The United states should develop an air quality program

Greetings. First, I'd like to thank my opponent for starting this debate and allowing any member of this website to take up his/her challenge. With that said, let us proceed. Ladies and Gentlemen: I'd like you to focus your attention towards the resolution. Take into consideration the following: "The United states should develop an air quality program." Taking into the account the words of the resolution, it is the job of the Instigator to prove the opposite of this statement; it is the con's job to prove that the United States should NOT develop an air quality program. With that said, if my opponent's arguments do not manage to do this, you can dismiss them. Now, I will start by providing some relevant information on air pollution. Observe the following: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Air pollution can affect both the respiratory and cardiac systems. The health effects of air pollution can be seen as a pyramid, with the mildest but not common effects at the bottom of the pyramid, and the least common but more severe at the top of the pyramid. The pyramid demonstrates that as severity decreases the number of people affected increases. Health Endpoints Associated with Increased Air Pollutants Levels Mortality: All non-accidental mortality causes Hospital Admissions: Cardiovascular and Respiratory Hospital Admissions Emergency Room Visits: Visit to an emergency department Asthma Symptom Days: Exacerbation of asthma symptoms in individuals with diagnosed asthma Restricted Activity Days: Days spent in bed, missed from work, and days when activities are partially restricted due to illness" Acute Respiratory Symptoms: Respiratory-related symptoms such as chest discomfort, coughing and wheezing http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Taking into account this information, we learn two things: First, many illnesses can be traced back to air pollution. Tending to the quality of the US citizens' health should be a primary objective for the US government. Negating this resolution insures the strength of these illnesses within our nation, which will surely cost many their lives. Second, a great deal of US citizens will suffer financially. After all, the more days spent having to miss work, the less payment one is insured to receive. Furthermore, since the US does not have universal health care, the increase of health related payments will also prove detrimental to many US citizens if the United States does not have an air quality program. From these 2 points, we can conclude that the health and income for many US citizens will become problematic if there is not an air quality program. Now I will address my opponent's arguments: He states that several air quality programs are already in each state, but this does not link with his position concerning the resolution. As I've noted, it is his job to prove that the United States should NOT develop an air quality program. The fact that air quality programs have already been developed (hence the fact that the need has been recognized) does not support my opponent's case. In other words, you can turn that argument around and supply my case with it. He then states that people do not want to change, but provides you with no polls or statistics to confirm the thoughts of most US citizens. Therefore, this premise is dismissible. He states that changing the air quality will take several airs, but again refuses to provide evidence for his claim. Keep in mind that the burden of proof belongs to my opponent. Furthermore, as I've previously stated, citizen health and income can vary depending on the existence of anti-air pollution programs. Even if what my opponent states is correct, surely both of these values are important enough to utilize several years to uphold. Perhaps my opponent isn't familiar with the Ant and the grass hopper fable. To quote to lines found in it, "To work today is to eat tomorrow" and "It is best to prepare for the days of necessity." I believe this message is self-explanatory. With that said, I await my opponent's rebuttal.