Resolution: Allowing deep water offshore oil drilling is in the best interest of the United States

Unfortunately we got thrown pretty far off schedule. For now I will rebut my opponent's case. Good luck. ============================= Contention 1 - Reliance on foreign assets ============================= I have three main responses. - Achieving energy independence is feasible without drilling offshore. America is sitting on top of a massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America's Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC's short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant. [1] - Reliance on oil does not encourage "clean" energy development. The more oil we have, the longer we can survive without alternative energy sources. (electric, hydro, geothermal, etc.) The longer we can survive without clean energy, the smaller the sense of urgency about developing new, cleaner technologies becomes. This leads to the US falling behind on new forms of energy development, and does nothing to improve our oil problems or help the environment. - Competition is inherently good for the (US) economy My opponent says that increasing our offshore drilling would lower competition with other countries such as China as far as gas prices go. Last time I checked, competition was what has driven the US economy since, well, THE BIRTH OF THE US. Capitalism has certainly been in ths US's best interests so far, and has been one of the main reasons we are so prosperous. Why would my opponent want to throw that away. More competition means lower gas prices. Isn't this what he is arguing for? His argument about competition is self-defeating. ======================== Contention 2 - Increases oil supply ======================== As of recently, said extra supplies of oil have been dumped into the Gulf of Mexico. I have already addressed this with safer, on-shore methods. Again, reference my argument about alternative energy. =================== Contention 3 - Employment =================== There are many things in this world that could provide jobs for people who have no work, and help the economy. Some are worthwhile endeavors, and some are not. What about employing people to make iPods? Are iPods harmful to the public when used responsibly? No. Are they hurting the environment? Nope. Are they creating any lasting negative impacts on humanity? Negatory. Should we employ people to make them as long as there is a demand for them? Sure. It stimulates the economy and helps the jobless, just like my opponent said. Now, consider offshore drilling. Has offshore drilling harmed the public? Yes. Has offshore drilling hurt the environment? Certainly. Has offshore drilling created any lasting negative impacts on humanity? Arguably. Layers of oil now coat beaches, ocean floors, and fumes have been released into the air. Could we help some jobless people by employing them to help in the offorts of offshore drilling? It is possible. Should we? I'll let the voters decide. [1] http://www.nextenergynews.com...