speaker Boehner needs to have that adult moment right now." As investorsworldwide keenly watch the unfolding debate, GOP leaders are conducting outreach to financial leaders. Anotherkey Republican, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia, planned to visit Wall Street on Tuesday. Boehnerreiterated his position that no new tax increases be on the table, a stance that will be difficult to maintain as

    Democrats press to close tax loopholes. Officials from both parties have floated a two-track strategythat would provide immediate spending cuts while setting triggers that would require further

    budget reforms in future years if deficit reduction goals are not met. But Boehner appeared to dismiss thetrigger approach Monday.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    16/39

    2NC AT LINK TURNS

    No political support for the plan.Thompson, 2011[Loren, Chief Financial Officer Lexington Institute, Human Spaceflight, April,http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Defense/HumanSpaceflight-

    Mars.pdf]This all makes sense from a budgetary and scientific perspective. Whats missing is a grasp ofthe rationalerequired to sustain political support across multiple administrations. While exploration ofthe Moons far side or nearby asteroids may have major scientific benefits, those benefits areunlikely to be appreciated by politicians struggling to reconcile record deficits. NASAs currentresearch plans do not connect well with the policy agendas of either major political party, andthe flexible path will not change that. To justify investments of hundreds of billions of dollars in human spaceflightover the next 20 years while entitlements are being pared and taxes are increasing, NASA must offer a justificationfor its efforts commensurate with the sacrifices required. Mars is the only objective of sufficient interest orimportance that can fill that role. Thus, the framework of missions undertaken pursuant to the flexible-pathapproach must always be linked to the ultimate goal of putting human beings on the Martian surface, and the

    investments made must be justified mainly on that basis. The American public can be convinced tosupport a costly series of steps leading to a worthwhile objective, but trips to the Moon andnear-Earth objects arent likely to generate sustained political support during a period of severe

    fiscal stress.

    http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Defense/HumanSpaceflight-Mars.pdfhttp://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Defense/HumanSpaceflight-Mars.pdfhttp://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Defense/HumanSpaceflight-Mars.pdfhttp://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/library/resources/documents/Defense/HumanSpaceflight-Mars.pdf
  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    17/39

    POLITICAL CAPITAL LINKS

    The plan costs capital.Whittington, 5-4-2011[Mark, Staff Writer, Harrison Schmitt's Plan to Solve the Energy Problem by Mining theMoon,

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ac/20110504/us_ac/8419965_harrison_schmitts_plan_to_solve_the_energy_problem_by_mining_the_moon]Harrison Schmitt, Apollo moonwalker, geologist, and former U.S. Senator, spoke at the Williston Basin PetroleumConference recently and presented his plan to solve the long-term energy needs of the world bymining the moon. The idea is to mine a substance that is almost nonexistent on the Earth, but extant onthe moon called helium 3 (3HE), an isotope of the well known substance usually put in party balloons. Helium 3has been deposited in lunar soil over billions of years by solar wind and exists in trace amounts waiting to beextracted. 100 kilograms of helium 3 could be obtained from processing a 2 kilometer square area of lunar soildown to the depth of three meters. That amount would run a 1,000 megawatt fusion reactor for a year. Schmittsays helium 3 is an ideal fuel for future fusion reactors because it leaves little or no radioactive residue, whichobviates the need to decontaminate the reactor periodically. The downside is that a helium 3 fusion reaction has totake place at hotter temperatures than other fusion reactions using, for example, deuterium. Schmitt proposes that$5 billion be spent to build a test reactor that would burn helium 3 to create power. In the meantime a return to the

    moon would have as its main focus the extraction and shipping back to Earth helium 3 to fuel the reactor. A

    return to the moon was ruled out over a year ago byPresident Barack

    Obama when he canceledthe Constellation space exploration program. However, there has recently been aresurgence in interest in sending astronauts back to the moon, especially in the Congress. Schmitt'sscheme has the virtue of connecting the desire to go back to the Moon with solving the long term energy needs ofplanet Earth. While there are abundant fossil fuels, the supply is finite and in any case using oil and coal causesvarious forms of pollution. Solar and wind have thus far proven inadequate as a means of replacing fossil fuels.Helium 3 fueled hydrogen provides a potential of providing clean, virtually limitless energy for the foreseeable

    future. Of course, there are obstacles in the path of a helium 3 fusion future, both technicaland political. Developing a reactor that will create more energy than it consumes to create a helium 3 fusionreaction will be daunting. Then there are the problems of developing of lunar mining techniques and a cost

    effective transportation infrastructure between Earth and the moon.The political problem is almost asacute. The Fusion Technology Institute is funded with private money, as the EnergyDepartment thinks that space based helium 3 is a NASA problem and NASA thinks fusionenergy is an Energy Department problem. It will take a leader of vision to sort out the turfbattles and get Schmitt's plan rolling.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    18/39

    2NC AT WE TRADE OFF/NOT NEW APPROPRIATION

    Budget tradeoffs for space will be a huge political fightHandberg, 11 - Professor and Chair of the Department of Political Science at the Universityof Central Florida (Rodger, Small ball or home runs: the changing ethos of US humanspaceflight policy, The Space Review, 1/17, http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1)

    NASA Administrator Charles Bolden alluded to that reality recently: Future NASA space programs must beaffordable, sustainable and realistic to survive political and funding dangers that have killedprevious initiatives. This is harsh talk but it reflects the reality confronting all USdiscretionary programs in the federal budget. The new Republican House majority isdetermined to cut federal expenditures and appear to have little concern for where the cutsoccur.The budget struggles this year and next will find all discretionary programs mobilizingtheir supporters. Competing agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National ScienceFoundation (NSF) have constituencies who are savvy veterans of getting their way even whenbudgets are tight. The cure for some disease is always just another appropriation away from happening.

    http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/01/06/04.xmlhttp://www.thespacereview.com/article/1759/1http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/asd/2011/01/06/04.xml
  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    19/39

    2NC EXTS KILLS ECON

    Destroys the US economy.Hurst, 6-10-2011[Nathan, Detroit News Washington Bureau, Raising nation's debt ceiling becomes high-stakes debate, http://detnews.com/article/20110610/POLITICS03/106100383/Raising-

    nations-debt-ceiling-becomes-high-stakes-debate#ixzz1P8ahDm7P]Congress has less than two months to resolve the question of whether to raise the nation'sdebt ceiling, and those on both sides of the issue are digging in their heels. The White House and congressionalDemocrats say not raising the ceiling could sink the world economy, while Republicans say the nation's ballooningdeficit is more dangerous. The sparring has revealed wide differences. The White House warns failing to raise thedebt ceiling threatens to sink the economy just as states such as Michigan start to regain their fiscal footing.Republicans say spending cuts and deficit control are key to economic growth and are demanding that any increasein the borrowing limit be matched with cuts of equal or greater size, though the cuts could be over the next decade

    or more. Currently at $14.3 trillion, the debt ceiling is the federal government's self-imposed creditlimit, and includes the money it borrows from investor nations and its own trust funds (SocialSecurity and Medicaid, for example). If it isn't raised before early August, the federal governmentessentially can't pay its bills, creditors start to worry and the economic effects growexponentially. Americans would feel the impact of not raising the debt ceiling through highermortgage rates, lost jobs, lower business exports and a cutoff of money for federal

    programs. "The general consensus is that the debt ceiling topping out would be very, very bad inways we've never imagined," said Van Conway, principal of Conway McKenzie, a business turnaround firm inBirmingham. "Once it's hit, the government starts to default on its obligations and when thathappens, everything's pretty much downhill from there."Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithnersays the federal government's credit line will be fully tapped by Aug. 2 and there'sincreasing worry that for the first time, the U.S. government could default on its financialobligations. Talks between Democrats and the GOP toward a compromise on the debt ceilingcontinued Thursday in a private meeting. It was the sixth meeting between Vice President Joe Biden and toplawmakers. Biden and Geithner made a pitch for more revenue. Republicans resolutely oppose anything that couldbe called a tax increase. Democrats insisted that new taxes must be part of any deficit-reduction deal, a positionRepublicans have rejected. The U.S. House took its first vote last week to raise the debt limit to $16.7 trillion. Itfailed, 318-97, as Michigan Democratic Reps. John Dingell, Dale Kildee and Hansen Clarke voted for it. Republicansvowed after a meeting with President Barack Obama to block an increase unless big cuts were made including to

    Medicare. Rep. Bill Huizenga, R-Zeeland, said that for him to vote for an increase, it would have to

    be tied to significant spending cuts. Huizenga said he doesn't have a specific target. "But the dealwould have to be really, really good." If the dire predictions come true, here are some ofthe possibleeffects:The nascent national economic recovery, which is beginning to add jobs, would grind to ahalt. That means more worker layoffs nationwide and in Michigan, which has seen more than 1 million jobs lost inthe past decade. If the economy grinds to a halt, that will have implications worldwide, threatening todry up export markets. Michigan sent $44.5 billion worth of products overseas last year, according to U.S.Commerce Department statistics, from autos to office furniture, and from corn to cherries. Mortgage and otherloan markets would gyrate wildly, dragging down the real estate and stock markets. Homevalues in Metro Detroit have declined this spring to their lowest levels since 1993 after tens of thousands of

    homeowners defaulted on their mortgages, sending foreclosures skyrocketing. Interest rates on loans andcredit cards would likely rise since the federal government would be paying more on its owndebt, throwing credit markets into turmoil. Creditors could demand higher interest ratesfrom the federal government, if they decided to continue lending the United States money at

    all.Even if Congress were to later raise the limit after hitting the debt ceiling, creditors would likely demand higher

    interest rates since the guarantee of repayment would be shakier. Thousands of businesses struggling toget back on their feet from the economic downturn could get a second shock, too, since themarket disruptions would interrupt lines of credit. The stock market would likely tumble,severely affecting the value of businesses such as Boeing, ExxonMobil, Chase Bank, Ford Motor Co., Steelcase, DowChemical Co. and General Motors, which just re-entered the market in November after its government-ledbankruptcy. Pension group fund investments would be hit hard. Take the General Retirement System for the city ofDetroit, for example. Its $2.25 billion in assets includes $230 million invested in securities, mortgage-backedsecurities and mortgage and construction loans. If those investments lose value, the amount the pension fund canpay out to recipients could be in jeopardy. Nearly 2 million federal workers and more than 50,000 in Michigan would likely not be paid since Washington wouldn't have access to money. Pension funds and other retirement

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    20/39

    accounts could see another deep dip in value, potentially one worse than the market's 2007 and 2008 lows. Forworkers nearing retirement age, that means even recent market gains could be wiped out, ruining nest eggs forsoon-to-be retirees and for those already retired. Funding for federal programs could be in jeopardy. About 1.8million Michiganians receive need-based health benefits through Medicaid; 1.8 million get Social Security; morethan 1.3 million are on food stamps and temporary aid to needy families. The state gets billions in federal aid eachyear to administer the programs, payments that could be cut off if the government defaults and runs out of cash.

    White House officials, in briefing reporters, however, saved the scariest possibility for the end. "There is noback-up plan," one senior administration official said. "None."

    Spreads globally -- crashes global financial markets.Dayen, 2010[David, Could a Debt Limit Increase Get Held Hostage By Republicans? 11-1,http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/11/01/could-a-debt-limit-increase-get-held-hostage-by-republicans/]Paul Krugman takes on the debt moralizers today, those who demand in the middle of a recession that everyonesacrifices and lives within their means, when that is in fact the wrong prescription for a government during thistime to boost the economy. If everyone globally pays down debt at the same time, everyone loses, and the world

    gets mired in stagnation. But the moralizers will have none of it. They denounce deficit spending,declaring that you cant solve debt problems with more debt. They denounce debt relief,calling it a reward for the undeserving. And if you point out that their arguments dont add up, they flyinto a rage. Try to explain that when debtors spend less, the economy will be depressed unless somebody elsespends more, and they call you a socialist. Try to explain why mortgage relief is better for America than foreclosingon homes that must be sold at a huge loss, and they start ranting like Mr. Santelli. No question about it: themoralizers are filled with a passionate intensity. And those who should know better lack all conviction. Right now,the results of such debt-moralizing come in the form of prolonged suffering, higher unemployment, lower economic

    growth. But before long, the result of this moralizing could be really catastrophic. What if Republicans blockan increase in the debt ceiling?The most powerful IED on the road ahead is timed to explode some timethis spring. Last February, Congress raised the ceiling on the national debt from $12.4 trillion to $14.2 trillion. Sincethen, the debt has risen to $13.7 trillion which means Congress will have to raise it yet again within a few

    months. A failure to approve one would, technically, bar the government from borrowing moremoney. In other words, we would not have the cash to pay our bills. And yet Tea Party candidates andtheir fellow travelers in the GOP have vowed to oppose further increases in the legal debtceiling.This formally looks about the same as a government shutdown, only on a globalscale. As international investors and banks dont get repaid, the result could trigger a globalfinancial crisis. Just the loss of confidence in the US temporarily defaulting could set off theanimal spirits and lead to a crash. The tea partiers would cast around for somebody to blame, but wed havefar more pressing concerns.

    Perception quickly spreads globally.McCarter, 1-5-2011[Joan, Daily Kos, New GOP member doesn't "know" what will happen if debt ceiling isn'traised, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/05/933597/-New-GOP-member-doesnt-know-what-will-happen-if-debt-ceiling-isnt-raised]Although not all the possible consequences ofa government default are known, it would mean that thegovernment could no longer meet all of its legal obligations. Not only the default, but theefforts to resolve it would arguably have negative repercussions on both domestic andinternational financial markets and economies. Not having a crystal ball, CRS can't detail every disasterthat could occur with default. But here are a few clues: "the immediate cessation of more than 40percent of all federal government activities (excluding only interest payments on the

    national debt), including Social Security, military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan,homeland security, Medicare, and unemployment insurance. This would not only threaten thesafety and economic security of all Americans, but also have dire impacts for the economyand job growth." That's here at home--and in Iraq and Afghanistan (are they really forgetting about the wars?).Internationally, American default would very likely lead to panic in financial markets, becauseU.S. Treasury bonds hold so much investment capital, investment that would be disruptedwith a default and that could potentially cause a run on outstanding Treasury bonds. (Picturethe run on the Bailey Savings and Loan in It's a Wonderful Life times billions? Trillions?) In other words,catastrophe.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    21/39

    Economists are conclusive.News Sentinel, 6-12-2011[NEWS SENTINEL EDITORIAL BOARD, Knox News, Editorial: Compromise needed beforedefault, http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2011/jun/12/compromise-needed-before-default/]Economists of all persuasions say that would mean interest rates would skyrocket, the dollar

    would collapse and the economy would plunge back into a recession. Credit agencies warnthat America's stellar credit rating would take a hit - Fitch Ratings said last week that Americansecurities would be downgraded to junk bond status if the country doesn't meet scheduleddebt payments.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    22/39

    2NC AT DEFAULT DOESNT LAST

    Even short-term default screws the economy.Reuters, 1-6-2011[Republicans acknowledge debt limit should rise,http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/07/us-usa-debt-idUSTRE70606E20110107]

    Geithner said the federal government may hit the ceiling by March 31 on the amount of debt it is legally allowedto issue, and urged Congress to raise it before then to avoid pushing the United States intodefault. "Even a short-term or limited default would have catastrophic economicconsequences that would last for decades," Geithner said in a letter to Senate Majority Leader HarryReid, a Democrat. Republicanswon control of the House of Representatives in November elections on a promise tocut government spending and reduce debt but are faced with having to compromise on the debt limit. They say anyvote to increase the ceiling must be paired with a commitment to lower federal costs over the long term. "TheAmerican people will not stand for such an increase unless it is accompanied by meaningful action by the president

    and Congress to cut spending," House Speaker John Boehner said. DEFAULT DANGERS A debt default wouldthrow markets into turmoil and dramatically increase government borrowing costs for yearsto come, further increasing the U.S. debt burden and sapping resources from the economy.Bond investors remain wary of the safety and soundness of sovereign debt after the bailoutsof Greece and Ireland last year, but Treasury officials said they did not see any evidence of such concernspushing up U.S. debt yields at this time.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    23/39

    2NC AT RAISING CEILING BAD

    Deficit reduction not key to the economy.Kuttner, 6-12-2011

    [Robert, Co-founder and co-editor -- The American Prospect, The Gang of Six and OtherRogues, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/gang-of-six_b_875654.html]

    Even with the withdrawal of Senator Tom Coburn, leaving just five bipartisan stalwarts, the Gang of Six (minus one)claims it is on the verge of agreeing to a deficit reduction plan that proposes $4.7 trillion in spending cuts over adecade. If the test is how much to cut, this plan goes both Obama and Ryan one better. But is that really the right

    test? For most Americans, the federal deficit is an abstraction.The problem is too few jobs, flat wages,declining home equity, unaffordable health care, rising college costs, diminished opportunityfor the young.The entire political class has convinced itself that the way to economic recoveryis via deficit reduction. The only problem with that is that no known theory of economics canplausibly demonstrate the connection. Debt financing is not crowding out private investment-- interest costs are at record lows. The problem is that business doesn't see enoughcustomers to increase investment, because of the recession itself. No amount of deficitreduction between now and November 2012 will improve the jobs picture. On the contrary, by denyingthe government money to invest in projects that could create jobs, the deficit obsession will worsen the economicpicture -- and the Obama Administration's re-election prospects.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    24/39

    1NC/2NC FOOD PRICES IMPACT

    Debt ceiling freeze causes global food spikes.Min, 2010[David, Associate Director for Financial Markets Policy -- Center for American Progress, TheBig Freeze, 10-28, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/10/big_freeze.html]

    The conservative pledge to freeze the debt ceiling would also lead to some fairlymomentous problems in the worlds financial markets. Following the financial crisis of 2008-2009,which exposed problems with many private financial instruments that were previously thought to be safe, such as

    money market funds and AAA-rated asset-backed securities, investors sought safe haven by investing insovereign debt. Unfortunately, sovereign debt crises in Greece and Ireland have caused significant uncertainty inEuropean financial markets, and as a result, investors have flocked to the perceived safety ofsovereign debt issued by the United States, which has never defaulted in its history. A freezeon the debt ceiling could erode confidence in U.S. Treasury bonds in a number of ways, creatingfurther and wider panic in financial markets. First, by causing a disruption in the issuance of

    Treasury debt, as happened in 1995-96, a freeze would cause investors to seek alternativefinancial investments, even perhaps causing a run on Treasurys. Such a run would cause thecost of U.S. debt to soar, putting even more stress on our budget, and the resultingenormous capital flows would likely be highly destabilizing to global financial markets,

    potentially creating more asset bubbles and busts throughout the world. Second, the massivewithdrawal of public spending that would occur would cause significant concern amonginstitutional investors worldwide that the U.S. would swiftly enter a second, very deep,recession, raising concerns about the ability of the United States to repay its debt. Finally, thesheer recklessness of a debt freeze during these tenuous times would signal to alreadynervous investors that there was a significant amount of political risk, which could causethem to shy away from investing in the United States generally.Taken together, these factorswould almost certainly result in a significant increase in the interest rates we currently pay on ournational debt, currently just above 2.5 percent for a 10-year Treasury note. If in the near term these rates movedeven to 5.9 percent, the long-term rate predicted by the Congressional Budget Office, then our interest payments

    would increase by more than double, to nearly $600 billion a year.These rates could climb even higher, ifinvestors began to price in a default risk into Treasuryssomething that reckless actions byCongress could potentially sparkthus greatly exacerbating our budget problems.The U.S. dollar, ofcourse, is the worlds reserve currency in large part because of the depth and liquidity of the U.S.

    Treasury bond market. If this market is severely disrupted, and investors lost confidence inU.S. Treasurys, then it is unclear where nervous investors might go next. A sharp and swiftmove by investors out of U.S. Treasury bonds could be highly destabilizing, straining thealready delicate global economy.Imagine, for example, if investors moved from sovereigndebt into commodities, most of which are priced and traded in dollars. This could have thecatastrophic impact of weakening the worlds largest economies while also raising the pricesof the basic inputs (such as metals or food) that are necessary for economic growth. In short, afreeze on the debt ceiling would cause our interest payments to spike, making our budget situation even moreproblematic, while potentially triggering greater global instabilityperhaps even a global economic depression. Thevery idea of a federal debt freeze among the radical right in our country, while they continue to ignore responsibledeficit reduction measures and continue to focus on the wrong policy solutions, exemplifies their obstinacy as much

    as their short-sightedness. A freeze on the debt ceiling, or shutting down the federal government will notreduce the federal budget deficit and will in fact increase it over the long run by tipping the

    global economy into depression.Voters may assume that conservative candidates will not live up to their

    pledge of recklessness once they understand the consequences.This is a risky gamble, particularly giventhe precedent already set by conservatives in 1995.

    Kills 3 billion.Brown, 2005[Lester, President of Earth Policy Institute, MPA at Harvard, Former Advisor to the Secretaryof Agriculture, 2005, Outgrowing The Earth, http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Out/]Many Americans see terrorism as the principal threat to security, said Brown, but for much of humanity, the

    effect of water shortages and rising temperatures on food security are far more important issues. For the 3

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    25/39

    billion people who live on 2 dollars a day or less and who spend up to 70 percent of theirincome on food, even a modest rise in food prices can quickly become life-threatening. Forthem, it is the next meal that is the overriding concern.

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    26/39

    1NC/2NC HEG IMPACT

    Debt crisis collapses heg and guarantees global wars.Khalilzad, 2-8-2011[Zalmay, was the United States ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nationsduring the presidency of George W. Bush and the director of policy planning at the Defense

    Department from 1990 to 1992, The Economy and National Security, 2-8,http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad]Without faster economic growth and actions to reduce deficits, publicly held national debt is projected to reachdangerous proportions. If interest rates were to rise significantly, annual interest payments which already arelarger than the defense budget would crowd out other spending or require substantial tax increases that would

    undercut economic growth. Even worse, if unanticipated events trigger what economists call a suddenstop in credit markets for U.S. debt, the United States would be unable to roll over itsoutstanding obligations, precipitating a sovereign-debt crisis that would almost certainlycompel a radical retrenchment of the United States internationally. Such scenarios wouldreshape the international order. It was the economic devastation of Britain and Franceduring World War II, as well as the rise of other powers, that led both countries to relinquishtheir empires. In the late 1960s, British leaders concluded that they lacked the economiccapacity to maintain a presence east of Suez. Soviet economic weakness, which crystallizedunder Gorbachev, contributed to their decisions to withdraw from Afghanistan, abandonCommunist regimes in Eastern Europe, and allow the Soviet Union to fragment. If the U.S.debt problem goes critical, the United States would be compelled to retrench, reducing itsmilitary spending and shedding international commitments. We face this domestic challenge whileother major powers are experiencing rapid economic growth. Even though countries such as China,India, and Brazil have profound political, social, demographic, and economic problems, theireconomies are growing faster than ours, and this could alter the global distribution of power.

    These trends could in the long term produce a multi-polar world. If U.S. policymakers fail to actand other powers continue to grow, it is not a question of whether but when a new internationalorder will emerge. The closing of the gap between the United States and its rivals couldintensify geopolitical competition among major powers, increase incentives for local powersto play major powers against one another, and undercut our will to preclude or respond tointernational crises because of the higher risk of escalation.The stakes are high. In modern

    history, the longest period of peace among the great powers has been the era of U.S.leadership. By contrast, multi-polar systems have been unstable, with their competitivedynamics resulting in frequent crises and major wars among the great powers. Failures of multi-polar international systems produced both world wars. American retrenchment could have devastatingconsequences. Without an American security blanket, regional powers could rearm in an attempt tobalance against emerging threats. Under this scenario, there would be a heightened possibilityof arms races, miscalculation, or other crises spiraling into all-out conflict. Alternatively, inseeking to accommodate the stronger powers, weaker powers may shift their geopolitical posture away from the

    United States. Either way, hostile states would be emboldened to make aggressive moves in theirregions.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzadhttp://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzadhttp://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzadhttp://www.nationalreview.com/articles/259024/economy-and-national-security-zalmay-khalilzad
  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    27/39

    1NC/2NC SHUTDOWN IMPACT (CYBERWAR)

    Failure to reach a deal guarantees government shutdown.Farry, 1-19-2011[Yanira, Junior Editor Veterans Today, Military & Foreign Affairs Journal, GOP-Tea PartyPlay Chicken With U.S. Credit, Courting Catastrophe,

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/01/19/gop-tea-party-play-chicken-with-u-s-credit-courting-catastrophe/]SHUTTING DOWN GOVERNMENT: If the debt limit is reached, the government is forced to move to apurely cash-flow budget, paying bills with only the tax revenue that comes in. Interest paymentson the debt would get paid first, but what is the order of payment after that? Government activities thatcould fail to be funded range from Social Security and Medicare to military actions in Iraq andAfghanistan. In 1995-96, when House Republicans, led by then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, refused to raisethe debt ceiling for a short time, it caused two temporary shutdowns of all nonessential federalgovernment activities, including a cessation of toxic waste cleanups, disease controlactivities, and a suspension of many law enforcement and drug control operations, ultimatelycosting the U.S. taxpayer more than $800 million.The Clinton Treasury Department was required toemploy some creative accounting including a temporary use of retirement funds for former governmentemployees to stave off even worse outcomes. Analysts at Deutsche Bank have found that such efforts

    would not work as well today, and the government would not be able to stave off agovernment shutdown (or possible suspension of bond payments) for long if the debtceiling isnt raised. But still, some Republicans, such as former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty (R),have said this is the route Congress should choose. As Austan Goolsbee, chairman of the Council ofEconomic Advisers put it, If we get to the point where we damage the full faith and credit of the United States,

    that would be the first default in history caused purely by insanity.

    That causes cyberattacks.Sideman, 2-23-2011[Alysha, Federal Computer Week Contributor, Agencies must determine computer securityteams in face of potential federal shutdown http://fcw.com/Articles/2011/02/23/Agencies-must-determine-computer-security-teams-in-face-of-shutdown.aspx?Page=1]With the WikiLeaks hacks and other threats to cybersecurity present, guarding against

    cyberattacks has become a significant part of governing -- especially because mostgovernment agencies have moved to online systems. As a potential government shutdowncomes closer, agencies must face new questions about defining essential computer personnel.Cyber threats werent as significant during the 1995 furlough as they are today, reportsNextGov. The publication adds that agencies need to buck up and be organized. In late January, governmentofficials, NATO and the European Union banded together in Brussels to formulate a plan to battle cyber bandits,

    according to Defense Systems. Leaders there agreed that existing cybersecurity measures wereincomplete and decided to fast-track a new plan for cyber incident response. Meanwhile, observers arewondering whether the U.S. government has a plan to deal with cyberattacks in the case ofa shutdown.The lists of essential computer security personnel drawn up 15 years ago areirrelevant today, computer specialists told NextGov. In 1995, the only agencies concerned about cybersecuritywere entities such as the FBI and CIA. Today, before any potential government shutdown happens, a plan of

    essential IT personnel should be determined, the specialists add. Agencies should be figuring out whichsystems will need daily surveillance and strategic defense, as well as evaluating the job

    descriptions of the people operating in those systems, former federal executives told NextGov. HordTipton, a former Interior Department CIO, agrees. If they havent done it, theres going to be amad scramble, and theres going to be a hole in the system, he told the site. All governmentdepartments are supposed to have contingency plans on deck that spell out essential systems and the employees

    associated with them, according to federal rules. Meanwhile, some experts say determining which ITworkers are essential depends more on the length of the shutdown. Jeffrey Wheatman, asecurity and privacy analyst with the Gartner research group, tells NextGov that a shutdown lastinga couple of weeks would require incident response personnel, network administrators andstaff who monitor firewall logs for potential intrusions. If a shutdown lasted a month orlonger, more employees would need to report, he said, adding: New threats could emerge

  • 8/4/2019 Politics DA -- Michigan Camp Packet

    28/39

    during that time frame, which demands people with strategy-oriented job functions to devisenew lines of defense. Employees who are deemed essential are critical to national security. Cyberwarfare or holes in cybersecurity can threaten a nations infrastructure. In particular, the electricgrid, the nations military assets, financial sector and telecommunications networks can bevulnerable in the face of an attack, reports Federal Computer Week.

    Great power escalation.Fritz, 2009[Jason, researcher for International Commission on Nuclear Nonproliferation andDisarmament, former Army officer and consultant, and has a master of internationalrelations at Bond University, Hacking Nuclear Command and Control, July,http://www.icnnd.org/latest/research/Jason_Fritz_Hacking_NC2.pdf]

    This paper will analyse the threat of cyber terrorism in regard to nuclear weapons. Specifically, this research willuse open source knowledge to identify the structure of nuclear command and control centres, how those structuresmight be compromised through computer network operations, and how doing so would fit within established cyber

    terrorists capabilities, strategies, and tactics. If access to command and control centres is obtained,terrorists could fake or actually cause one nuclear-armed state to attack another, thusprovoking a nuclear response from another nuclear power. This may be an easier alternativefor terrorist groups than building or acquiring a nuclear weapon or dirty bomb themselves.

    This would also act as a force equaliser, and provide terrorists with the asymmetric benefits

    of high speed, removal of geographical distance, and a relatively low cost . Continuingdifficulties in developing computer tracking technologies which could trace the identity ofintruders , and difficulties in establishing an internationally agreed upon legal framework to guide responses tocomputer network operations, point towards an inherent weakness in using computer networks tomanage nuclear weaponry. This is particularly relevant to reducing the hair trigger postureof existing nuclear arsenals . All computers which are connected to the internet are susceptible to infiltrationand remote control. Computers which operate on a closed network may also be compromised byvarious hacker methods, such as privilege escalation, roaming notebooks, wireless accesspoints, embedded exploits in software and hardware, and maintenance entry point s. Forexample, e-mail