Datasets:

Hellisotherpeople

/

DebateSum

like 14

Forrest M. Mims III has reported in a Special Feature in The Citizen Scientist ("Meeting Dr. Doom," 31 March 2006) on a lecture he recently heard at a meeting of the Texas Academy of Science. The Academy chose to honor one Professor Eric R. Pianka, an eminent ecologist who studies desert ecologies, with its 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist Scientist award. Professor Pianka used the occasion to champion the notion, apparently without sanction of the Academy, that the Earth can only be saved if ninety percent of the human beings alive today are purged form the planet. He championed airborne Ebola as the most efficient virus to accomplish this. And while he stopped short of calling for terrorist action to bring this result about, he clearly implied that this was a right and proper future for our species and our planet. Astonishingly, after advocating for a future in which more than 5,000,000,000 persons would die a slow and agonizing death, many members of the Texas Academy of Science stood to their feet and applauded. I want to answer two questions here. Do academic institutions like the Texas Academy of Science have a duty to provide Professor Pianka a forum to advance these ideas? And what might the consequences be of allowing him to do so? My answer to the first question is a resounding "no." Furthermore, I am convinced that continuing to allow Professor Pianka unfettered access to impressionable students could one day lead to a loss of life that could make the Killing Fields of Southeast Asia look like a picnic ground. Let me explain. First, do Pianka's opinions deserve protection under the rubric of academic freedom? Well, that depends on whether this ideas are truly academic—that is, that they are consistent with the best understanding of our world that science has established. Now consider Pianka's arguments. Pianka claims that the natural world would be "better off" if there weren't so many humans. To see if that's true, we have to figure out just what constitutes the "natural world"? As an evolutionist, I see human beings as the products of the same natural forces that shaped all other life on earth. Our brains evolved on this planet subject to the same kinds of natural selection pressures as those that shaped peacock feathers. The same can be said of all of our social structures, our religions and every other aspect of what we are that helped us secure resources and propagate our species (the hammer and anvil of natural selection). In short, our institutions and our technology are every bit as much a part of the natural world as elk mating rituals and beaver dams. In fact, by evolving the ability to adapt the world to fit us , human beings have become better at securing resources and procreating than any other vertebrate on the planet. By this measure, we are evolution's most successful creation (amongst vertebrates). If extraterrestrials were asked to select nature's most successful vertebrate on the Earth they would certainly point to us. So it seems very strange to me for an evolutionist to identify one of evolution's most successful creations as somehow operating outside the natural order. To do so is to deny this undeniable truth of evolution. Pianka, however, is an evolutionist who believes that humanity is not part of the natural world. Somehow, the fact our evolution led us to a point whereby we can adapt our environment to our bodies, rather than wait for our bodies to adapt to our environment, puts us in an inferior position in nature. In his mind, Homo sapiens are the despoilers, the corruptors of the natural order. This viewpoint is every bit as anthropocentric as those who would place humans in a superior position, saying that we are the "pinnacle of evolution" or "chosen by God." Only instead of lauding humanity's position in nature, Pianka denigrates it. Evolution supports neither camp. Pianka is, of course, free to ignore the evidence and believe that humanity is, as he says, the "scourge" on the natural world. But this is a political opinion based on some vision he holds in his mind about the way the world ought to be. It is not a scientific fact. Indeed, it is a glaring scientific fallacy. Pianka also argues that human beings are now so densely populated that they provide an idea vector for disease transmission, and he expects that microbes will "ultimately purge the Earth of the scourge of humanity." (Personal correspondence with Forrest Mims.) The data stand utterly against this idea. Plagues have run rampant through human populations throughout time. Millions have died. Huge fractions of some populations have been wiped out. But the net death rate has never come close to the fractions that Pianka envisions. Virulent diseases that kill quickly tend to burn themselves out. Natural selection creates less lethal varieties because an organism can't spread if it kills its host before it can propagate. The flu pandemic of 1918 (the influenza virus is championed by Pianka) may have killed 50 million people, but that was only about 5 percent of those infected. Moreover, every year sees medical advancements—screening techniques improve, as do our methods of creating new vaccines and treating illness of all kinds. Not only that, a desperate situation would be met by desperate measures, including the implementation of martial law, the halting of all air and ground traffic except for emergency vehicles and so on, to stop contagion. In short, there is no historical precedent that supports the notion that humanity could be ninety percent depopulated by a single disease. Moreover, as time goes on and our technology and awareness grows, the risk to humanity is steadily falling. Professor Pianka can believe that microbes will depopulate the earth if he wants, and such alarmist nonsense by some Ph.D.s sells lots of books. However, Pianka's viewpoint runs contrary to the best science.

Carlson 2006 [Shawn, PhD, MacArthur Fellow, Founder and Executive Director for Society of Amateur Scientists, Creator of LABRats, The Tribe, April 2 2006, http://tribes.tribe.net/freedomguardians/thread/084f5b5c-379c-487a-a99d-c9ca6d386951] Bak

Professor Eric R. Pianka, an ecologist expects that microbes will "ultimately purge the Earth of the scourge of humanity. The data stand utterly against this idea. Plagues have run rampant through human populations throughout time. But the net death rate has never come close to the fractions that Pianka envisions. Virulent diseases that kill quickly tend to burn themselves out. Natural selection creates less lethal varieties because an organism can't spread if it kills its host before it can propagate. In short, there is no historical precedent that supports the notion that humanity could be ninety percent depopulated by a disease.

Disease can’t cause extinction – Lethal diseases burnout quickly

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Here was this sane-looking manager at Western Power, telling me the company was spending $200,000 to rescue six types of orchids. Would I like to write something about it? Give me time to investigate, I told him. I wanted to find out if it made sense.¶ A month later, I knew it didn’t make economic or ecological sense yet the money had been wisely spent. The $200,000 went to the Plant Science and Micropropagation Unit in Perth. The orchid project is led by Dr Kingsley Dixon, a botanist with a long reputation for saving endangered plants.¶ To save orchids, his group isolates the “helper fungus” for each one, grows thousands of plants and puts them in bushland sites. They back this up with tissue culture, cyrostorage of shoots, and DNA fingerprinting. It is painstaking work, with no shortcuts; and it all costs.¶ Why do it? I guessed there was some scientific incentive for saving these delicate, about-to-expire flowers: Drakaea elastica (the Glossy-leafed Hammer orchid), Caladenia huegelii (Grand Spider orchid), Epiblema grandiflorum ssp. cyanea (the Blue Babe in the Cradle orchid), Diuris purdiei (Purdies Donkey orchid), Diuris micrantha (Swamp Donkey orchid) and Thelymitra mangeniae (Cinnamon Sun orchid).¶ We’ve all read about the imperatives of biodiversity, the cancer-cures that may flow in the sap of some rainforest shrub. Could that be it? A lot of the information about biodiversity reduces to two assertions:¶ Biodiversity is needed as a life-support system for the planet and as a carrier of priceless genetic information.¶ Species are being lost at a horrifying rate.¶ We hear scary estimates about how many species are disappearing from our planet but those numbers may be nonsense. These estimates were based on the “species area curve” equation established by two researchers in the Florida Keys who counted the number of species in a specific area under study. Soon ecologists started using the same equation on Amazon rainforests and claimed something like 50,000 species a year were being “lost”. However, to know how many species are lost, you have to know how many you started with.¶ In all of this there was a factual problem. Over the past 500 years, almost 90 per cent of the forest along the Atlantic coast of Brazil has been cleared. But guess what? No one has found a single known species that could be declared extinct. Yet according to the “species area curve”, about half the known species in that Brazilian forest should have been lost.¶ “The scare about species extinction has been manufactured in complete contradiction to the scientific data,” declares Professor Julian Simon in his book The State of Humanity. “The highest proven observed rate of extinction until now is only one species per year. Yet the ‘official’ forecast has been 40,000 species dying out per year in the century, a million in all. It is truth that is becoming extinct, not species.”¶ Even if species were disappearing at a great clip in the Amazon, what has this to do with orchids in Western Australia? The Amazon scare started a “Save Everything!” movement. If the Amazon numbers were true (few doubted them), in time our only companions might be cockroaches and rats. Under those conditions, saving orchids, or anything else, seemed a wonderful idea. But if the Amazon numbers are nonsense, there is no reason to panic about saving orchids.¶ If you want an example of an extinct Australian plant, the last Scarlet Snake Bush died in 1995. So extinction does happen here. There are 29 other known cases like that in Western Australia, if you go back 100 years. Most of those plants probably were wiped out in the great agricultural expansion in the first part of the 20th century (up to about 1930). Globally this is a “high” extinction rate. But at least those extinctions are facts.

Heath, 99 (Jim Heath - Australian Orchid Council Inc., 1999, Orchids Australia, “WHY SAVE ORCHIDS UNDER THREAT?,” http://www.orchidsaustralia.com/whysave.htm, CM)

We hear scary estimates about how many species are disappearing These estimates were based on the “species area curve” equation established by two researchers in the Florida Keys who counted the number of species in a specific area under study. Soon ecologists started using the same equation on Amazon rainforests and claimed something like 50,000 species a year were being “lost”. However, to know how many species are lost, you have to know how many you started with.¶ In all of this there was a factual problem. Over the past 500 years, almost 90 per cent of the forest along the Atlantic coast of Brazil has been cleared. But guess what? No one has found a single known species that could be declared extinct. Yet according to the “species area curve”, about half the known species in that Brazilian forest should have been lost “The scare about species extinction has been manufactured in complete contradiction to the scientific data,”

No impact to biodiversity- their calculations are flawed

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Theoretical and empirical studies have identified a vast number of natural processes that can potentially maintain biodiversity. Biodiversity can be maintained by moderately intense disturbances that reduce dominance by species that would otherwise competitively exclude subordinate species. For example, selective grazing by bison can promote plant diversity in grasslands (Collins et al. 1998). Additionally, biodiversity can be maintained by resource partitioning, when species use different resources, or spatiotemporal partitioning, when species use the same resources at different times and places. For instance, plant species in the tundra can coexist by using different sources of nitrogen or use the same sources of nitrogen at different times of the growing season or at different soil depths (McKane et al. 2002). Furthermore, biodiversity can be maintained by interspecific facilitation, which occurs when species positively influence one another by increasing the availability of limiting resources, or by decreasing the limiting effects of natural enemies or physical stresses. Although previous theoretical and empirical studies have identified numerous processes that can maintain biodiversity, ecologists and conservationists rarely know which of these mechanisms actually maintains biodiversity at any particular time and place. Thus, further investigation is needed to identify the natural processes that actually maintain biodiversity in intact ecosystems.

Isbell 12 (Forest Isbell, 2011-present, Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Minnesota, 2010-2011, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, McGill University¶ 2010, Ph.D. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Iowa State University¶ 2005, B.S. Biology, University of Northern Iowa¶ 2005, B.A. Chemistry Teaching, University of Northern Iowa, Causes and Consequences of Biodiversity Declines, 2012, http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/causes-and-consequences-of-biodiversity-declines-16132475 )

Theoretical and empirical studies have identified a vast number of natural processes that can potentially maintain biodiversity Biodiversity can be maintained by moderately intense disturbances that reduce dominance by species that would otherwise competitively exclude subordinate species biodiversity can be maintained by resource partitioning biodiversity can be maintained by interspecific facilitation

Biodiversity is maintainable through natural processes, nature is resilient

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Biodiversity is a corner stone of the environmental movement. But there is no proof that biodiversity is important to the environment. Something without basis in scientific fact is called a Myth. Lets examine biodiversity througout the history of the earth. The earth has been a around for about 4 billion years. Life did not develop until about 500 million years later. Thus for the first 500 million years bio diversity was zero. The planet somehow survived this lack of biodiversity. For the next 3 billion years, the only life on the planet was microbial and not diverse. Thus, the first unexplainable fact is that the earth existed for 3.5 billion years, 87.5% of its existence, without biodiversity. Somewhere around 500 million years ago life began to diversify and multiple celled species appeared. Because these species were partially composed of sold material they left better geologic records, and the number of species and genera could be cataloged and counted. The number of genera on the planet is a indication of the biodiversity of the planet. Figure 1 is a plot of the number of genera on the planet over the last 550 million years. The little black line outside of the left edge of the graph is 10 million years. Notice the left end of this graph. Biodiversity has never been higher than it is today.

Dodds 2000 [Donald - president of North Pacific Research, The Myth of Biodiversity]

there is no proof that biodiversity is important to the environment. Something without basis in scientific fact is called a Myth Lets examine biodiversity througout the history of the earth. The earth has been a around for about 4 billion years. Life did not develop until about 500 million years later Thus for the first 500 million years bio diversity was zero. The planet somehow survived this lack of biodiversity For the next 3 billion years, the only life on the planet was microbial and not diverse

Biodiversity loss does not impact the overall survivability of the environment - scientifically proven

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

CONTINUED DESTRUCTION¶ The limbo enables destruction, environmentalists say.¶ After years of declines, preliminary government data suggests that deforestation increased by 15 percent between August 2012 and April 2013, compared with the same nine-month period a year earlier. The government says a fuller picture will follow the dry season and clarify what damage is man-made and what is the result of wildfires and other natural deterioration.¶ But the data so far supports the theory that high crop and commodity prices provoke destruction, said Ferreira, the federal official. In Mato Grosso, the state with the most deforestation since August, there was a 12 percent jump in soy planting.¶ The government's figures are modest compared to those compiled by Imazon, a private research institute that also tracks satellite imagery. Its figures suggest deforestation increased by as much as 88 percent during the nine-month period.¶ If borne out, the trend would underscore fears that Rousseff has delegated too much enforcement to local authorities, who critics say are more likely to favor development over environmental concerns. Deforestation is already creeping into areas where she has declassified parkland and changed policy to allow for hydroelectric dams and other infrastructure projects.

Reuters 6/5 [Wed Jun 5, 2013 3:34pm EDT, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/05/us-brazil-deforestation-idUSBRE9541D920130605] //duffee

CONTINUED DESTRUCTION The limbo enables destruction, environmentalists say. After years of declines, preliminary government data suggests that deforestation increased by 15 percent between August 2012 and April 2013, compared with the same nine-month period a year earlier But the data so far supports the theory that high crop and commodity prices provoke destruction, said Ferreira, the federal official. In Mato Grosso, the state with the most deforestation since August, there was a 12 percent jump in soy planting deforestation increased by as much as 88 percent during the nine-month period. If borne out, the trend would underscore fears that Rousseff has delegated too much enforcement to local authorities, who critics say are more likely to favor development over environmental concerns. Deforestation is already creeping into areas where she has declassified parkland and changed policy to allow for hydroelectric dams and other infrastructure projects.

First, Alt causes- Brazilian paralysis

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

The US space agency Nasa warned this week that the Amazon rainforest may be showing the first signs of large-scale degradation due to climate change.¶ A team of scientists led by the agency found that an area twice the size of California continues to suffer from a mega-drought that began eight years ago.¶ The new study shows the severe dry spell in 2005 caused far wider damage than previously estimated and its impact persisted longer than expected until an even harsher drought in 2010.¶ With little time for the trees to recover between what the authors describe as a “double whammy”, 70m hectares of forest have been severely affected, the analysis of 10 years of satellite microwave radar data revealed.¶ The data showed a widespread change in the canopy due to the dieback of branches, especially among the older, larger trees that are most vulnerable because they provide the shelter for other vegetation.¶ “We had expected the forest canopy to bounce back after a year with a new flush of leaf growth, but the damage appeared to persist right up to the subsequent drought in 2010,” said study co-author Yadvinder Malhi of Oxford University.¶ The Amazon is experiencing a drought rate that is unprecedented in a century, said the agency. Even before 2005, water availability had been shrinking steadily for more than 10 years, which made the trees more vulnerable. Between 2005 and 2010, localised dry spells added to the problem.

Watts 13 [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/19/amazon-rainforest-showing-signs-of-degradation-due-to-climate-change-nasa-warns/ Amazon rainforest showing signs of degradation due to climate change, NASA warns, Jonathan Watts an award-winning journalist and the author of When a Billion Chinese Jump: How China Will Save the World - or Destroy It., The Guardian, Saturday, January 19, 2013 1:21 EDT]

agency Nasa warned this week that the Amazon rainforest may be showing the first signs of large-scale degradation due to climate change an area twice the size of California continues to suffer from a mega-drought that began eight years ago. The new study shows the severe dry spell in 2005 caused far wider damage than previously estimated and its impact persisted longer than expected until an even harsher drought in 2010 . The data showed a widespread change in the canopy due to the dieback of branches, especially among the older, larger trees that are most vulnerable because they provide the shelter for other vegetation The Amazon is experiencing a drought rate that is unprecedented in a century, said the agency. Even before 2005, water availability had been shrinking steadily for more than 10 years, which made the trees more vulnerable. Between 2005 and 2010, localised dry spells added to the problem

And, Alt cause- Warming

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Do a search on “Global Warming and Amazon Rainforest” and enjoy over 200,000 sites mostly proclaiming that “Amazon rainforest may become a desert” or “large portion of the rainforest will be lost” or you name it. Throw in the 200 indigenous cultures in the forest, add in some clever phrases like “lungs of the planet,” argue that the rainforest is being destroyed faster than anyone expected, and then claim “incalculable damages” all because of global warming. The cure for everything and anything is surely hidden in the rainforest of the Amazon, and the loss of that ecosystem could spell the end of us all.¶ Three recent papers appearing in leading scientific journals spell trouble for the alarmists’ claims about global warming and the precious and delicate Amazon rainforest.¶ The first paper appeared in Science magazine and was written by four scientists from the University of Arizona and Brazil’s University of São Paulo. Saleska et al. begin reminding us that “Large-scale numerical models that simulate the interactions between changing global climate and terrestrial vegetation predict substantial carbon loss from tropical ecosystems, including the drought-induced collapse of the Amazon forest and conversion to savanna.” They further explain that “Model-simulated forest collapse is a consequence not only of climate change–induced drought but also of amplification by the physiological response of the forest: Water-limited vegetation responds promptly to initial drought by reducing transpiration (and photosynthesis), which in turn exacerbates the drought by interrupting the supply of water that would otherwise contribute to the recycled component of precipitation. This physiological feedback mechanism should be observable as short-term reductions in transpiration and photosynthesis in response to drought under current climates.”¶ In 2005, Mother Nature conducted an experiment for us by producing a substantial drought in the Amazon; the drought peaked in intensity during July to September of that year with the hardest hit part of the Amazon occurring in the central and southwestern portions of Amazonia. Saleska et al. used satellite-based measurements and much to their surprise, they found that forest canopy “greenness” over the drought-stricken areas increased at a highly significant rate. They conclude that “These observations suggest that intact Amazon forests may be more resilient than many ecosystem models assume, at least in response to short-term climatic anomalies.”¶ Next up is an article in a recent issue of the Journal of Vegetation Science by seven scientists from Panama, Brazil, and California; the piece is entitled “Long-term variation in Amazon forest dynamics” and therefore must contain horrible news about the state of the rainforest, right? Wrong! Laurance and her team conducted five different surveys of the forest in a protected area 50 miles north of Manaus in the central Amazon; they made these measurements between 1981 and 2003. Getting right to the bottom line, they report that “Forest biomass also increased over time, with the basal area of trees in our plots, which correlate strongly with tree biomass, rising by 4% on average.” They then add “The suite of changes we observed—accelerating tree growth and forest dynamism, and rising biomass—largely accords with findings from other long-term, comparative studies of forest dynamics across the Amazon Basin.” They state “One of the most frequent explanations for such findings is that forest productivity is rising, possibly in response to increasing CO2 fertilization or some other regional or global driver(s), such as increasing irradiance or rainfall variability.” We are partial to the increasing CO2 explanation, and it is worth noting that the first sentence in the “Conclusions” section in their abstract clearly states “The increasing forest dynamics, growth, and basal area observed are broadly consistent with the CO2 fertilization hypothesis.”¶ Our third recent article was written by three scientists from Brazil and Germany and it appeared in Global Biogeochemical Cycles. Lapola et al. begin noting that “Tropical South America vegetation cover projections for the end of the century differ considerably depending on climate scenario and also on how physiological processes are considered in vegetation models.” To investigate the future of the vegetation of the Amazon, the team created a numerical “Potential Vegetation Model” that could be coupled with global climate models. As seen in their figure below (Figure 1), the vegetation model appears to accurately replicate the current vegetation in the region. When they simulated climate change in the future and they included the CO2 fertilization effect, the vegetation was largely unchanged. Without the CO2 fertilization effect, the rainforest all but disappears under their expected change in climate. And if the climate does not change much and the CO2 fertilization effect is realized, the rainforest expands considerably.¶ In their own words, Lapola et al. conclude “Biome projections for the end of the century in tropical South America are quite variable, depending not only on the climate scenario, but also on the effect of CO2 fertilization on photosynthesis.” Furthermore “Our simulations show that if, in the future, CO2 fertilization effect does not play any role in tropical ecosystems then there must be substantial biome shifts in the region, including substitution of the Amazonian forest by savanna.” If the CO2 fertilization does in fact occur (and 1,000s of experiments suggest it is occurring and will occur in the future), “most of Amazonia would remain the same.”

World Climate Report 10 (nation’s leading publication in this realm, often cited by prominent scientists and lawmakers, http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/about-us/)

The cure for everything and anything is surely hidden in the rainforest of the Amazon, and the loss of that ecosystem could spell the end of us all. Three recent papers appearing in leading scientific journals spell trouble for the alarmists’ claims about global warming and the precious and delicate Amazon rainforest They further explain that “Model-simulated forest collapse is a consequence not only of climate change–induced drought but also of amplification by the physiological response of the forest: Water-limited vegetation responds promptly to initial drought by reducing transpiration (and photosynthesis), which in turn exacerbates the drought by interrupting the supply of water that would otherwise contribute to the recycled component of precipitation They conclude that “These observations suggest that intact Amazon forests may be more resilient than many ecosystem models assume, at least in response to short-term climatic anomalies.” Next up is an article in a recent issue of the Journal of Vegetation Science by seven scientists from Panama, Brazil, and California; the piece is entitled “Long-term variation in Amazon forest dynamics” and therefore must contain horrible news about the state of the rainforest The increasing forest dynamics, growth, and basal area observed are broadly consistent with the CO2 fertilization hypothesis Our simulations show that if, in the future, CO2 fertilization effect does not play any role in tropical ecosystems then there must be substantial biome shifts in the region, including substitution of the Amazonian forest by savanna.” If the CO2 fertilization does in fact occur (and 1,000s of experiments suggest it is occurring and will occur in the future), “most of Amazonia would remain the same.”

And, Amazon resilient – we have best studies and data

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Actually the concern should not be about losing a few plants and animals; mankind stands to lose much more. By destroying the tropical forests, we risk our own quality of life, gamble with the stability of climate and local weather, threaten the existence of other species, and undermine the valuable services provided by biological diversity. While in most areas environmental degradation has yet to reach a crisis level where entire systems are collapsing, it is important to examine some of the effects of existing environmental impoverishment and to forecast some of the potential repercussions of forest loss. Continuing loss of natural systems could make human activities increasingly vulnerable to ecological surprises in the future. The most immediate impact of deforestation occurs at the local level with the loss of ecological services provided by tropical rainforests and related ecosystems. Such habitats afford humans valuable services such as erosion prevention, flood control, water filtration, fisheries protection, and pollination—functions that are particularly important to the world's poorest people, who rely on natural resources for their everyday survival. Forest loss also reduces the availability of renewable resources like timber, medicinal plants, nuts and fruit, and game. Over the longer term, deforestation of tropical rainforests can have a broader impact, affecting global climate and biodiversity. These changes are more challenging to observe and forecast from local effects, since they take place over a longer time scale and can be difficult to measure.

Butler 12 (Rhett Butler, Today he serves as president and editor-in-chief of the web site. He is also the senior writer and photographer, creating much of the site's content, Consequences of deforestation, mongabay.com, July 22, 2012, http://rainforests.mongabay.com/0901.htm) //You

mankind stands to lose much more. By destroying the tropical forests, we risk our own quality of life Continuing loss of natural systems could make human activities increasingly vulnerable to ecological surprises in the future Such habitats afford humans valuable services such as erosion prevention, flood control, water filtration, fisheries protection, and pollination—functions that are particularly important to the world's poorest people, who rely on natural resources for their everyday survival. Over the longer term, deforestation of tropical rainforests can have a broader impact, affecting global climate and biodiversity. These changes are more challenging to observe and forecast from local effects, since they take place over a longer time scale and can be difficult to measure.

And, Long timeframe—the impacts of deforestation take on a larger scale, making it difficult to measure

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

The increase in global temperatures since the late 19th century just reflects the end of the Little Ice Age. The global temperature trends since then have followed not rising CO2 trends but the ocean temperature cycles of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Every 20 to 30 years, the much colder water near the bottom of the oceans cycles up to the top, where it has a slight cooling effect on global temperatures until the sun warms that water. That warmed water then contributes to slightly warmer global temperatures, until the next churning cycle.

Ferrara 2013 [Peter - director of entitlement and budget policy for the Heartland Institute and senior advisor for entitlement reform and budget policy @ National Tax Limitation Foundation, "To the horror of global warming alarmists, global cooling is here", FORBES, May 26, http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/05/26/to-the-horror-of-global-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here/]

The increase in global temperatures just reflects the end of the Little Ice Age. The global temperature trends since then have followed not rising CO2 trends but the ocean temperature cycles Every 20 to 30 years, the much colder water near the bottom of the oceans cycles up to the top, where it has a slight cooling effect on global temperatures until the sun warms that water

First, global warming is not anthropogenic - temperature increases due to ocean cycles and sunspots, not CO2

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about "global warming." Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something draMatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

Allegre, et. al. 2012 [Claude - former director of the Institute for the Study of Earth @ University of Paris, J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, "No need to panic about global warming", WALL STREET JOURNAL, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html]

a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.

And, you are wrong - there is a growing consensus of scientists that say warming is not happening - computer models prove no rise in temperature

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet. Lysenko and his team lived very well, and they fiercely defended their dogma and the privileges it brought them.

Allegre, et. al. 2012 [Claude - former director of the Institute for the Study of Earth @ University of Paris, J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, "No need to panic about global warming", WALL STREET JOURNAL, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html]

Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet.

And, treat the Aff's evidence with skepticism - alarmist warming research yields more profits and grants for their authors

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

(NAPSA)—One of the fundamental tenets of our justice system is one is innocent until proven guilty. While that doesn’t apply to scientific discovery, in the global warming debate the prevailing attitude is that human induced global warming is already a fact of life and it is up to doubters to prove otherwise.

Lupo 2012 (Anthony, PhD, Atmospheric Science department chair and professor, Michigan University, http://www.napsnet.com/pdf_archive/34/50144.pdf)

One of the fundamental tenets of our justice system is one is innocent until proven guilty in the global warming debate the prevailing attitude is that human induced global warming is already a fact of life and it is up to doubters to prove otherwise

Jury still out- no conclusive proof that warming is anthropogenic

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere's life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today. Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere.

Allegre, et. al. 2012 [Claude - former director of the Institute for the Study of Earth @ University of Paris, J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva, "No need to panic about global warming", WALL STREET JOURNAL, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html]

CO2 is not a pollutant CO2 is a key component of the biosphere's life cycle Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are toda . Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere

CO2 is not a pollutant - rise in CO2 levels leads to rise in plant growth and greater agricultural yields

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Washington — Since the 1980s, large-scale conventional crop farming has increasingly produced higher yields while using less fertilizer and water, and fewer chemical pesticides, says American political scientist Robert Paarlberg. And that is good for the environment, he said. With conventional agriculture based on science, “the land footprint of agriculture is getting smaller,” Paarlberg said at a March 15 discussion about “The Culture War Over Food and Farming” at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies in Washington. He added that increased yields are needed to feed the world’s growing population. Paarlberg said conventional farming today is “dramatically different” from conventional farming in the 1960s. One big factor affecting higher yields was the commercial introduction in 1996 of disease- and insect-resistant seeds improved through biotechnology, also known as genetically modified seeds. Biotech-modified maize, for instance, protects against infections from the corn borer insect without requiring the use of chemical spreads, he said. Resistant soybeans have replaced multiple sprayings of toxic herbicides and pesticides. And because biotech crops resist insects and weeds, less mechanical tillage is needed, reducing the amount of diesel fuel exhaust going into the air and conserving soil. The other more recent factor affecting conventional agriculture has been the use of global positioning systems (GPS) on farm machinery that “tell farmers exactly what part of the field needs to be watered and what part does not, what part is low on nitrogen and what part is not,” Paarlberg said. That prevents excessive applications of fertilizer and reduces toxic runoff into streams. GPS-equipped tractors also allow farmers to insert fertilizer into the soil precisely where seeds have been planted. “Today, farm equipment is much more precise,” Paarlberg said. The benefits of biotech seeds and other modern farming techniques such as targeted irrigation are widespread. Between 1990 and 2004 in the 34 countries that belong to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the use of water for irrigation decreased 9 percent, excess nitrogen from overapplications of fertilizer decreased 17 percent, pesticide use went down 5 percent and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture dropped 3 percent. Because tractors are applying fewer pesticides and fertilizer, agricultural energy use is increasing at only one-sixth the rate of energy use in other areas of the economy, Paarlberg said.

McConnell ’12 (Kathryn, is a staff writer at IIP Digital, “Modern Agricultural Production Continues to Increase Yields”, April 5th, 2012 http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/article/2012/04/201204053331.html#ixzz2akVShede, SD)

large-scale conventional crop farming has increasingly produced higher yields while using less fertilizer and water, and fewer chemical pesticides that is good for the environment conventional farming today is “dramatically different” from conventional farming in the 1960 One big factor affecting higher yields was the commercial introduction disease- and insect-resistant seeds improved through biotechnology, use of global positioning systems (GPS) on farm machinery Today, farm equipment is much more precise . The benefits of biotech seeds and other modern farming techniques such as targeted irrigation are widespread

First, Ag production high now – mechanization

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

A new study, published today (2 August) in Science, has called for a 'climate-smart food system' to prevent climate change from slowing progress in eradicating global hunger. The researchers carried out a review of key scientific papers on food security and climate change since 1990. It confirmed a robust and coherent global pattern of climate change impacts on crop productivity that could have consequences for food availability. The review highlighted improvements in agricultural technologies, such as more productive and climate-resilient crop varieties, are important to counter this threat, but are unlikely to be sufficient on their own. Wider changes in food trade and stocks, and nutrition and social policy options are also critical. The last few decades have witnessed a substantial decline in the number of hungry people worldwide. However, since 2007, progress has slowed and world food supply and demand have been precariously balanced - climate change threatens to tip this balance, most dramatically in the poorer areas of the world. Professor Tim Wheeler, from the University of Reading's Walker Institute for Climate System Research and lead author of the review, said: "The food price spike of 2008 highlights the increasing vulnerability of the global food system to shocks, such as extreme weather and economic volatility. A step change is needed in efforts to create a 'climate-smart food system' that can better withstand whatever climate throws at us. This should include development of drought- and heat-tolerant crops or new tillage techniques that reduce release of carbon from soils, but we need to go further and ensure trade, investment and development policies all have 'climate-smart' food as a central goal." Warmer temperatures, changes in rainfall patterns and more extreme weather under climate change are expected to affect food and fodder production, change patterns of pest and diseases of crops and animals and impact on food supplies. Countries where these impacts are expected to be negative are also those where hunger is most prevalent now. Extreme weather, such as floods, drought and heatwaves, contributes to short term food price spikes and longer term climate change is likely to be an important factor in future price trends. Volatile food prices are a particular concern to the poor, who often spend a high proportion of their income on food.

Wheeler ‘13 (Tim is Professor of Crop Science at the University of Reading and Deputy Chief Scientific Adviser for the UK Department for International Development, “World Food Security More Vulnerable than ever to Climate Change”, 8-2-13, SD)

A new study has called for a 'climate-smart food system' to prevent climate change from slowing progress in eradicating global hunger It confirmed a robust and coherent global pattern of climate change impacts on crop productivity that could have consequences for food availability. Wider changes in food trade and stocks, and nutrition and social policy options are also critical. , progress has slowed and world food supply and demand have been precariously balanced - climate change threatens to tip this balance, The food price spike of 2008 highlights the increasing vulnerability of the global food system to shocks such as extreme weathe . A step change is needed in efforts to create a 'climate-smart food system' that can better withstand whatever climate throws at us. include development of drought- and heat-tolerant crops or new tillage techniques that reduce release of carbon from soils, but we need to go further and ensure trade, investment and development policies all have 'climate-smart' food as a central goal. Extreme weather, such as floods, drought and heatwaves, contributes to short term food price spikes and longer term climate change is likely to be an important factor in future price trends.

Second, alternate causality to food security - climate change

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Some fast food companies say the increased demand for corn brought on by ethanol plants is the reason menu prices, namely beef, pork and chicken, are higher. "It's harder every day to offer great value because our costs are skyrocketing," Lisa Ingram, president of White Castle, recently said in Washington. "In fact, since the RFS became law our cost for beef has increased by forty-seven percent." Fox News reports the sentiment is mimicked by Wendy’s franchise owners. Ron Ross, owner of four Wendy’s restaurants in southern California, says an industry study found higher costs, supposedly impacted by the RFS, have taken $25,000 in revenues from each of his stores. Because competition limits how much of the costs can be transitioned to customers, Ross says he’s had to cut back on employee bonuses and delay new store plans. Higher beef prices can’t be blamed solely on increased corn demand created by ethanol plants. Two consecutive years of drought forced cattle herds to shrink to a 60-year low, which pushed wholesale beef prices to record highs earlier this summer.

AG Professional 8-1( Grocers, Fast Food Shops Blame Ethanol for Higher Food Prices 8-1-13 http://www.agprofessional.com/news/Grocers-fast-food-shops-blame-ethanol-for-higher-food-prices-217793201.html?ref=201)

food companies say the increased demand for corn brought on by ethanol plants , namely beef, pork and chicken, are higher. "It's harder every day to offer great value because our costs are skyrocketing our cost for beef has increased by forty-seven percent Higher beef prices can’t be blamed solely on increased corn demand created by ethanol plants. Two consecutive years of drought forced cattle herds to shrink to a 60-year low, which pushed wholesale beef prices to record highs earlier this summer.

And, alternate causes to food prices - drought

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Although China maintains vast reserves of grain, and other foods like pork and edible oils, the United States and most other countries have abandoned this wise approach. Thirty years of neoliberal market fundamentalism has treated agriculture and food like other consumer products—as opposed to a necessity of life. Private big grain traders never liked reserves, and their greed was rationalized by “efficient markets hypothesis,” which claimed that reserves were inefficient and distorted markets. U.S. farm bills have abandoned reserves and other tools to manage supply. International financial institutions often pressure countries around the world to sell off their reserves and reduce support for their own farmers. This free-market system left food-importing countries without a lifeline when global prices spiked in 2007. In the following year the ranks of the world’s hungry swelled by another 100 million. Fortunately, the idea of grain reserves is gaining traction again. It will be among the topics of discussion at the G-20 summit in France in May as a response to rising global hunger. West African countries are considering the establishment of regional reserves, Asian countries are starting a rice reserve, and the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are exploring options for a collective reserve. Thus far, the United States has resisted these proposals despite the lessons of the last food crisis. But that could change. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported the lowest stocks for corn in the last 15 years, putting us one severe weather event away from a major corn shortage. And major agricultural exporting countries like Russia, Argentina and Australia have all experienced major weather events that have limited crop production and further tightened global grain supplies.

Harkness ’11 (Jim, as a B.A. in Asian studies from the University of Wisconsin and a master's in development sociology from Cornell University and has written and spoken frequently on China and sustainable development, and has served as an advisor to the World Bank and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, “Food security and national security: Learning from China’s approach to managing its wheat supplies”, IATP, February 28th, 2011, http://www.iatp.org/documents/food-security-and-national-security-learning-from-china%E2%80%99s-approach-to-managing-its-wheat-s#sthash.7krfIN0g.dpuf, SD)

China maintains vast reserves of grain , the United States and most other countries have abandoned this wise approach Thirty years of neoliberal market fundamentalism has treated agriculture and food like other consumer products—as opposed to a necessity of life Fortunately, the idea of grain reserves is gaining traction again. It will be among the topics of discussion at the G-20 summit in France in May as a response to rising global hunger West African countries are considering the establishment of regional reserves the U S has resisted these proposals But that could chang And major agricultural exporting countries have all tightened global grain supplies

And, no food collapse - global food reserves

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

6 June 2013, Beijing - Global agricultural production is expected to grow 1.5 percent a year on average over the coming decade, compared with annual growth of 2.1 percent between 2003 and 2012, according to a new report published by the OECD and FAO today. Limited expansion of agricultural land, rising production costs, growing resource constraints and increasing environmental pressures are the main factors behind the trend. But the report argues that farm commodity supply should keep pace with global demand. The OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2013-2022 expects prices to remain above historical averages over the medium term for both crop and livestock products due to a combination of slower production growth and stronger demand, including for biofuels. The report says agriculture has been turned into an increasingly market-driven sector, as opposed to policy-driven as it was in the past, thus offering developing countries important investment opportunities and economic benefits, given their growing food demand, potential for production expansion and comparative advantages in many global markets.

FAO ’13 (“OECD-FAO expect slower global agricultural production growth”, June 6th, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN, SD)

agricultural production is expected to grow 1.5 percent a year on average over the coming decade the report argues that farm commodity supply should keep pace with global demand. The OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2013-2022 expects prices to remain above historical averages agriculture has been turned into an increasingly market-driven secto thus offering developing countries important investment opportunities and economic benefits, given their growing food demand, potential for production expansion and comparative advantages in many global markets.

Ag production will continue to rise

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

Thus, climate change is expected to bring warmer temperatures; changes to rainfall patterns; and increased frequency, and perhaps severity, of extreme weather. By the end of this century, the global mean temperature could be 1.8° to 4.0°C warmer than at the end of the previous century (15). Warming will not be even across the globe and is likely to be greater over land compared with oceans, toward the poles, and in arid regions (15). Recent weather records also show that land surface temperatures may be increasing more slowly than expected from climate models, potentially because of a higher level of absorption of CO2 by deep oceans (19). Sea-level rises will increase the risk of flooding of agricultural land in coastal regions. Changes in rainfall patterns, particularly over tropical land, are less certain, partly because of the inability of the current models to represent the global hydrological cycle accurately (20). In general, it is expected that the summer Asian monsoon rainfall may increase, while parts of North and southern Africa could become drier (15). How will these regional changes in climate affect food security? Agriculture is inherently sensitive to climate variability and change, as a result of either natural causes or human activities. Climate change caused by emissions of greenhouse gases is expected to directly influence crop production systems for food, feed, or fodder; to affect livestock health; and to alter the pattern and balance of trade of food and food products. These impacts will vary with the degree of warming and associated changes in rainfall patterns, as well as from one location to another. Climate change could have a range of direct and indirect effects on all four dimensions of food security. How is the evidence base distributed across the dimensions of food security? We undertook a bibliographic analysis of peer-reviewed journal papers on food security and climate change since the publication of the first Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report in 1990 (21). That report was ground-breaking for the climate science that it reviewed, but agriculture was entirely absent. Our analysis shows that a small peak of papers with climate change and food security in the title or abstract were published in the mid-1990s, followed by a lull then a sharp increase in papers published with these terms from 2008 onward. The distribution of the evidence across the four dimensions of food security is, however, heavily skewed toward food availability within 70% of the publications. Access, utilization, and stability dimensions of food security are represented by only 11.9, 13.9, and 4.2% of the total publications on food security and climate change, respectively. Climate change could transform the ability to produce certain products at regional and international levels. If it turns out, for example, that the geography of biomass production shifts at a global scale (38), this will have production implications for all bio-based products—whether food, feed, fuels, or fiber—and will impinge on food trade flows, with implications for (farm) incomes and access to food (39). Similar changes have been observed in the geography and relative productivity of certain ocean species, such as shifts between anchovy and sardine regimes in the Pacific Ocean (40).

Wheeler and Braun ’13 (Tim is Professor of Crop Science at the University of Reading and Deputy Chief Scientific Adviser for the UK Department for International Development, “Climate Change Impacts on Global Food Security”, Science Vol. 341 no. 6145 pp. 508-513, August 2 2013, http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6145/508.full, SD)

climate change is expected to bring warmer temperatures By the end of this century, the global mean temperature could be warmer than at the end of the previous century ). Warming will not be even across the globe and is likely to be greater over land compared with oceans, toward the poles, and in arid regions How will these regional changes in climate affect food security? Agriculture is inherently sensitive to climate variability and change, as a result of either natural causes or human activit es Climate change caused by emissions of greenhouse gases is expected to directly influence crop production systems for food, feed, or fodder . Climate change could have a range of direct and indirect effects on all four dimensions of food security. . Climate change could transform the ability to produce certain products at regional and international levels

Agriculture is sensitive to climate change - leads to a change in food availability

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

World food prices have dropped in the third consecutive quarters, says the World Bank July 25, 2013. According to the Bank’s Food Price Watch, global food prices continued to fall between February and June 2013, a trend observed since the recent all-time peak in August 2012. But it noted that food prices were only 12% below the August peak. The World Bank’s monitoring showed that higher production, declining imports and lower demand generally pushed export prices down although international markets continue to be tight for maize. It said the current prices of wheat reflect expectations that world production will rebound this year from last year’s declines as rice prices continued to decrease moderately. Domestic prices, meanwhile, generally followed seasonal trends but wide variations continued. Where prices rose between February and June 2013, the Bank attributed it to a combination of factors including bad weather, dwindling supplies, currency devaluations and public procurement policies. Looking ahead, the World Bank said uncertainty in the international market remains. “Recently unfavourable weather conditions in northern and central Europe, the Russian Federation and China may affect the prospects of a rebound in the world wheat production,” it said and “the current situation in Egypt may also impact international markets of wheat, given Egypt is the world’s top wheat importer”. –

GBN 7-30( World Food Prices Fall But Remain High 7-30-13 Ghana Business News http://www.ghanabusinessnews.com/2013/07/30/world-food-prices-fall-but-remain-high-world-bank/)

World food prices have dropped in the third consecutive quarters The World Bank’s monitoring showed that higher production, declining imports and lower demand generally pushed export prices down although international markets continue to be tight for maize. Domestic prices, meanwhile, generally followed seasonal trends but wide variations continued. Where prices rose between February and June 2013, the Bank attributed it to a combination of factors including bad weather . “Recently unfavourable weather conditions in northern and central Europe, the Russian Federation and China may affect the prospects of a rebound in the world wheat production

Alt cause – weather conditions

Advantage Frontline Toolbox - Northwestern 2013 Sophomores.html5

Northwestern (NHSI)

Affirmatives

2013

The problems along the Rio Grande were confirmed in October 2010, just two weeks after Mexico’s bicentennial celebration. David and Tiffany Hartley, a married couple who had moved to the border from Colorado three years earlier for a job in the oil industry, 1 The worst massacre of migrants chronicled by international media happened in August 2010 in Tamaulipas, where the bodies of 72 migrant workers were discovered. Members of Los Zetas reportedly were held responsible. 2 Statistics reported in northeastern Mexico, September 2010. 5 Foreign Policy Research Institute ventured illegally on jet skis into the Mexican waters of the Rio Grande. As the Hartleys searched for an abandoned Catholic church they had previously tou red for recreation, Mexican bandits allegedly ambushed them in speedboats. The husband, David, was missing after the encounter and, according to Tif fany, was wounded and killed. The incident illustrated the lack of an effective cooperative security strategy between Mexico and the United States. Although both nations have pushed forward diplomatic platitudes, the current absence of security along the U.S.-Mexico frontier is both unacceptable and unsustainable. Indeed, the furious reactions to the Hartley incident appear similar to Arizonans ’ responses in April 2010 to the death of rancher Robert Krentz, whose murder preceded the state legislature’s passage of SB 1070, Arizona’s controver sial illegal immigration law. Despite the well - publicized capture o f Mexican cartel kingpins, there are no signs that the anarchy south of the border will soon abate. Mexico’s inability to control the cartels has exposed fundamental weaknesses in the Mexican state, particularly in the north. Regional kingpins continue to seek authority over local governments and businesses in addition to control over smuggling routes. These developments are a natural consequence of many forces — including NAFTA, migration, economic inequality, law enforcement corruption, and political repression — that have plagued Mexico for decades. The outcome of this twenty - first century irregular war, which may become even more violent during the course of this decade, will have far reaching consequences for the United States. Barring an unlikely increase in Mexico’s nationwide security capacity, the anarchy will continue unchecked. This situation has the potential to threaten both the legitimacy of the state and the fabric of Mexican society.

Danelo, 11 [T OWARD A U.S. - M EXICO S ECURITY S TRATEGY : T HE G EOPOLITICS OF N ORTHERN M EXICO AND THE I MPLICATIONS FOR U.S. P OLICY By David J. Danelo, https://www.fpri.org/docs/Toward_a_US_Mexico_Security_Strategy_Danelo.pdf]

The problems along the Rio Grande were confirmed in October 2010 two weeks after Mexico’s bicentennial celebration The worst massacre where the bodies of 72 migrant workers were discovered. The incident illustrated the lack of an effective cooperative strategy between Mexico and the U S Although both nations have pushed forward diplomatic platitudes the current absence of security along the U.S.-Mexico frontier is both unacceptable and unsustainable These developments are a natural consequence of many forces including NAFTA migration economic inequality law enforcement corruption and political repression that have plagued Mexico for decades. This situation has the potential to threaten both the legitimacy of the state and the fabric of Mexican society.

No mechanism for effective cooperation

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

"There's probably no other country in the world that's as intertwined with the United States. Our economies are intertwined; Mexico is now the second destination for U.S. exports and the third largest trading partner overall," said Shannon O'Neil, fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.¶ The U.S. automotive, food, and computer and electronics industries depend on Mexican consumers, said O'Neil. "For 21 out of 50 states, Mexico is the No. 1 or No. 2 destination for their exports," she said. "And it's not just the states on the border that have huge trade with Mexico, but as far away as New Hampshire, Vermont, Michigan and Indiana."¶ Mexico also is a friendly source of oil, O'Neil noted. It's the United States' third largest supplier behind Canada and Saudi Arabia, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.¶ "So keeping our lights on and our cars going depend today much on Mexico," she said.¶ Since the two countries share a border, they also share the problems and responsibilities of regulating the environment, preventing drug trafficking and maintaining security.¶ Every president of Mexico has had a different take on U.S. relations, but all of the top contenders in the current race have indicated they will work with the United States, said O'Neil.¶ The economy in Mexico is recovering faster than the United States. Helping transform Mexico's economy is a growing middle class, she said. View a chart of GDP growth in both countries:¶ Source: World Bank¶ "Thirty-plus years ago, Mexico was a commodity-driven, oil-driven, inward-looking economy," said O'Neil. "Today it is a manufacturing and services-based economy, export-led with a focus on the U.S. market and that is fundamentally different than just a few decades ago."¶ Partly because of Mexico's economic growth, immigration between the two countries has slowed to a net zero last year. The slowdown also can be attributed to a demographic shift in Mexico in the last several years, O'Neil said. "There are fewer Mexicans turning 18 and looking for jobs than there were in the past. And more and more Mexicans are staying in school longer and investing in their future and investing in their skills. So they're not leaving the country. They're not thinking about going abroad at 15 or 16 anymore, they're staying in school."¶ Mexico is becoming an increasingly urban society as well, said O'Neil. "So the old days of a campesino (peasant) wearing a sombrero riding a burro -- it's a reality for a few Mexicans now, but very few. It's a more urban society. And that's a total transformation from back in the '50s or '60s."¶ Helping drive the current conditions is a transformed government. "There are still problems with corruption, accountability and transparency -- in particular at the state level," she said. "But it also is a democracy. They're about to have elections that almost everywhere in the world people think are going to be free and fair. And that's something new."

Epatko, 12 [Larisa, PBS News Hour, U.S. and Mexico: Ties That Bind, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2012/06/us-mexico-ties.html]

There's no other country in the world that's as intertwined with the U S Our economies are intertwined Mexico is the second destination for U.S. exports and the third largest trading partner said O'Neil fellow for Latin American studies at C F R The U.S. automotive, food, and computer and electronics industries depend on Mexican consumers said O'Neil. For 21 out of 50 states, Mexico is the No. 1 or No. 2 destination for their exports And it's not just the states on the border that have huge trade with Mexico, but as far away as New Hampshire Mexico also is a friendly source of oil, keeping our lights on depend on Mexico The economy in Mexico is recovering faster than the United States. Helping transform Mexico's economy is a growing middle class Thirty- years ago Mexico was a commodity-driven, oil-driven, inward-looking economy said O'Neil. Today it is a manufacturing and services-based economy, export-led with a focus on the U.S. market and that is fundamentally different than just a few decades ago." Partly because of Mexico's economic growth immigration between the two countries has slowed to a net zero last year. The slowdown also can be attributed to a demographic shift in Mexico in the last several years, There are fewer Mexicans turning 18 and looking for jobs than there were in the past. And more and more Mexicans are staying in school longer and investing in their future and investing in their skills. So they're not leaving the country. They're not thinking about going abroad at 15 or 16 anymore, they're staying in school." Helping drive the current conditions is a transformed government.

Interdependence means cooperation is inevitable – economic growth slays the case

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Secretary of Foreign Relations José Antonio Meade yesterday called on the United States to work together with Mexico to create prosperous, safe and sustainable development of the border region without implementing measures that could affect the ties between the two communities. “Walls are not the solution to the migration phenomenon and they are not congruent with a modern and secure border,” said Meade in a press conference. [See the video of the press conference below.] “They don´t contribute to the development of the competitive region that both countries want to foster.” On Monday the U.S. Senate voted for a plan that double the size of the U.S. Border Patrol and require another 350 miles of fencing at the boundary with Mexico, at a price tag its backers say will reach US$38 billion. The security amendment was demanded by Republicans in order to support the immigration reform bill. Mexico, on the other hand, would prefer to put those efforts into developing infrastructure in the border region to provide jobs and business opportunities, according to a press release of Meade´s conference issued by the Secretariat. These are the types of priorities that are more important to allocate resources to, said Meade.

BMO, 6/26 – Buisness and Legal resource published by international expert to discuss Mexico (Business Mexico Online, “As US Senate contemplates immigration reform, Mexico says “walls are not the solution,” BMO, 6/26/13, http://business-mexico-online.com/as-us-senate-contemplates-immigration-reform-mexico-says-walls-are-not-the-solution/)//SMS

Secretary of Foreign Relations Meade called on the U S to work together with Mexico to create prosperous, safe and sustainable development of the border region Walls are not the solution said Meade Monday the U.S. Senate voted for a plan that require another 350 miles of fencing at the boundary with Mexico Mexico would prefer to put those efforts into developing infrastructure in the border region to provide jobs and business opportunities,

Disputes over border fences are an alt cause to relations

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Today, Mexico has shaken off this volatile past to become one of the most open and globalized economies in the world. It maintains free-trade agreements with over 40 countries. The country's trade as a percentage of GDP -- a useful measure of economic openness -- is 65 percent, compared with 59 percent in China, 32 percent in the United States, and 25 percent in Brazil. No longer addicted to oil, Mexico's export economy is now driven by manufacturing, especially of cars, computers, and appliances. The shift from commodities and agriculture to services and manufacturing has catapulted the country forward, and Mexico is outpacing many other emerging-market countries, including China, India, and Russia, in making this economic transition. These fundamental changes began in 1982, at the onset of the Latin American debt crisis. Hit by rising interest rates and declining oil prices, the Mexican government stopped payment on some $80 billion in foreign obligations, mostly to U.S. commercial banks. The ensuing financial crisis further crippled the economy and cost millions their livelihoods, but it also forced the government to consider drastic economic reforms. President Miguel de la Madrid led the charge after 1982, cutting public spending, reducing subsidies, and signing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (the predecessor of the World Trade Organization), which committed Mexico to lowering tariffs and trade barriers. His successor, Carlos Salinas, was even more aggressive. He eradicated the traditional ejido (communal landholding) system, privatized hundreds of public companies, and negotiated NAFTA with the United States and Canada, a treaty that was, at the time, the most comprehensive and ambitious free-trade agreement in the world. These policies helped, but in 1994, Mexico stumbled again. An overvalued peso, a weak banking sector, dwindling foreign reserves, and the PRI's elevated preelection spending led to yet another financial mess. The peso lost half its value in just weeks, GDP fell by seven percent, inflation soared to triple digits, and over one million Mexicans lost their jobs. Fortunately, due to the trade security provided by NAFTA and earlier reforms that had opened the economy, the recession was relatively short, with recovery beginning in 1996. Even better, Mexico emerged with a strong fiscal management system, including an independent central bank dedicated to curbing inflation and a finance ministry committed to balancing the federal budget. The combination of permanent access to the world's largest consumer market, through NAFTA, and currency devaluation made Mexican businesses more globally competitive and led to a manufacturing boom and a fourfold surge in exports between 1990 and 2000. Industries producing goods such as auto parts, electronics, and apparel added some 800,000 jobs, pushing the total number of factory workers to well over one million. Foreign direct investment poured in, averaging $11 billion a year in the late 1990s. Other economic transformations also accelerated during this time. Over two million farmers were put out of work as small-scale agriculture became unprofitable in the face of subsidized U.S. agribusiness. This reflects the harsh implications of NAFTA, but it is also a trend that is common to many industrializing economies, in which manufacturing and services replace agriculture as the drivers of economic growth and employment. In addition, oil became much less important to the economy. To be sure, it still funds over a third of the federal budget, but as a share of GDP, it fell from a peak of nearly 20 percent in 1981 to around six percent today. MEXICO'S MIDDLE Along with these economic reforms came significant social changes, especially the rise of Mexico's middle class. By the early 1980s, the country's middle class had grown to about a third of the population, thanks to the PRI's commitment to accessible education and the expansion of public-sector employment. But the 1982 financial crisis and the subsequent reforms of the late 1980s and early 1990s hurt the government-nurtured middle class by trimming public-sector jobs and government subsidies and largess. At the same time, these reforms opened up the space for a more diverse, less PRI-dependent middle class to grow. The past 15 years of economic stability have bettered the lives of many Mexicans, whose savings and investments are no longer repeatedly wiped out by financial crises. NAFTA has both increased investment in the economy and lowered costs for average Mexicans. A study by Tufts University's Global Development and Environment Institute shows that the agreement has lowered the price of basic goods in Mexico by some 50 percent, making salaries go much further than in the past. In addition, growing access to credit has enabled millions of Mexicans to buy their own homes and start or expand businesses. As a result, modern Mexico is a middle-class country. The World Bank estimates that some 95 percent of Mexico's population is in the middle or the upper class. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also puts most of Mexico's population on the upper rungs, estimating that 50 percent of Mexicans are middle class and another 35 percent are upper class. Even the most stringent measurement, comparing incomes alongside access to health care, education, social security, housing, and food, finds that just over 45 percent of Mexicans are considered poor -- meaning that almost 55 percent are not. According to the World Bank, more than three-quarters of Mexicans are city dwellers, and the growing middle class is a decidedly urban phenomenon. Today's middle-class Mexicans are also much less dependent on the government than their parents were, as most work in the private sector. These professionals frequently fill jobs as accountants, lawyers, engineers, entrepreneurs, specialized factory workers, taxi drivers, or midlevel managers in Mexico's growing service and manufacturing sectors. In addition, Mexico's work force includes more women than ever before. Forty-five percent of Mexican women now work outside their homes -- more than double the rate of 30 years ago. Although there are fewer dual-income households in Mexico than in many other developing countries, they are increasingly common. This trend is tied to a change in average family size, which has allowed women to pursue their own careers. In the 1970s, the typical Mexican family included seven children. Today, most women have only two children, which is the average in the United States. And Mexican children now spend much more time in school than they did in the past. In 1990, most children made it through only the primary grades. Today, the majority remain through high school. As the number of Mexicans with greater earnings has increased, so, too, has consumption. With middle-class annual individual incomes estimated at somewhere between $7,000 and $85,000, households now earn enough to buy modern appliances, such as refrigerators, televisions, and washing machines. Approximately 80 percent of all Mexicans own a cell phone, half own a car, and nearly a third own a computer. The media might depict Mexico as a crime-ridden battlefield, but the country boasts a middle-income, emerging-market economy.

O’Neil, 13 – Senior Fellow for Latin American Studies at CFR (Shannon K., “Mexico Makes It,” Council on Foreign Relations, March/April, http://www.cfr.org/mexico/mexico-makes/p30098)//SMS

Today, Mexico has shaken off this volatile past to become one of the most open and globalized economies in the world. It maintains free-trade agreements with over 40 countries. The country's trade as a percentage of GDP -- is 65 percent, compared with 59 percent in China, 32 percent in the U S and 25 percent in Brazil. The shift from commodities and agriculture to services and manufacturing has catapulted the country forward The combination of permanent access to the world's largest consumer market, through NAFTA, and currency devaluation made Mexican businesses more globally competitive and led to a manufacturing boom Along with these economic reforms came significant social changes, especially the rise of Mexico's middle class. The past 15 years of economic stability have bettered the lives of many Mexicans, whose savings and investments are no longer repeatedly wiped out by financial crises. NAFTA has both increased investment in the economy and lowered costs for average Mexicans. The OECD puts most of Mexico's population on the upper rungs, estimating that 50 percent of Mexicans are middle class and another 35 percent are upper class Today's middle-class Mexicans are also much less dependent on the government than their parents were And Mexican children now spend much more time in school than they did in the past. With middle-class annual individual incomes estimated at somewhere between $7,000 and $85,000, households now earn enough to buy modern appliances, such as refrigerators, televisions, and washing machines. Approximately 80 percent of all Mexicans own a cell phone, half own a car, and nearly a third own a computer. The media might depict Mexico as a crime-ridden battlefield, but the country boasts a middle-income, emerging-market economy.

Squo solves – Mexico’s economy and standard of living is massively improving already

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Kai Ryssdal: President Obama is meeting with his Mexican counterpart today in Mexico City. He and President Felipe Calderon will talk national security, the drug trade and the global economic crisis all in just a few short hours. Then they will both head out to Trinidad and Tobago for a Summit of the Americas conference later this week. The U.S.-Mexico relationship is long and it's complicated. Shannon O'Neil is the Douglas Dillon Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. Shannon, good to have you with us. Shannon O'Neil: Nice to be here. Ryssdal: Give us a sense, would you, of the state of the economic relationship between the United States and Mexico. O'Neil: The economic relationship with the U.S. and Mexico is really quite strong. Since NAFTA came into effect 15 years ago, trade between the two nations has tripled. And it's the most important trading relationship in many ways for both countries -- or particularly for states in the United States. So it's the third-largest trading partner for the United States and it's the second-largest destination of U.S. exports. So it's quite important. Ryssdal: And yet all we've been hearing in the lead up to this trip by the president is: drug violence, the prospect of Mexico as a failed state, how NAFTA really hasn't worked out for Mexico. How do you explain that difference? O'Neil: You know, U.S.-Mexico relations goes through its patterns. And as happens in many relationships, you focus on the complaints rather than the positives, at least in the discussion. So that's really what's happening here. We're focused on the violence -- which is really, and has increased in the last several months -- but in many ways, the real substance of the relationship and the positives fall by the wayside in those sound bytes.

O’Neil, 9 – (Shannon K.“U.S.-Mexico relationship remains strong,” Marketplace, April 16, 2009, http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/us-mexico-relationship-remains-strong)//SMS

The economic relationship with the U.S. and Mexico is really quite strong. Since NAFTA came into effect 15 years ago, trade between the two nations has tripled. it's the most important trading relationship particularly for the U S it's the third-largest trading partner for the U S and the second-largest destination of U.S. exports U.S.-Mexico relations goes through its patterns you focus on the complaints rather than the positives, at least in the discussion. So that's really what's happening here. We're focused on the violence -- which is really, and has increased in the last several months -- but in many ways, the real substance of the relationship and the positives fall by the wayside in those sound bytes.

Relations are strong and resilient – their evidence is just media sensationalism

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mexico is the second largest economy in Latin America and a popular vacation destination for many Americans. However, the country has begun to attract many American investors as well, thanks to its economic resilience in the latest slowdown, and its quickly growing economy. The country has turned into something of a manufacturing powerhouse, and it has stolen share from other big emerging nations such as China. Additionally, the nation has made several moves on a political and policy front, and many believe that these ensure favorable financial conditions and economic growth for the nation’s future. Economy Outlook In fact, Mexico has a great potential for accelerating economic growth. In 2012 Mexico maintained a strong growth at 3.9%, while some believe that higher rates could be in the country’s future should the American economy continue to improve as well (See Why Mexico ETF is a long term Winner) The country also represents a very large market as it ranks 8th in the emerging world, and 11th overall in terms of GDP size. To top things off, it also received a solid BBB+ rating from Fitch suggesting that the nation has a solid economic foundation, and that its reforms are well received (See Time to Buy These Top Ranked Latin America ETF) News in Favor Mexico’s growth prospects are attracting investment banks and investors hunting for ways to gain greater exposure to international markets. “It’s the coming of age of the Mexican market,” said Eduardo Cepeda, J.P. Morgan’s senior country officer (See Inside the Surging Mexico ETF) The market for credit is also growing, and the banks are strongly capitalized and have complied with International Basel 3 standards. Local companies are generating cash and are looking to expand in the domestic and international markets. The foreign manufacturers are also returning to Mexico as the country has a rich industrial base. The automakers plan to invest $10 billion in new assembly plants this year alone.

Zacks Equity Research, 6/7 – leading investment research firm focusing on stock research, analysis and recommendations (“Time to Worry about the Mexico ETF?,” ZER, 6/7/13, http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/101032/Time-to-Worry-about-the-Mexico-ETF)//SMS

Mexico is the second largest economy in Latin America and a popular vacation destination for many Americans the country has begun to attract many investors as well, The country has turned into a manufacturing powerhouse, and it has stolen share from big emerging nations such as China. Additionally, the nation has made several moves on a political and policy front that ensure favorable financial conditions and economic growth Mexico has a great potential for accelerating growth. In 2012 Mexico maintained a strong growth at 3.9%, The country also represents a very large market as it ranks 11th overall in terms of GDP size it also received a solid BBB+ rating from Fitch It’s the coming of age of the Mexican market Local companies are generating cash and are looking to expand in the domestic and international markets. The foreign manufacturers are also returning to Mexico as the country has a rich industrial base

Mexico’s economy is strong and growing

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Over the past 2-3 decades Mexico has experienced improving income distribution.  The GINI coefficient come down from averaging above 51 in the 1990s to 0.483 in 2008, according to the World Bank.  However, another source, the CIA World Fact Book reports GINI still above 50 for Mexico in 2008 so there is some uncertainty about just how fast Mexico GINI is improving.  The same source also reports GINI for China in 2009 at 0.48.  Numbers from all sources for the U.S. are in close agreement.

GEI, 3/28 – a private, nonprofit, nonpartisan research institution devoted to the study of international economic policy (Global Economic Intersection, “Income Inequality: China, U.S. Increasing, Mexico Decreasing,” GEI, 3/28/13, http://econintersect.com/b2evolution/blog1.php/2013/03/28/income-inequality-china-u-s-increasing-mexico-decreasing)//SMS

Over the past decades Mexico has experienced improving income distribution The GINI coefficient come down from averaging above 51 to 0.483 according to the World Bank.

Income gap has massively decreased in Mexico

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

When President Barack Obama meets this week with President Enrique Peña Nieto in Mexico, he will be visiting a country that was much maligned throughout his first term. Washington has viewed Mexico largely as a source of problems for the United States in the past six years. Many Mexicans, in a mirror image, consider the United States the origin of their troubles. They blame Mexico’s epidemic of violent crime on an insatiable appetite for drugs and loose control over gun and ammunition sales in the United States. In addition, the U.S. financial crisis left the Mexican economy reeling in 2009. But in the past year, particularly since Peña Nieto’s election in July 2012, Mexico’s standing in the United States and internationally has increased dramatically — along with its national self-esteem. Though organized crime and violence remain key concerns for Mexico, stories of economic and social reform are now among the headlines. A November Economist article about Mexico was titled “From Darkness, Dawn.” And that message has become a standard media refrain. Some in Washington talked about Mexico as a likely failed state, but that has been decisively debunked. Mexico is now viewed as on the rise, though its homicide rate has fallen only slightly and no one is sure that improvements can be sustained. In fact, there are many Mexicos for Obama to deal with — the successful and prospering; the backward, corrupt and stagnant; and everything in between. This mix is not unusual. It is characteristic of most nations, even the United States. Obama needs to bring an optimistic perspective with him to Mexico, reflecting the growing confidence that Mexicans have in their country — and the image they project internationally. In this, Obama has little choice. No country is likely to affect the future of the United States more than Mexico, just as none will affect Mexico’s future more than the United States. No two nations have more to gain from energetically pursuing closer cooperation. Mexico’s reinvigorated economy has proven more resilient and vibrant than anyone expected. It shrank by more than 6 percent in 2009, one year after the Wall Street financial collapse, but economic expansion since has been faster than at any time in the past two decades. Mexico’s growth, while modest by Asian standards, has in the past three years been more robust than that of Brazil, one of the region’s strongest economies. It is also competing successfully with China in U.S. markets. Mexico will displace Canada as the largest U.S. trade partner within roughly six years, according to some economic projections. Close U.S.-Mexico economic ties, once seen as the culprit in our southern neighbor’s sluggish growth and sharp downturn, are now, as the U.S. continues to recover, a prime explanation for Mexico’s rising economic fortunes. The future may be even brighter. Peña Nieto has launched an ambitious reform agenda to overcome the many obstacles to stable, rapid economic growth. He is demonstrating the political talent needed to get his policies approved and put into practice. The Mexican president, for example, managed to negotiate the Pacto por Mexico, an accord among the country’s three major parties that bridged many of their long-held ideological differences and secured their agreement on a broad package of economic changes. Despite suffering some tangles and setbacks in recent weeks, the Pacto continues to provide a path forward to far-reaching reform. Peña Nieto plans to revamp Mexico’s oil industry and open it to foreign investment could reverse the decline in oil production and assure that the country remains a leading exporter. Proposed changes would also pave the way for the systematic exploitation of Mexico’s huge, untapped deposits of shale gas and oil. Other reforms are designed to augment government revenue and improve fiscal management. Peña Nieto wants to increase competition in telecommunications and other critical sectors, and upgrade the country’s mediocre schools and universities to raise productivity and create paths for social mobility. This explosion of reform initiatives has helped change opinion in the United States about Mexico. Less than a year ago, Mexico was widely viewed as an increasingly dangerous neighbor. Today, it is talked about as a promising economic partner. The partnership will be far stronger if — as now appears likely — Congress passes sensible and humane immigration reforms. The Mexican government seems most encouraged by the prospect of U.S. legislation that would include an expanded temporary worker program and would provide immediate legal status and a path to citizenship for most currently undocumented immigrants ‑ about half of whom are Mexican nationals. These changes could substantially eliminate a persistent tension in U.S.-Mexican relations. Mexicans have long been angered and insulted by U.S. debates on immigration, including insistent demands that the border be walled up; the spread of anti-immigration (and often anti-Latino) legislation in many states and communities, and absurd and offensive proposals like GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s call for migrants to “self-deport.” Equally important, immigration reform will offer an array of economic benefits to both nations. Despite the Peña Nieto administration’s impressive start, however, there is reason for caution in thinking about the future of the country and its relationship with the United States. Mexico clearly looks better than ever, but it was never as seriously endangered as it was reported to be. It was never close to being a failed state. It is true that its homicide rate and violence rose rapidly in the past five years — and the associated brutality was unparalleled. But Mexico’s murders per capita are still far from the highest in Latin America. They regularly trail those of Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, most of Central America and the Caribbean. On the economic side, yes, Mexico has only recently emerged from some 15 years of listless growth. During that period, however, the economy and banking system were well managed. Mexico maintained ample reserves and a low ratio of debt to gross domestic product. Inflation was kept firmly under control. For more than two decades now, Mexico has been building a modern economy with vibrant manufacturing and export sectors well integrated into U.S. supply chains. The Mexican economy was never as troubled as it was portrayed — and now the opportunities for improvement are greater than ever. Still, Mexico is not the sure bet that many believe it to be. It has to demonstrate that it can make its economy grow faster. The past 30 years offer little evidence that Mexico has the potential for sustained, rapid expansion, or for carrying out the reforms that such growth will require. The Mexican economy has long suffered fundamental shortcomings that restrain its productivity, job creation and capacity to compete. The obstacles to change remain formidable. Peña Nieto’s reform initiatives are just getting started. The legislature has already given its initial approval for changes in education, labor laws, telecommunication policy and some other sectors. But in many cases, original proposals have been watered down, additional legislation will also be required in almost every area and effective implementation is still to come. Success will depend heavily on Peña Nieto’s political skills — as well as the technical mastery of his advisers and managers. It will also hinge on whether the fragile inter-party consensus backing the Pacto por Mexico can be sustained and popular support mobilized for change. Crime and violence are likely to remain unrelenting challenges for Peña Nieto. They could even take central stage again. In fact, public security may not improve anytime soon — despite the new government’s multiple initiatives. Peña Nieto’s predecessor, Felipe Calderón, learned how arduous a task it is to reform Mexico’s police and its justice system, and restore public confidence in them. Now, Peña Nieto is making clear his deep dissatisfaction with — and his intention to overhaul — Calderón U.S.-supported approach to security and drug issues. The expected changes will almost surely irritate many in Washington and may even become a new source of friction in the bilateral relationship. But neither the United States nor Mexico is perfect. The two nations cannot look at each other only as sources of opportunity and gain; cooperation is needed to address risks and problems. Neither country has much of an option, however, because their economies and populations are so deeply integrated. There is no turning the clock back. Mexico and the United State have to solve their problems together and find ways to generate and exploit new opportunities jointly. If they can do it, the payoff will be enormous.

Hakim 13, President emeritus and senior fellow of the Inter-American Dialogue He writes articles about foreign policy issues, many of which have appeared in Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, NYT, the Washington Post, Miami Herald, LA Times, etc. Former professor at MIT and Columbia. Member of the Council on Foreign Relations(Peter, "Which Mexico for Obama?" 5/1/13, Reuters, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/05/01/which-mexico-for-obama/)//AD

Mexico was much maligned throughout his first term. Washington has viewed Mexico largely as a source of problems for the United States in the past six years. Many Mexicans, in a mirror image, consider the United States the origin of their troubles. They blame Mexico’s epidemic of violent crime on an insatiable appetite for drugs and loose control over gun and ammunition sales in the United States. organized crime and violence remain key concerns for Mexico, there are many Mexicos for Obama to deal with — the successful and prospering; the backward, corrupt and stagnant; and everything in between. Obama needs to bring an optimistic perspective with him to Mexico, reflecting the growing confidence that Mexicans have in their country — and the image they project internationally. . Mexicans have long been angered and insulted by U.S. debates on immigration, including insistent demands that the border be walled up; the spread of anti-immigration (and often anti-Latino) legislation in many states and communities, and absurd and offensive proposals like GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney’s call for migrants to “self-deport.” Despite the Peña Nieto administration’s impressive start, however, there is reason for caution in thinking about the future of the country and its relationship with the United States. Peña Nieto’s reform initiatives are just getting started. The legislature has already given its initial approval for changes in education, labor laws, telecommunication policy and some other sectors. But in many cases, original proposals have been watered down, additional legislation will also be required in almost every area and effective implementation is still to come. Crime and violence are likely to remain unrelenting challenges for Peña Nieto.

Divides over gun control, immigration, drug policies, and crime cause splits between Mexico and the US--alt cause to relations collapse

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

McALLEN, Texas -- An agency that monitors the U.S.-Mexico boundary is agreeing to a U.S. proposal to build border fence segments in a South Texas flood plain, a move Mexico opposes. The decision by the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission comes despite objections from its Mexican counterpart. Mexico argues the fence would deflect floodwaters to its side of the Rio Grande and violate a bi-national treaty. The Associated Press on Tuesday obtained a letter the commission sent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection noting it will not oppose the project. The commission says its analysis found that the fence proposed for three areas in South Texas would not be a significant obstruction to river waters. Half of the 14 miles proposed would be in the flood plain. "When it comes right down to it, the scientific analysis is what we have to fall back on," John Merino, principal engineer with the U.S. commission, said Tuesday. In his February letter, Merino wrote that after a thorough review, the agency concluded that the project "will not cause significant deflection or obstruction of the normal or flood flows of the Rio Grande" and is consistent with the treaty. Jenny Burke, a spokeswoman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection, said that one of the segments, in Los Ebanos, is no longer considered necessary and more funding is needed to build the other two in Rio Grande City and Roma. Merino also pointed out that the government would have to bring back detailed construction drawings of the fence for approval before proceeding. Still, the green light for a permanent fence made of spaced vertical steel tubes is a significant reversal for an agency that expressed concerns when the government was still proposing a "moveable" fence in 2008. A 1970 treaty between the United States and Mexico called on both countries to prohibit the building of anything that "may cause deflection or obstruction of the normal flow of the river or of its flood flows." In July 2008, Al Riera, then the principal operations engineer for the U.S. boundary commission, told a citizens forum, "If they (Department of Homeland Security) don't show us they have something in place to guarantee removal of the (fence) panels ... the commission would never agree to something like that." That movable fence was planned to involve a base of concrete barriers topped with about 15 feet of tightly woven steel fencing that could be removed in advance of floodwaters. Merino said the project had not been analyzed when Riera made those comments. Riera is no longer with the commission. But a letter from a Mexican engineer to Merino in December 2011 said the project represented a serious obstruction. "The location, alignment and design of the proposed fence represent a clear obstruction of the Rio Grande hydraulic area, since in the towns of Rio Grande City and Roma, (Texas), the fence would occupy nearly all of the hydraulic area on the U.S. side, causing the deflection of flows towards the Mexican side," wrote principal engineer Luis Antonio Rascon Mendoza. Jesus Luevano, secretary of the commission's Mexican section, said in an email Tuesday that Mexico's position is that the "wall constitutes an obstruction of the normal current ... in terms of the 1970 Boundary Treaty, therefore we continue fighting its placement with respect to the Rio Grande flood zone." He added that Mexico recognizes the border fence is a unilateral endeavor, but said it wasn't improving relations between the neighbors. The U.S. has built about 650 miles of border barriers along the 1,954-mile U.S.-Mexico boundary. In Texas, the fence segments have been built more than a mile away from the river in some rural areas, but the three segments recently reviewed by the commission would be built closer because all three communities abut the river. In 2008, the Department of Homeland Security waived a host of environmental regulations to allow speedy construction. Merino said the disagreement stems from differing assumptions. He said Mexico looks at the fence as a solid barrier like a dam that would not allow water to pass through. U.S. engineers believe water will pass through it as long as it's kept free of debris. Jeffrey Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER, said he will send a letter to the commission Wednesday demanding an explanation for the agency's new position. He noted that the proposed fencing would cut through a national wildlife refuge. "We don't know the reason that all of these concerns evaporated," Ruch said Tuesday.

Sherman 12, Rio Grande Valley correspondent for The Associated Press(Christopher, "U.S. And Mexico Disagree Over Border Fence" The Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost. com/2012/07/26/us-and-mexico-disagree-over-border-fence_n_1706983.html)//AD

An agency that monitors the U.S.-Mexico boundary is agreeing to a U.S. proposal to build border fence segments in a South Texas flood plain, a move Mexico opposes. The decision comes despite objections from its Mexican counterpart Mexico argues the fence would deflect floodwaters to its side of the Rio Grande and violate a bi-national treaty. a letter from a Mexican engineer said the project represented a serious obstruction. The location, alignment and design of the proposed fence represent a clear obstruction of the Rio Grande hydraulic area the "wall constitutes an obstruction of the normal current ... in terms of the 1970 Boundary Treaty, therefore we continue fighting its placement with respect to the Rio Grande flood zone He added that Mexico recognizes the border fence is a unilateral endeavor, but said it wasn't improving relations between the neighbors

Alt cause to relations collapse--new border fence construction and controversies over the flow of river water guarantee a split

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

MEXICO CITY — The U.S. Senate's proposal to spend $46 billion to help secure the country's southern border may or may not persuade skeptical colleagues in the House to support broader immigration reform. But the proposal is generating some serious grumbling in Mexico. "We are 'friends and neighbors,' as is repeated ad nauseam," Fernando Belaunzaran, a congressman with Mexico's left-wing Democratic Revolution Party, tweeted this week, "but the U.S. is about to militarize the border with Mexico as if we were at war." "Neighbors don't do this to each other," Univision news anchor Jorge Ramos wrote in the newspaper Reforma. On a national radio show, Lorenzo Meyer, a respected columnist and academic, suggested that Mexico retaliate by kicking out CIA and Defense Department officials who are collaborating with the government in the fight against drug cartels. Or perhaps, Meyer mused, Mexico could get back at the U.S. by refusing to accept any more American retirees. The proposed spending spree at the border — which supporters have labeled a "surge," after the 2007 U.S. troop increase in Iraq — was included as an amendment to a broader immigration bill that appears almost certain to pass in the Senate this week. The additional spending would add nearly 20,000 Border Patrol officers, roughly doubling the current force. It would also fund the completion of 700 miles of border fencing and 24-hour surveillance flights by drones. The Senate voted 67 to 27 on Monday to end debate on the amendment. Supporters are hoping that a lopsided approval of the immigration reform bill in the Senate will build momentum for the proposal as it heads to the House of Representatives. In the lower chamber, some conservative lawmakers do not want to support the bill's provision of a "path to citizenship" for unauthorized immigrants, particularly because they fear it will encourage more people to sneak in. But supporters of the surge are hoping to convince skeptical House members that slipping across the border will become far more difficult. The plan's American critics include immigrant rights advocates, budget hawks and civil libertarians wary of the expanded surveillance capabilities the Border Patrol would be granted. In Mexico, most of the complaints have come from the left, whose leaders have reiterated the long-held opinion here that U.S. border policy, with its walls, fences and armed border agents, is an insult to their nation. A number of critics also have taken aim at the government of President Enrique Peña Nieto for not speaking out more forcefully. "The passivity and negligence of his government is incomprehensible; it's as if this had nothing to do with him, as if this was not going to seriously affect millions of Mexicans," Ramos, the TV anchor, wrote in his column Sunday. Peña Nieto's team has chosen to hang back from the immigration debate north of the border, apparently out of fear that any cheerleading for the cause could be construed by American conservatives as unwarranted meddling. Former Mexican President Vicente Fox's efforts to persuade Americans to accept immigration reform in 2001 led to a substantial backlash. Fox's former foreign secretary, Jorge Castañeda, who helped lobby for a change in immigration law in 2001, said the Mexican government needed to speak out about the plan. "Mexico can't say nothing in the face of a reform that includes doubling the number of Border Patrol agents," he said in a radio interview Monday. "It strikes me as shameful." On Tuesday, Foreign Secretary Jose Antonio Meade delivered a measured statement in which he reiterated the government's contention that U.S. immigration reform would help millions of Mexican migrants. But fences, Meade said, "are not the solution to the phenomenon of migration, and aren't consistent with a modern and secure border. They don't contribute to the development of the competitive region that both countries seek to promote." The apprehension of Mexicans at the U.S. border has been trending dramatically downward since fiscal 2000, when 1.6 million Mexicans were detained. In fiscal 2012, the number was 262,000. It's likely that fewer Mexicans have been trying to cross in light of the sputtering U.S. economy, stricter border control and fear of Mexican criminals who prey on migrants. U.S. government statistics show that the number of non-Mexicans apprehended at the border, most of whom were Central Americans, also declined from fiscal 2005 to 2011. But the number doubled from 2011 to 2012, to 94,000, probably a result of rising violence and instability in several Central American countries. Maria Garcia, the president of the Mexico City-based Aztlan Binational Migrants Movement, said that increased border enforcement would force migrants to find even more dangerous and remote places to cross the border, putting their lives at greater risk. She also doubted that a more heavily fortified border would do much to scare off migrants seeking better wages. "Hunger is too strong," she said. "They'll keep risking their lives." But Alfredo Rodriguez, a 59-year-old hardware store clerk, said he could live with the border plan if the U.S. gave Mexicans more legal avenues for employment, such as temporary work visas. In any case, he said, the Americans were within their rights to beef up their security. "If you invade someone's property," he said, "obviously, there are going to be consequences."

Fauset 13, Richard Fausset covers Mexico and Central America for the Los Angeles Times(Richard, "In Mexico, U.S. border 'surge' proposal stirs outcry" 6/25/13, LA Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/25/world/la-fg-mexico-border-anger-20130626)//AD

The U.S. Senate's proposal to spend $46 billion to help secure the country's southern border is generating some serious grumbling in Mexico. "We are 'friends and neighbors,' as is repeated ad nauseam but the U.S. is about to militarize the border with Mexico as if we were at war "Neighbors don't do this to each other On a national radio show, Lorenzo Meyer, a respected columnist and academic, suggested that Mexico retaliate by kicking out CIA and Defense Department officials who are collaborating with the government in the fight against drug cartels. In Mexico, most of the complaints have come from the left, whose leaders have reiterated the long-held opinion here that U.S. border policy, with its walls, fences and armed border agents, is an insult to their nation. number of critics also have taken aim at the government of President Enrique Peña Nieto for not speaking out more forcefully. "The passivity and negligence of his government is incomprehensible; it's as if this had nothing to do with him, as if this was not going to seriously affect millions of Mexicans," Peña Nieto's team has chosen to hang back from the immigration debate north of the border, apparently out of fear that any cheerleading for the cause could be construed by American conservatives as unwarranted meddling fences are not the solution to the phenomenon of migration, and aren't consistent with a modern and secure border. They don't contribute to the development of the competitive region that both countries seek to promote."

Alternative causalities to relations collapse--rising tensions over the perceived militarization of the Mexican border is a thorn in the side of relations

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

MEXICO CITY — The human and financial costs of Mexico's drug war, diplomatic cable leaks, the influx of U.S. arms and a wave of anti-immigration initiatives in the United States are all taking a toll on Mexico-U.S. relations that had shown steady improvement in recent years. As President Felipe Calderon prepares for an official visit to Washington on Thursday to meet with President Barack Obama, frustrations have come out into the open and the rhetoric in some ways has regressed to the 1980s, when the two governments routinely traded barbs about drugs, money laundering, trade and investment issues. The visit comes a little more than two weeks after the killing of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jaime Zapata, who was shot to death on a highway in northern Mexico on Feb. 15 – with a gun that was smuggled in from the United States. The killing brought back U.S. doubts about Mexico's ability to control violence, at the same time Mexico is beginning to chafe under what it sees as a lack of U.S. willingness to reduce its demand for drugs or stem the flow south of guns that fuel a conflict that has cost more than 34,600 lives here since Calderon took office in 2006. "As far as reducing the demand for drugs, they haven't done so. ... As far as reducing the flow of arms, they haven't, it has increased," Calderon said in unusually harsh comments the week before the visit in an interview with the newspaper El Universal. "Institutional cooperation has been notoriously insufficient." Calderon "has not gotten a response beyond rhetoric on the gun issue ... and I think he is bothered by the prospect that special-interest groups in the United States have more influence than Mexico's entire leadership," said Raymundo Riva Palacio, a veteran columnist and political observer in Mexico City. According to Mexican officials, the Calderon-Obama meeting was planned before the Zapata killing, and will focus on economic issues, anti-crime cooperation, and conditions for the estimated 12 million Mexican migrants living in the United States. But Calderon's most important meeting may be with the new U.S. House Speaker, Republican John Boehner, according to Pamela Starr, professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California. It may be Mexico's best opportunity to defend the next phase of the $1.4 billion U.S. Merida Initiative anti-drug aid plan. Calderon "wants to make sure they don't cut the funding for Merida, in their zeal to cut," Starr said. Contributing to the friction was the release of leaked cables written by U.S. Embassy personnel depicting Mexico's armed forces and police agencies as inefficient, corrupt, riven by infighting and "reliant on the United States for leads and operations." Calderon's response was furious and, at times, personal. The cables "have done a lot of damage with the stories they tell that are, in truth, distorted," Calderon said. He objected to cables that talked about a lack of coordination among Mexican agencies. "I do not have to tell the U.S. ambassador how many times I meet with my security Cabinet. It is none of his business. I will not accept or tolerate any type of intervention," he said. "But that man's ignorance translates into a distortion of what is happening in Mexico, and affects things and creates ill-feeling within our own team," Calderon said. Calderon's office refused to say whether the "ignorance" remark referred specifically to U.S. Ambassador Carlos Pascual. The office said Pascual has met regularly with Calderon, despite local news media reports suggesting Calderon was avoiding him. Julian Ventura, Mexico's assistant secretary of foreign relations, denied reports of disenchantment and said the government had "a direct, intense relationship" with Pascual. But the ambassador may have stepped on some toes in Mexico. Calderon complained that "the ambassadors or whoever wrote these cables are pushing their own agendas." Riva Palacio noted there was a "self-congratulatory tone" in cables like the one sent after Mexican marines killed drug lord Arturo Beltran Leyva in a December 2009 shootout. "The impression they left was of a big celebration what 'we' (the United States) did," Riva Palacio said, despite the fact that Mexico has borne the human and economic toll of the drug war. Pascual may have also ruffled feathers in the government and the ruling National Action Party by dating the daughter of Francisco Rojas, the congressional leader of the former ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. Rojas' office and the U.S. Embassy declined to comment on the issue. "It can't help since she's the child of a PRI leader and Calderon is anti-PRI to the core of his being," Starr said. "Calderon will do whatever he can to defeat the PRI. He's convinced the worst thing that could happen to Mexico would be a return to the PRI." In practice, the day-to-day contacts across the border between regulatory and law enforcement agencies, private companies and investors are immeasurably better than in the 1980s, when the U.S. suspected top Mexican officials of complicity in drug trafficking, money laundering or attacks on U.S. agents. Things got so bad that in 1990 the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration paid operatives in Mexico to kidnap and bring north a suspect in the 1985 torture-murder of DEA Agent Enrique "Kiki" Camarena. But things changed. Mexico signed the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1994, the PRI lost its 71-year grip on the presidency in 2000, Mexico began extraditing record numbers of suspects and Calderon launched an offensive against the cartels in 2006. The country has also opened to investment, inspection and regulation to such a degree that some U.S. agencies now operate what are essentially satellite offices here. But while the United States wonders if Mexico can control violence and bring criminals to justice, Mexico has just been left wondering whether that opening is reciprocal. Mexico continues to wait for the opening of U.S. highways to Mexican trucks, something it is entitled to under NAFTA. The U.S. Congress has simply blocked that program under pressure from industry groups with arguments about highway safety. And Mexicans have been angered at tough measures to crack down on illegal immigration in several U.S. states. They are especially alarmed about proposals that aim to deny citizenship to children of undocumented migrants born in the United States. Two days before Calderon's visit, the Mexican Senate urged him to "express emphatically and categorically" Mexico's opposition to such measures in his meeting with Obama.

Stevenson 11, Writer for the Huffington Post(Mark, "Mexico President Visits U.S. Amid Tension" 03/ 2/11, Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/mexico-president-visits-u_n_830463.html#)//AD

The human and financial costs of Mexico's drug war, diplomatic cable leaks, the influx of U.S. arms and a wave of anti-immigration initiatives in the United States are all taking a toll on Mexico-U.S. relations , frustrations have come out into the open and the rhetoric in some ways has regressed to the 1980s, when the two governments routinely traded barbs about drugs, money laundering, trade and investment issues Mexico is beginning to chafe under what it sees as a lack of U.S. willingness to reduce its demand for drugs or stem the flow south of guns that fuel a conflict that has cost more than 34,600 lives As far as reducing the demand for drugs, they haven't done so. ... As far as reducing the flow of arms, they haven't, it has increased Institutional cooperation has been notoriously insufficient." Contributing to the friction was the release of leaked cables written by U.S. Embassy personnel depicting Mexico's armed forces and police agencies as inefficient, corrupt, riven by infighting and "reliant on the United States for leads and operations." But while the United States wonders if Mexico can control violence and bring criminals to justice, Mexico has just been left wondering whether that opening is reciprocal. Mexico continues to wait for the opening of U.S. highways to Mexican trucks, something it is entitled to under NAFTA. Mexicans have been angered at tough measures to crack down on illegal immigration in several U.S. states

Anti-immigration initiatives, NAFTA policies, loose gun laws, drug demand and lack of cooperation compromise relations--ideological splits hurt relations

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

But shortly after Mexico’s new president, Enrique Peña Nieto, took office in December, American agents got a clear message that the dynamics, with Washington holding the clear upper hand, were about to change.

Archibold et al. 13 – Bureau chief for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, New York Times (Randal C., Damien Cave, and Ginger Thompson, “Mexico’s Curbs on U.S. Role in Drug Fight Spark Friction,” New York Times, 4/30, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/world/americas/friction-between-us-and-mexico-threatens-efforts-on-drugs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)//SY

shortly after Mexico’s new president, Peña Nieto, took office American agents got a clear message that dynamics were about to change.

Relations already low – increased security measures and decreased intelligence sharing

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

If so, it would represent a step beyond the Mexican discomfort with Americans operating on their turf that emerged in December, just after Mr. Peña Nieto’s inauguration. It solidified after an explosion on Jan. 31 at the office complex of the state oil company, Pemex, in which 37 people died and more than 120 were injured.

Archibold et al. 13 – Bureau chief for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean, New York Times (Randal C., Damien Cave, and Ginger Thompson, “Mexico’s Curbs on U.S. Role in Drug Fight Spark Friction,” New York Times, 4/30, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/01/world/americas/friction-between-us-and-mexico-threatens-efforts-on-drugs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)//SY

it would represent a step beyond discomfort with Americans operating on their turf that emerged after Peña Nieto’s inauguration. It solidified after an explosion at the office complex of the state oil company, Pemex, in which 37 people died

Alt cause to relations – lack of cooperation in law enforcement and intelligence

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Peña Nieto’s predecessor, Felipe Calderón, learned how arduous a task it is to reform Mexico’s police and its justice system, and restore public confidence in them. Now, Peña Nieto is making clear his deep dissatisfaction with — and his intention to overhaul — Calderón U.S.-supported approach to security and drug issues. The expected changes will almost surely irritate many in Washington and may even become a new source of friction in the bilateral relationship.

Hakim, 13 - President emeritus and senior fellow, Inter-American Dialogue (Peter, “Which Mexico for Obama?” Reuters, May 1, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/05/01/which-mexico-for-obama/)//SY

Peña Nieto’s predecessor, Calderón, learned how arduous a task it is to reform Mexico’s police and justice system, and restore public confidence Peña Nieto is making clear his deep dissatisfaction with and intention to overhaul U.S.-supported approach to security and drug issues. The changes surely irritate many in Washington and become a new source of friction in the bilateral relationship.

Alt cause to relations – Peña Nieto’s rejection of US-based security approach

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

When President Barack Obama meets this week with President Enrique Peña Nieto in Mexico, he will be visiting a country that was much maligned throughout his first term.

Hakim, 13 - President emeritus and senior fellow, Inter-American Dialogue (Peter, “Which Mexico for Obama?” Reuters, May 1, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/05/01/which-mexico-for-obama/)//SY

When Obama meets with Peña Nieto in Mexico, he will be visiting a country that was much maligned throughout his first term.

Relations already past brink – mutual blame over drug war and economic problems

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

While the shape of the strategy remains unclear, dramatically reducing the pervasive and proactive military presence throughout much of Mexico has been an appropriate first step. The Mexican president has narrowed the window of U.S. involvement in intelligence, counternarcotics operations, and Mexican military affairs—a clear rebuff to the U.S. government. The Obama administration may be justifiably concerned about the ability of the new government to diminish the power and reach of criminal organizations built largely on drug-trafficking, yet President Obama should, in a gesture of solidarity and shared responsibility, acknowledge the systemic flaws in U.S. counternarcotics and anti-organized crime strategies.

Barry, 13 – Senior Policy Analyst and Americas Policy Program Fellow, Center for International Policy (Tom, “Changing Perspectives on U.S.-Mexico Relations,” North American Congress on Latin America, May 2, https://nacla.org/news/2013/5/2/changing-perspectives-us-mexico-relations)//SY

The Mexican president has narrowed the window of U.S. involvement in intelligence, counternarcotics operations, and Mexican military affairs—a clear rebuff to the U.S. government. The Obama administration may be justifiably concerned about the ability of the new government to diminish the power of criminal organizations built largely on drug-trafficking, yet Obama should acknowledge systemic flaws in U.S counternarcotics and anti-organized crime strategies.

Can’t solve relations – counternarcotics disagreements have already destroyed the relationship

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

MEXICO CITY — For the past seven years, Mexico and the United States have put aside their tension-filled history on security matters to forge an unparalleled alliance against Mexico’s drug cartels, one based on sharing sensitive intelligence, U.S. training and joint operational planning.

Priest, 13 – Pulitzer Prize-winning national security reporter, Washington Post (Dana, “U.S. role at a crossroads in Mexico’s intelligence war on the cartels,” Washington Post, April 27, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-27/news/38861969_1_u-s-embassy-cartels-national-intelligence/4)//SY

For the past seven years, Mexico and the U S put aside tension-filled history on security matters to forge an alliance against Mexico’s drug cartels, based on sharing intelligence and joint operational planning.

US-Mexico relations terrible now – ideological differences between PRI and previous administration that plan can’t resolve

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Also unremarked upon was the mounting criticism that success against the cartels’ leadership had helped incite more violence than anyone had predicted, more than 60,000 deaths and 25,000 disappearances in the past seven years alone.

Priest, 13 – Pulitzer Prize-winning national security reporter, Washington Post (Dana, “U.S. role at a crossroads in Mexico’s intelligence war on the cartels,” Washington Post, 4/ 27, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-27/news/38861969_1_u-s-embassy-cartels-national-intelligence/4)//SY

unremarked upon was the mounting criticism that success against the cartels’ leadership had helped incite more violence than anyone had predicted, more than 60,000 deaths and 25,000 disappearances in seven years alone.

Mexico-US relations already strained over drug war – plan can’t solve

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

(CNN) -- Ahead of their meetings in Mexico City this week, President Obama and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto hinted that they wanted to put economic ties atop their agenda. But reports that Mexico is restructuring the way it cooperates with American officials on security matters -- in essence restricting communication -- threaten to impose a shadow over the positive economic story the leaders want to tell. The apparent friction highlights the critical security relationship and illustrates the complexities of U.S.-Mexico relations. "We spend so much time on security issues between the United States and Mexico that sometimes I think we forget this is a massive trading partner, responsible for huge amounts of commerce and huge numbers of jobs on both sides of the border," Obama said this week. But writing a new narrative on U.S.-Mexico relations that doesn't lead with Mexico as a major transit point for narcotics, or the United States as a market hungry for the drugs, isn't easy. That was made clear by the spate of news reports this week on both sides of the border about changes to how Mexico cooperates with the Americans. Under the new rules, all U.S. requests for collaboration with Mexican agencies will flow through a single office, Interior Minister Miguel Angel Osorio Chong confirmed to Mexico's state-run Notimex news agency. It is a drastic change from recent years, when U.S. agents enjoyed widespread access to their Mexican counterparts. So in the days leading up to Obama's arrival in the Mexican capital, the buzz was not about the economy, but whether Mexico was being uncooperative with the United States. Osorio Chong downplayed the idea that the change signified a retreat in security cooperation. The United States "should have the confidence that things are on a good path," he told Notimex. In a conference call with reporters, Obama administration official Ben Rhodes said it was natural that Peña Nieto, who has been in office for only five months, would want to revisit its security structure. "We're currently working with the Mexicans to evaluate the means by which we cooperate, the means by which we provide assistance, and we're certainly open to discussing with Mexico ways to improve and enhance cooperation, streamline the provision of assistance," said Rhodes, who is the deputy national security adviser for strategic communications. "Our goal is not to have a certain amount of presence in terms of security efforts in Mexico; it's to cooperate with the Mexicans so that we can meet the interests of both our countries." But analysts say impact of the changes should not be underestimated. U.S. officials who had built rapport and personal relationships with Mexican counterparts now have an obstacle to their communication, said George Grayson, an expert on Mexican security issues and professor of government at the College of William & Mary. "The door is not wide-open like it used to be," he said. There is a lot to boast of on the economic front, but security will likely remain a key part of how U.S.-Mexico relations will be judged. Among U.S. officials, there is an unspoken concern about whether Peña Nieto will merely give lip service to the the idea of security cooperation or whether he will provide real substance, said David Shirk, former director of the Trans-Border Institute in San Diego. "I've talked to many people at very high levels that have expressed these concerns," Shirk said. "There is a kind of wait-and-see attitude. I think U.S. ofificals want to give Peña Nieto the benefit of the doubt." What is clear is that Peña Nieto rejects the "kingpin" strategy of his predecessor, Felipe Calderon, who made the capture of cartel leaders the centerpiece of his security plan. A number of high-ranking drug cartel leaders were killed or captured during Calderon's term, but the results usually backfired -- new leaders rose in their place, rival cartels fought for the leftovers and a high level of violence persisted. Peña Nieto has talked about focusing on violence reduction, and engaging in educational, social and economic reforms. But this broad vision has not yet produced a defined security strategy. "The question is, what (do) you replace the kingpin strategy with?" Grayson said. The changes to protocols between U.S. and Mexican officials are likely part of the process to figure that out, but one that could rankle the United States, said Tony Payan, a Mexico expert and fellow at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University. The previous strategy of identifying kingpins and going after them suited the United States, which has the tools and capabilities to aid in those operations, Payan said. A more hands-off approach may not go over well. "Clearly, there is disagreement on how to approach this issue," he said.

Castillo, 13 – Newsdesk Editor for Latin America at CNN (Mariano, “Security dominates talk of U.S.-Mexico relations,” CNN, May 2, http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/02/world/americas/mexico-us-relations)//SY

reports that Mexico is restructuring the way it cooperates with American officials on security matters -- in essence restricting communication -- threaten to impose a shadow over the positive story leaders want to tell. The apparent friction illustrates the complexities of U.S.-Mexico relations. a new narrative on U.S.-Mexico relations that doesn't lead with Mexico as a major transit point for narcotics, or the U S as a market hungry for drugs, isn't easy. That was made clear by the spate of reports about changes to how Mexico cooperates with the Americans. Under the new rules, all U.S. requests for collaboration with Mexican agencies will flow through a single office, Interior Minister Miguel Angel Osorio Chong confirmed It is a drastic change from recent years, when U.S. agents enjoyed widespread access to their Mexican counterparts. in the days leading up to Obama's arrival the buzz was not about the economy, but whether Mexico was being uncooperative with the United States. analysts say impact of the changes should not be underestimated. U.S. officials who had built rapport and personal relationships with Mexican counterparts now have an obstacle to their communication, said George Grayson, an expert on Mexican security issues at the College of William & Mary. "The door is not wide-open like it used to be," security will likely remain key part of how U.S.-Mexico relations will be judged. Among U.S. officials, there is concern about whether Peña Nieto will merely give lip service to the the idea of security cooperation or whether he will provide real substance, "I've talked to many people at very high levels that have expressed these concerns," What is clear is that Peña Nieto rejects the "kingpin" strategy of his predecessor, Felipe Calderon, who made the capture of cartel leaders the centerpiece of his security plan. the results usually backfired -- new leaders rose in their place, rival cartels fought for the leftovers and a high level of violence persisted. Peña Nieto has talked about focusing on violence reduction, this broad vision has not yet produced a defined security strategy. The changes to protocols between U.S. and Mexican officials are likely to rankle the United States, said Tony Payan, a Mexico expert at the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy The previous strategy of identifying kingpins and going after them suited the United States, which has the tools and capabilities to aid in those operations, A hands-off approach may not go over well. Clearly, there is disagreement on how to approach this issue,"

Security issues complicating US-Mexico relations – plan can’t solve

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

After the period of rising inequality in the 1980’s and early 1990s, Mexico’s income inequality has been falling since the mid-1990s. Between 1994 and 2006, Mexico’s Gini coefficient fell from 0.564 to 0.506.35 The incomes of the bottom 20 percent grew more than twice than the incomes of the top ten percent. The faster growth of incomes at the bottom of the distribution happened during a period of lackluster aggregate economic growth. After the 1995 peso crisis, when GDP contracted by around 8 percent, the economy quickly recovered. Between 1996 and 2000 Mexico’s per capita GDP grew at a rate of 4 percent per year. However, between 2000 and 2006, growth slowed down significantly; per capita GDP grew at only 1 percent per year. Mexico experienced a period of slow pro-poor growth. The decline in inequality coincided with the implementation of NAFTA in 1994 and with a shift in government spending patterns. Since the early 1990s, public spending on education, health and nutrition became more progressive. Also, in 1997 the Mexican government launched the conditional cash transfer program Progresa (later called Oportunidades), a large-scale anti-poverty program which reaches around 5 million poor households. These changes made the post-fiscal income distribution less unequal, reenforcing the trend followed by income inequality shown above. Esquivel, Lustig and Scott (2010) analyze the proximate determinants of the decline in income inequality between 1994 and 2006. Using nonparametric decomposition methods and standard benefit-incidence analysis, the authors examine the roles played by changes in the distribution of labor income, demographics, and government transfers in accounting for the decline in inequality. The results suggest that the increase in the proportion of adults and of working adults was equalizing but the impact was modest compared to the equalizing effects of changes in the distribution of labor and non-labor income.

Gaspirini, et al. 11 – Centro de Estudios Distributivos, Laborales y Sociales, Universidad Nacional de La Plata (Leonardo, “The Rise and Fall of Income Inequality in Latin America,” Tulane University Department of Economics, February, http://econ.tulane.edu/RePEc/pdf/tul1110.pdf)//SY

After the period of rising inequality in the 1980’s and early 1990s, Mexico’s income inequality has been falling since the mid-1990s. Between 1994 and 2006, Mexico’s Gini coefficient fell The incomes of the bottom 20 percent grew more than twice than the incomes of the top ten percent. The faster growth of incomes at the bottom of the distribution happened during a period of lackluster aggregate economic growth. Mexico experienced a period of slow pro-poor growth. The decline in inequality coincided with the implementation of NAFTA and with a shift in government spending patterns. Since the early 1990s, public spending on education, health and nutrition became more progressive. Also, Mexican government launched the conditional cash transfer program a large-scale anti-poverty program which reaches around 5 million poor households. These changes made the post-fiscal income distribution less unequal, reenforcing the trend roles played by changes in the distribution of labor income, demographics, and government transfers in accounting for the decline in inequality suggest increase in the proportion of adults and of working adults was equalizing but the impact was modest compared to the equalizing effects of changes in the distribution of labor and non-labor income.

Income inequality in Mexico steadily decreasing, even in periods of low economic growth

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Changes in returns can be due to changes in the relative demand and supply of workers of different characteristics (in particular, education used as a proxy for skill) and/or changes in institutional factors such as the minimum wage and the unionization rate. We apply the methodology proposed by Bound and Johnson (1992) to shed light on which factors were predominant. The results suggest that institutional factors and the increase in relative demand for skilled workers (workers with high school education and more) explained the increase in hourly wages (earnings) inequality between 1989 and 1994. This result is consistent with the findings of a large body of existing research (see, for example, Revenga 1997; Hanson and Harrison 1999; Bosch and Manacorda 2010). Institutional factors, however, did not account for the decline in wage inequality between 1994 and 2006. The evidence suggests that wage inequality fell because the supply of skilled workers outpaced demand. The slightly rising trend in wage inequality during 2006 and 2010 appears to be the consequence of a weakening in the relative demand of low-skilled workers (workers with secondary education or less).

Campos et al., 12 – Professor, Center for Economic Studies, El Colegio de Mexico (Raymundo, Gerardo Esquivel, and Nora Lustig, “The Rise and Fall of Income Inequality in Mexico, 1989–2010,” Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, September, http://www.ecineq.org/milano/WP/ECINEQ2012-267.pdf)//SY

Changes in returns can be due to changes in the relative demand and supply of workers of different characteristics or changes in institutional factors such as the minimum wage and the unionization rate. results suggest that institutional factors and the increase in relative demand for skilled workers explained the increase in hourly wages inequality between 1989 and 1994. Institutional factors, however, did not account for the decline in wage inequality between 1994 and 2006. evidence suggests that wage inequality fell because the supply of skilled workers outpaced demand. The slightly rising trend in wage inequality during 2006 and 2010 appears to be the consequence of a weakening in the relative demand of low-skilled workers

Plan can’t solve the development gap – increasing supply of skilled workers key to solve inequality

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

This situation, however, could have started to change in recent years. In this paper we provide evidence on the reduction in income inequality that has taken place in Mexico since 1994 and we discuss some of the likely sources of such process. The recent trend in inequality in Mexico is important for at least two reasons: first, because it has almost completely reverted the widely documented increase in inequality that occurred in the 1984-1994 period; and second, because this reduction seems to be the outcome of two important structural changes in the Mexican economy: on the one hand, a reduction in labor income and wage inequality that could be associated to the openness of the economy and, on the other, to the role of better-targeted social programs such as Progresa/Oportunidades. Therefore, this suggests that both actors, the market and the State, could have contributed to the recent dynamics of inequality in Mexico. A third, although not quite positive, contributing factor to the recent reduction in inequality seems to have been the growing flow of remittances that many millions of Mexicans living abroad send to their families that were left behind in Mexico.

Esquivel, 8 – Professor, Centro de Estudios Económicos, Colegio de México (Gerardo, “The Dynamics of Income Inequality in Mexico since NAFTA,” Center for International Development, Harvard University, http://www.cid.harvard.edu/Economia/GEsquivel.pdf)//SY

This situation started to change in recent years. reduction in income inequality has taken place in Mexico since 1994 recent trend in inequality in Mexico is important for at least two reasons: first, it has almost completely reverted the widely documented increase in inequality that occurred in the 1984-1994 period second, because this reduction seems to be the outcome of a reduction in labor income and wage inequality that could be associated to the openness of the economy and the role of better-targeted social programs both actors, the market and the State have contributed to the recent dynamics in Mexico. A third contributing factor to the recent reduction in inequality seems to have been the growing flow of remittances

Economic inequality almost completely reversed in Mexico – openness of economy and better social programs

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The evolution in the distribution of monetary income in Mexico can also be analyzed using the Growth Incidence Curves (GICs) suggested by Ravallion and Chen (2003). These curves show the percent change in per capita income along the entire income distribution between two points in time. Figure 5 shows the GIC for the entire 1994-2006 period at the national, urban and rural levels. The negative slope in the first graph clearly show why Mexico’s income inequality diminished during this period: throughout the period, the income of the bottom part of the distribution grew faster than the income from the middle and the top segments of the income distribution. Figure 5 also shows the different patterns followed by the urban and rural income distributions during this period: in the urban areas, income growth was pretty flat across the entire distribution except for the top three deciles which experienced smaller and in some cases even negative income growth rates; in the case of rural areas, two aspects are salient: first, average income growth was greater than in urban areas (an effect that given, the relatively large rural-urban gap, is inequality-reducing) and, second, the rural GIC curve also had a negative slope, so that the bottom half of the rural income distribution had higher income growth rates than the top segment of the distribution. All these facts contributed to the reduction in income inequality in Mexico that has taken place since 1994.

Esquivel, 8 – Professor, Centro de Estudios Económicos, Colegio de México (Gerardo, “The Dynamics of Income Inequality in Mexico since NAFTA,” Center for International Development, Harvard University, http://www.cid.harvard.edu/Economia/GEsquivel.pdf)//SY

The evolution in the distribution of monetary income in Mexico can be analyzed using Growth Incidence Curves These show the percent change in per capita income along the entire income distribution at the national, urban and rural levels. The negative slope clearly show why Mexico’s income inequality diminished during this period: throughout the period, the income of the bottom part of the distribution grew faster than the income from the middle and the top segments of the income distribution. : in the urban areas, income growth was pretty flat across the entire distribution except for the top three deciles which experienced smaller and in some cases even negative income growth rates; in the rural areas, average income growth was greater than in urban areas (an effect that is inequality-reducing) the rural GIC curve also had a negative slope, so that the bottom half of the rural income distribution had higher income growth rates than the top segment of the distribution. All these facts contributed to the reduction in income inequality in Mexico taken place since 1994.

Statistics prove wealth distribution in Mexico improving – plan not key to solving inequality

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

As explained above, inequality has continuously increased in developed countries since the 1980s. In contrast, Mexico exhibits a decrease in inequality after 1994, and in this paper I explore the causes of such a decline. This is important for at least three reasons. First, societies generally value a more egalitarian distribution of resources. Hence the example of Mexico may be useful to other similar countries that desire to attain lower inequality levels. Second, it is also interesting to investigate whether Mexico has "job polarized" as other countries and analyze how this process modiÖes the wage distribution. Finally, other Latin American countries have seen a decline in wage inequality recently, hence the Mexican experience could help in building a consensus on why wage inequality has fallen in the region.6

Campos-Vázquez, 10 – Professor, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos (Raymundo M., “Why did wage inequality decrease in Mexico after NAFTA?” Centro de Estudios Económicos, October, http://cee.colmex.mx/documentos/documentos-de-trabajo/2010/dt201015.pdfhttp://cee.colmex.mx/documentos/documentos-de-trabajo/2010/dt201015.pdf)//SY

inequality has continuously increased in developed countries since the 1980s. In contrast, Mexico exhibits a decrease in inequality after 1994, an This is important for at least three reasons. First, societies generally value a more egalitarian distribution of resources. the example of Mexico may be useful to other similar countries that desire to attain lower inequality levels. other Latin American countries have seen a decline in wage inequality recently, hence the Mexican experience could help in building a consensus on why wage inequality has fallen in the region.

Development has been decreasing in Mexico – better wage distribution

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mexico’s banking system is resilient and well capitalized, and stress tests indicate that it would be capable of sustaining significant shocks, the IMF said in its latest assessment of the country’s financial system.However, Mexico, the current president of the Group of Twenty (G-20) advanced and emerging economies, will need to be vigilant to risks from outside the country and should strengthen the institutional framework for its supervision of financial regulation by establishing a fixed term for the President of the Banking Commission, rebalancing its Board and promoting stronger legal safeguards for its personnel, the IMF said.“Our assessment of Mexico’s financial system is very positive,” said Fernando Montes-Negret, a senior financial expert in the IMF’s Monetary and Capital Markets Department and head of the team that conducted the assessment.Cross-border linkages“The country has better tools for systemic crisis management and competent supervision. However, there have been episodes of distress in recent years and given Mexico’s significant linkages to the global economy and to Spanish banks, authorities need to monitor closely and respond quickly to emerging risks,” Montes-Negret said. The assessment was published on March 30.In the wake of the global economic crisis, the IMF has strengthened its surveillance of countries’ financial systems. Since 1999, the IMF has monitored countries’ financial sectors on a voluntary basis through a joint review process with the World Bank called the Financial Sector Assessment Program.Mexico is one of the major 25 financial sectors that must undergo a review of its financial health as part of the IMF’s economic surveillance and monitoring. The global economic crisis laid bare the devastating economic consequences a financial crisis in one country can have on the global economy. Countries with financial sectors that have the greatest impact on global financial stability are now required to undergo in-depth reviews of their financial health by the IMF every five years.In its assessment of the health of Mexico’s financial system, the IMF recommended the government enact a series of reforms as Latin America’s second largest economy continues to modernize.

IMF 12 (International Monetary Fund, “Mexico Banks Resilient, But Global Risks Need Care”, 3/30/12, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2012/car033012a.htm)//WL

Mexico’s banking system is resilient and well capitalized stress tests indicate that it would be capable of sustaining significant shocks, the IMF said Our assessment of Mexico’s financial system is very positive said a senior financial expert in the IMF The country has better tools for systemic crisis management and competent supervision In the wake of the global economic crisis, the IMF has strengthened its surveillance of countries’ financial systems

Mexico’s economy is resilient

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mexico is the second largest economy in Latin America and a popular vacation destination for many Americans. However, the country has begun to attract many American investors as well, thanks to its economic resilience in the latest slowdown, and its quickly growing economy.The country has turned into something of a manufacturing powerhouse, and it has stolen share from other big emerging nations such as China. Additionally, the nation has made several moves on a political and policy front, and many believe that these ensure favorable financial conditions and economic growth for the nation’s future.Economy OutlookIn fact, Mexico has a great potential for accelerating economic growth. In 2012 Mexico maintained a strong growth at 3.9%, while some believe that higher rates could be in the country’s future should the American economy continue to improve as well (See Why Mexico ETF is a long term Winner)The country also represents a very large market as it ranks 8th in the emerging world, and 11th overall in terms of GDP size. To top things off, it also received a solid BBB+ rating from Fitch suggesting that the nation has a solid economic foundation, and that its reforms are well received (See Time to Buy These Top Ranked Latin America ETF)News in FavorMexico’s growth prospects are attracting investment banks and investors hunting for ways to gain greater exposure to international markets. “It’s the coming of age of the Mexican market,” said Eduardo Cepeda, J.P. Morgan’s senior country officer (See Inside the Surging Mexico ETF)The market for credit is also growing, and the banks are strongly capitalized and have complied with International Basel 3 standards. Local companies are generating cash and are looking to expand in the domestic and international markets.The foreign manufacturers are also returning to Mexico as the country has a rich industrial base. The automakers plan to invest $10 billion in new assembly plants this year alone.Bad News LatelyRecently the Mexican government has cut its growth outlook for 2013 to 3.1% from 3.5% after a soft first quarter. Mexico’s near-term slowdown is largely driven by short-term external factors that are likely to lose relevance in the second half of 2013.A policy shift towards urbanization has drawn mixed results. Moreover, mixed signals from the U.S. may limit the growth outlook for Mexico. Analysts expect the central bank could cut interest rates again once a current spike in inflation subsides.Outlook and Mexico ETFStill, despite some of this near term gloom, the future for the Mexican economy is bright. The country is relatively correlated to the U.S.—which is a good thing now that the American economy is back on track—while it has a massive consumer base of its own, along with a booming industrial production market as well.Given this, some long term investors may want to consider now as an attractive entry point for the Mexican economy, especially after the recent slump in equity prices. For these investors, a closer look at the Mexico ETF, described below, could be warranted:iShares MSCI Mexico Capped Investable Market Index Fund (EWW).Launched in March 1996, EWW tracks the MSCI Mexico Investable Market index, which consists of stocks traded primarily on the Mexican Stock Exchange. EWW is a large blend fund with net assets of $3.1 billion and a trading volume of more than 2.6 million shares a day.The fund holds 47 stocks in total and the top ten stocks make up 60% of the fund. EWW holds 42% giant and 38% large cap stocks with maximum exposure in the consumer staples (30%), materials (19%) and telecommunication sector (18%) sectors.The ETF charges 52bps per year in expenses. The fund has a yield of 1.09% and has a low tracking error of .54% with its index. The product is more volatile as compared to the S&P 500, though its growth outlook is far brighter as well.The Bottom LineMexico is a key emerging market that has a huge potential for growth. Recent reforms would further back the country’s strong fundamentals, attracting more investors to Mexico. This is especially true since many of these reforms are in visible sectors like services and financials. The main fund to play Mexico has surged over the past 12 months, but there has been significant near term weakness in the fund, like in many other emerging markets.Still, we view this drop as a potential buying opportunity, as we are maintaining our top Zacks ETF Rank of 1 or ‘Strong Buy’ on this product, suggesting that a rebound and outperformance are in this ETF’s future, at least based on our models for the next one year time frame.

Zacks Equity Research 6/6 – Investment Company that reviews investment opportunities (“Time to Worry about the Mexico ETF?”, 6/6/13, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/time-worry-mexico-etf-215612997.html)//WL

the country has economic resilience in the latest slowdown, and its quickly growing economy The country has turned into something of a manufacturing powerhouse the nation has made several moves on a political and policy front that ensure favorable financial conditions and economic growth for the nation’s future It’s the coming of age of the Mexican market the banks are strongly capitalized and complied with International standards the future for the Mexican economy is bright The country .S has a massive consumer base of its own, along with a booming industrial production market as well. investors may want to consider now as an attractive entry point for the Mexican economy Recent reforms further back the country’s strong fundamentals

Mexico Heavily Resilient – recent reforms and strong consumer base

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mexico's ResilienceFew economies escaped the global slowdown in the summer of 2012. Mexico was a rare and notable exception. While marked deterioration in China, India and Brazil grabbed the headlines, Mexico quietly hummed along, generating remarkably smooth growth. For an economy so tied to US fortunes, that is quite an achievement. What is the secret of Mexico's success?GDP statistics tell the tale. India's growth plunged from 8 per cent in mid-2011 to just under 3 per cent last summer. Brazil's long slide saw year-to-year increases tumble from 8 per cent in mid 2010 to less than half of one percent in the second quarter of 2012. China's slowdown was less dramatic, sliding from 9 per cent at the end of 2011 to 7.4 per cent by mid-2012 - but given that China's economy experiences serious dislocation at around 6 per cent growth, its dip was too close for comfort. Thankfully, the worst seems to be over, and these economies are now on the mend.At the same time, Mexico steadily generated quarterly growth in the 3.5-to-5 per cent range, with no discernible down-trend. True, the latest GDP figure is the weakest showing since the recession in 2009, but over the course of a year, growth fell by a mere 1 per cent, to a still-healthy 3.3 per cent. Among major emerging markets, only Russia showed similar resilience - but in terms of net steadiness, Mexico still comes out on top. How do the numbers add up?Delving into Mexico's national accounts is revealing. Consumers were surprisingly resilient in the post-recession period, but they are currently less enthusiastic; growth recently receded from the steady 4 per cent pace to just 2.2 per cent in the third quarter of 2012. Private investment saw an even steeper decline. From an impressive 8-10 per cent pace, private construction registered a stunning 20 per cent year-on-year gain at the end of 2011 - only to see growth completely vanish by the summer of 2012. Similarly, private sector machinery and equipment investment - accustomed to hefty double-digit increases - sunk to a year-on-year gain just shy of 4 per cent early last fall.So far, the Mexican economy doesn't seem much different from the rest of the world. What is keeping its overall numbers afloat? Throughout 2012, the growing private investment void was filled in by a surge of public investment - mostly construction projects. On paper it seems too good to be true, but the government's intervention couldn't have been better timed and the amounts could hardly have been better calibrated. In the history of fiscal timing, it's probably one for the record books.But the story doesn't end there. Notwithstanding the very recent lull, rising private investment speaks to Mexico's ongoing success at attracting large amounts of foreign investment. Production arising from these investments is boosting Mexico's exports, which over the past two years have outpaced import growth, yielding a decent net contribution to the economy. That's something the other large emerging markets were not been able to say until very recently, and highlights the underlying strength of the US economy, the main driver of Mexico's export success.Will Mexico's enviable record continue? The keen interest of foreign investors in Mexico suggests that the slowdown of private investment is temporary - good news for the government, which can't afford to offset private investment indefinitely. More importantly, the export potential that justifies foreign investments is strong, thanks to resurgent US housing, consumer and corporate markets.The bottom line? Mexico's recent growth run is impressive, and is set to continue. Over the coming months, this market will be one to watch.

Hall 1/24 - Vice-President and Chief Economist at Export Development Canada (Peter G, “Mexico's Resilience”, Export Development Canada, 1/24/13, http://embamex.sre.gob.mx/canada_eng/images/pdfs/mexico_resilience.pdf)//WL

Mexico's ResilienceFew economies escaped the global slowdown in the summer of 2012. Mexico was a rare and notable exception While marked deterioration in China, India and Brazil grabbed the headlines, Mexico quietly hummed along For an economy so tied to US fortunes, that is quite an achievement. Mexico steadily generated quarterly growth in the 3.5-to-5 per cent range, with no discernible down-trend in terms of steadiness, Mexico comes out on top. Consumers were resilient in the post-recession period, rising private investment speaks to Mexico's ongoing success at attracting large amounts of foreign investment. Production arising from these investments is boosting Mexico's exports he bottom line? Mexico's recent growth run is impressive, and is set to continue

Mexico is resilient – ability to easily overcome past crises

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mexico Resilient in 2011 Amid Global Uncertainty and Sluggish U.S. Growth Mexico navigated a new wave of international financial volatility during the second half of 2011, growing 3.9 percent for the year—slower than the 5.5 percent pace in 2010 but ahead of the 2.2 percent annual average of 2001–11. The recent performance overcame a period of heightened European financial tension, sluggish growth in the U.S. and global supply-chain disruptions related to Japan’s natural disasters. Weaker manufacturing output growth and a 2.3 percent decline in oil activity slowed expansion in 2011. Agricultural output also stagnated in 2011, while construction improved after experiencing no growth in 2010. The 2012 consensus forecast for a 3.4 percent rate of expansion is modest compared with the prior two years’ data (Chart 1). In contrast to the U.S. upturn, robust job growth has characterized Mexico’s recovery since the 2009 recession. Formal-sector employment—defined as workers covered by Mexico’s social security system—grew 4.1 percent in 2011, with more than 600,000 jobs created. Manufacturing accounted for 27 percent of the new jobs, while trade was responsible for 25 percent and business services for 18 percent. Domestic demand also bounced back. Buoyed by relatively healthy banks, rising household credit and greater employment, retail sales increased 3.1 percent in 2011— sales volumes surpassed the precrisis peak year of 2008. Household credit rose 19 percent in 2011 after posting no growth in real terms in 2010. Manufacturing and Trade Growth Mexico’s rebound began in summer 2009, led by manufactured goods exports to the U.S., where the recession had ended that June.1 This reliance on manufacturing and exports leaves Mexico vulnerable to global events. Notably, Japan’s earthquake, tsunami and nuclear incidents in March 2011 arrested Mexican manufacturing growth. After annual average expansion of 6.8 percent during first quarter 2011, Mexico manufacturing decelerated in the second quarter to 5 percent as supply-chain disruptions took hold. Anecdotal evidence indicates that Mexican plants scaled back production, reflecting increased lead times for machine tools, wire harnesses and other Asia-made inputs. In the second half of 2011, when uncertainty abated, supply chains were reestablished and orders returned to Mexican facilities. Manufacturing production rose 4.8 percent year over year, with manufacturing exports gaining 10 percent. Total exports grew 14 percent in 2011. Mexico continues to be one of the best manufacturing platforms to meet U.S. demand. Proximity, quick turnarounds on manufacturing design changes and a skilled and experienced manufacturing labor force are important advantages (see the box “IntraIndustry Trade: The U.S.–Mexico Connection in Import, Export Data” on page 13).2Transportation equipment manufacturing, which includes motor vehicle production, has been crucial to Mexico’s recent economic recovery and impressive job growth. Transportation equipment employment growth averaged 17.1 percent in 2011, up from 12.6 percent in 2010 (Chart 2). The sector represents 22 percent of Mexico’s manufacturing production and 17 percent of its manufacturing employment. Thus, the uncertain performance of the U.S. economy and the question of whether the recent run-up in U.S. automotive demand can be sustained remain significant downside risks for Mexico. Withstanding Global Shocks Mexico also navigated financial disruption in Europe in the latter half of the year. When global markets go awry, investors withdraw capital from emerging markets in search of safer outlets. The premium Mexico must pay on its debt relative to comparable U.S. instruments jumped more than 55 percent from July to September and reached levels not seen since July 2009 (Chart 3). Foreign portfolio investment in Mexico, which tripled in 2010, grew just 4.1 percent in 2011. The diminished rate of investment flows helps explain a 15 percent peso depreciation against the dollar from July to December. In turn, the weaker peso fueled increased imported goods prices, pushing up inflation by year-end. Mexico’s solid macroeconomic fundamentals and the credibility policymakers earned over the past decade helped persuade the international community that the inflation pickup and peso depreciation were transitory.3After spiking during the third quarter, the global Emerging Markets Bond Index spread declined significantly. And, in a vote of confidence by international investors, Mexico in January issued $2 billion in 10-year bonds yielding 3.7 percent, the lowest rate the country has obtained for the maturity. Additionally, financial markets stabilized, with inflation slowing from November’s levels.

Cañas 12 - business economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas he analyzes the regional economy. Has a BA in economics (Jesus, “Mexico resilient in 2011 amid global uncertainty and sluggish U.S. growth”, The Southwest Economy, Q2 2012, http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/swe/2012/swe1202c.pdf)//WL

Mexico Resilient in 2011 Amid Global Uncertainty and Sluggish U.S. Growth Mexico navigated a new wave of international financial volatility during the second half of 2011 The recent performance overcame a period of heightened European financial tension, sluggish growth in the U.S. and global supply-chain disruptions related to Japan’s natural disasters In contrast to the U.S. upturn, robust job growth has characterized Mexico’s recovery since the 2009 recession Domestic demand also bounced back Withstanding Global Shocks Mexico also navigated financial disruption in Europe in the latter half of the year Mexico’s solid macroeconomic fundamentals and the credibility policymakers earned over the past decade helped persuade the international community that the inflation pickup and peso depreciation were transitory

More evidence – Ability to weather Global Recession and Eurozone meltdown

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The economic crisis sweeping the globe has spared no nation, but some are showing remarkable resilience. Mexico's economic performance, for example, has shown tremendous strength. When the U.S. Federal Reserve extended a loan of $30 billion each to the central banks of Brazil, South Korea, Singapore and Mexico, Mexico did not touch those funds. It simply reinvested them in Treasury bonds, leaving them in accounts in New York. This is no accident. It stems from prudent economic policies implemented after the December 1994 devaluation of the Mexican peso that sent the economy into a tailspin. At that time, President Ernesto Zedillo had been in office a few days, and his entire agenda was thrown into disarray by the crisis. The Clinton administration had to issue an emergency $50 billion loan –- which Mexico paid back ahead of schedule and with interest -– and the International Monetary Fund, or IMF, helped craft a recovery program. It was a painful adjustment as budgets were slashed, fiscal restraint was implemented across the board, and the Mexican people saw their investments and savings diminish. That was 15 years ago, and the lessons learned the hard way are now paying off: Mexico's stock market fell 23 percent in 2008, the "best" performing major index at a time when the U.S. markets fell 38 percent and Russian markets collapsed by an astounding 70 percent. Last fall, some feared that the Mexican economy would not be able to escape the turmoil engulfing the United States, and the Mexican peso fell almost 30 percent vis-à-vis the American dollar. It has since recovered, although it has suffered a 20 percent devaluation since the economic crisis began last summer. These currency fluctuations reflect the fact that, because of the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, neither Mexico nor Canada have "decoupled" from the U.S. economy. There are several reasons for Mexico's economic resilience. One is the fiscal restraint that Zedillo initiated and that his successor, Vicente Fox, continued. Fox, a former corporate executive, made significant strides in eliminating Mexico's foreign debt. Mexico's current president, Felipe Calderon, has kept spending in line, even as revenues have increased. When disaster struck, Mexico had a balanced budget, almost no foreign debt and rising federal revenues, allowing it to intervene to stabilize prices. Mexico also dodged the housing speculation that brought its neighbor to its knees. Mexico's financial system has always been stringent in extending credit. Americans roll their eyes at the bureaucracy this entailed –- two forms of ID are required to open a bank account in Mexico; when customers request checks, they have to pick them up at the bank, where their signature and ID are verified; credit card applications must be made in person at the financial institution, and not over the phone or through unsolicited mail-in applications. As a result, "identity theft" is almost non-existent in Mexico, and it was nearly impossible for a housing bubble to emerge there. Another factor is the windfall oil profits – despite the sudden drop in oil prices. When oil peaked at $147 a barrel last summer, there was disbelief around the world: Would it shoot up to $200 or fall back? The conventional wisdom was that $100 a barrel for oil was the new reality going forward, and there was a frenzy to lock in prices through futures contracts. Mexican officials at Pemex, the state-owned oil monopoly, didn't believe that price was sustainable; their economic models indicated that, with slacking demand due to the recession, a price range between $60 and $80 was "sustainable." Other countries -– most notably Venezuela and Russia –- were more ambitious, and reckless. Both countries let spending explode, believing that they could finance anything they wanted. The economies in both countries today are in freefall. Mexico, by comparison, was prudent, saving the oil windfall, and Mexican traders implemented a strategy that hinged on the price of oil falling below the $60 to $80 range. "They're great traders," Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp., said of Pemex futures traders. "If the economy continues to slow, they're looking like geniuses." The world economy has more than slowed: It has hit a wall. And Mexico is collecting $90 to $110 per barrel today, for oil that is trading in the $38 to $45 range at the beginning of 2009. Having hedged its exports, Mexico is getting a premium, and a significant windfall that will total several billion dollars this year, enough to sustain social spending without massive federal deficits. Will this be enough to prevent Mexico from slipping into recession in 2009? Probably not, but the fact that it has managed to escape a debilitating slowdown –- the United States is in its 14th month of official recession –- suggests that whatever economic slowdown there is will be relatively mild, considering the global situation. "The U.S. needs to show some proof they have a plan to get out of the fiscal problem," Ernesto Zedillo told reporters at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland last week. "We, as developing countries, need to know we won't be crowded out of the capital markets, which is already happening."

Nevaer 9 – New America Media Reporter (Louis, “In Global Economic Crisis, Mexico Is Resilient”, New America Media, 2/6/9, http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=b8dc03d6f2792eba9e84392106c2c6f4)//WL

The economic crisis sweeping the globe has spared no nation, but some are showing remarkable resilience. Mexico's economic performance , has shown tremendous strength There are several reasons for Mexico's economic resilience One is the fiscal restraint that Zedillo and his successor Fox, continued Fox, a former corporate executive, made significant strides in eliminating Mexico's foreign debt. When disaster struck, Mexico had a balanced budget, almost no foreign debt and rising federal revenues, allowing it to intervene to stabilize prices Mexico also dodged the housing speculation that brought its neighbor to its knees Americans roll their eyes at the bureaucracy this entailed As a result, "identity theft" is almost non-existent in Mexico, and it was nearly impossible for a housing bubble to emerge there Another factor is the windfall oil profits – despite the sudden drop in oil prices The conventional wisdom was that $100 a barrel for oil was the new reality going forward, Mexican officials at Pemex, the state-owned oil monopoly, didn't believe that price was sustainable; their economic models indicated that, with slacking demand due to the recession, a price range between $60 and $80 was "sustainable." Mexico was prudent, saving the oil windfall, and Mexican traders implemented a strategy that hinged on the price of oil falling below the $60 to $80 range they're looking like geniuses And Mexico is collecting $90 to $110 per barrel today Having hedged its exports, Mexico is getting a premium, and a significant windfall that will total several billion dollars this year, enough to sustain social spending without massive federal deficits

Even more evidence – sustainable fiscal and economic policies

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

From 1970 to 2010, more than 10 million Mexicans migrated to the US. Now, after decades of rising numbers immigrating to the US, a new demographic trend is playing out: illegal immigration is waning. The Department of Homeland Security said in a 2010 report that the number of immigrants residing unauthorized in the US, 62 percent of whom come from Mexico, has declined from a peak of 11.8 million in January of 2007 to 10.8 million in January of 2010. US Customs and Border Protection also released data showing that the number of those arrested trying to cross the border illegally is is down sharply – by 58 percent since fiscal year 2006. The Pew Hispanic Center, using Mexican government data, estimates that the number of Mexicans annually leaving Mexico for the US declined by 60 percent from 2006 to 2010. Many dispute the reason why. Here are four factors that play a role. Tougher US measures In the same period that arrests have gone down along the US-Mexico border, the number of agents placed there has doubled. The Obama administration is responsible for a historic number of deportations. Recent figures from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) show that nearly 400,000 individuals were deported between October 2010 and September 2011. Some believe that tough state laws like those in Arizona and Alabama have also had a deterrent effect. Critics argue that tougher enforcement does not have a direct link to reduced migration flows. Still, a tougher US stance has had an indirect one: It has pushed up smuggler fees, making it too difficult for some migrants to pay. A bad American economy Aside from cases of family reunification, migrants leave their communities for one reason: jobs. If there are no jobs, there is no reason to uproot. The Pew Hispanic Center says that declining job opportunities state side have played a major part in the US no longer seeming as attractive an option as it once was to potential migrants. The recession had a significant impact on industries such as construction and manufacturing, which disproportionately employ Latino immigrants. Many have stayed in the US to ride out turbulent economic times, but the remittances that they send home ebb and flow with their ability to earn. A better Mexican economy Most Mexicans say they would actually prefer to stay home. If they could find viable jobs in Mexico, they would gladly work in them. Now, there is some indication that a brighter economic reality for Mexico has meant less of an incentive to leave. The New York Times recently quoted experts on both sides of the border showing that a rise in wages in Mexico, and greater access to education, has meant that generations of Mexicans no longer see a stint in the US as a “rite of passage.” Others dismiss this as a reason. The prospect of wages far higher than what they earn at home has always been a mighty pull to the US. About one fifth of Mexicans still live in extreme poverty, and 50 percent of the population is considered poor. With a population of 113 million, that is a lot of potential economic migrants. Crime in Mexico Mexico’s migration commissioner, Salvador Beltran del Rio, recently said that there has been a reduction in the number of Central Americans being apprehended in Mexico. The number has fallen from 433,000 in 2005 to 140,000 in 2010. Many of them have said that they are no longer willing to risk their lives, as drug trafficking organization have become increasingly involved in human smuggling. In August 2010, 72 migrants, mostly from Central America, were found murdered in a mass grave in the northern state of Tamaulipas, reportedly for refusing to work for a drug gang. Many migrants, both from Mexico and beyond, have gone missing in their northward treks toward the US, a powerful incentive to stay home.

Llana 11 - masters in journalism from Columbia University and a BA in history from the University of Michigan, Christian Science Monitor’s European Bureau Chief (Sara, “Four reasons why illegal immigration across the US-Mexico border has dropped,” CSM, 10/26/11, http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2011/1026/Four-reasons-why-illegal-immigration-across-the-US-Mexico-border-has-dropped/Tougher-US-measures)//AC

From 1970 to 2010, more than 10 million Mexicans migrated to the US. Now, after decades of rising numbers immigrating to the US, a new demographic trend is playing out: illegal immigration is waning. US Customs and Border Protection also released data showing that the number of those arrested trying to cross the border illegally is is down sharply – by 58 percent since 2006. Here are four factors that play a role. Tougher US measures In the same period that arrests have gone down along the US-Mexico border, the number of agents placed there has doubled Critics argue that tougher enforcement does not have a direct link to reduced migration flows. Still, a tougher US stance has had an indirect one: It has pushed up smuggler fees, making it too difficult for some migrants to pay. migrants leave their communities for one reason: jobs. If there are no jobs, there is no reason to uproot. declining job opportunities state side have played a major part in the US no longer seeming as attractive an option as it once was to potential migrants. The recession had a significant impact on industries such as construction and manufacturing, which disproportionately employ Latino immigrants Most Mexicans say they would actually prefer to stay home. If they could find viable jobs in Mexico, they would gladly work in them. a brighter economic reality for Mexico has meant less of an incentive to leave a rise in wages in Mexico, and greater access to education, has meant that generations of Mexicans no longer see a stint in the US as a “rite of passage Mexico’s migration commissioner, Salvador Beltran del Rio, recently said that there has been a reduction in the number of Central Americans being apprehended in Mexico they are no longer willing to risk their lives, as drug trafficking organization have become increasingly involved in human smuggling. migrants from Central America, were found murdered in a mass grave Many migrants, both from Mexico and beyond, have gone missing in their northward treks toward the US, a powerful incentive to stay home.

Immigration is declining – four reasons

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Shortly after the new bipartisan immigration bill was released this week, one opponent, Republican Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, said it contained "a fatal flaw:" the provision for a 10-year process through which some illegal immigrants could gain citizenship. "It legalizes almost everyone in the country illegally, also known as amnesty, before it secures the border," Smith said. "As a result, the Senate proposal issues an open invitation to enter the country illegally." Smith voices a common fear among border-security hawks: That any so-called "amnesty" or legalization plan will somehow spur more foreigners to make unauthorized dashes across the border. A recent poll by the Rasmussen company found that nearly half of respondents thought a pathway to citizenship would lead to more more illegal immigration. But here's one thing that might allay those fears: Mexicans, who make up the plurality of illegal immigrants, are feeling better and better about their country, and fewer are interested in moving across the border. Though an estimated 300,000 people still enter the U.S. illegally each year, that represents a precipitous fall from the first half of the decade, when the number was 850,000. In 2010, net migration to and from Mexico was approximately zero. Part of the reason, of course, is the global economic downturn, which eliminated many of the low-wage job opportunities that Mexican immigrants might have come to the U.S. to seek. But in addition to the U.S. becoming a less attractive destination, part of the explanation for the drop is that prospects in Mexico are actually looking up. Even though Mexico is clearly still struggling, there are signs that the country is gradually improving. Crime is down in border cities like Ciudad Juarez. Mexico's fertility rate is falling and its population is aging, meaning there are fewer young workers scrambling for jobs (half of all Mexican immigrants are under age 33). For the first time in decades, Mexico has a fledgling middle class. Its GDP growth rivals Brazil's, and economically, some economists think the country is doing even better than the United States. According to the OECD, Mexicans are about as satisfied with their lives as people in Iceland or Ireland are.

Khazan, 4/17 – The Atlantic's global editor (Olga, “Mexico Is Getting Better, and Fewer Mexicans Want to Leave,” The Atlantic, 4/17/13, http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/mexico-is-getting-better-and-fewer-mexicans-want-to-leave/275064/)//SMS

Mexicans, who make up the plurality of illegal immigrants, are feeling better and better about their country, and fewer are interested in moving across the border. Though 300,000 still enter the U.S. illegally that represents a precipitous fall from the 850,000. In 2010, net migration to and from Mexico was approximately zero. Part of the reason, is the economic downturn in addition to the U.S. becoming less attractive prospects in Mexico are looking up. there are signs that the country is gradually improving Crime is down Mexico's fertility rate is falling and its population is aging, meaning there are fewer young workers scrambling for jobs Mexico has a fledgling middle class. Its GDP growth rivals Brazil's, and economically, some economists think the country is doing even better than the U S Mexicans are about as satisfied with their lives as people in Iceland or Ireland are.

No risk of illegal immigration – statistics prove Mexicans are less likely to cross the border illegally

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Illegal aliens are leaving the United States and returning to Mexico in search of a better life. You heard that right. One Mexican official tells the Sacramento Bee that Mexico has "become a middle class country" where it's now easier to buy homes on credit, get higher education and find a job." Not so here in the U.S. where the employment picture remains grim. Just today came announcements from Cisco and Goldman Sachs that they're cutting thousands of jobs. Plus - a report from payroll processor ADP shows that although the private sector added jobs in July, growth is below what's needed for a steady recovery. Meanwhile - As we wait for the monthly jobs report Friday, consider this: Mexico's unemployment rate is 4.9%... compared to 9.2% in the U.S. You do the math. It's estimated that about 300,000 illegal aliens have left California alone since 2008. Experts say the weaker U.S. economy along with rising deportations and tougher border enforcement means fewer illegal aliens. But - there have also been significant improvements in Mexico's society. Its economy is growing at 4-5% and, according to the UN, Mexico's average standard of living - which includes things like health, education and per capita income - is higher than in Russia, China and India. Turns out Mexicans might just have better luck of achieving the American Dream south of the border.

Cafferty, 11 - former CNN commentator and occasional host of specials (Jack, “Illegal aliens leaving U.S., returning to Mexico for better life?,” CNN, August 3, 2011, http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/03/illegal-aliens-leaving-u-s-returning-to-mexico-for-better-life/)//SMS

Illegal aliens are leaving the U S and returning to Mexico Mexico has "become a middle class country" where it's now easier to buy homes on credit, get higher education and find a job." Not so in the U.S. where the employment picture remains grim Mexico's unemployment rate is 4.9%... compared to 9.2% in the U.S. 300,000 illegal aliens have left California alone since 2008. the weaker economy along with rising deportations and tougher border enforcement means fewer illegal aliens there have also been significant improvements in Mexico's society. Its economy is growing Mexico's average standard of living is higher than in Russia, China and India

They have it backwards – Mexicans are returning home due to better conditions and a poor US economy

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Douglas S. Massey, co-director of the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton, an extensive, long-term survey in Mexican emigration hubs, said his research showed that interest in heading to the United States for the first time had fallen to its lowest level since at least the 1950s. “No one wants to hear it, but the flow has already stopped,” Mr. Massey said, referring to illegal traffic. “For the first time in 60 years, the net traffic has gone to zero and is probably a little bit negative.” The decline in illegal immigration, from a country responsible for roughly 6 of every 10 illegal immigrants in the United States, is stark. The Mexican census recently discovered four million more people in Mexico than had been projected, which officials attributed to a sharp decline in emigration. American census figures analyzed by the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center also show that the illegal Mexican population in the United States has shrunk and that fewer than 100,000 illegal border-crossers and visa-violators from Mexico settled in the United States in 2010, down from about 525,000 annually from 2000 to 2004. Although some advocates for more limited immigration argue that the Pew studies offer estimates that do not include short-term migrants, most experts agree that far fewer illegal immigrants have been arriving in recent years.

Cave, 11 – foreign correspondent for The New York Times, based in Mexico City. He covers Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean.(Damien, “Better Lives for Mexicans Cut Allure of Going North,” New York Times, July 6, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/07/06/world/americas/immigration.html)//SMS

co-director of the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton said his research showed that interest in heading to the U S had fallen to its lowest level the flow has already stopped Massey said, referring to illegal traffic. the net traffic has gone to zero and is probably a little bit negative.” the illegal Mexican population in the U S has shrunk and fewer than 100,000 illegal border-crossers and visa-violators from Mexico settled in the United States in 2010, down from about 525,000 annually from 2004.

Analysis suggests net immigration from Mexico is slightly negative

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

But if terrorists are smart enough to plan such an attack, they're smart enough to get into the United States, no matter how many agents and troops are on the Mexican border. If terrorists have the determination to train for years, if they can pay for flight lessons or anthrax or a nuclear bomb, then they can easily bribe or forge their way into America — or waltz in with legitimate visas. Mohamed Atta did not have to hire a coyote or swim across the Rio Grande. He and the other hijackers entered the country legally. The 500,000 or so people who manage to sneak in from Mexico each year are a minuscule fraction — about 1 percent — of the tourists and students and other visitors who enter America legally. Mexico is not the preferred route of the suspected terrorists caught so far because they prefer more convenient options, like the Canadian border. Even if the northern border were sealed with the Great Wall of Saskatchewan, there would still be thousands of miles of unsecured coastline — and plenty of drug runners with boats and planes who would have no trouble delivering a terrorist or a suitcase bomb.

Tierney 06 - John Tierney writes a column, Findings, for the Science Times section, (“Throwing Hawks a Bone”, may 16, 2006, NY Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/16/opinion/16tierney.html)//sawyer

But if terrorists are smart enough to plan such an attack, they're smart enough to get into the United States, no matter how many agents and troops are on the Mexican border. If terrorists have the determination to train for years, if they can pay for flight lessons or anthrax or a nuclear bomb, then they can easily bribe or forge their way into America Mexico is not the preferred route of the suspected terrorists caught so far because they prefer more convenient options, like the Canadian border. Even if the northern border were sealed with the Great Wall of Saskatchewan, there would still be thousands of miles of unsecured coastline — and plenty of drug runners with boats and planes who would have no trouble delivering a terrorist or a suitcase bomb.

No internal to terrorism – alt causes

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

CALIFORNIA may seem the best place to study the impact of illegal immigration on the prospects of American workers. Hordes of immigrants rushed into the state in the last 25 years, competing for jobs with the least educated among the native population. The wages of high school dropouts in California fell 17 percent from 1980 to 2004. But before concluding that immigrants are undercutting the wages of the least fortunate Americans, perhaps one should consider Ohio. Unlike California, Ohio remains mostly free of illegal immigrants. And what happened to the wages of Ohio's high school dropouts from 1980 to 2004? They fell 31 percent. As Congress debates an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, several economists and news media pundits have sounded the alarm, contending that illegal immigrants are causing harm to Americans in the competition for jobs. Yet a more careful examination of the economic data suggests that the argument is, at the very least, overstated. There is scant evidence that illegal immigrants have caused any significant damage to the wages of American workers. The number that has been getting the most attention lately was produced by George J. Borjas and Lawrence F. Katz, two Harvard economists, in a paper published last year. They estimated that the wave of illegal Mexican immigrants who arrived from 1980 to 2000 had reduced the wages of high school dropouts in the United States by 8.2 percent. But the economists acknowledge that the number does not consider other economic forces, such as the fact that certain businesses would not exist in the United States without cheap immigrant labor. If it had accounted for such things, immigration's impact would be likely to look less than half as big. Mr. Katz was somewhat taken aback by the attention the study has received. "This was not intended," he said. At first blush, the preoccupation over immigration seems reasonable. Since 1980, eight million illegal immigrants have entered the work force. Two-thirds of them never completed high school. It is sensible to expect that, because they were willing to work for low wages, they would undercut the position in the labor market of American high school dropouts. This common sense, however, ignores half the picture. Over the last quarter-century, the number of people without any college education, including high school dropouts, has fallen sharply. This has reduced the pool of workers who are most vulnerable to competition from illegal immigrants. In addition, as businesses and other economic agents have adjusted to immigration, they have made changes that have muted much of immigration's impact on American workers. For instance, the availability of foreign workers at low wages in the Nebraska poultry industry made companies realize that they had the personnel to expand. So they invested in new equipment, generating jobs that would not otherwise be there. In California's strawberry patches, illegal immigrants are not competing against native workers; they are competing against pickers in Michoacán, Mexico. If the immigrant pickers did not come north across the border, the strawberries would. "Immigrants come in and the industries that use this type of labor grow," said David Card, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley. "Taking all into account, the effects of immigration are much, much lower." In a study published last year that compared cities that have lots of less educated immigrants with cities that have very few, Mr. Card found no wage differences that could be attributed to the presence of immigrants. Other research has also cast doubt on illegal immigration's supposed damage to the nation's disadvantaged. A study published earlier this year by three economists — David H. Autor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mr. Katz of Harvard and Melissa S. Kearney of the Brookings Institution — observed that income inequality in the bottom half of the wage scale has not grown since around the mid-1980's. Even economists striving hardest to find evidence of immigration's effect on domestic workers are finding that, at most, the surge of illegal immigrants probably had only a small impact on wages of the least-educated Americans — an effect that was likely swamped by all the other things that hit the economy, from the revolution in technology to the erosion of the minimum wage's buying power. When Mr. Borjas and Mr. Katz assumed that businesses reacted to the extra workers with a corresponding increase in investment — as has happened in Nebraska — their estimate of the decline in wages of high school dropouts attributed to illegal immigrants was shaved to 4.8 percent. And they have since downgraded that number, acknowledging that the original analysis used some statistically flimsy data.

Porter, 6 – New York Time correspondent (EDUARDO, “Cost of Illegal Immigration May Be Less Than Meets the Eye,” April 16, 2006, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/16/business/yourmoney/16view.html)//SMS

before concluding that immigrants are undercutting the wages of the least fortunate perhaps one should consider Ohio. Ohio remains mostly free of illegal immigrants. And the wages of Ohio's high school dropouts fell 31 percent. a careful examination of the economic data suggests that the argument is overstated There is scant evidence that illegal immigrants have caused any significant damage to the wages of American workers Over the last quarter-century, the number of people without any college education, including high school dropouts, has fallen sharply. This has reduced the pool of workers who are most vulnerable to competition from illegal immigrants. In addition businesses have adjusted to immigration, they have made changes that have muted much of immigration's impact on American workers. the availability of foreign workers at low wages made companies realize that they had the personnel to expand So they invested In California's illegal immigrants are not competing against native workers; they are competing against pickers in Michoacán, Mexico Taking all into account, the effects of immigration are much, much lower. research has cast doubt on illegal immigration's supposed damage to the nation's disadvantaged at most, the surge of illegal immigrants probably had only a small impact

Illegal immigrant’s effect on wages is exaggerated – analysis doesn’t account for the economic benefits they produce

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

"[M]any economists say the effect of an estimated 11 million undocumented workers is minimal. While illegal immigrants have a negative impact on unskilled workers — many of whom lack technical training or a high school diploma — economists believe that overall, the American economy benefits a small amount from illegal immigration — a little bit less than 1 percent... That finding... suggests that neither side of the immigration issue has a strong economic argument to make... Illegal immigration has both negative and positive impacts on different parts of the economy. As noted above, wages for low-skilled workers go down. But that means the rest of America benefits by paying lower prices for things like restaurant meals, agricultural produce and construction. Another negative impact is on government expenditures. Since undocumented workers generally don't pay income taxes but do use schools and other government services, they are seen as a drain on government spending. There are places in the United States where illegal immigration has big effects (both positive and negative). But economists generally believe that when averaged over the whole economy, the effect is a small net positive. Harvard's George Borjas says the average American's wealth is increased by less than 1 percent because of illegal immigration. The economic impact of illegal immigration is far smaller than other trends in the economy, such as the increasing use of automation in manufacturing or the growth in global trade. Those two factors have a much bigger impact on wages, prices and the health of the U.S. economy."

Davidson, 6 – International Business and Economics Correspondent for NPR (David, “Is illegal immigration an economic burden to America?,” Pro-Con, March 30, 2006, http://immigration.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000788)//SMS

"[M]any economists say the effect of undocumented workers is minimal. overall, the American economy benefits a small amount from illegal immigration when averaged over the whole economy, the effect is a small net positive. The economic impact of illegal immigration is far smaller than other trends in the economy, such as the increasing use of automation in manufacturing or the growth in global trade. Those two factors have a much bigger impact on wages, prices and the health of the U.S. economy."

Immigrants have a slightly positive effect on the economy and alt causes like industrial automation and global trade outweigh

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

But a larger question arises. Even if tomorrow the Mexican military began waging its anti-narcotics campaign with the probity of, say, the Swiss Guard, could it overcome the power of cartels? The drug bosses and their organizations have become integrated into Mexican society, corrupting every aspect of the nation’s life.  The U.S. government estimates that the cultivation and trafficking of illegal drugs directly employs 450,000 people in Mexico. Unknown numbers of people, possibly in the millions, are indirectly linked to the drug industry, which has revenues estimated to be as high as $25 billion a year, exceeded only by Mexico’s annual income from manufacturing and oil exports. Dr. Edgardo Buscaglia, a law professor at the Autonomous Technological Institute in Mexico City and a senior legal and economic adviser to the UN and the World Bank, concluded in a recent report that 17 of Mexico’s 31 states have become virtual narco-republics, where organized crime has infiltrated government, the courts, and the police so extensively that there is almost no way they can be cleaned up. The drug gangs have acquired a “military capacity” that enables them to confront the army on an almost equal footing. “This in itself does not prove that we are in a situation of a failed state today,” Buscaglia wrote. He seemed to be suggesting that the situation could change tomorrow—and not for the better.

Caputo 09, Philip Caputo is a prolific writer, journalist and author. He wrote "A Rumor of War," a memoir of his experiences during the Vietnam war. He is a frequent contributor to newspapers like the New York Times and the Atlantic(Philip, "The Fall of Mexico" 12/1/09, The Atlantic, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/12/the-fall-of-mexico/307760/3/)//AD (recut from Pappas's email)

Even if tomorrow the Mexican military began waging its anti-narcotics campaign with the probity of, the Swiss Guard The drug bosses and their organizations have become integrated into Mexican society The U.S. government estimates that the cultivation and trafficking of illegal drugs directly employs 450,000 people in Mexico. Unknown numbers of people, possibly in the millions, are indirectly linked to the drug industry, which has revenues estimated to be as high as $25 billion a year, exceeded only by Mexico’s annual income from manufacturing and oil

Anti-corruption efforts threaten economic collapse--drug trafficking is a billion-dollar industry, the cornerstone of the Mexican economy

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Two weeks after Enrique Pena Nieto won Mexico’s July 1 presidential election, he unveiled his most pressing priorities for action. The contrast with his pre- election agenda was unmistakable. His first order of business when Congress convenes in September will be three bills to tackle corruption and increase transparency in government and media, Pena Nieto wrote in a July 16 column in Reforma newspaper. Proposals to revamp the economy will be offered “in their own time,” he said, without specifying when that will be. This marks a change in emphasis from the campaign, when Pena Nieto pledged to open the state-run oil industry to outside investment -- a measure he called his “signature issue” -- and overhaul tax and labor codes as soon as possible, said Jorge Chabat at the Center for Economic Research and Teaching. “I don’t think any of these economic reforms will be passed between now and December because the post-electoral atmosphere won’t permit it,” said Chabat, a political science professor at the Mexico City-based university. “It’s important to pass these laws in the beginning, because it’s when presidents have the most power.” Pena Nieto’s decision to push first for an anti-corruption panel, transparency requirements for local authorities and a citizen watchdog to oversee government spending on the media came amid protests that have brought thousands onto the streets of Mexico City each weekend since the election. Many are supporters of runner-up Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, 58, who has challenged the results, alleging that local officials of the winner’s Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, embezzled public funds to buy millions of votes. Protests Protesters against Pena Nieto, 46, the former governor of Mexico’s biggest state, have sought to revive memories of the PRI’s 71-year hold on power that ended in 2000 and which they say was marked by corruption, cronyism and repression. Pena Nieto, who takes office Dec. 1, beat Lopez Obrador by 6.6 percentage points, about half the margin forecast by most opinion polls before the election. The PRI failed to win a majority in either the Senate or the Chamber of Deputies. While the nation’s top electoral court is unlikely to throw out the election, Pena Nieto’s attempt to placate his opponents with anti-corruption proposals risks postponing policies needed to boost economic growth that averaged 2.3 percent over the past decade, said Enrique Alvarez of research firm IdeaGlobal. “He has to demonstrate that his pledges are more than just political rhetoric,” Alvarez, the head of Latin America fixed- income research at IdeaGlobal in New York, said in an interview. “If you had a very sharp focus on economic reform and understood that it was critical for the Mexican economy, you’d have left politics aside and continued to stress this.” Investor Optimism Signs that Pena Nieto may need to delay his economic agenda haven’t affected investors’ optimism. The extra yield investors demand to own Mexican dollar debt instead of U.S. Treasuries has fallen 14 basis points since the election to 188, compared to a gain of 2 points to 210 for Brazilian dollar debt, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s EMBI Global Index. Mexico’s benchmark IPC stock index has climbed 9.8 percent this year, reaching a record on July 17, while the peso’s 1.7 percent advance to 13.7090 against the dollar is the second- biggest gain among 16 major currencies tracked by Bloomberg. In a May 30 interview, Luis Videgaray, Pena Nieto’s campaign chief, stressed that the incoming president wants to ask Congress to approve changes to the constitution to allow companies to own stakes in oil fields before he takes office in December. In an interview in November, Pena Nieto said such proposals would be the “signature issue” on which he wanted to be judged. No Distraction The focus on tackling graft won’t distract from the longstanding goal of overhauling the economy, Pena Nieto wrote in Reforma. “While these are my three first bills, my team will also be working on economic reforms that I promised, and in their own time, I’ll present them to Congress,” Pena Nieto wrote. Videgaray said on July 11 in an interview broadcast on Radio Formula that the transparency legislation will require a two-thirds vote to amend the constitution. Since the PRI’s alliance didn’t win an outright majority in either the Senate or lower house, it would need support from other parties to pass the measures. PRI ‘Smokescreen’ The announcement of the measures follows Lopez Obrador’s complaint that the PRI bought millions of votes using pre-paid supermarket and bank cards. Veronica Juarez, a spokeswoman for his Democratic Revolution Party, said by phone that Pena Nieto’s anti-corruption bills are a “smokescreen” and that transparency efforts should start with clearing up irregularities in the election. PRI President Pedro Joaquin Coldwell in turn yesterday at a press conference accused the PRD of breaking campaign finance rules to bankroll Lopez Obrador’s run. The PRD has denied the PRI’s charges, while Coldwell yesterday reiterated that the PRD’s charges against Pena Nieto’s campaign have no merit. Josefina Vazquez Mota, 51, the candidate of the ruling National Action Party, who finished third, also raised the ghosts of past PRI misconduct during the campaign. In a June 10 debate, she associated Pena Nieto with a former PRI governor accused by U.S. prosecutors of taking millions of dollars in drug cartel bribes, and at a rally the next week she said Pena Nieto represents “corruption, authoritarianism and surrender before organized crime.” Pena Nieto said at a July 18 press conference that while he’s committed to pushing the economic proposals, he recognizes the importance of transforming the PRI. “The party has to modernize, be updated and reform itself,” he said. “My participation will be ongoing and active during this process.” Skepticism Students who for months marched against the return of the PRI will have a hard time believing Pena Nieto will keep his word to boost transparency and fight corruption, said Roberto Rios Orozco, a representative of the protest movement known as #YoSoy132, in reference to its origin on Twitter. “There will be a great push in the media to make us believe him,” Rios Orozco said. “I like the proposals, but I don’t think Pena Nieto or the PRI will carry them out.” Making the fight for government fairness an initial focus could be a good strategy if it helps unify Mexico’s divided political parties behind a common purpose, said Eric Farnsworth, vice president of the Council of the Americas in Washington. That would help build goodwill for Pena Nieto’s economic proposals, which will probably be more controversial, he said. Labor Overhaul “If his first success is in the realm of anti-corruption, that’s going to cause critics to be a little circumspect and give the guy room to operate,” said Farnsworth. “It’s tough to criticize somebody for doing what you say needs to be done.” While Lopez Obrador’s legal challenge and the PRI’s lack of a congressional majority may slow Pena Nieto’s economic agenda, they won’t prevent him from eventually moving forward, said Carlos Ramirez, an analyst with Eurasia Group, a Washington- based research organization. The labor overhaul, which the ruling PAN party has proposed in the past, stands a strong chance of passing this year even with Pena Nieto’s new anti- corruption focus, Ramirez said. “It will probably slow it down a bit, but not derail it,” he said in a phone interview. “Economic reforms have been waiting for 15 years. They can wait three more months.”

Cattan and Martin 12, Nacha Cattan is a reporter for Bloomberg News, stationed in Mexico City. Eric Martin is a reporter for Bloomberg News, stationed in Washington DC(Nacha/Eric, "Pena Nieto Anti-Corruption Focus Slows Mexican Economy Overhaul" 7/25/12, Bloomberg News, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-25/pena-nieto-anti-corruption-focus-slows-mexican-economy-overhaul.html)//AD

after Enrique Pena Nieto won Mexico’s presidential election His first order of business will be to tackle corruption and increase transparency in government and media, Pena Nieto’s decision to push first for an anti-corruption panel, transparency requirements for local authorities and a citizen watchdog to oversee government spending on the media came amid protests that have brought thousands onto the streets of Mexico City each weekend since the election alleging that local officials of the winner’s Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, embezzled public funds to buy millions of votes. Pena Nieto’s attempt to placate his opponents with anti-corruption proposals risks postponing policies needed to boost economic growth If you had a very sharp focus on economic reform and understood that it was critical for the Mexican economy, you’d have left politics aside and continued to stress this.” Signs that Pena Nieto may need to delay his economic agenda haven’t affected investors’ optimism. The extra yield investors demand to own Mexican dollar debt instead of U.S. Treasuries has fallen 14 basis points since the election to 188, compared to a gain of 2 points to 210 for Brazilian dollar debt, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s EMBI Global Index. Democratic Revolution Party said that Pena Nieto’s anti-corruption bills are a “smokescreen” and that transparency efforts should start with clearing up irregularities in the election. Pena Nieto represents “corruption, authoritarianism and surrender before organized crime.” Pena Nieto said “The party has to modernize, be updated and reform itself,” My participation will be ongoing and active during this process.” Students who for months marched against the return of the PRI will have a hard time believing Pena Nieto will keep his word to boost transparency and fight corruption,

Further anti-corruption efforts threaten to push the country off the brink--extreme political partisanship, protests, economic slowdown will increase. Pena Nieto will become a lightning rod for oppostion--further fragmentation

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

As Pena Nieto faces the biggest political crisis of his presidency thus far, we examine how far reforms should go. Protests by striking teachers in the Mexican state of Guerrero intensify as President Enrique Pena Nieto's plan to make sweeping changes to the country's economy wavers. Pena Nieto is facing what has been described as the biggest political crisis of his presidency so far. Allegations of vote buying by members of his Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) have the potential to derail the president's "Pact for Mexico" - a plan to radically change the country's economy. The allegations led to the postponement of the unveiling of the finance industry reform this week. Other industries due to see changes are Mexico's powerful telecommunications monopolies and the oil sector. Pena Nieto began his reforms in education earlier this year, and teachers in Guerrero state have intensified their protests. Pena Nieto overhauled Mexico's educational system, making teachers subject to testing. But some teachers say the reforms will mean massive layoffs and privatisation. Powerful teachers' union leader Esther Elba Gordillo was arrested on charges of embezzling $160m shortly after the law went into effect. Pena Nieto has also introduced reforms to Mexico's telecommunications duopoly aimed at making cell phone and TV services cheaper and more regulated. But critics say it is a measure that will benefit well-connected businessmen looking to break into the telecom market rather than new companies. Another key element of what is called Pena Nieto's Pact for Mexico has been boosting private investment in the state oil company. Pena Nieto has also enacted reforms within his own party - he ended legal immunity for lawmakers and civil servants, but kept it for himself, the president. He also rewrote party rules to incorporate the president into the PRI's leadership structure, in an attempt to ensure his control of his party. The president has been praised for going after powerful interests in his own party to reform Mexico's historically corrupt political system. But some say these reforms do not adequately tackle the broader problems of inequality or hit hard enough at Mexico's elite. So how far should reforms in Mexico go? And who is paying the price of Mexico's reform?

Al Jazeera 13, Broadcast and news service covering stories from the US, Europe, Middle East, Asia-Pacific, and Africa. News stories deal with finance, weather, sports, politics and current events(Al Jazeera, "The political cost of Mexico's reforms" 4/26/13, Al Jazeera, http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2013/04/2013426101540753152.html)//AD

Pena Nieto faces the biggest political crisis of his presidency Protests by striking teachers in the Mexican state of Guerrero intensify as President Enrique Pena Nieto's plan to make sweeping changes to the country's economy wavers. Other industries due to see changes are Mexico's powerful telecommunications monopolies and the oil sector. Pena Nieto began his reforms in education earlier this year Pena Nieto overhauled Mexico's educational system, making teachers subject to testing. Pena Nieto has also introduced reforms to Mexico's telecommunications duopoly aimed at making cell phone and TV services cheaper and more regulated. Another key element of what is called Pena Nieto's Pact for Mexico has been boosting private investment in the state oil company. Pena Nieto has also enacted reforms within his own party - he ended legal immunity for lawmakers and civil servants The president has been praised for going after powerful interests in his own party to reform Mexico's historically corrupt political system

Reform programs are aimed at overhauling every aspect of Mexico's financial sector--comprehensive efforts are going after special interests, reducing corruption

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Newly inaugurated Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto promised during his campaign to triple Mexico’s GDP growth rate to 5-6 percent annually. In order to even approach that lofty goal, Peña Nieto must confront the country’s bloated monopolies that discourage competition and raise the cost of goods and services for Mexicans. Complicating this already monumental task is Mexico’s entrenched culture of monopolies, which will be harder to defeat than the actual monopolies themselves. When it comes to Mexican monopolies, the big offenders are well-known: Telmex, the telecommunications conglomerate owned by the world’s richest man, Carlos Slim; Televisa, the largest multimedia company in Latin America; Cemex, a building material supplier and cement producer with a reported market share of nearly 90 percent; and Walmex, Wal-Mart’s branch in Mexico and the nation’s largest private sector employer, to name a few. According to the OECD, the lack of competition in Mexico’s economy has cost the country $129.2 billion between 2005 and 2009, or 1.8 percent of GDP per year. Peña Nieto has stated broadly that Mexicans should have more consumer choice and that companies should be made to compete, ensuring lower prices and better quality. But although he has promised to “fight” monopolies, he has avoided mentioning the specifics of which ones and how. To complicate matters, the Mexican government runs two of the country’s largest monopolies, both of which are constitutionally mandated. Pemex, the state-owned petroleum company and one of the world’s top petroleum producers, controls all of the country’s oil and gas exploration, drilling, transportation and sales. Mexico’s state-owned electricity monopoly, the Federal Electricity Commission, is responsible for generating, controlling and transmitting all of the country’s electricity. Both companies are notoriously inefficient. Mexico’s labor unions are not by definition monopolies, but they too succeed in exercising undue influence over the government, thereby making Mexico’s labor force less competitive. Over their history, labor unions have won important rights for Mexico’s workers. However, Mexico’s unions have today become disruptive behemoths, focused primarily on their own self-preservation. Year after year, unions have evaded government regulation by auctioning their political capital to the highest bidder. Union-led protests frequently shut down Mexico City’s main avenue for hours, causing massive traffic jams in an already congested city. Meanwhile, union leaders, some of whom have been in office for decades, have politicians fearful of crossing them, and have been accused of everything from influence-peddling to corruption and mismanagement of funds. It is therefore no surprise that unions managed to escape relatively unscathed from Mexico’s recently approved labor reform bill, which seeks to modernize the country’s inefficient labor sector. The bill makes it easier to hire and fire workers, eases restrictions on part-time work and updates outsourcing practices. However, as a result of their alliance with the majority PRI party, which returned to the presidency with Peña Nieto, unions succeeded in enfeebling measures intended to make them more accountable, democratic and transparent. Transportation monopolies also negatively impact Mexico’s growth. In a country with sprawling urban centers and an increasingly fast-paced life, good public transportation is paramount. But centrally planned public transportation projects aimed at reducing traffic and pollution are often obstructed by taxi and bus drivers’ unions eager to protect their monopolies. The unions have already succeeded in obstructing the construction of streamlined metro-bus systems in Acapulco and Puebla, both important and populous cities. Such public transportation systems would encourage competition by offering travelers an alternative to often overpriced taxis and dangerous buses. Instead, the existing transportation monopolies inconvenience passengers and present a significant challenge for city planning and development across Mexico. In Mexico City, for example, thousands of unregulated “pesero” buses drive recklessly and pollute heavily. Because they compete for fares, they often race other buses to pick up passengers, adding to the chaos of driving in a metropolitan area of more than 21 million people. Mexico’s supposedly free-market economy has long been held hostage by monopolies that control up to 80, 90 or even 100 percent of market share. Injecting competition into the economy and regulating monopolies requires a tough stance toward big business and unions. Peña Nieto’s PRI party is allied with both. In order for the new president to even approach his growth promise -- not to mention keeping Mexico competitive in the global economy -- the incoming administration must tackle monopolies in a meaningful way. This means not just confronting big companies but also unions, low-level monopolies and the government’s own state-run companies. Peña Nieto claims that addressing Mexico’s monopoly problem is part of his proposed structural reforms. Specifically, his team has proposed harsher penalties for monopolistic behavior, and antitrust courts that would embolden Mexico’s competition authority, Cofeco. Peña Nieto also proposed a constitutional amendment that would allow private and foreign investment in Pemex, arguing that Mexico should increase production capacity and emulate Brazil’s state-run oil company, Petrobras. This Sunday, on his second day in office, Peña Nieto signed a pact with the chairmen of rival parties the PAN and the PRD to work collaboratively to, among other things, weaken Mexico’s telecommunications monopoly. Still, Peña Nieto would not be the first Mexican president to implement pro-competition and antitrust reforms. The Mexican Antitrust Act was strengthened twice under former President Felipe Calderón, in 2006 and 2011. Cofeco even succeeded in slamming Telcel mogul Carlos Slim with a record $1 billion fine in April 2011. The question is whether Peña Nieto can take reforms further than his predecessor. Although he has presented himself as the “new face” of the PRI, many are skeptical that Peña Nieto will break from the party known for its corruption and cronyism. Peña Nieto ran on a platform of economic reforms that would improve the everyday lives of Mexicans. Real change in Mexico will require addressing the culture that allows monopolies to flourish. Unless Peña Nieto is willing to jeopardize his close ties to the political elites, unions and big business that underlie this culture, Mexicans are likely looking at six more years of subpar economic performance.

Siskind 12, Latin American expert and research analyst for Control Risks in Mexico City, writer for World Politics Review(Cory, "To Reform Mexico's Economy, Peña Nieto Must Tackle 'Culture of Monopolies'" World Politics Review, 12/04/12. http://www.worldp oliticsreview.com/articles/12539/to-reform-mexicos-economy-pena-nieto-must-tackle-culture-of-monopolies)//AD

Peña Nieto must confront the country’s bloated monopolies that discourage competition and raise the cost of goods and services for Mexicans. Complicating this already monumental task is Mexico’s entrenched culture of monopolies, which will be harder to defeat than the actual monopolies themselves. Peña Nieto has stated broadly that Mexicans should have more consumer choice and that companies should be made to compete, ensuring lower prices and better quality. But although he has promised to “fight” monopolies, the Mexican government runs two of the country’s largest monopolies, both of which are constitutionally mandated Both companies are notoriously inefficient. Mexico’s unions have today become disruptive behemoths, focused primarily on their own self-preservation. Year after year, unions have evaded government regulation by auctioning their political capital to the highest bidder influence-peddling to corruption and mismanagement of funds. Peña Nieto claims that addressing Mexico’s monopoly problem is part of his proposed structural reforms. Specifically, his team has proposed harsher penalties for monopolistic behavior, and antitrust courts that would embolden Mexico’s competition authority, Peña Nieto signed a pact with the chairmen of rival parties the PAN and the PRD to work collaboratively to, among other things, weaken Mexico’s telecommunications monopoly. he has presented himself as the “new face” of the PRI, many are skeptical that Peña Nieto will break from the party known for its corruption and cronyism.

Plan gives a mandate to supplement Pena Nieto's current anti-corruption programs--includes restructuring of the Mexican economy

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Many of today’s most-respected thinkers, from Stephen Hawking to David Attenborough, argue that our efforts to fight climate change and other environmental perils will all fail unless we “do something” about population growth. In the Universe in a Nutshell, Hawking declares that, “in the last 200 years, population growth has become exponential… The world population doubles every forty years.” But this is nonsense. For a start, there is no exponential growth. In fact, population growth is slowing. For more than three decades now, the average number of babies being born to women in most of the world has been in decline. Globally, women today have half as many babies as their mothers did, mostly out of choice. They are doing it for their own good, the good of their families, and, if it helps the planet too, then so much the better. Here are the numbers. Forty years ago, the average woman had between five and six kids. Now she has 2.6. This is getting close to the replacement level which, allowing for girls who don’t make it to adulthood, is around 2.3. As I show in my new book, Peoplequake, half the world already has a fertility rate below the long-term replacement level. That includes all of Europe, much of the Caribbean and the far east from Japan to Vietnam and Thailand, Australia, Canada, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Algeria, Kazakhstan, and Tunisia. It also includes China, where the state decides how many children couples can have. This is brutal and repulsive. But the odd thing is that it may not make much difference any more: Chinese communities around the world have gone the same way without any compulsion—Taiwan, Singapore, and even Hong Kong. When Britain handed Hong Kong back to China in 1997, it had the lowest fertility rate in the world: below one child per woman. So why is this happening? Demographers used to say that women only started having fewer children when they got educated and the economy got rich, as in Europe. But tell that to the women of Bangladesh, one of the world’s poorest nations, where girls are among the least educated in the world, and mostly marry in their mid-teens. They have just three children now, less than half the number their mothers had. India is even lower, at 2.8. Tell that also to the women of Brazil. In this hotbed of Catholicism, women have two children on average—and this is falling. Nothing the priests say can stop it. Women are doing this because, for the first time in history, they can. Better healthcare and sanitation mean that most babies now live to grow up. It is no longer necessary to have five or six children to ensure the next generation—so they don’t. There are holdouts, of course. In parts of rural Africa, women still have five or more children. But even here they are being rational. Women mostly run the farms, and they need the kids to mind the animals and work in the fields. Then there is the middle east, where traditional patriarchy still rules. In remote villages in Yemen, girls as young as 11 are forced into marriage. They still have six babies on average. But even the middle east is changing. Take Iran. In the past 20 years, Iranian women have gone from having eight children to less than two—1.7 in fact—whatever the mullahs say. The big story here is that rich or poor, socialist or capitalist, Muslim or Catholic, secular or devout, with or without tough government birth control policies in place, most countries tell the same tale of a reproductive revolution. That doesn’t mean population growth has ceased. The world’s population is still rising by 70m a year. This is because there is a time lag: the huge numbers of young women born during the earlier baby boom may only have had two children each. That is still a lot of children. But within a generation, the world’s population will almost certainly be stable, and is very likely to be falling by mid-century. In the US they are calling my new book “The Coming Population Crash.” Is this good news for the environment and for the planet’s resources? Clearly, other things being equal, fewer people will do less damage to the planet. But it won’t on its own do a lot to solve the world’s environmental problems, because the second myth about population growth is that it is the driving force behind our wrecking of the planet. In fact, rising consumption today far outstrips the rising headcount as a threat to the planet. And most of the extra consumption has been in rich countries that have long since given up adding substantial numbers to their population, while most of the remaining population growth is in countries with a very small impact on the planet. By almost any measure you choose, a small proportion of the world’s people take the majority of the world’s resources and produce the majority of its pollution. Let’s look at carbon dioxide emissions: the biggest current concern because of climate change. The world’s richest half billion people—that’s about 7 per cent of the global population—are responsible for half of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. Meanwhile, the poorest 50 per cent of the population are responsible for just 7 per cent of emissions. Virtually all of the extra 2bn or so people expected on this planet in the coming 30 or 40 years will be in this poor half of the world. Stopping that, even if it were possible, would have only a minimal effect on global emissions, or other global threats. Ah, you say, but what about future generations? All those big families in Africa will have yet bigger families. Well, that’s an issue of course. But let’s be clear about the scale of the difference involved. The carbon emissions of one American today are equivalent to those of around four Chinese, 20 Indians, 30 Pakistanis, 40 Nigerians or 250 Ethiopians. A woman in rural Ethiopia can have ten children and, in the unlikely event that those ten children all live to adulthood and have ten children of their own, the entire clan of more than a hundred will still be emitting less carbon dioxide than you or me. It is over-consumption, not over-population that matters. Economists predict the world’s economy will grow by 400 per cent by 2050. If this does indeed happen, less than a tenth of that growth will be due to rising human numbers. True, some of those extra poor people might one day become rich. And if they do—and I hope they do—their impact on the planet will be greater. But it is the height of arrogance for us in the rich world to downplay the importance of our own environmental footprint because future generations of poor people might one day have the temerity to get as rich and destructive as us. How dare we?

Pearce, 10 – is an English author and journalist based in London. He is a science writer and has reported on the environment. (Fred, “The overpopulation myth,” Prospect, March 8, 2010, http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/the-overpopulation-myth/#.UdNcSvnDxHY)//SMS

there is no exponential growth population growth is slowing the average number of babies being born to women in most of the world has been in decline Forty years ago, the average woman had between five and six kids. Now she has 2.6. half the world already has a fertility rate below the long-term replacement level Better healthcare and sanitation mean that most babies now live to grow up. It is no longer necessary to have five or six children to ensure the next generation within a generation, the world’s population will almost certainly be stable, and is very likely to be falling by mid-century fewer people will do less damage to the planet. But it won’t on its own do a lot to solve the world’s environmental problems rising consumption today far outstrips the rising headcount as a threat to the planet. By almost any measure you choose, a small proportion of the world’s people take the majority of the world’s resources and produce the majority of its pollution The world’s richest half billion people—that’s about 7 per cent of the global population—are responsible for half of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. The carbon emissions of one American today are equivalent to those of around four Chinese, 20 Indians, 30 Pakistanis, 40 Nigerians or 250 Ethiopians. It is over-consumption, not over-population that matters.

Global population is slowing and will soon decline – it is consumerism, not population that causes their impacts

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The main factors contributing to excessive growth of population are: Increased birth rate Increased longevity Reduced infant mortality Decreased death rate Lack of education Cultural influences Immigration/Emigration Another reason behind growth in human population is that there is no particular breeding season in human beings. They can mate and have children any time of the year, unlike other animals whose mating season is restricted to only a particular period of the year. Also, developments in the medical field have increased the average lifespan of human beings, thereby boosting population growth. Let's take a closer look at the different causes of overpopulation. Decline in the Death Rate: Reduced mortality rate is one of the leading causes of overpopulation. Due to medical advancements, many of the once incurable diseases have cures today. Owing to advances in both preventive and curative medicine, diseases have either been eradicated or have more effective treatments now. There are effective ways to control epidemics and there are better measures to treat critical health ailments, thus leading to a drop in death rates. Developments in medicine have led to reduced mortality and increase in the average life expectancy of humans. Infant mortality rates are very low and cases of deaths during childbirth are less frequent. Good prenatal care has improved the chances of survival for both the mother and the baby. Rise in the Birth Rate: Once again owing to advances in medicine, the average birth rate has gone up. Due to various fertility treatments available today, there are effective solutions to infertility problems, which increases chances of conception. Due to modern medicine, pregnancies are safer. In case of conception after a fertility treatment, there are chances of a multiple pregnancy, further contributing to increasing birth rates. In addition to this, there is a social pressure to have children. This further contributes to overpopulation. Early marriages also contribute to population growth as getting married at an early age increases the chances of having more children. And especially so with the uneducated class where family planning is not adopted. Lack of Education: Illiteracy is another important factor that contributes to overpopulation. Those lacking education fail to understand the need to curb population growth. Modern methods of birth control and family planning don't reach the illiterate sections of society. Furthermore, due to lack of awareness there is resistance in adopting such methods. The illiterate are unable to understand what impact overpopulation can have. The educated class can make more responsible decisions about marriage and childbirth. Thus education is an effective tool to curb overpopulation. Cultural Influences: The concept of birth control is not widely accepted. Adopting birth control measures is considered taboo in certain cultures. Some cultures foster beliefs where marrying at a certain age or having a certain number of children is considered to be ideal. In some cultures male children are preferred. This indirectly forces couples to produce children till a child of the preferred gender is conceived. Plus, there is a pressure from the family and society to have children. Social norms influence decisions of starting and extending one's family. In cultures where a woman's role is considered to be that of a child-bearer, large families become the norm. Migration: Immigration is a problem in some parts of the world. If the inhabitants of various countries migrate to a particular part of the world and settle in that region, the area has to face the negative effects of overpopulation. If the rates of emigration from and immigration to a country do not match, it results in increased population density in that country. The area becomes thickly populated. People inhabiting the area experience scarcity of resources. This leads to uneven distribution of natural resources which is a direct consequence of overpopulation. Though migration of people between regions does not affect the world population figure, it does lead to something that can qualify as localized overpopulation. Increase in population is an increase in the number of human resources which means more working hands. But we cannot ignore the fact that an increase in the number of producers implies an increase in the number of consumers too. We need to strike a balance between population growth and resource consumption. Resources are limited, population growth needs to be controlled. We need to take steps, now.

Oak 11 – Staff Writer for Buzzle, previous computer science engineer (Manali, “Causes of Overpopulation,” Buzzle, 7/11/12, http://www.buzzle.com/articles/causes-of-overpopulation.html)//AC

The main factors contributing to excessive growth of population are: Increased birth rate Increased longevity Reduced infant mortality Decreased death rate Lack of education Cultural influences Immigration/Emigration Another reason behind growth in human population is that there is no particular breeding season in human beings. They can mate and have children any time of the year, unlike other animals whose mating season is restricted to only a particular period of the year. Also, developments in the medical field have increased the average lifespan of human beings, thereby boosting population growth. Reduced mortality rate is one of the leading causes of overpopulation. Owing to advances in both preventive and curative medicine, diseases have either been eradicated or have more effective treatments now. There are effective ways to control epidemics and there are better measures to treat critical health ailments, thus leading to a drop in death rates. Good prenatal care has improved the chances of survival for both the mother and the baby there are effective solutions to infertility problems, which increases chances of conception pregnancies are safer. there are chances of a multiple pregnancy, further contributing to increasing birth rates there is a social pressure to have children Early marriages also contribute to population growth Illiteracy is another important factor that contributes to overpopulation. Those lacking education fail to understand the need to curb population growth The concept of birth control is not widely accepted. Adopting birth control measures is considered taboo in certain cultures In some cultures male children are preferred. This indirectly forces couples to produce children till a child of the preferred gender is conceived

Tons of alt causes to population growth

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The most general cause of population decline is modernity itself; birthrates started declining in the nineteenth century when industrialization and technological advances began to accelerate. Better nutrition, sanitation, and health care, for example, have reduced infant mortality in America from about 300 babies dying out of 1,000 live births in 1850, to about six today. More babies surviving lessened the need for multiple pregnancies, which in turn reduced family size. During the Industrial Revolution, migration to cities made children less useful than they were on farms and more expensive. Easier divorce, reliable birth control, cohabitation replacing marriage, and women entering the workforce in greater numbers––since 1990, about 70 percent of women have been working at any given time––have all contributed to the decline in marriage and the diminishing centrality of children in people’s lives. These forces have created disincentives to reproduction, not the least being the $1.1 million price tag for rearing and educating a child today. Two larger cultural trends have reinforced the effects of technological developments and industrialization. As Last points out, fertility rates among the educated classes began falling in the middle of the eighteenth century, which was about the same time as the rise of capitalism. The pursuit of individual initiative and self-interest contributed to the erosion of community and family. Economic advancement requires mobility and fewer obligations; constraints hamper self-improvement and risk-taking, after all. Having children, perhaps the greatest constraint of all, became less and less a factor in people’s calculations of their self-interests. Something else would be required to get people to procreate. That imperative to reproduce used to be grounded in religion, but during the eighteenth century, secularization began to loosen the hold that religious practice––actually going to church rather than just self-identifying by sect––used to have on people’s behavior. The effect of religious practice on fertility is obvious from statistics. Indeed, the effects of religion on fertility can be “so powerful that even if you’re not the churchgoing type yourself, you’ll be affected if your parents are.” People whose mothers never went to church are twice as likely to cohabit than those whose mothers went more than once a week. The direct effects of churchgoing are even more dramatic. A woman who never attends church is seven times more likely to cohabit than one who goes weekly. Cohabitation in turn affects marriage and divorce, making marriage less likely and divorce more likely. Churchgoers have happier, more stable marriages, contributing to the chance they’ll have more children. This effect can be seen in “desired fertility” statistics, a measure of the number of children people say is ideal. Among non-religious Americans, 21 percent say three or more children make the ideal family size. Among weekly churchgoers, 41 percent do. Last concludes, “Religion helps marriage and marriage helps fertility––the end result being that religiosity winds up being an even better predictor of fertility than either education or income.” Fertility rates prove Last’s point. Observant Protestants and Catholics have a TFR of 2.25 compared to secular Americans’ 1.66. The highest fertility rate in the U.S. is in Mormon Utah, at 2.60.

Thornton 13 - research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of classics and humanities at California State University in Fresno, California (Bruce, “The Coming Demographic Crisis: What to Expect When No One Is Expecting,” 4/25/13, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/25/the_coming_demographic_crisis_what_to_expect_when_no_one_is_expecting_118128.html)//AC

The most general cause of population decline is modernity itself; birthrates started declining in the nineteenth century when industrialization and technological advances began to accelerate More babies surviving lessened the need for multiple pregnancies, which in turn reduced family size. women have been working These forces have created disincentives to reproduction, not the least being the $1.1 million price tag for rearing and educating a child today. Two larger cultural trends have reinforced the effects of technological developments and industrialization. As Last points out, fertility rates among the educated classes began falling in the middle of the eighteenth century, which was about the same time as the rise of capitalism. The pursuit of individual initiative and self-interest contributed to the erosion of community and family. Economic advancement requires mobility and fewer obligations; constraints hamper self-improvement and risk-taking, after all. Having children, perhaps the greatest constraint of all, became less and less a factor in people’s calculations of their self-interests.

The population will inevitably decrease

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

For two centuries, overpopulation has haunted the imagination of the modern world. According to Thomas Malthus, writing in 1798, human population growth would always surpass agricultural production, meaning “gigantic inevitable famine” would “with one mighty blow level the population with the food of the world.” Later, eugenicists like Margaret Sanger in the 1920s fretted over the wrong people reproducing too much, creating what she called “human weeds,” a “dead weight of human waste” to inherit the earth. In 1968, Paul Ehrlich predicted that in the 1970s, “hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death” because of the “population bomb.” These days, environmentalists worry that too many people will overload the natural world’s resources and destroy the planet with excessive consumption and pollution, leading to catastrophic global warming. A strain of anti-humanism has always run through population paranoia, a notion that human beings are a problem rather than a resource. But as Jonathan Last documents in his new book What to Expect When No One’s Expecting, it is not overpopulation that threatens the well-being of the human race, it is under-population. As Last writes, “Throughout recorded human history, declining populations have always been followed by Very Bad Things.” Particularly for our modern, high-tech, capitalist world of consumers who buy, entrepreneurs who create wealth and jobs, and workers whose taxes fund social welfare entitlements, people are an even more critical resource. The Facts of Population Decline Last, a senior writer for the Weekly Standard and father of three, provides a reader-friendly but thorough analysis of the demographic crisis afflicting the West and the “Very Bad Things” that will follow population decline. Clearly argued and entertainingly written, Last covers the how and why of our refusal to reproduce, and the consequences that will follow. The facts of population decline are dramatic. Women must average a total fertility rate (TFR) of 2.1 children apiece for populations to remain stable. But across the developed world, and increasingly everywhere else, fertility is quickly declining below this number: “All First World countries are already below the 2.1 line,” Last writes, and the rates of decline among Third World countries “are, in most cases, even steeper than in the First World.” Japan and Italy, for example, have a 1.4 TFR, a “mathematical tipping point” at which the population will decline by 50 percent in 45 years. As for the rest of Europe, by 2050 only three countries in the E.U., which today has an average rate of 1.5 TFR, will not be experiencing population declines. Those countries are France, Luxembourg, and Ireland. Immigration from the Third World will not provide a long-term solution, as fertility rates are declining there as well. The average fertility rate for Latin America was six children per woman in the 1960s; by 2005, it had dropped to 2.5. At that rate of decline, within a few decades, Latin American countries will likely have a fertility rate lower than that of the United States. Compared to Singapore’s 1.1 TFR, or Germany’s 1.36, the U.S.’s 2.0 (an average of varying rates ranging from 1.93 to 2.18) looks pretty good. But, in Last analysis, the negative trends do not bode well for the future. The large numbers of Hispanic immigrants reached 50.5 million in 2010, compared to 22.3 million in 1990, a doubling of their population in 20 years. Hispanic women are outpacing the U.S. fertility rate with their 2.35 TFR. But that number represents a decline from 2.96 in 1990, plunging nearly 10 percent just between 2007 and 2009. Last warns, “Our population profile is so dependent on Hispanic fertility that if this group continues falling toward the national average––and everything about American history suggests that it will––then our 1.93 fertility rate will take a nosedive.” The United States should not count on a population surge via Mexico, where 60 percent of the Hispanic immigrants into this country come from. Mexico’s fertility rate has fallen from 6.72 in 1970 to 2.07 in 2009, a trend that points to further decline. In addition, labor shortages in Latin America will likely lead to diminished emigration. Causes and Consequences Such are the brute facts of population decline. Why it has happened, what the consequences of it will be, and what we can do to arrest it make up the remaining bulk of Last’s book.

Thornton 13 - research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of classics and humanities at California State University in Fresno, California (Bruce, “The Coming Demographic Crisis: What to Expect When No One Is Expecting,” 4/25/13, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/25/the_coming_demographic_crisis_what_to_expect_when_no_one_is_expecting_118128.html)//AC

days, environmentalists worry that too many people will overload the natural world’s resources and destroy the planet with excessive consumption and pollution, leading to catastrophic global warming. A strain of anti-humanism has always run through population paranoia, a notion that human beings are a problem rather than a resource. But as Jonathan Last documents in his new book What to Expect When No One’s Expecting, it is not overpopulation that threatens the well-being of the human race, it is under-population “Throughout recorded human history, declining populations have always been followed by Very Bad Things.” Particularly for our modern, high-tech, capitalist world of consumers who buy, entrepreneurs who create wealth and jobs, and workers whose taxes fund social welfare entitlements, people are an even more critical resource. Immigration from the Third World will not provide a long-term solution, as fertility rates are declining there as well. The average fertility rate for Latin America was six children per woman in the 1960s; by 2005, it had dropped to 2.5. At that rate of decline, within a few decades, Latin American countries will likely have a fertility rate lower than that of the United States. Hispanic women are outpacing the U.S. fertility rate with their 2.35 TFR. But that number represents a decline from 2.96 in 1990, plunging nearly 10 percent just between 2007 and 2009. Last warns, “Our population profile is so dependent on Hispanic fertility that if this group continues falling toward the national average––and everything about American history suggests that it will––then our 1.93 fertility rate will take a nosedive.” The United States should not count on a population surge via Mexico, where 60 percent of the Hispanic immigrants into this country come from. Mexico’s fertility rate has fallen from 6.72 in 1970 to 2.07 in 2009, a trend that points to further decline.

Stopping immigration isn’t key – Mexican fertility rates will decrease

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Dropping Birth Rates The mainstream media always tosses out a lot of broad, vague concepts about how the world is overpopulated to the total detriment of the environment, as if it is just an accepted, incontrovertible fact. Are we in dire straights? Is the Earth becoming so overburdened by the burgeoning human population that it’s about to plummet out of space? No. Not even close. In fact, when the actual data is considered, the only thing dropping, and fast, are human birth rates. Many countries’ have zero or even negative population growth, with birth rates below national replacement rates — the degree upon which a population replaces itself. As it stands, the Western European countries of Germany, Holland, Belgium, Spain, Italy, and Sweden have total fertility rates below the replacement rate. Denmark saw 4,400 fewer children born in 2011 than in 2010, with projections in 2012 on track for the nation having its lowest birth rate on record since 1988. Canada’s birth rate fell to 10.5 per 1,000 people in 2002, the lowest it had been since 1921. New figures in 2011 showed it had dipped even further to 10.28. Australia’s birth rate decline over the past two decades is so worrisome to its government that it introduced “extensive changes” to taxes and benefits that would assist families and encourage growth. China, a nation typically (but incorrectly) called out as experiencing a continuous population boon comparative to rabbits, has seen its birth rates decline from 16.12 per 1,000 people in 2000 to 12.31 in 2012. Mexico’s population explosion is now a myth similar to China’s; in 2010, The Economist declared the country’s birth rate to be in “free fall.” Russia’s 2012 birth rate was lower at 10.94 per 1,000 people than its death rate at 16.03 per 1,000 people. Russia has the second highest death rate of any country in the world. In 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared South Korea to have the world’s lowest birth rate for the second year in a row; North Korea’s birth rates were also in steep decline, from 20.43 per 1,000 people in 2000 to 14.51 per 1,000 people in 2012. Japan’s government is now estimating that if birth rates in the country continue to decline on the same trend as seen in the past few decades, the nation’s population will shrink 30 percent by 2060. Morocco, Syria, and Saudi Arabia’s fertility rates have all declined nearly 60 percent overall. Singapore’s birth rates dropped so low in 2012 (1.2 per 1,000 people), the nation’s Prime Minister’s office released a paper to combat the “serious” issue entitled, “Our Population Our Future.” While birth rates for both boys and girls are dropping in India, baby girl births are showing a much sharper decline than baby boys. Poland officially has one of the lowest birth rates in the world as well. Finally, American birth rates have fallen to the lowest levels since the Great Depression, with the 2011 fertility rate being the lowest reported in all of U.S. History. The highest birth rates in 2012 were reported in the African nations of Niger and Uganda, but these two countries also have some of the lowest overall life expectancy rates at 54 and 53 years respectively as when compared with the U.S. or the U.K., where life expectancy rates are nearly 30 years higher. According to a population growth study conducted by University of Minnesota Ecology Professor Clarence Lehman, “Human population growth has turned ‘a very sharp corner’ and is now slowing, on its way to leveling off in the next century.” Rising Disease Rates While birth and fertility rates are dropping en masse, other figures are rising just as quickly. WHO has estimated that Alzheimer’s and other debilitating dementias effect 24.3 million people and are rising in developing countries; WHO has announced this number is now expected to double every 20 years. Childhood Leukemia and brain cancers are on the rise as well, with figures jumping about one percent every year for each of the last 20 years. Autoimmune diseases are rocketing off the charts. Celiac disease — an autoimmune disorder that causes the body to attack the small intestine which has the primary function of nutrient absorption — now afflicts five times as many Americans than it did in the 1950s. According to the American Diabetes Association, the incidence of type 1 diabetes in American youth increased 23 percent just between 2001 and 2009. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) admitted in a study released earlier this year that autism now afflicts one in every 88 children. “It clearly suggests that environmental factors are at play due to the significant increase in these diseases,” explained Virginia Ladd, President and Executive Director of the American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association (AARDA). “Genes do not change in such a short period of time.” Are We Killing the Environment or Is It Killing Us? What environmental factors could be making people so abundantly ill? There are so many lovely options to choose from. Could it be the vaccines laced with heavy metals and formaldehyde? Isn’t it ironic that public service announcements constantly tell us smoking is bad because cigarettes contain formaldehyde and formaldehyde causes cancer, something even the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) warns us about, but shooting a baby up with formaldehyde in a vaccine is somehow supposed to be perfectly acceptable? Administering a two month old one shot for diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, and hepatitis B, and one shot for polio would mean shooting 200 micrograms of formaldehyde straight into the infant’s bloodstream; that’s just one set of vaccines. The average American child is set to receive 36 inoculations by the time he or she is five years old. Perhaps it is the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in our food which have been shown in studies (the ones not funded by Monsanto) to cause everything from infertility and liver disease, to tumors and death, all courtesy of Big Agra, the same companies to bring us DDT and Agent Orange. Or is it geoengineering otherwise known by some as “chemtrails,” science’s “answer” to the man-made global warming hoax that involves planes spraying a chemical mixture of strontium, barium salts and aluminum particles into our atmosphere? Michael Murphy of the chemtrail documentary “What in the World Are They Spraying?” notes that the effect of having these toxic chemicals sprayed on us without our consent “has been devastating to crops, wildlife and human health.” The latest proposal to geoengineer our planet will only cost us a mere $5 billion dollars per year, and although there is evidence these programs have been going on since at least the ’90s, officials still will not fully admit it. The mainstream media has to sell it to us first. As if our air and food being poisoned isn’t enough, artificial fluoride, a chemical waste byproduct of aluminum and phosphate fertilizer manufacturing, is being dumped into municipal water across the U.S. and all over the world. The water in Nazi concentration camps was purposefully fluoridated, and it’s not likely Adolf Hitler was worried about the inmates’ dental health. Studies on fluoride’s detrimental health effects are numerous; fluoride has been shown to negatively impact every soft tissue in the body. Fluoride has been tied to kidney damage, arthritis, thyroid disease, pineal gland calcification, endocrine disruption, infertility, bone cancer, cardiovascular disease, joint damage, gastrointestinal issues, and lowered IQ. What’s even more twisted? If Americans want artificial fluoride removed from our public water sources, we actually have to fight our city councils in many cases. Perhaps it’s all the pharmaceuticals people are taking. In the U.S. alone, prescription medications kill an estimated 300% more people than illegal drugs. The American Medical Association (AMA) admits that, conservatively, the adverse reactions of FDA-approved medications kill nearly 300 people every single day — causing over 106,000 deaths in the U.S. per year. This means pharmaceuticals kill more Americans than most cancers (except lung), Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, kidney disease, liver disease, traffic accidents or violence. And that’s just here in the United States. Overpopulation Is a Myth This depopulation agenda is foisted on people through the “green” movement, something that can make people feel all warm and squishy inside because they’re doing something “good” for the environment; the flipside to that coin is the elites’ ultimate agenda for mass death under the guise of saving the Earth. According to the Population Research Institute (PRI), the myth of overpopulation has been brought up again and again over the past few centuries for to scare people into accepting a eugenics agenda: Multiple sources from PRI to National Geographic’s Robert Kunzig claim that, when the math is done properly, every family on the planet could have a house with a yard and reside in a land mass the size of Texas. Texas is just under 269,000 square miles of the entire Earth’s 57.5 million square miles of land. Perhaps the state would not readily have the resources to support that many people, but that is not the point. The point is that it could be done. British Scholar Thomas Malthus (1766-1838) is credited with the original theory of population “growth” which was, really, just an argument for population control. Malthus argued that population increases would eventually lead to starvation and poverty, thus he felt the lower classes should have their family sizes regulated. Darwin admitted in his autobiography that his theory of natural selection was based in part on Malthus’ work. Fast forward to today, when we have eugenicist billionaires with enough money to affect global change like former Vice President Al Gore claiming population stabilization is the only way to combat global warming; Bill Gates lecturing on how we could save ten teachers’ jobs if we cut end-of-life care for grandma; and CNN-founder Ted Turner (who has five children of his own) talking about how everyone else should be forced to adhere to a one-child policy for 100 years to reduce the world down to 2 billion people. Fearmongerer Gore stands to make billions off his global warming carbon tax initiatives should they pass; while Gore flies around in private jets and spends $30,000 a year in utility bills for his 20-room mansion, he basically wants to tax breathing for everyone else. Gates’ “charitable” foundation has a mission to “vaccinate the planet” — vaccination that he admitted will reduce the world’s population by 15 percent. Gates’ valiant mission recently left nearly 48,000 children paralyzed in India. Turner recently announced in a television appearance he thinks it’s “good” that record numbers of U.S. soldiers are committing suicide. Notice all of these people are advocating population reduction, but none of them are personally volunteering to go first. Al Gore, Bill Gates, Ted Turner, and others like them, are using their power, wealth, and influence to play God, but they are not gods; they are mere men who, because of their wealth and power, believe themselves to be above the rest of us. They believe they alone can make decisions on who is worthy to live and die. The eugenics agenda lives on, and the bought and controlled media continues to churn out propaganda telling us we have to die so that the Earth (and the elite) may live. Every day we are being poisoned, robbed and lied to on a massive scale. We have to wake people up to what’s really going on here, before it’s too late.

Melton 12 - experienced researcher, graphic artist and investigative journalist (Melissa, “Overpopulation Is a Eugenics Agenda Lie,” Infowars.com, 11/1/12, http://www.infowars.com/overpopulation-is-a-eugenics-agenda-lie/)//AC

Dropping Birth Rates The mainstream media always tosses out a lot of broad, vague concepts about how the world is overpopulated to the total detriment of the environment, as if it is just an accepted, incontrovertible fact. , when the actual data is considered, the only thing dropping, and fast, are human birth rates. Many countries’ have zero or even negative population growth, with birth rates below national replacement rates — the degree upon which a population replaces itself. Finally, American birth rates have fallen to the lowest levels since the Great Depression, with the 2011 fertility rate being the lowest reported in all of U.S. History According to a population growth study conducted by University of Minnesota Ecology Professor Clarence Lehman, “Human population growth has turned ‘a very sharp corner’ and is now slowing, on its way to leveling off in the next century.” WHO has estimated that Alzheimer’s and other debilitating dementias effect 24.3 million people and are rising in developing countries; WHO has announced this number is now expected to double every 20 years. Childhood Leukemia and brain cancers are on the rise as well, with figures jumping about one percent every year for each of the last 20 years. Autoimmune diseases are rocketing off the charts. Celiac disease now afflicts five times as many Americans than it did in the 1950s the incidence of type 1 diabetes in American youth increased 23 percent just between 2001 and 2009 environmental factors are at play due to the significant increase in these diseases Genes do not change in such a short period of time Isn’t it ironic that public service announcements constantly tell us smoking is bad because cigarettes contain formaldehyde and formaldehyde causes cancer, something even the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) warns us about, but shooting a baby up with formaldehyde in a vaccine is somehow supposed to be perfectly acceptable? Administering a two month old one shot for diphtheria, tetanus, acellular pertussis, and hepatitis B, and one shot for polio would mean shooting 200 micrograms of formaldehyde straight into the infant’s bloodstream; that’s just one set of vaccines. The average American child is set to receive 36 inoculations by the time he or she is five years old. Perhaps it is the genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in our food which have been shown in studies (the ones not funded by Monsanto) to cause everything from infertility and liver disease, to tumors and death, all courtesy of Big Agra, the same companies to bring us DDT and Agent Orange. The mainstream media has to sell it to us first. As if our air and food being poisoned isn’t enough, artificial fluoride, a chemical waste byproduct of aluminum and phosphate fertilizer manufacturing, is being dumped into municipal water across the U.S. and all over the world. The water in Nazi concentration camps was purposefully fluoridated, and it’s not likely Adolf Hitler was worried about the inmates’ dental health. Studies on fluoride’s detrimental health effects are numerous; fluoride has been shown to negatively impact every soft tissue in the body. prescription medications kill an estimated 300% more people than illegal drugs According to the Population Research Institute (PRI), the myth of overpopulation has been brought up again and again over the past few centuries for to scare people into accepting a eugenics agenda: Multiple sources from PRI to National Geographic’s Robert Kunzig claim that, when the math is done properly, every family on the planet could have a house with a yard and reside in a land mass the size of Texas. The eugenics agenda lives on, and the bought and controlled media continues to churn out propaganda telling us we have to die so that the Earth (and the elite) may live. Every day we are being poisoned, robbed and lied to on a massive scale. We have to wake people up to what’s really going on here, before it’s too late.

Overpopulation is a myth to scare people into accepting an agenda – population is declining

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

A new report from the Center for American Progress (CAP) thoroughly debunks the simplistic claims of nativist groups that immigration to the United States fuels the destruction of the U.S. environment by contributing to “over-population” of the country. The report, entitled From a “Green Farce” to a Green Future: Refuting False Claims About Immigrants and the Environment, points out that the “over-population” argument of the nativists is based on the false premise that more people automatically produce more pollution. However, the truth of the matter is that “more people do not necessarily equal more stress on the planet, and stopping the flow of immigrants to this country will not solve our environmental challenges.” In fact, the report finds that “immigrants actually live greener than most Americans and they can play a critical role in solving our environmental challenges.” In contrast to the “over-population” arithmetic of nativists, the CAP report notes that the United States produces 70 percent more greenhouse gases than the nations of the European Union (EU)-15, even though it is home to 23 percent fewer people. In other words, the EU-15 countries manage to produce less pollution with more people while maintaining a standard of living comparable to that of the United States. Moreover, within the United States, immigrants are more likely than the native-born to live in “high-density” metropolitan areas where recycling, conservation, and use of public transportation are the norm. That is why the U.S. cities with the largest immigrant populations—such as Los Angeles, New York, San Diego, and El Paso—are characterized by relatively low per capita carbon emissions; while the cities with the highest per capita “carbon footprints”—such as Knoxville, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, and Cincinnati—are home to relatively few immigrants. The CAP report also points out that “immigrants are integral to driving clean energy innovation” given that so many scientists and engineers in the United States are foreign-born. This conclusion echoes the findings of a June 2010 report from the Immigration Policy Center (IPC), which notes that “America’s young scientists and engineers, especially the ones drawn to emerging industries like alternative energy, tend to speak with an accent.” In fact, according to the IPC report, “nearly 70 percent of the men and women who entered the fields of science and engineering from 1995 to 2006 were immigrants.” Not surprisingly, nativists conveniently fail to mention the pivotal role which immigrants play in developing high-tech solutions to our environmental problems. As the CAP report correctly concludes, nativists are attempting to “present Americans with a false choice between achieving fair and humane immigration reform and climate legislation that will respect the environment and lead our country to a clean and prosperous energy future.” The report calls upon environmentalists to resist this siren call and to “reject false choices and distractions from…the true causes of pollution and climate change: our dependence on fossil fuels and our unsustainable systems of energy consumption.” The “over-population” argument being advanced by nativists with dismal environmental records is simply a fig leaf behind which they attempt to conceal their anti-immigrant political agenda.

Ewing 10 - Ph.D., is the Senior Researcher at the Immigration Policy (Walter, “Immigration and the Environment: Why the “Over-Population” Argument Doesn’t Hold Water,” Immigration Policy Center (IPC), 10/13/10, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/10/13/910043/-Immigration-and-the-Environment-Why-the-Over-Population-Argument-Doesn-t-Hold-Water)//AC

A new report from the Center for American Progress (CAP) thoroughly debunks the simplistic claims of nativist groups that immigration to the United States fuels the destruction of the U.S. environment by contributing to “over-population” of the country the “over-population” argument of the nativists is based on the false premise that more people automatically produce more pollution. However, the truth of the matter is that “more people do not necessarily equal more stress on the planet, and stopping the flow of immigrants to this country will not solve our environmental challenges.” In fact, the report finds that “immigrants actually live greener than most Americans and they can play a critical role in solving our environmental challenges.” In contrast to the “over-population Moreover, within the United States, immigrants are more likely than the native-born to live in “high-density” metropolitan areas where recycling, conservation, and use of public transportation are the norm. cities with the highest per capita “carbon footprints”—such as Knoxville, Oklahoma City, St. Louis, and Cincinnati—are home to relatively few immigrants. immigrants are integral to driving clean energy innovation” given that so many scientists and engineers in the United States are foreign-born. America’s young scientists and engineers, especially the ones drawn to emerging industries like alternative energy, tend to speak with an accent. “nearly 70 percent of the men and women who entered the fields of science and engineering from 1995 to 2006 were immigrants Not surprisingly, nativists conveniently fail to mention the pivotal role which immigrants play in developing high-tech solutions to our environmental problems the true causes of pollution and climate change: our dependence on fossil fuels and our unsustainable systems of energy consumption.” The “over-population” argument being advanced by nativists with dismal environmental records is simply a fig leaf behind which they attempt to conceal their anti-immigrant political agenda.

Your overpopulation claims are false – immigrants are key to develop clean energy and save the environment

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The world’s seemingly relentless march toward overpopulation achieved a notable milestone in 2012: Somewhere on the planet, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the 7 billionth living person came into existence. Lucky No. 7,000,000,000 probably celebrated his or her birthday sometime in March and added to a population that’s already stressing the planet’s limited supplies of food, energy, and clean water. Should this trend continue, as the Los Angeles Times noted in a five-part series marking the occasion, by midcentury, “living conditions are likely to be bleak for much of humanity.” A somewhat more arcane milestone, meanwhile, generated no media coverage at all: It took humankind 13 years to add its 7 billionth. That’s longer than the 12 years it took to add the 6 billionth—the first time in human history that interval had grown. (The 2 billionth, 3 billionth, 4 billionth, and 5 billionth took 123, 33, 14, and 13 years, respectively.) In other words, the rate of global population growth has slowed. And it’s expected to keep slowing. Indeed, according to experts’ best estimates, the total population of Earth will stop growing within the lifespan of people alive today. And then it will fall. This is a counterintuitive notion in the United States, where we’ve heard often and loudly that world population growth is a perilous and perhaps unavoidable threat to our future as a species. But population decline is a very familiar concept in the rest of the developed world, where fertility has long since fallen far below the 2.1 live births per woman required to maintain population equilibrium. In Germany, the birthrate has sunk to just 1.36, worse even than its low-fertility neighbors Spain (1.48) and Italy (1.4). The way things are going, Western Europe as a whole will most likely shrink from 460 million to just 350 million by the end of the century. That’s not so bad compared with Russia and China, each of whose populations could fall by half. As you may not be surprised to learn, the Germans have coined a polysyllabic word for this quandary: Schrumpf-Gesellschaft, or “shrinking society.” American media have largely ignored the issue of population decline for the simple reason that it hasn’t happened here yet. Unlike Europe, the United States has long been the beneficiary of robust immigration. This has helped us not only by directly bolstering the number of people calling the United States home but also by propping up the birthrate, since immigrant women tend to produce far more children than the native-born do. But both those advantages look to diminish in years to come. A report issued last month by the Pew Research Center found that immigrant births fell from 102 per 1,000 women in 2007 to 87.8 per 1,000 in 2012. That helped bring the overall U.S. birthrate to a mere 64 per 1,000 women—not enough to sustain our current population. Moreover, the poor, highly fertile countries that once churned out immigrants by the boatload are now experiencing birthrate declines of their own. From 1960 to 2009, Mexico’s fertility rate tumbled from 7.3 live births per woman to 2.4, India’s dropped from six to 2.5, and Brazil’s fell from 6.15 to 1.9. Even in sub-Saharan Africa, where the average birthrate remains a relatively blistering 4.66, fertility is projected to fall below replacement level by the 2070s. This change in developing countries will affect not only the U.S. population, of course, but eventually the world’s. Why is this happening? Scientists who study population dynamics point to a phenomenon called “demographic transition.” “For hundreds of thousands of years,” explains Warren Sanderson, a professor of economics at Stony Brook University, “in order for humanity to survive things like epidemics and wars and famine, birthrates had to be very high.” Eventually, thanks to technology, death rates started to fall in Europe and in North America, and the population size soared. In time, though, birthrates fell as well, and the population leveled out. The same pattern has repeated in countries around the world. Demographic transition, Sanderson says, “is a shift between two very different long-run states: from high death rates and high birthrates to low death rates and low birthrates.” Not only is the pattern well-documented, it’s well under way: Already, more than half the world’s population is reproducing at below the replacement rate. If the Germany of today is the rest of the world tomorrow, then the future is going to look a lot different than we thought. Instead of skyrocketing toward uncountable Malthusian multitudes, researchers at Austria’s International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis foresee the global population maxing out at 9 billion some time around 2070. On the bright side, the long-dreaded resource shortage may turn out not to be a problem at all. On the not-so-bright side, the demographic shift toward more retirees and fewer workers could throw the rest of the world into the kind of interminable economic stagnation that Japan is experiencing right now. And in the long term—on the order of centuries—we could be looking at the literal extinction of humanity. That might sound like an outrageous claim, but it comes down to simple math. According to a 2008 IIASA report, if the world stabilizes at a total fertility rate of 1.5—where Europe is today—then by 2200 the global population will fall to half of what it is today. By 2300, it’ll barely scratch 1 billion. (The authors of the report tell me that in the years since the initial publication, some details have changed—Europe’s population is falling faster than was previously anticipated, while Africa’s birthrate is declining more slowly—but the overall outlook is the same.) Extend the trend line, and within a few dozen generations you’re talking about a global population small enough to fit in a nursing home. It’s far from certain that any of this will come to pass. IIASA’s numbers are based on probabilistic projections, meaning that demographers try to identify the key factors affecting population growth and then try to assess the likelihood that each will occur. The several layers of guesswork magnify potential errors. “We simply don’t know for sure what will be the population size at a certain time in the future,” demographer Wolfgang Lutz told IIASA conference-goers earlier this year. “There are huge uncertainties involved.” Still, it’s worth discussing, because focusing too single-mindedly on the problem of overpopulation could have disastrous consequences—see China’s one-child policy. One of the most contentious issues is the question of whether birthrates in developed countries will remain low. The United Nation’s most recent forecast, released in 2010, assumes that low-fertility countries will eventually revert to a birthrate of around 2.0. In that scenario, the world population tops out at about 10 billion and stays there. But there’s no reason to believe that that birthrates will behave in that way—no one has every observed an inherent human tendency to have a nice, arithmetically stable 2.1 children per couple. On the contrary, people either tend to have an enormous number of kids (as they did throughout most of human history and still do in the most impoverished, war-torn parts of Africa) or far too few. We know how to dampen excessive population growth—just educate girls. The other problem has proved much more intractable: No one’s figured out how to boost fertility in countries where it has imploded. Singapore has been encouraging parenthood for nearly 30 years, with cash incentives of up to $18,000 per child. Its birthrate? A gasping-for-air 1.2. When Sweden started offering parents generous support, the birthrate soared but then fell back again, and after years of fluctuating, it now stands at 1.9—very high for Europe but still below replacement level. The reason for the implacability of demographic transition can be expressed in one word: education. One of the first things that countries do when they start to develop is educate their young people, including girls. That dramatically improves the size and quality of the workforce. But it also introduces an opportunity cost for having babies. “Women with more schooling tend to have fewer children,” says William Butz, a senior research scholar at IIASA. In developed countries, childrearing has become a lifestyle option tailored to each couple’s preferences. Maximizing fertility is rarely a priority. My wife and I are a case in point. I’m 46, she’s 39, and we have two toddlers. We waited about as long to have kids as we feasibly could because we were invested in building our careers and, frankly, enjoying all the experiences that those careers let us have. If wanted to pop out another ankle-biter right now, our ageing bodies might just allow us to do so. But we have no intention of trying. As much as we adore our little guys, they’re a lot of work and frighteningly expensive. Most of our friends have just one or two kids, too, and like us they regard the prospect of having three or four kids the way most people look at ultramarathoning or transoceanic sailing—admirable pursuits, but only for the very committed. That attitude could do for Homo sapiens what that giant asteroid did for the dinosaurs. If humanity is going to sustain itself, then the number of couples deciding to have three or four kids will consistently have to exceed the number opting to raise one or zero. The 2.0 that my wife and I have settled for is a decent effort, but we’re not quite pulling our weight. Are we being selfish? Or merely rational? Our decision is one that I’m sure future generations will judge us on. Assuming there are any.

Wise 13 - New York-based magazine writer and author of Extreme Fear: The Science of Your Mind in Danger. A contributing editor at Popular Mechanics and Travel + Leisure, he specializes in aviation, adventure, and psychology (Jeff, “About That Overpopulation Problem,” Slate, 1/9/13, http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/01/world_population_may_actually_start_declining_not_exploding.2.html)//AC

It took humankind 13 years to add its 7 billionth. That’s longer than the 12 years it took to add the 6 billionth—the first time in human history that interval had grown. (The 2 billionth, 3 billionth, 4 billionth, and 5 billionth took 123, 33, 14, and 13 years, respectively.) In other words, the rate of global population growth has slowed. And it’s expected to keep slowing. Indeed, according to experts’ best estimates, the total population of Earth will stop growing within the lifespan of people alive today. And then it will fall. But population decline is a very familiar concept in the rest of the developed world, where fertility has long since fallen far below the 2.1 live births per woman required to maintain population equilibrium. In Germany, the birthrate has sunk to just 1.36, worse even than its low-fertility neighbors Spain (1.48) and Italy (1.4). American media have largely ignored the issue of population decline for the simple reason that it hasn’t happened here yet. Unlike Europe, the United States has long been the beneficiary of robust immigration. This has helped us not only by directly bolstering the number of people calling the United States home but also by propping up the birthrate, since immigrant women tend to produce far more children than the native-born do. But both those advantages look to diminish in years to come immigrant births fell from 102 per 1,000 women in 2007 to 87.8 per 1,000 in 2012. That helped bring the overall U.S. birthrate to a mere 64 per 1,000 women—not enough to sustain our current population. Moreover, the poor, highly fertile countries that once churned out immigrants by the boatload are now experiencing birthrate declines of their own Mexico’s fertility rate tumbled from 7.3 live births per woman to 2.4 This change in developing countries will affect not only the U.S. population, of course, but eventually the world’s. “in order for humanity to survive things like epidemics and wars and famine, birthrates had to be very high.” Eventually, thanks to technology, death rates started to fall in Europe and in North America, and the population size soared. In time, though, birthrates fell as well, and the population leveled out. The same pattern has repeated in countries around the world. Demographic transition, Sanderson says, “is a shift between two very different long-run states: from high death rates and high birthrates to low death rates and low birthrates.” Not only is the pattern well-documented, it’s well under way: Already, more than half the world’s population is reproducing at below the replacement rate. the long-dreaded resource shortage may turn out not to be a problem at all the demographic shift toward more retirees and fewer workers could throw the rest of the world into the kind of interminable economic And in the long term—on the order of centuries—we could be looking at the literal extinction of humanity. That might sound like an outrageous claim, but it comes down to simple math. According to a 2008 IIASA report, if the world stabilizes at a total fertility rate of 1.5—where Europe is today—then by 2200 the global population will fall to half of what it is today. By 2300, it’ll barely scratch 1 billion Europe’s population is falling faster than was previously anticipated, while Africa’s birthrate is declining more slowly—but the overall outlook is the same.) Extend the trend line, and within a few dozen generations you’re talking about a global population small enough to fit in a nursing home focusing too single-mindedly on the problem of overpopulation could have disastrous consequences—see China’s one-child policy. demographic transition can be expressed in one word: education. One of the first things that countries do when they start to develop is educate their young people, including girls. That dramatically improves the size and quality of the workforce. But it also introduces an opportunity cost for having babies. “Women with more schooling tend to have fewer children, As much as we adore our little guys, they’re a lot of work and frighteningly expensive. Most of our friends have just one or two kids, too, and like us they regard the prospect of having three or four kids the way most people look at ultramarathoning or transoceanic sailing—admirable pursuits, but only for the very committed. That attitude could do for Homo sapiens what that giant asteroid did for the dinosaurs. If humanity is going to sustain itself, then the number of couples deciding to have three or four kids will consistently have to exceed the number opting to raise one or zero.

Population will decline – underpopulation leads to extinction

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The dire economic and social effects of plummeting birthrates remind us that marriage and childbirth are not just private lifestyle choices. A country with fewer children becomes, on average, increasingly older. Cities and towns begin to empty, while the cost of caring for retirees and elderly sick people skyrockets. Old people spend less and invest less, shrinking capital pools for the new businesses that create new jobs. Entrepreneurs do not come from among the aged: countries with a higher median age have a lower percentage of entrepreneurs. Most important, a shrinking labor force means fewer workers contributing the payroll taxes that finance old-age care. The Social Security program is already beginning to be impacted by the decline in the worker-to-retiree ratio. In 1940, there were 160 workers for each retiree. By 2010, there were just 2.9. Once some 80 million Baby Boomers retire, the number will plummet to 2.1. This means taxes will have to increase and benefits be cut substantially to keep the program solvent. Medicare is similarly threatened by declining fertility. Both programs will cost more but have fewer workers footing the bill.

Thornton 13 - research fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor of classics and humanities at California State University in Fresno, California (Bruce, “The Coming Demographic Crisis: What to Expect When No One Is Expecting,” 4/25/13, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/04/25/the_coming_demographic_crisis_what_to_expect_when_no_one_is_expecting_118128.html)//AC

The dire economic and social effects of plummeting birthrates remind us that marriage and childbirth are not just private lifestyle choices. A country with fewer children becomes, on average, increasingly older. Cities and towns begin to empty, while the cost of caring for retirees and elderly sick people skyrockets. Old people spend less and invest less, shrinking capital pools for the new businesses that create new jobs. Entrepreneurs do not come from among the aged: countries with a higher median age have a lower percentage of entrepreneurs. Most important, a shrinking labor force means fewer workers contributing the payroll taxes that finance old-age care. The Social Security program is already beginning to be impacted by the decline in the worker-to-retiree ratio This means taxes will have to increase and benefits be cut substantially to keep the program solvent. Medicare is similarly threatened by declining fertility. Both programs will cost more but have fewer workers footing the bill

Underpopulation raises taxes and increases costs for healthcare and social security

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Texas continues to be the land route of choice, with 739 suspects from “special interest” countries nabbed during illegal crossings into the Lone Star State over the last five years, according to Rep. Blake Farenthold, R-Corpus Christi. An independent analysis by Vanderbilt political science and law professor Carol M. Swain and Saurabh Sharad found a 67 percent increase in the number of arrests of border crossers from suspect nations &#151 up from 213 in 2000 to 355 in 2009. Yet none of these suspects has faced terror-related charges or carried out a terrorist act, according to senior federal law enforcement officials who have checked government records. The single greatest terrorist threat to the United States remains al-Qaida affiliated recruits slipping through 327 airports and other ports of entry with legal or fradulent passports the way the 19 suicide hijackers gained entry to carry out the 2001 attacks. Radicalized volunteers from countries that are not on any watch list remain an ongoing threat, as do self-radicalized U.S. citizens such as accused Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist charged with a rampage in 2009 that killed 13 and wounded 29. Indeed, suspects in at least 24 of the 27 terrorist plots unmasked in the United States over the last two years have either been radicalized U.S. citizens or foreign nationals already residing in the United States. “I’m not aware that anyone who has committed a terrorist act in the United States had crossed the southwest border,” a senior official with Immigration and Customs Enforcement told the Houston Chronicle, speaking on condition of anonymity. “It’s an arduous trip through multiple countries to be smuggled across the southwestern border as opposed to using a passport, getting a visitor’s visa and just flying into any airport,” the official said. None of Texas’ terror-related cases has involved a suspect who illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border.

Powell, 11 – Reporter for Chron (Stewart, “Terrorism threat on Mexican border: Reality or political scare tactics?,” Chron, March 28, 2011, http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2011/03/terrorism-threat-on-mexican-border-reality-or-political-scare-tactics/)//SMS

Texas continues to be the land route of choice, with 739 suspects from “special interest” countries nabbed during illegal crossings . Yet none of these suspects has faced terror-related charges or carried out a terrorist act . The single greatest terrorist threat to the U S remains al-Qaida recruits slipping through 327 airports and other ports of entry with legal or fradulent passports the way the 19 suicide hijackers gained entry Radicalized volunteers remain an ongoing threat as do self-radicalized U.S. citizens Indeed, suspects in at least 24 of the 27 terrorist plots unmasked in the U S over the last two years have either been radicalized U.S. citizens or foreign nationals already residing in the U S I’m not aware that anyone who has committed a terrorist act in the U S had crossed the southwest border a senior official with I C E told the Houston Chronicle None of Texas’ terror-related cases has involved a suspect who illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border.

Airport entry and self-radicalization are comparatively more likely to allow terrorism

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

A former Mexican cabinet member says the U.S. should accept more low-skill migrants from Central America, because otherwise the migrants would stay in Mexico. If they can’t get into the United States, “they’re going to stay in Mexico, creating a burden for us that we have to carry,” Jorge Castañeda said on “Al Punto,” a Spanish-language show on Univision. “I think Mexico should raise its voice much more clearly and forcefully to say that if the United States wants a wall, it needs to have more doors in this wall, with more bells at these doors so that Mexicans and Central Americans can enter the United States with papers,” he said, as translated. He criticized the items in the bill meant to address border security, as well as concern to the number of temporary work visas the bill will create, which he believes to be too small. The Center for Immigration Studies reports that Castañeda criticized the Mexican government for being too passive when discussing the bill with the United States, out of respect for not becoming involved in foreign affairs. Immigrants hoping to enter the United States, legally or illegally, will invariably pass through Mexico to get there, Castañeda said. Assuming they can’t get into the country, with the heightened border security, he predicted that they will just stay in Mexico. The U.S. needs to provide more temporary work visas to ensure that these illegal immigrants become U.S. citizens, rather than a “burden” that Mexico will have to deal with. Castañeda projected that the number of temporary work visas the bill will create, currently sitting at 20,000 per year, should be raised to “at least 150,000 to 200,000.” Mexico has a Gini index at 0.48, a measure of income inequality, meaning that economic distribution has a nearly 50/50 rate of unequal dispersion in Mexico. Compared to the United States’ 0.38 index, it stands to reason that Mexican citizens would like to immigrate.

Dorton 7/1/13 – Contributor to the Daily Caller (Elizabeth, “Former Mexican official: Immigrants will become Mexico’s burden if US doesn’t take more,” The Daily Caller, 7/1/13, http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/01/former-mexican-official-immigrants-will-become-mexicos-burden-if-us-doesnt-take-more/)//AC

U.S. should accept more low-skill migrants from Central America, because otherwise the migrants would stay in Mexico. If they can’t get into the United States, “they’re going to stay in Mexico, creating a burden for us that we have to carry,” I think Mexico should raise its voice much more clearly and forcefully to say that if the United States wants a wall, it needs to have more doors in this wall, with more bells at these doors so that Mexicans and Central Americans can enter the United States with papers Immigrants hoping to enter the United States, legally or illegally, will invariably pass through Mexico to get there, Castañeda said. Assuming they can’t get into the country, with the heightened border security, he predicted that they will just stay in Mexico. The U.S. needs to provide more temporary work visas to ensure that these illegal immigrants become U.S. citizens, rather than a “burden” that Mexico will have to deal with.

All the negative effects of immigration the aff claims will be applied to Mexico

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The impact on everyone else, though, is surprisingly positive. Giovanni Peri, an economist at the University of California, Davis, has written a series of influential papers comparing the labor markets in states with high immigration levels to those with low ones. He concluded that undocumented workers do not compete with skilled laborers — instead, they complement them. Economies, as Adam Smith argued in “Wealth of Nations,” work best when workers become specialized and divide up tasks among themselves. Pedro Chan’s ability to take care of routine tasks on a work site allows carpenters and electricians to focus on what they do best. In states with more undocumented immigrants, Peri said, skilled workers made more money and worked more hours; the economy’s productivity grew. From 1990 to 2007, undocumented workers increased legal workers’ pay in complementary jobs by up to 10 percent.

Davidson, 13 – economist for the New York Times and co-founder of Planet Money, NPR’s team of economics reporters whose goal is to translate often confusing and sometimes terrifying economic and financial news (Adam, “Do Illegal Immigrants Actually Hurt the U.S. Economy?”, The New York Times, 2/12/2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/17/magazine/do-illegal-immigrants-actually-hurt-the-us-economy.html?pagewanted=all) // MS

The impact is surprisingly positive Peri, an economist at the University of California, Davis, has written a series of influential papers comparing the labor markets in states with high immigration levels to those with low ones. He concluded that undocumented workers do not compete with skilled laborers — instead, they complement them In states with more undocumented immigrants, Peri said, skilled workers made more money and worked more hours; the economy’s productivity grew undocumented workers increased legal workers’ pay in complementary jobs by up to 10 percent

Illegal immigrants are key to the economy – this evidence cites the economic consensus and assumes all their warrants

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

For a given labor inflow, the productivity gains from immigration will be larger the scarcer the skills of the incoming immigrants. A given type of worker may be scarce either because the U.S. supply of his skill type is low relative to the rest of the world, as with workers who have little schooling, or because the U.S. demand for his skill type is high relative to the rest of the world, as with computer scientists and engineers.

Hanson, 7 – Ph.D. in economics at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and holder of the Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair in International Economic Relations at UC San Diego, where he is director of the Center on Emerging and Pacific Economies and has faculty positions in the School of International Relations and Pacific Studies and the Department of Economics (Gordon, “The Economic Logic of Illegal Immigration,” Council on Foreign Relations, April 2007, pg. 14-18) // MS

productivity gains from immigration will be larger the scarcer the skills of the incoming immigrants. A given type of worker may be scarce either because the U.S. supply of his skill type is low relative to the rest of the world or because the U.S. demand for his skill type is high relative to the rest of the world, as with computer scientists and engineers

Illegal immigration is key to the economy – fills low-skill jobs

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - In the heated debate over the impact of illegal immigration on the U.S. economy, Andrew Sum is one of those focusing on the negative.

Isidore, 6 – CNN Money economist (Chris, “Illegal workers: good for U.S. economy,” CNN Money, 5/1/2006, http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/01/news/economy/immigration_economy) // MS

In the heated debate over the impact of illegal immigration on the U.S. economy, Andrew Sum is one of those focusing on the negative.

Even opponents of immigration concede it’s a net benefit for the economy

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Mark Mobius, who oversees $53 billion in emerging markets, said the rebound in U.S. stocks signals the world’s largest economy will improve by the end of this year.

Bonorchis, 7/1 – economic reporter for Bloomberg (Renee, “Mobius Sees U.S. Economy Improving After Stock Market Recovery,” Bloomberg, 7/1/2013, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-01/mobius-sees-u-s-economy-improving-after-stock-market-recovery.html) // MS

Mobius, who oversees $53 billion in emerging markets, said the rebound in U.S. stocks signals the world’s largest economy will improve by the end of this year

Economy high and improving – statistics and top economists

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. housing recovery is strengthening. Factories are fielding more orders. And Americans’ confidence in the economy has reached its highest point in 5½ years.

Rugaber and Crutsinger, 6/25 – AP reporters reporting on recent economic statistics (Christopher and Martin, “REPORTS REFLECT FED'S MESSAGE OF STRONGER ECONOMY,” Associate Press, 6/25/2013, http://bigstory.ap.org/article/reports-reflect-feds-message-stronger-economy) // MS

The U.S. housing recovery is strengthening. Factories are fielding more orders. And Americans’ confidence in the economy has reached its highest point in 5½ years

It’s improving now – multiple warrants

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

For environmentalists, population has long been a problem. Many of the things we do wouldn't cause so much trouble if there weren't so many of us. It's why I wrote a book some years ago called "Maybe One: An Argument for Smaller Families." Heck, it's why I had only one child. And many of us, I think, long viewed immigration through the lens of population; it was another part of the math problem. I've always thought we could afford historical levels of immigration, but I understood why some other environmentalists wanted tougher restrictions. More Americans would mean more people making use of the same piece of land, a piece that was already pretty hard-used.¶ In recent years, though, the math problem has come to look very different to me. It's one reason I feel it's urgent that we get real immigration reform, allowing millions to step out of the shadows and on to a broad path toward citizenship. It will help, not hurt, our environmental efforts, and potentially in deep and powerful ways.¶ One thing that's changed is the nature of the ecological problem. Now that global warming is arguably the greatest danger we face, it matters a lot less where people live. Carbon dioxide mixes easily in the atmosphere. It makes no difference whether it comes from Puerto Vallarta or Portland.¶ It's true that the typical person from a developing nation would produce more carbon once she adopted an American lifestyle, but she also probably would have fewer children. A December report from the Pew Research Center report showed that birthrates in the U.S. were dropping faster among Mexican American women and women who immigrated from Mexico than among any other group.¶ This is a trend reflected among all Latinas in the U.S. As an immigrant mother of two from the Dominican Republic told the New York Times: "Before, I probably would have been pressured to have more, [but] living in the United States, I don't have family members close by to help me, and it takes a village to raise a child. So the feeling is, keep what you have right now." Her two grandmothers had had a total of 27 children. The carbon math, in other words, may well be a wash.¶

McKibben 13 - environmentalist, author, and journalist - Schumann Distinguished Scholar and Professor at Middlebury College (Bill, “Immigration reform -- for the climate,” Los Angeles Times, 3/14/13, http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/14/opinion/la-oe-mckibben-immigration-environment-20130314)//AC

For environmentalists, population has long been a problem More Americans would mean more people making use of the same piece of land, a piece that was already pretty hard-used.¶ In recent years, though, the math problem has come to look very different to me. It's one reason I feel it's urgent that we get immigration It will help, not hurt, our environmental efforts, and potentially in deep and powerful ways.¶ Carbon dioxide mixes easily in the atmosphere. It makes no difference whether it comes from Puerto Vallarta or Portland.¶ It's true that the typical person from a developing nation would produce more carbon once she adopted an American lifestyle, but she also probably would have fewer children. A December report from the Pew Research Center report showed that birthrates in the U.S. were dropping faster among Mexican American women and women who immigrated from Mexico than among any other group.¶ This is a trend reflected among all Latinas in the U.S. As an immigrant mother of two from the Dominican Republic told the New York Times: "Before, I probably would have been pressured to have more, [but] living in the United States, I don't have family members close by to help me, and it takes a village to raise a child. Her two grandmothers had had a total of 27 children. The carbon math, in other words, may well be a wash.¶

Immigrants solve climate change – they have less children in the US

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Many of today’s most-respected thinkers, from Stephen Hawking to David Attenborough, argue that our efforts to fight climate change and other environmental perils will all fail unless we “do something” about population growth. In the Universe in a Nutshell, Hawking declares that, “in the last 200 years, population growth has become exponential… The world population doubles every forty years.”

Pearce, 10 – UK environment journalist of the year and science writer specializing in global environmental issues, popular science and development issues from 64 countries over the past 20 years (Fred, “The overpopulation myth,” Prospect Magazine, 3/8/2010, http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/the-overpopulation-myth/#.UdMjPBaATF8) // MS

Many thinkers argue that our efforts to fight climate change and other environmental perils will all fail unless we “do something” about population growth Hawking declares that, “in the last 200 years, population growth has become exponential… The world population doubles every forty years.”

Population growth is slowing drastically and consumption is a huge alt cause to the environment

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

A few online outposts have started to comment on America’s enormous collection of international military bases. The United States maintains the largest collection of foreign military bases in world history. Officially, at the beginning of 2011, there were 1,429,367 American troops stationed in 150 countries worldwide. This number does not include contractors who outnumber troops in Iraq and Afghanistan or the operations of the CIA or other secretive units. Anthropologist David Vine spent three years researching the changing structure of America’s military bases worldwide. His research found a network of more than 1000 American bases, located on every continent except Antarctica. “While the collection of Cold War–era giant bases such as those in Germany are shrinking, the global infrastructure of bases overseas has exploded in size and scope” David Vine posted online at TomDispatch.com. He describes “a new generation of bases the military calls “lily pads” (as in a frog jumping across a pond toward its prey). These are small, secretive, inaccessible facilities with limited numbers of troops, spartan amenities, and pre-positioned weaponry and supplies… Around the world, from Djibouti to the jungles of Honduras, the deserts of Mauritania to Australia’s tiny Cocos Islands, the Pentagon has been pursuing as many lily pads as it can, in as many countries as it can, as fast as it can. Although statistics are hard to assemble, given the often-secretive nature of such bases, the Pentagon has probably built upwards of 50 lily pads and other small bases since around 2000, while exploring the construction of dozens more… not to mention 11 aircraft carrier task forces — essentially floating bases — and a significant, and growing, military presence in space. The United States currently spends an estimated $250 billion (A$241 billion) annually maintaining bases and troops overseas.” David Vine posted. Mark Gillem agrees, and he explains in his book, America Town: Building the Outposts of Empire, “avoidance” of local populations, publicity, and potential opposition is the new aim. “To project its power, (the United States wants) secluded and self-contained outposts strategically located (around the world)” he says. The strategy is demonstrated in Yemeni counter-terrorism efforts where “teams of CIA officers and US contractors have operated in Yemen for some time, hunting Al Qaeda militants and developing intelligence for drone strikes” as sited in the Los Angeles times. An article in The Guardian stated that America has increased their military aid package to Yemen from less than US$11 million in 2006 to more than $70 million in 2009, as well as providing up to $121 million for development over the next three years. In Australia, despite some local unrest and objections from China, America negotiated for 2500 US Marines to ‘share’ a base in Darwin. In a Sydney Morning Herald article, Australian Defense minister Stephen Smith said the US marine presence was ”qualitatively different” from a base although US marines have been given access to Australia’s air and naval bases. The Pentagon is also pursuing plans for a drone and surveillance base in Australia’s Cocos Islands. Nick Turse is another researcher of US military strategy from TomDispatch.com, “Forget full-scale invasions and large-footprint occupations on the Eurasian mainland. Instead, think: special operations forces… proxy armies… the militarisation of spying and intelligence… drone aircraft… cyber-attacks, and joint Pentagon operations with increasingly militarised ‘civilian’ government agencies,” he wrote. The ‘lily pad’ overseas bases have begun to generate some scrutiny from Republicans, Democrats and New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. While congress is looking for ways to trim the deficit, closing such overseas bases might make more dollars and sense than ever.

The Epoch Times 12 – [International Media Organization “US Military Bases Growing Worldwide” 7/23/12 http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/world/us-military-bases-growing-worldwide-269170.html //NGopaul]

The United States maintains the largest collection of foreign military bases in world history 1,429,367 American troops stationed in 150 countries worldwide. While the collection of Cold War–era giant bases such as those in Germany are shrinking, the global infrastructure of bases overseas has exploded in size and scope a new generation of bases the military calls “lily pads small, secretive, inaccessible facilities with limited numbers of troops, spartan amenities, and pre-positioned weaponry and supplies Around the world, from Djibouti to the jungles of Honduras, the deserts of Mauritania to Australia’s tiny Cocos Islands, the Pentagon has been pursuing as many lily pads as it can, in as many countries as it can, as fast as it can. the Pentagon has probably built upwards of 50 lily pads and other small bases since around 2000 To project its power, (the United States wants) secluded and self-contained outposts strategically located (around the world)” Al Qaeda militants and developing intelligence for drone strikes” as sited in the Los Angeles times

Deterrence resilient – strong presence

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The power pattern in the world has significantly changed since the end of the cold war. The United States is indeed in a new period of power expansion. However, nuclear weapons of the United States provide little contribution to its fast growing power. Lieber and Press are therefore wrong to predict that the United States would gain new coercive power. First, the United States cannot develop a fully disarming nuclear strike capability against Russia and China given its intelligence deficiency; second, a disarming capability of surprise attack in peacetime cannot generate coercive power in crisis given the difficulty of signaling; third, the United States cannot gain new nuclear coercive power as its new methods of using nuclear weapons are constrained by the nuclear taboo. In this new era, nuclear weapons essentially remain a paper tiger. U.S. nuclear modernization toward greater strike capability is just a whitening of the paper tiger’s teeth. If more people in the world today understood that this fundamental nature of nuclear weapons will remain unchanged, even with the rise of American nuclear strike capabilities, we might still avoid the re-emergence of the Cold War’s worst nightmare scenarios.

Li 6 – Director of the Arms Control Program and Professor of the Institute of International Studies (2006, Bin, China Security “Paper Tiger with Whitened Teeth,” http://www.chinasecurity.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=213, Sawyer)

nuclear weapons provide little contribution to growing power the U S cannot develop a fully disarming nuclear strike capability given its intelligence deficiency a disarming capability of surprise attack in peacetime cannot generate coercive power in crisis given the difficulty of signaling new methods of using nuclear weapons are constrained by the nuclear taboo nuclear weapons essentially remain a paper tiger. U.S. nuclear modernization toward greater strike capability is just a whitening of the paper tiger’s teeth.

Nuclear deterrence is a paper tiger

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

More than two decades after the Cold War dramatically ended, the U.S. maintains a Cold War military. America has a couple score allies, dozens of security commitments, hundreds of overseas bases, and hundreds of thousands of troops overseas. Yet international hegemonic communism has disappeared, the Soviet Union has collapsed, Maoist China has been transformed, and pro-communist Third World dictatorships have been discarded in history's dustbin. The European Union has a larger economy and population than America does. Japan spent decades with the world's second largest economy. South Korea has 40 times the GDP and twice the population of North Korea. As Colin Powell exclaimed in 1991, "I'm running out of demons. I'm running out of enemies. I'm down to Castro and Kim Il-sung." Yet America accounts for roughly half of the globe's military outlays. In real terms the U.S. government spends more on the military today than at any time during the Cold War, Korean War, or Vietnam War. It is difficult for even a paranoid to concoct a traditional threat to the American homeland. Terrorism is no replacement for the threat of nuclear holocaust. Commentator Philip Klein worries about "gutting" the military and argued that military cuts at the end of the Cold War "came back to haunt us when Sept. 11 happened." Yet the reductions, which still left America by far the world's most dominant power, neither allowed the attacks nor prevented Washington from responding with two wars. And responding with two wars turned out to be a catastrophic mistake. Evil terrorism is a threat, but existential threat it is not. Moreover, the best response is not invasions and occupations — as the U.S. has learned at high cost in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Rather, the most effective tools are improved intelligence, Special Forces, international cooperation, and restrained intervention. Attempts at nation-building are perhaps even more misguided than subsidizing wealthy industrialized states. America's record isn't pretty. The U.S. wasn't able to anoint its preferred Somali warlord as leader of that fractured nation. Washington's allies in the still unofficial and unstable nation of Kosovo committed grievous crimes against Serb, Roma, and other minorities. Haiti remains a failed state after constant U.S. intervention. The invasion of Iraq unleashed mass violence, destroyed the indigenous Christian community, and empowered Iran; despite elections, a liberal society remains unlikely. After nine years most Afghans dislike and distrust the corrupt government created by the U.S. and sustained only by allied arms. The last resort of those who want America to do everything everywhere is to claim that the world will collapse into various circles of fiery hell without a ubiquitous and vast U.S. military presence. Yet there is no reason to believe that scores of wars are waiting to break out. And America's prosperous and populous allies are capable of promoting peace and stability in their own regions.

Bandow 11 – senior fellow at the Cato Institute. A former special assistant to Ronald Reagan, he is the author of Foreign Follies: America's New Global Empire (Xulon) [1-31-2011, Doug Bandow, “Solving the Debt Crisis: A Military Budget for a Republic”, January 31st, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12746]

two decades after the Cold War the U.S. maintains a Cold War military Soviet Union has collapsed, Maoist China has been transformed, and pro-communist Third World dictatorships have been discarded in history's dustbin European Union has a larger economy Japan spent decades with the world's second largest economy. South Korea has 40 times the GDP and twice the population of North Korea. As Colin Powell exclaimed , "I'm running out of demons. I'm running out of enemies. It is difficult for even a paranoid to concoct a traditional threat to the American homeland Terrorism is no replacement for the threat of nuclear holocaust The last resort of those who want America to do everything everywhere is to claim that the world will collapse into various circles of fiery hell without a ubiquitous and vast U.S. military presence. Yet there is no reason to believe that scores of wars are waiting to break out America's prosperous and populous allies are capable of promoting peace and stability in their own regions.

And, our allies can deter

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

When the global financial crisis struck roughly a year ago, the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of scary predictions of, and commentary regarding, ensuing conflict and wars -- a rerun of the Great Depression leading to world war, as it were. Now, as global economic news brightens and recovery -- surprisingly led by China and emerging markets -- is the talk of the day, it's interesting to look back over the past year and realize how globalization's first truly worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the international security landscape. None of the more than three-dozen ongoing conflicts listed by GlobalSecurity.org can be clearly attributed to the global recession. Indeed, the last new entry (civil conflict between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestine) predates the economic crisis by a year, and three quarters of the chronic struggles began in the last century. Ditto for the 15 low-intensity conflicts listed by Wikipedia (where the latest entry is the Mexican "drug war" begun in 2006). Certainly, the Russia-Georgia conflict last August was specifically timed, but by most accounts the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics was the most important external trigger (followed by the U.S. presidential campaign) for that sudden spike in an almost two-decade long struggle between Georgia and its two breakaway regions. Looking over the various databases, then, we see a most familiar picture: the usual mix of civil conflicts, insurgencies, and liberation-themed terrorist movements. Besides the recent Russia-Georgia dust-up, the only two potential state-on-state wars (North v. South Korea, Israel v. Iran) are both tied to one side acquiring a nuclear weapon capacity -- a process wholly unrelated to global economic trends. And with the United States effectively tied down by its two ongoing major interventions (Iraq and Afghanistan-bleeding-into-Pakistan), our involvement elsewhere around the planet has been quite modest, both leading up to and following the onset of the economic crisis: e.g., the usual counter-drug efforts in Latin America, the usual military exercises with allies across Asia, mixing it up with pirates off Somalia's coast). Everywhere else we find serious instability we pretty much let it burn, occasionally pressing the Chinese -- unsuccessfully -- to do something. Our new Africa Command, for example, hasn't led us to anything beyond advising and training local forces. So, to sum up: * No significant uptick in mass violence or unrest (remember the smattering of urban riots last year in places like Greece, Moldova and Latvia?); * The usual frequency maintained in civil conflicts (in all the usual places); * Not a single state-on-state war directly caused (and no great-power-on-great-power crises even triggered); * No great improvement or disruption in great-power cooperation regarding the emergence of new nuclear powers (despite all that diplomacy); * A modest scaling back of international policing efforts by the system's acknowledged Leviathan power (inevitable given the strain); and * No serious efforts by any rising great power to challenge that Leviathan or supplant its role. (The worst things we can cite are Moscow's occasional deployments of strategic assets to the Western hemisphere and its weak efforts to outbid the United States on basing rights in Kyrgyzstan; but the best include China and India stepping up their aid and investments in Afghanistan and Iraq.) Sure, we've finally seen global defense spending surpass the previous world record set in the late 1980s, but even that's likely to wane given the stress on public budgets created by all this unprecedented "stimulus" spending. If anything, the friendly cooperation on such stimulus packaging was the most notable great-power dynamic caused by the crisis. Can we say that the world has suffered a distinct shift to political radicalism as a result of the economic crisis? Indeed, no. The world's major economies remain governed by center-left or center-right political factions that remain decidedly friendly to both markets and trade. In the short run, there were attempts across the board to insulate economies from immediate damage (in effect, as much protectionism as allowed under current trade rules), but there was no great slide into "trade wars." Instead, the World Trade Organization is functioning as it was designed to function, and regional efforts toward free-trade agreements have not slowed. Can we say Islamic radicalism was inflamed by the economic crisis? If it was, that shift was clearly overwhelmed by the Islamic world's growing disenchantment with the brutality displayed by violent extremist groups such as al-Qaida. And looking forward, austere economic times are just as likely to breed connecting evangelicalism as disconnecting fundamentalism. At the end of the day, the economic crisis did not prove to be sufficiently frightening to provoke major economies into establishing global regulatory schemes, even as it has sparked a spirited -- and much needed, as I argued last week -- discussion of the continuing viability of the U.S. dollar as the world's primary reserve currency. Naturally, plenty of experts and pundits have attached great significance to this debate, seeing in it the beginning of "economic warfare" and the like between "fading" America and "rising" China. And yet, in a world of globally integrated production chains and interconnected financial markets, such "diverging interests" hardly constitute signposts for wars up ahead. Frankly, I don't welcome a world in which America's fiscal profligacy goes undisciplined, so bring it on -- please! Add it all up and it's fair to say that this global financial crisis has proven the great resilience of America's post-World War II international liberal trade order. Do I expect to read any analyses along those lines in the blogosphere any time soon? Absolutely not. I expect the fantastic fear-mongering to proceed apace. That's what the Internet is for.

Thomas P.M. Barnett (senior managing director of Enterra Solutions LLC and a contributing editor/online columnist for Esquire magazine) August 2009 “The New Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis” http://www.aprodex.com/the-new-rules--security-remains-stable-amid-financial-crisis-398-bl.aspx

When the global financial crisis struck the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of scary predictions of, ensuing conflict and wars globalization's first truly worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the international security landscape. None of the more than three-dozen ongoing conflicts can be clearly attributed to the global recession Looking over the various databases, then, we see a most familiar picture: the usual mix of civil conflicts, insurgencies, and liberation-themed terrorist movements. a process wholly unrelated to global economic trends Everywhere else we find serious instability we pretty much let it burn to sum up * No significant uptick in mass violence or unrest The usual frequency maintained in civil conflicts (in all the usual places Not a single state-on-state war directly caused (and no great-power-on-great-power crises even triggered No disruption in great-power cooperation * No serious efforts by any rising great power to challenge that Leviathan or supplant its role. there was no great slide into "trade wars." At the end of the day, the economic crisis did not prove to be sufficiently frightening to provoke major economies plenty of experts see the beginning of "economic warfare And yet, in a world of globally integrated production chains and interconnected financial markets, such "diverging interests" hardly constitute signposts for wars up ahead.

No impact to the economy

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Just a few months ago, the consensus among influential thinkers was that the economic crisis would unleash a wave of geopolitical plagues. Xenophobic outbursts, civil wars, collapsing currencies, protectionism, international conflicts, and street riots were only some of the dire consequences expected by the experts.

Moisés Naím 10, editor in chief of Foreign Policy, January/February 2010, “It Didn’t Happen,” http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/01/04/it_didnt_happen?print=yes&hidecomments=yes&page=full

the consensus among thinkers was that the economic crisis would unleash geopolitical plagues civil wars protectionism, international conflicts were expected by the experts

Every economy impact is overwhelmingly empirically denied

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The question may be reformulated. Do wars spring from a popular reaction to a sudden economic crisis that exacerbates poverty and growing disparities in wealth and incomes? Perhaps one could argue, as some scholars do, that it is some dramatic event or sequence of such events leading to the exacerbation of poverty that, in turn, leads to this deplorable denouement. This exogenous factor might act as a catalyst for a violent reaction on the part of the people or on the part of the political leadership who would then possibly be tempted to seek a diversion by finding or, if need be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the process leading to war. According to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, there would not appear to be any merit in this hypothesis. After studying ninety-three episodes of economic crisis in twenty-two countries in Latin America and Asia in the years since the Second World War they concluded that:19 Much of the conventional wisdom about the political impact of economic crises may be wrong ... The severity of economic crisis – as measured in terms of inflation and negative growth - bore no relationship to the collapse of regimes ... (or, in democratic states, rarely) to an outbreak of violence ... In the cases of dictatorships and semidemocracies, the ruling elites responded to crises by increasing repression (thereby using one form of violence to abort another).

Miller, 2k (Morris, Economist, Adjunct Professor in the Faculty of Administration – University of Ottawa, Former Executive Director and Senior Economist – World Bank, “Poverty as a Cause of Wars?”, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, Winter, p. 273)

Do wars spring from economic crisis According to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, there would not appear to be any merit in this hypothesis. After studying ninety-three episodes of economic crisis they concluded that the conventional wisdom may be wrong The severity of economic crisis bore no relationship to an outbreak of violence

93 empirical instances prove

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Morgenthau talks about national morale and character as key elements of national power; characteristics that don’t normally weigh heavily in declinist literature which favors the easily quantifiable measures such as national shares of global economic product. As Robert Lieber has recently argued, US resilience, which results from the openness of American society and its resulting flexibility and adaptability, will benefit the United States as it responds to the Great Recession and the prospect of national decline. In that regard the often-criticized American “capitalisme sauvage,” which many foreign critics blame for producing the economic crisis, may assist the United States in recovering more quickly than others. As a recent Economist survey of business in America noted, the Schumpeterian process of “creative destruction” means that “America’s non-financial businesses are suffering. But they will emerge from the recession leaner and stronger than ever.” Niall Ferguson predicts that “when the crisis ends, America will still be the best place in the world to do business.” That is fully consistent with the findings of the recently released third annual Legatum Institute Prosperity Index which rated the United States number one in the world for innovation and entrepreneurship and found that “the ability of a nation’s people to innovate is more strongly related to the soundness of its economy than any other factor.”129

Eric S. Edelman 10, former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, was Principal Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs, 2010, “Understanding America’s Contested Primacy,” Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments

Morgenthau talks about national morale and character as key elements of national power US resilience, which results from the openness of American society and its flexibility and adaptability, will benefit the U S as it responds to the Great Recession America’s non-financial businesses are suffering. But they will emerge from the recession leaner and stronger than ever when the crisis ends, America will still be the best place in the world to do business the Legatum Institute Prosperity Index rated the U S number one in the world for innovation and entrepreneurship

Economic leadership’s resilient and inevitable

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

A new advertising campaign has got American progressives spluttering into their soy lattes. Plastered across the pages of the liberal American canon - newspapers and magazines like the New York Times, the New Republic, the American Prospect, the Nation and Harper's - are a series of full-page ads calling for progressives to join forces with anti-immigration activists in the name of saving the environment. The ads, which show bulldozers ripping up pristine forests while endless traffic jams snake off toward the horizon, blame overpopulation - driven, of course, by unchecked immigration - for suburban sprawl, greenhouse-gas emissions, depleted water resources and traffic congestion. "300 million people today, 600 million tomorrow," the ads warn darkly. "Think about it."

Whitford, 8 – freelance journalist for the Guardian, Newsweek and Slate (Ben, “Does immigration hurt the environment?”, The Guardian, 8/1/2008, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/01/immigrationpolicy.usa) // MS

ads, which show bulldozers ripping up pristine forests while endless traffic jams snake off toward the horizon, blame overpopulation - driven, of course, by unchecked immigration - for suburban sprawl, greenhouse-gas emissions, depleted water resources and traffic congestion

Immigration has no environmental impact and slows global population growth – also they justify neo-Nazism

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Attempts by opponents of immigrants’ rights to weaken support for comprehensive immigration reform have long tried to shove an array of wedge issues into the movement in attempts to split it.

NYCLU, no date – New York Civil Liberties Union (“Debunking the Immigration vs. Environment Myth,” n.d., http://www.nyclu.org/content/debunking-immigration-vs-environment-myth) // MS

opponents of immigrants’ rights have long tried to shove an array of wedge issues into the movement in attempts to split it.

No internal link to the environment

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Earth Day 1970 provoked a torrent of apocalyptic predictions. “We have about five more years at the outside to do something,” ecologist Kenneth Watt declared to a Swarthmore College audience on April 19, 1970. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment. The day after Earth Day, even the staid New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” Very Apocalypse Now. Three decades later, of course, the world hasn’t come to an end; if anything, the planet’s ecological future has never looked so promising. With half a billion people suiting up around the globe for Earth Day 2000, now is a good time to look back on the predictions made at the first Earth Day and see how they’ve held up and what we can learn from them. The short answer: The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong. More important, many contemporary environmental alarmists are similarly mistaken when they continue to insist that the Earth’s future remains an eco-tragedy that has already entered its final act. Such doomsters not only fail to appreciate the huge environmental gains made over the past 30 years, they ignore the simple fact that increased wealth, population, and technological innovation don’t degrade and destroy the environment. Rather, such developments preserve and enrich the environment. If it is impossible to predict fully the future, it is nonetheless possible to learn from the past. And the best lesson we can learn from revisiting the discourse surrounding the very first Earth Day is that passionate concern, however sincere, is no substitute for rational analysis.

Ronald Bailey, adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, May 2k,http://reason.com/0005/fe.rb.earth.shtml

Earth Day 1970 provoked a torrent of apocalyptic predictions. Three decades later the world hasn’t come to an end; if anything, the planet’s ecological future has never looked so promising. The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong. many contemporary alarmists are similarly mistaken when they continue to insist that the Earth’s future remains an eco-tragedy Such doomsters not only fail to appreciate the huge environmental gains made over the past 30 years, they ignore the simple fact that increased wealth, population, and technological innovation don’t degrade the environment. Rather, such developments preserve the environment.

Apocalyptic environmental predictions are empirically wrong

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Reading too much into a few months’ numbers would be risky, though. The optimism about Mexico was never based on this year’s economic growth. Even before the disappointing first-quarter GDP report, the OECD, a Paris-based think-tank for industrialised countries, had issued a study on the Mexican economy predicting a weak 2013 because of feeble demand abroad. Part of the motivation for the reforms that Mr Peña has kick-started is that the country is too dependent on the vagaries of the global economy, and needs to generate more of its own dynamism by freeing business at home.

The Economist, 13 – (“Reality bites,” 5/25/2013, http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21578440-lacklustre-growth-shows-need-reform-reality-bites) // MS

the country is too dependent on the vagaries of the global economy, and needs to generate more of its own dynamism by freeing business at home

Global economy turns Mexican economy but not the other way around

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Politicians of all stripes preach to an anxious, appreciative, and very numerous choir when they, like President Obama, proclaim atomic terrorism to be “the most immediate and extreme threat to global security.” It is the problem that, according to Defense Secretary Robert Gates, currently keeps every senior leader awake at night. This is hardly a new anxiety. In 1946, atomic bomb maker J. Robert Oppenheimer ominously warned that if three or four men could smuggle in units for an atomic bomb, they could blow up New York. This was an early expression of a pattern of dramatic risk inflation that has persisted throughout the nuclear age. In fact, although expanding fires and fallout might increase the effective destructive radius, the blast of a Hiroshima-size device would “blow up” about 1% of the city’s area—a tragedy, of course, but not the same as one 100 times greater. In the early 1970s, nuclear physicist Theodore Taylor proclaimed the atomic terrorist problem to be “immediate,” explaining at length “how comparatively easy it would be to steal nuclear material and step by step make it into a bomb.” At the time he thought it was already too late to “prevent the making of a few bombs, here and there, now and then,” or “in another ten or fifteen years, it will be too late.” Three decades after Taylor, we continue to wait for terrorists to carry out their “easy” task. In contrast to these predictions, terrorist groups seem to have exhibited only limited desire and even less progress in going atomic. This may be because, after brief exploration of the possible routes, they, unlike generations of alarmists, have discovered that the tremendous effort required is scarcely likely to be successful. The most plausible route for terrorists, according to most experts, would be to manufacture an atomic device themselves from purloined fissile material (plutonium or, more likely, highly enriched uranium). This task, however, remains a daunting one, requiring that a considerable series of difficult hurdles be conquered and in sequence. Outright armed theft of fissile material is exceedingly unlikely not only because of the resistance of guards, but because chase would be immediate. A more promising approach would be to corrupt insiders to smuggle out the required substances. However, this requires the terrorists to pay off a host of greedy confederates, including brokers and money-transmitters, any one of whom could turn on them or, either out of guile or incompetence, furnish them with stuff that is useless. Insiders might also consider the possibility that once the heist was accomplished, the terrorists would, as analyst Brian Jenkins none too delicately puts it, “have every incentive to cover their trail, beginning with eliminating their confederates.” If terrorists were somehow successful at obtaining a sufficient mass of relevant material, they would then probably have to transport it a long distance over unfamiliar terrain and probably while being pursued by security forces. Crossing international borders would be facilitated by following established smuggling routes, but these are not as chaotic as they appear and are often under the watch of suspicious and careful criminal regulators. If border personnel became suspicious of the commodity being smuggled, some of them might find it in their interest to disrupt passage, perhaps to collect the bounteous reward money that would probably be offered by alarmed governments once the uranium theft had been discovered. Once outside the country with their precious booty, terrorists would need to set up a large and well-equipped machine shop to manufacture a bomb and then to populate it with a very select team of highly skilled scientists, technicians, machinists, and administrators. The group would have to be assembled and retained for the monumental task while no consequential suspicions were generated among friends, family, and police about their curious and sudden absence from normal pursuits back home. Members of the bomb-building team would also have to be utterly devoted to the cause, of course, and they would have to be willing to put their lives and certainly their careers at high risk, because after their bomb was discovered or exploded they would probably become the targets of an intense worldwide dragnet operation. Some observers have insisted that it would be easy for terrorists to assemble a crude bomb if they could get enough fissile material. But Christoph Wirz and Emmanuel Egger, two senior physicists in charge of nuclear issues at Switzerland‘s Spiez Laboratory, bluntly conclude that the task “could hardly be accomplished by a subnational group.” They point out that precise blueprints are required, not just sketches and general ideas, and that even with a good blueprint the terrorist group would most certainly be forced to redesign. They also stress that the work is difficult, dangerous, and extremely exacting, and that the technical requirements in several fields verge on the unfeasible. Stephen Younger, former director of nuclear weapons research at Los Alamos Laboratories, has made a similar argument, pointing out that uranium is “exceptionally difficult to machine” whereas “plutonium is one of the most complex metals ever discovered, a material whose basic properties are sensitive to exactly how it is processed.“ Stressing the “daunting problems associated with material purity, machining, and a host of other issues,” Younger concludes, “to think that a terrorist group, working in isolation with an unreliable supply of electricity and little access to tools and supplies” could fabricate a bomb “is farfetched at best.” Under the best circumstances, the process of making a bomb could take months or even a year or more, which would, of course, have to be carried out in utter secrecy. In addition, people in the area, including criminals, may observe with increasing curiosity and puzzlement the constant coming and going of technicians unlikely to be locals. If the effort to build a bomb was successful, the finished product, weighing a ton or more, would then have to be transported to and smuggled into the relevant target country where it would have to be received by collaborators who are at once totally dedicated and technically proficient at handling, maintaining, detonating, and perhaps assembling the weapon after it arrives. The financial costs of this extensive and extended operation could easily become monumental. There would be expensive equipment to buy, smuggle, and set up and people to pay or pay off. Some operatives might work for free out of utter dedication to the cause, but the vast conspiracy also requires the subversion of a considerable array of criminals and opportunists, each of whom has every incentive to push the price for cooperation as high as possible. Any criminals competent and capable enough to be effective allies are also likely to be both smart enough to see boundless opportunities for extortion and psychologically equipped by their profession to be willing to exploit them. Those who warn about the likelihood of a terrorist bomb contend that a terrorist group could, if with great difficulty, overcome each obstacle and that doing so in each case is “not impossible.” But although it may not be impossible to surmount each individual step, the likelihood that a group could surmount a series of them quickly becomes vanishingly small. Table 1 attempts to catalogue the barriers that must be overcome under the scenario considered most likely to be successful. In contemplating the task before them, would-be atomic terrorists would effectively be required to go though an exercise that looks much like this. If and when they do, they will undoubtedly conclude that their prospects are daunting and accordingly uninspiring or even terminally dispiriting. It is possible to calculate the chances for success. Adopting probability estimates that purposely and heavily bias the case in the terrorists’ favor—for example, assuming the terrorists have a 50% chance of overcoming each of the 20 obstacles—the chances that a concerted effort would be successful comes out to be less than one in a million. If one assumes, somewhat more realistically, that their chances at each barrier are one in three, the cumulative odds that they will be able to pull off the deed drop to one in well over three billion. Other routes would-be terrorists might take to acquire a bomb are even more problematic. They are unlikely to be given or sold a bomb by a generous like-minded nuclear state for delivery abroad because the risk would be high, even for a country led by extremists, that the bomb (and its source) would be discovered even before delivery or that it would be exploded in a manner and on a target the donor would not approve, including on the donor itself. Another concern would be that the terrorist group might be infiltrated by foreign intelligence. The terrorist group might also seek to steal or illicitly purchase a “loose nuke“ somewhere. However, it seems probable that none exist. All governments have an intense interest in controlling any weapons on their territory because of fears that they might become the primary target. Moreover, as technology has developed, finished bombs have been out-fitted with devices that trigger a non-nuclear explosion that destroys the bomb if it is tampered with. And there are other security techniques: Bombs can be kept disassembled with the component parts stored in separate high-security vaults, and a process can be set up in which two people and multiple codes are required not only to use the bomb but to store, maintain, and deploy it. As Younger points out, “only a few people in the world have the knowledge to cause an unauthorized detonation of a nuclear weapon.” There could be dangers in the chaos that would emerge if a nuclear state were to utterly collapse; Pakistan is frequently cited in this context and sometimes North Korea as well. However, even under such conditions, nuclear weapons would probably remain under heavy guard by people who know that a purloined bomb might be used in their own territory. They would still have locks and, in the case of Pakistan, the weapons would be disassembled. The al Qaeda factor The degree to which al Qaeda, the only terrorist group that seems to want to target the United States, has pursued or even has much interest in a nuclear weapon may have been exaggerated. The 9/11 Commission stated that “al Qaeda has tried to acquire or make nuclear weapons for at least ten years,” but the only substantial evidence it supplies comes from an episode that is supposed to have taken place about 1993 in Sudan, when al Qaeda members may have sought to purchase some uranium that turned out to be bogus. Information about this supposed venture apparently comes entirely from Jamal al Fadl, who defected from al Qaeda in 1996 after being caught stealing $110,000 from the organization. Others, including the man who allegedly purchased the uranium, assert that although there were various other scams taking place at the time that may have served as grist for Fadl, the uranium episode never happened. As a key indication of al Qaeda’s desire to obtain atomic weapons, many have focused on a set of conversations in Afghanistan in August 2001 that two Pakistani nuclear scientists reportedly had with Osama bin Laden and three other al Qaeda officials. Pakistani intelligence officers characterize the discussions as “academic” in nature. It seems that the discussion was wide-ranging and rudimentary and that the scientists provided no material or specific plans. Moreover, the scientists probably were incapable of providing truly helpful information because their expertise was not in bomb design but in the processing of fissile material, which is almost certainly beyond the capacities of a nonstate group. Kalid Sheikh Mohammed, the apparent planner of the 9/11 attacks, reportedly says that al Qaeda’s bomb efforts never went beyond searching the Internet. After the fall of the Taliban in 2001, technical experts from the CIA and the Department of Energy examined documents and other information that were uncovered by intelligence agencies and the media in Afghanistan. They uncovered no credible information that al Qaeda had obtained fissile material or acquired a nuclear weapon. Moreover, they found no evidence of any radioactive material suitable for weapons. They did uncover, however, a “nuclear-related” document discussing “openly available concepts about the nuclear fuel cycle and some weapons-related issues.” Just a day or two before al Qaeda was to flee from Afghanistan in 2001, bin Laden supposedly told a Pakistani journalist, “If the United States uses chemical or nuclear weapons against us, we might respond with chemical and nuclear weapons. We possess these weapons as a deterrent.” Given the military pressure that they were then under and taking into account the evidence of the primitive or more probably nonexistent nature of al Qaeda’s nuclear program, the reported assertions, although unsettling, appear at best to be a desperate bluff. Bin Laden has made statements about nuclear weapons a few other times. Some of these pronouncements can be seen to be threatening, but they are rather coy and indirect, indicating perhaps something of an interest, but not acknowledging a capability. And as terrorism specialist Louise Richardson observes, “Statements claiming a right to possess nuclear weapons have been misinterpreted as expressing a determination to use them. This in turn has fed the exaggeration of the threat we face.” Norwegian researcher Anne Stenersen concluded after an exhaustive study of available materials that, although “it is likely that al Qaeda central has considered the option of using non-conventional weapons,” there is “little evidence that such ideas ever developed into actual plans, or that they were given any kind of priority at the expense of more traditional types of terrorist attacks.” She also notes that information on an al Qaeda computer left behind in Afghanistan in 2001 indicates that only $2,000 to $4,000 was earmarked for weapons of mass destruction research and that the money was mainly for very crude work on chemical weapons. Today, the key portions of al Qaeda central may well total only a few hundred people, apparently assisting the Taliban’s distinctly separate, far larger, and very troublesome insurgency in Afghanistan. Beyond this tiny band, there are thousands of sympathizers and would-be jihadists spread around the globe. They mainly connect in Internet chat rooms, engage in radicalizing conversations, and variously dare each other to actually do something. Any “threat,” particularly to the West, appears, then, principally to derive from self-selected people, often isolated from each other, who fantasize about performing dire deeds. From time to time some of these people, or ones closer to al Qaeda central, actually manage to do some harm. And occasionally, they may even be able to pull off something large, such as 9/11. But in most cases, their capacities and schemes, or alleged schemes, seem to be far less dangerous than initial press reports vividly, even hysterically, suggest. Most important for present purposes, however, is that any notion that al Qaeda has the capacity to acquire nuclear weapons, even if it wanted to, looks farfetched in the extreme. It is also noteworthy that, although there have been plenty of terrorist attacks in the world since 2001, all have relied on conventional destructive methods. For the most part, terrorists seem to be heeding the advice found in a memo on an al Qaeda laptop seized in Pakistan in 2004: “Make use of that which is available … rather than waste valuable time becoming despondent over that which is not within your reach.” In fact, history consistently demonstrates that terrorists prefer weapons that they know and understand, not new, exotic ones. Glenn Carle, a 23-year CIA veteran and once its deputy intelligence officer for transnational threats, warns, “We must not take fright at the specter our leaders have exaggerated. In fact, we must see jihadists for the small, lethal, disjointed, and miserable opponents that they are.” al Qaeda, he says, has only a handful of individuals capable of planning, organizing, and leading a terrorist organization, and although the group has threatened attacks with nuclear weapons, “its capabilities are far inferior to its desires.” Policy alternatives The purpose here has not been to argue that policies designed to inconvenience the atomic terrorist are necessarily unneeded or unwise. Rather, in contrast with the many who insist that atomic terrorism under current conditions is rather likely— indeed, exceedingly likely—to come about, I have contended that it is hugely unlikely. However, it is important to consider not only the likelihood that an event will take place, but also its consequences. Therefore, one must be concerned about catastrophic events even if their probability is small, and efforts to reduce that likelihood even further may well be justified. At some point, however, probabilities become so low that, even for catastrophic events, it may make sense to ignore them or at least put them on the back burner; in short, the risk becomes acceptable. For example, the British could at any time attack the United States with their submarine-launched missiles and kill millions of Americans, far more than even the most monumentally gifted and lucky terrorist group. Yet the risk that this potential calamity might take place evokes little concern; essentially it is an acceptable risk. Meanwhile, Russia, with whom the United States has a rather strained relationship, could at any time do vastly more damage with its nuclear weapons, a fully imaginable calamity that is substantially ignored. In constructing what he calls “a case for fear,” Cass Sunstein, a scholar and current Obama administration official, has pointed out that if there is a yearly probability of 1 in 100,000 that terrorists could launch a nuclear or massive biological attack, the risk would cumulate to 1 in 10,000 over 10 years and to 1 in 5,000 over 20. These odds, he suggests, are “not the most comforting.” Comfort, of course, lies in the viscera of those to be comforted, and, as he suggests, many would probably have difficulty settling down with odds like that. But there must be some point at which the concerns even of these people would ease. Just perhaps it is at one of the levels suggested above: one in a million or one in three billion per attempt.

Mueller 10 (John, professor of political science at Ohio State, Calming Our Nuclear Jitters, Issues in Science and Technology, Winter, http://www.issues.org/26.2/mueller.html)

Politicians of all stripes preach to an anxious choir when they, like Obama, proclaim atomic terrorism the most immediate threat This is hardly a new anxiety Oppenheimer warned that an atomic bomb could blow up New York. This was an early expression of a pattern of dramatic risk inflation the blast of a Hiroshima-size device would “blow up 1% of the city’s area we continue to wait for terrorists to carry out their “easy” task In contrast to predictions, terrorist groups have exhibited only limited desire and even less progress in going atomic the tremendous effort required is scarcely likely to be successful armed theft of fissile material is exceedingly unlikely not only because of the resistance of guards, but because chase would be immediate this requires the terrorists to pay off a host of greedy confederates any one of whom could turn on them or furnish them with stuff that is useless If terrorists were somehow successful at obtaining relevant material, they would have to transport it a long distance over unfamiliar terrain while being pursued by security forces smuggling routes are not as chaotic as they appear and are under the watch of suspicious and careful criminal regulators Once outside the country terrorists would need to set up a large and well-equipped machine shop to manufacture a bomb and then to populate it with a very select team of highly skilled scientists The group would have to be assembled and retained for the monumental task while no consequential suspicions were generated Members of the bomb-building team would have to be willing to put their lives at high risk the task “could hardly be accomplished by a subnational group precise blueprints are required even with a good blueprint the terrorist group would be forced to redesign the work is difficult, dangerous, and extremely exacting technical requirements verge on the unfeasible uranium is “exceptionally difficult to machine plutonium is one of the most complex metals ever discovered to think that a terrorist group, working in isolation with an unreliable supply of electricity and little access to tools and supplies” could fabricate a bomb “is farfetched at best Under the best circumstances, the process of making a bomb could take a year or more which would have to be carried out in utter secrecy If the effort to build a bomb was successful, the finished product, weighing a ton would then have to be transported to and smuggled into the relevant target country where it would have to be received by collaborators who are totally dedicated and technically proficient The financial costs could become monumental. There would be expensive equipment to buy, smuggle, and set up and people to pay or pay off vast conspiracy requires a considerable array of criminals each of whom has every incentive to push the price for cooperation as high as possible although it may not be impossible to surmount each individual step, the likelihood that a group could surmount a series of them quickly becomes vanishingly small atomic terrorists will undoubtedly conclude that their prospects are terminally dispiriting Adopting probability estimates that heavily bias in the terrorists’ favor the cumulative odds that they will be able to pull off the deed drop to one in well over three billion Other routes terrorists might take to acquire a bomb are even more problematic. They are unlikely to be given or sold a bomb because the risk would be high that the bomb (and its source) would be discovered the terrorist group might be infiltrated by foreign intelligence The terrorist group might steal or illicitly purchase a “loose nuke none exist. All governments have an intense interest in controlling any weapons on their territory finished bombs have been out-fitted with devices that destroys the bomb if it is tampered with. And there are other security techniques multiple codes are required not only to use the bomb but to store, maintain, and deploy it if a nuclear state were to utterly collapse nuclear weapons would remain under heavy guard They would still have locks and, in Pakistan, the weapons would be disassembled The degree to which al Qaeda has pursued or even has much interest in a nuclear weapon may have been exaggerated the uranium episode never happened scientists were incapable of providing truly helpful information because their expertise was not in bomb design which is certainly beyond the capacities of a nonstate group al Qaeda’s bomb efforts never went beyond searching the Internet the reported assertions appear at best to be a desperate bluff Statements claiming a right to possess nuclear weapons have been misinterpreted This has fed the exaggeration of the threat we face there is “little evidence that ideas ever developed into actual plans $4,000 was earmarked for weapons of mass destruction research the money was for chemical weapons Any “threat appears principally to derive from self-selected people who fantasize about performing dire deeds their capacities and schemes seem to be far less dangerous than initial press reports vividly, even hysterically, suggest any notion that al Qaeda has the capacity to acquire nuclear weapons, even if it wanted to, looks farfetched in the extreme history consistently demonstrates that terrorists prefer weapons that they know and understand, not new, exotic ones We must not take fright at the specter our leaders have exaggerated we must see jihadists for the small, lethal, disjointed, and miserable opponents that they are its capabilities are far inferior to its desires atomic terrorism is hugely unlikely At some point probabilities become so low that it may make sense to ignore them the risk becomes acceptable there must be some point at which the concerns would ease it is at one in three billion

No risk of nuclear terror – assumes every warrant

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

If one were to read the most recent unclassified report to Congress on the acquisition of technology relating to weapons of mass destruction and advanced conventional munitions, it does have a section on CBRN terrorism (note, not WMD terrorism). The intelligence community has a very toned down statement that says “several terrorist groups … probably remain interested in [CBRN] capabilities, but not necessarily in all four of those capabilities. … mostly focusing on low-level chemicals and toxins.” They’re talking about terrorists getting industrial chemicals and making ricin toxin, not nuclear weapons. And yes, Ms. Squassoni, it is primarily al Qaeda that the U.S. government worries about, no one else. The trend of worldwide terrorism continues to remain in the realm of conventional attacks. In 2010, there were more than 11,500 terrorist attacks, affecting about 50,000 victims including almost 13,200 deaths. None of them were caused by CBRN hazards. Of the 11,000 terrorist attacks in 2009, none were caused by CBRN hazards. Of the 11,800 terrorist attacks in 2008, none were caused by CBRN hazards.

Wolfe 12 – Alan Wolfe is Professor of Political Science at Boston College. He is also a Senior Fellow with the World Policy Institute at the New School University in New York. A contributing editor of The New Republic, The Wilson Quarterly, Commonwealth Magazine, and In Character, Professor Wolfe writes often for those publications as well as for Commonweal, The New York Times, Harper's, The Atlantic Monthly, The Washington Post, and other magazines and newspapers. March 27, 2012, "Fixated by “Nuclear Terror” or Just Paranoia?" http://www.hlswatch.com/2012/03/27/fixated-by-“nuclear-terror”-or-just-paranoia-2/

the most recent unclassified report to Congress on the acquisition of technology relating to weapons of mass destruction and advanced conventional munitions, it does have a section on CBRN terrorism (note, not WMD terrorism). The intelligence community has a very toned down statement that says “several terrorist groups probably remain interested in low-level chemicals and toxins not nuclear weapons The trend of worldwide terrorism continues to remain in the realm of conventional attacks. In 2010, there were more than 11,500 terrorist attacks None of them were caused by CBRN hazards.

Terrorists aren’t pursuing nukes

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

NONE OF this is meant to suggest that the United States faces no major challenges today. Rather, the point is that the problems confronting the country are manageable and pose minimal risks to the lives of the overwhelming majority of Americans. None of them -- separately or in combination -- justifies the alarmist rhetoric of policymakers and politicians or should lead to the conclusion that Americans live in a dangerous world. Take terrorism. Since 9/11, no security threat has been hyped more. Considering the horrors of that day, that is not surprising. But the result has been a level of fear that is completely out of proportion to both the capabilities of terrorist organizations and the United States' vulnerability. On 9/11, al Qaeda got tragically lucky. Since then, the United States has been preparing for the one percent chance (and likely even less) that it might get lucky again. But al Qaeda lost its safe haven after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, and further military, diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement efforts have decimated the organization, which has essentially lost whatever ability it once had to seriously threaten the United States. According to U.S. officials, al Qaeda's leadership has been reduced to two top lieutenants: Ayman al-Zawahiri and his second-in-command, Abu Yahya al-Libi. Panetta has even said that the defeat of al Qaeda is "within reach." The near collapse of the original al Qaeda organization is one reason why, in the decade since 9/11, the U.S. homeland has not suffered any large-scale terrorist assaults. All subsequent attempts have failed or been thwarted, owing in part to the incompetence of their perpetrators. Although there are undoubtedly still some terrorists who wish to kill Americans, their dreams will likely continue to be frustrated by their own limitations and by the intelligence and law enforcement agencies of the United States and its allies.

Zenko and Cohen 12, *Fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations, *Fellow at the Century Foundation, (Micah and Michael, "Clear and Present Safety," March/April, Foreign Affairs, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137279/micah-zenko-and-michael-a-cohen/clear-and-present-safety

the point is that the problems confronting the country are manageable and pose minimal risks to the lives of the overwhelming majority of Americans. None of them should lead to the conclusion that Americans live in a dangerous world. Take terrorism. Since 9/11, no security threat has been hyped more But the result has been a level of fear that is completely out of proportion to both the capabilities of terrorist organizations and the United States' vulnerability. On 9/11, al Qaeda got tragically lucky. Since then, the United States has been preparing for the one percent chance (and likely even less) that it might get lucky again al Qaeda lost its safe haven and further military, diplomatic, intelligence, and law enforcement efforts have decimated the organization, which has essentially lost whatever ability it once had to seriously threaten the United States al Qaeda's leadership has been reduced to two top lieutenants: Panetta has even said that the defeat of al Qaeda is "within reach." The near collapse of the original al Qaeda organization is one reason why, in the decade since 9/11, the U.S. homeland has not suffered any large-scale terrorist assaults. All subsequent attempts have failed or been thwarted, owing in part to the incompetence of their perpetrators terrorists will likely continue to be frustrated by their own limitations and by the intelligence and law enforcement agencies of the United States and its allies.

No threat – weak leadership and no recent attacks

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

A major barrier to graduating more STEM majors is the way we teach these disciplines. My own personal experience is a good example. Until sixth grade, I was not good in math. This was partly due to the poor pedagogy and some teachers who were not able to contextualize the material to make learning fun and enjoyable.

Qayoumi, 13 – Ph.D., President of San Jose State University (Mohammad, “Removing Obstacles to STEM Education is Critical to U.S. Vitality,” Huffington Post, 3/18/13, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mohammad-humayon-qayoumi/removing-obstacles-to-ste_b_2903025.html)

A major barrier to graduating more STEM majors is the way we teach teachers were not able to contextualize the material to make learning fun and enjoyable.

Alt cause – teaching methods

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The fears come to a head over investment, trade and migration policies. Indian activists protest the patenting of the neem tree by foreign pharmaceutical companies. Anti-globalization movements protest treating cultural goods the same as any other commodity in global trade and investment agreements. Groups in Western Europe oppose the entry of foreign workers and their families. What these protesters have in common is the fear of losing their cultural identity, and each contentious issue has sparked widespread political mobilization. How should governments respond? This chapter argues that policies that regulate the advance of economic globalization—the movements of people, capital, goods and ideas—must promote, rather than quash, cultural freedoms. It looks at three policy challenges that are among the most divisive in today’s public debates: • Indigenous people, extractive industries and traditional knowledge. Controversy rages over the importance of extractive industries for national economic growth and the socio-economic and cultural exclusion and dislocation of indigenous people that often accompany mining activities. Indigenous people’s traditional knowledge is recognized by the Convention on Biological Diversity but not by the global intellectual property rights regime as embodied in the World Intellectual Property Organization and the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights agreement. • Trade in cultural goods. International trade and investment negotiations have been divided over the question of a “cultural exception” for films and audiovisual goods, which would permit them to be treated differently from other goods. • Immigration. Managing the inflow and integration of foreign migrants requires responding to anti-immigrant groups, who argue that the national culture is threatened, and to migrant groups, who demand respect for their ways of life. The extreme positions in these debates often provoke regressive responses that are nationalistic, xenophobic and conservative: close the country off from all outside influences and preserve tradition. That defence of national culture comes at great costs to development and to human choice. This report argues that these extreme positions are not the way to protect local cultures and identities. There need not be a choice between protecting local identities and adopting open policies to global flows of migrants, foreign films and knowledge and capital. The challenge for countries around the world is to design countryspecific policies that widen choices rather than narrow them by supporting and protecting national identities while also keeping borders open.

Human Development Report, 4 (“Globalization and cultural choice”, 2004, http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr04_chapter_5.pdf)//KG

fears come to a head over investment, trade and migration policies Groups in Western Europe oppose the entry of foreign workers and their families Managing the inflow and integration of foreign migrants requires responding to anti-immigrant groups, who argue that the national culture is threatened, and to migrant groups, who demand respect for their ways of life The extreme positions in these debates often provoke regressive responses

Investment and immigration extremely divisive

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

Few issues in modern United States politics have generated the same amount of spark or received as much attention as the Mexican immigration movement to the United States. Fading in and out of the news media, immigration has always been a contentious issue. Even now, with the recent uproar over the Arizona Immigration Law signed in April 2010, thousands voice their opinions in protests across the nation. Even more than demonstrating the passion immigration issues create, the recent reaction to the Arizona Immigration Law shows that there is a weakness in the United States immigration policy, one that has yet to be fully solved and addressed. Hopefully the signing of this law will again reopen the immigration debate in Congress, and furthermore that the result of this debate will be a new immigration policy, one which will advance both the United States and Mexico towards future progress and prosperity. Mexican immigration to the United States is one of the longest running labor migration movements in the world, yet why is it now such a contentious issue (Sotelo 52)? Recent changes in the movement have given it much more attention in today‟s news media. When Mexicans first immigrated to the United States, it was primarily to the American southwest, and their work was limited to certain industries like agriculture, mining, and railroad construction. Today we are now witnessing new destinations of this old immigration movement (Sotelo 55). Mexicans immigrants have now found jobs in many diverse sectors of the economy, and have settled and found homes in many new corners of the United States. This is largely in part to the 2 expansion of social networks, which immigration relies upon. This is also in part to an expansion of the US economy, and with it an increase in labor demands from employers. When developing countries are close to countries with booming economies, migration is the inevitable result (LeMay 107).

Schwalbe, 10 - Honors B.A., International Relations from the University of Delaware (Kaleigh, “Mexican Immigration to the United States”, University of Delaware, Spring 2010, http://udspace.udel.edu/bitstream/handle/19716/5521/Schwalbe,%20Kaleigh.pdf?sequence=1)//KG

Few issues in modern United States politics have generated the same amount of spark or received as much attention as the Mexican immigration movement to the United States. immigration has always been a contentious issue immigration debate in Congress Recent changes in the movement have given it much more attention in today‟s news media.

Plan is contentious from connection to immigration

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The assumption that governments have partisan (and electoral) incentives in regulating economic activity is ubiquitous in the literature on politics and macro-economic performance. Hibbs (1977, 1992), Tufte (1978), Esping-Andersen (1990), Goldthorpe (1984), among others, are precursors in this tradition.11 We adopt the same approach and assume that parties of the left will try to advance the political agenda of owners of labor, while parties of the right are identified with the interests of domestic business owners. Moreover, we argue that this argument follows because foreign investment is likely to affect differently the return to domestic factors of production, potentially creating a distributive cleavage in the regulation of FDI. This argument is consistent with that in literature on the link between investment and trade politics.12 In their analysis of quid-pro-quo FDI, Bhagwati et al. argue that among those actors supporting the position of multinationals we usually find business groups brought into joint-ventures with foreign investors, labor unions that experience employment gains, and local communities that benefit from location of the MNC facility.13 Grossman & Helpman (1996) refer to this distributive rationale in their analysis of trade policy in the presence of multinationals: “When policy toward DFI is endogenous, the politics may generate a con- flict between domestic firms wanting investment restrictions and domestic workers with industry-specific skills wanting free entry by multinationals.” (Grossman and Helpman, 1996, pp. 220.) We explicitly model the distributive consequences of foreign investment, as driving the preferences of domestic actors on the demand side of politics. We also map those preferences onto the partisan disposition of governments. We predict that left-leaning governments -those governments that cater to labor- are more likely to provide better investment conditions to lure foreign investment into those sectors where labor is a complement of FDI. Furthermore, we argue that governments that defend the interests of the right-leaning party -the party identified with domestic business owners- will offer a more favorable investment environment to foreign investors that are likely to raise the return to domestic capital. At the same time, they will limit the inflow of foreign capital to those sectors where foreign investment is more likely to increase the demand for labor, compete down the rents that would have otherwise accrued to domestic business owners, thus reducing the return they receive from their economic activity.14 In a strategic environment foreign investors anticipate and react to government’s policy by investing in a country and sector when the host government is of the “right” type.

Pinto and Pinto, 7 - Department of Economics, West Virginia University AND Department of Political Science, Columbia University (Santiago M. and Pablo M, “The Politics of Investment: Partisan Governments, Wages and Employment”, March 2007, http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/politics/seminars/Pinto_Paper2.pdf)//KG

The assumption that governments have partisan incentives in regulating economic activity is ubiquitous in the literature on politics parties of the left will try to advance the political agenda of owners of labor, while parties of the right are identified with the interests of domestic business owners this argument follows because foreign investment is likely to affect differently the return to domestic factors of production This argument is consistent with that in literature on the link between investment and trade politics We explicitly model the distributive consequences of foreign investment, as driving the preferences of domestic actors on the demand side of politics left-leaning governments -those governments that cater to labor- are more likely to provide better investment conditions to lure foreign investment into those sectors where labor is a complement right-leaning party -the party identified with domestic business owners- will offer a more favorable investment environment to foreign investors that are likely to raise the return to domestic capital

Foreign investment is always partisan – models prove

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

(Reuters) - When the conversation between President Barack Obama and his newly elected Mexican counterpart Enrique Pena Nieto turns to the controversial topic of energy during their meeting this week, both are apt to step carefully. The two countries have abruptly changed positions over the past decade: Mexico, once the growing energy power, is struggling to maintain production; the United States, once a guaranteed importer, is enjoying a lucrative energy boom. However, the thorny issues of foreign investment in Mexico's oil production sector or swapping different types of crude oil between the two nations will likely only be brought up in private, if at all. Although Mexico's aging refineries could operate more efficiently using some of the light crude emerging from U.S. oilfields, state oil and gas monopoly Pemex has long avoided incremental imports in order to maintain its reliance on the heavier crude produced domestically. Meanwhile, U.S. pipeline exports of natural gas to Mexico have surged, and could double within a few years as new projects link Latin America's second-largest economy with major U.S. producing regions, despite concerns in the United States that exports could push prices higher at home. Less divisive topics, such as climate change and how to improve cross-border energy efficiency, are expected to be discussed, Sergio Alcocer, Mexico's deputy foreign minister responsible for the United States, told Reuters. "This is more like the first dance of the season," said Bill O'Grady, chief markets strategist at Confluence Investment Management. "You get to see each other, get to know each other. But Mexico is still trying to figure out how to reform its own state oil company." SOME KIND OF A SWAP? Mexican oil and gas output remains flat while national demand increases, creating a dilemma for Pena Nieto, whose opponents vigorously oppose foreign investment in the country's energy sector. Although Mexican crude is a staple for Gulf Coast refineries, crude oil imports from Mexico have dropped a third over the past decade, sinking below 1 million barrels per day last year for the first time since 1994, according to government data. Mexico has duly shifted its focus. A month ago Pemex touted a new two-year deal to boost crude exports to China by 30,000 bpd. Talk of some kind of oil "swap" has also circulated, based on the idea that U.S. producers could get a better price for their light-sweet crude in Mexico while Texas and Louisiana refineries built to run on heavy-sour grades could get more of that type of oil from Mexico, albeit at lesser rates than in the past. There is little indication yet that Pemex is angling for U.S. shale oil, or that U.S. companies are pressing to sell it. GAS BONANZA As lawmakers engage in an increasingly fierce debate in Washington over whether natural gas exports would drive up fuel prices at home, foreign companies are racing to export more to Mexico, where demand is growing fast. U.S. natural gas exports to Mexico rose by 24 percent in 2012 to all-time highs, according to U.S. government data. The capacity to export will double by the end of 2014 as Mexican power plants hook up to pipelines running from the giant Eagle Ford play in Texas and further afield. Companies like Sempra Energy, Japan's Mitsui and Kinder Morgan are all planning to build new pipelines in Mexico, potentially reducing its dependence on imported LNG from overseas. Alejandro Martinez, the top natural gas executive at Pemex, said exports of U.S. gas to Mexico and Mexican oil to the United States present "a natural exchange" for the two countries. "I think we have to have a much greater integration," he said in an interview with Reuters this week. INVESTMENT ESSENTIAL Whether Obama and Nieto will discuss the more delicate matter of Mexico's allowing foreign investment in its struggling oil sector is unclear. Development of the country's large shale formations is still on hold as it considers its options. Mexico has the fourth-largest shale gas resources in the world after the United States, China and Argentina, according to a U.S. government report on global shale deposits in 2011, though it remains to be seen how they will be developed. Pena Nieto has pledged to open up Mexican oil production and exploration to more outside investment in order to ramp up growth. "When push comes to shove, it's U.S. companies that have the technology and experience to help Mexico develop its deepwater and onshore unconventional resources," said Ed Morse, managing director of commodity research at Citi Group. Traditionalists who view Pemex as a symbol of Mexican self-sufficiency strongly oppose the prospect. Jorge Buendia, political analyst and director of polling firm Buendia & Laredo, said Mexico was therefore likely to avoid open talk of oil and gas with the United States for now, though "back-room" discussions would no doubt take place. Raising the subject frankly would lay the new president open to accusations that he was selling Mexico out to those looking "to steal" its oil, and imply that the industry was falling behind, Buendia added. "The current situation doesn't lend itself at all to bringing this subject up in public."

McAllister, 13 – journalist for Reuters (Edward, “For Obama and Pena Nieto, a delicate 'first dance' around energy”, Reuters, 5-2-13, http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/02/us-energy-usa-mexico-idUSBRE9410GN20130502)//KG

conversation between Obama and Nieto turns to the controversial topic of energy , both are apt to step carefully foreign investment in Mexico will likely only be brought up in private if at all lawmakers engage in an increasingly fierce debate in Washington Whether Obama and Nieto will discuss the more delicate matter of Mexico's allowing foreign investment is unclear Traditionalists who view Pemex as a symbol of Mexican self-sufficiency strongly oppose Buendia, political analyst said Mexico was therefore likely to avoid open talk Raising the subject frankly would lay the new president open to accusations that he was selling Mexico out The current situation doesn't lend itself at all to bringing this subject up in public.

US investment in Mexico controversial

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The 2012 U.S. elections featured a bipartisan race to align campaign positions with the U.S. public’s opposition to status-quo trade policies. Recent polling indicates that U.S. public opinion has intensified from broad opposition to overwhelming opposition to NAFTA-style trade deals. The presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney deployed more than three times as many trade-themed ads as were used in the 2008 presidential race, creating a trade-reform-is-urgently needed narrative that reinforced the majority view of the U.S. public. A Kantar Media study found that presidential campaigns spent an unprecedented $68 million—about $34 million each—in ads attacking more-of-the-same trade policies. Trade-themed presidential ads aired an estimated 83,000 times in 2012, more than twice the number of trade-related airings in 2008. Of the 16 most-targeted media markets for these ads, nine were not located in the free-trade-wary Rust Belt, but in parts of the country that, despite prior support for “free trade,” received a heavy dose of campaigning for trade reform. Following the presidential trend, 57 percent of candidates in competitive congressional races also campaigned on trade policy via ads or campaign websites. Out of more than 125 paid ads used by congressional candidates across 30 U.S. states, only one indicated support for any trade deals modeled on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). (It was from GOP candidate Linda Lingle, who lost her bid for Hawaii’s Senate seat.) Meanwhile, Senate candidates who employed ads against status quo trade won seats in Connecticut, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Wisconsin, increasing the net number of fair-trade members of the Senate by at least six. Such widespread campaigning against more-of-the-same on trade both reflected and reinforced the U.S. public’s broad rejection of the trade status quo enshrined in NAFTA-style “free trade” agreements (FTAs). A May 2012 Angus Reid Public Opinion poll found that U.S. respondents who believe that the United States should “renegotiate” or “leave” NAFTA outnumbered by nearly 4-to-1 those that say the country should “continue to be a member” (53 vs.15 percent). Support for the “leave” or “renegotiate” positions dominated among Republicans, Independents, and Democrats alike. Just 1 in 3 U.S. respondents thought that NAFTA benefitted the overall U.S. economy, and only 1 in 4 saw the pact as having benefitted U.S. workers. Given such results, it is not surprising that the NAFTA-style “free trade” agreements (FTAs) passed by Congress in 2011 with Korea, Panama, and Colombia bring political liability. Immediately after passage, a plurality of U.S. voters expressed opposition to the FTAs in an October 2011 National Journal survey, with Republicans and Democrats showing equivalent levels of opposition. Republicans without a college education opposed the FTAs by a nearly 2-to-1 margin and women expressed especially high opposition. In 2010, while testing Democratic messages for voter response, Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research found that 45 percent of voters were much more likely or somewhat more likely to support a Democratic candidate if he or she were to highlight an opponent’s support of the Colombia, Panama and South Korea FTAs. Of four possible messages, the anti-FTA message was just as powerful in swaying voters as a statement in support of tax cuts for the middle class rather than the rich. The anti-FTA message was more powerful than a message on opposing tax breaks for companies outsourcing U.S. jobs and statements linking the opposing candidate to former President Bush’s policies.

Public Citizen, 12 - nonprofit organization that advocates for the people of the US (“Polling Shows NAFTA-style Trade Deals Becoming Even More Unpopular”, Economy in Crisis, 12-16-12, http://economyincrisis.org/content/18019)//KG

Recent polling indicates that U.S. public opinion has intensified from broad opposition to overwhelming opposition to NAFTA-style trade deals presidential campaigns spent an unprecedented $68 million in ads attacking more-of-the-same trade policies Out of more than 125 paid ads nly one indicated support for any trade deals Senate candidates who employed ads against status quo trade won seats in Connecticut, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Wisconsin Such widespread campaigning against more-of-the-same on trade both reflected and reinforced the U.S. public’s broad rejection of the trade status quo enshrined in NAFTA-style “free trade” agreements U.S. respondents who believe that the United States should “renegotiate” or “leave” NAFTA outnumbered by nearly 4-to-1 those that say the country should “continue to be a member . Just 1 in 3 U.S. respondents thought that NAFTA benefitted the overall U.S. economy, and only 1 in 4 saw the pact as having benefitted U.S. workers. the NAFTA-style “free trade” agreements passed by Congress in 2011 bring political liability Republicans without a college education opposed the FTAs by a nearly 2-to-1 margin and women expressed especially high opposition 45 percent of voters were much more likely or somewhat more likely to support a Democratic candidate if he or she were to highlight an opponent’s support of FTAs the anti-FTA message was just as powerful in swaying voters as a statement in support of tax cuts for the middle class rather than the rich

Large controversy over economic agreements like NAFTA

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

The security challenges faced by each country are real and unavoidable. They should be prioritized, yet balanced with an agenda based on economic opportunity and shared prosperity. The definition and implementation of new, more focused security strategies designed to reduce violence and strengthen the rule of law, within a framework of shared responsibility, may bring new energy and popular support to a difficult ongoing issue.

Castro et al. 12 - (Rafael Fernández de is the Chair, Department of International Studies, Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México, former Foreign Policy Advisor to President Calderón, “A Stronger Future Policy Recommendations for U.S.-Mexico Relations”, Wilson Center, July 11, 12, http://sunnylands.org/files/posts/159/stronger_f.pdf)//sawyer

The security challenges faced by each country are real and unavoidable. They should be prioritized strategies designed to reduce violence and strengthen the rule of law, within a framework of shared responsibility, may bring new energy and popular support to a difficult ongoing issue

Security comes first in relations

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

While PRB’s President Wendy Baldwin has said that population growth has declined to 1.2 percent per year, it still isn’t slow enough. This number means the human population is still growing rather than staying the same. Rather than sending money over to these third-world countries for only food (which of course is important), they should also invest in birth control. Not only would birth control help to slow the population growth rate, but it can also help to prevent the high rate for infant deaths in those countries. Less than 5 percent of people in most countries in Africa use contraceptives according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health. If this number was higher and more people were aware of the benefits of birth control, and it was accessible to them, it would help everyone and the planet overall. According to the International Planned Parenthood Foundation (IPPF), “Promoting birth control in Africa faces a host of obstacles – patriarchal customs, religious taboos, ill-equipped public-health systems – but experts also cite a powerful, more distant force: the U.S. government.” Under President George W. Bush, billions of dollars were given to Africa to help their struggle with AIDS, however, he prohibited its use toward family planning services, according to IPPF. An example of how well family planning and contraceptives can work for the problem with population appears in our very own home. In 1972, the Supreme Court legalized birth control for all United States citizens. Since then, the population growth rate in the U.S. has gone down significantly. If we can find a way to bring our knowledge and access to birth control to everyone on the planet, we can help slow the rates of population growth over time.

Katz 11 – Joelle Katz is a staff writer for the Daily Sundial, (“The problem of overpopulation and how we can work to solve it”, November 20th, 2011, http://sundial.csun.edu/2011/11/the-problem-of-overpopulation-and-how-we-can-work-to-solve-it/)//sawyer

This number means the human population is still growing rather than staying the same. invest in birth control. Not only would birth control help to slow the population growth rate, but it can also help to prevent the high rate for infant deaths in those countries. If this number was higher and more people were aware of the benefits of birth control, and it was accessible to them, it would help everyone and the planet overa experts also cite a powerful, more distant force: the U.S. government.” example of how well family planning and contraceptives can work for the problem with population appears in our very own hom . In 1972, the Supreme Court legalized birth control for all United States citizens. Since then, the population growth rate in the U.S. has gone down significantly. If we can find a way to bring our knowledge and access to birth control to everyone on the planet, we can help slow the rates of population growth over time.

Text: The United States Federal Government should invest in birth control and invest in making birth control accessible worldwide

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013

For decades people have pointed to overgrazing by cattle as the main cause of once-fertile grasslands turning to rapidly eroding, nearly lifeless deserts. These desertified landscapes are then incapable of supporting the livestock themselves, agriculture, or large wild animals who once lived in great numbers on the same land. This is leads to famine and conflict in different areas around the world. Growing up in Kenya, Allan Savory was terribly moved by this. “I grew up loving wildlife and hating livestock,” he said at the TED Conference in Long Beach, California last week (watch his full TED talk in the video above). Two-thirds of the ear The Pachyderm Paradox As a young man he thought the blame also lay with an overpopulation of elephants, and so, despite a deep love for these animals, he recommended and supported the culling of large herds. Over the years this practice has resulted in the intentional killing of more than 40,000 elephants, but no real improvement in the health of grasslands. Realizing what an error he and others had made, Savory confessed, “this was the saddest and gravest mistake of my life.” “Clearly we have never understood desertification,” he added, “which now threatens us globally.” A New Vision Speaking with Allan Savory after his presentation I got some insight into the shift in thinking that occurred next. Our society in general has tended to try to solve problems by breaking them into pieces, isolating elements, and attempting to control complex situations through simple, forced measures. This is all wrong, the way Savory sees it. True, sustainable solutions are found by looking at whole systems, holistically, unconcerned with time, and focused on the restoration of natural balances. For example, when I asked him (in insistent, fast-paced reporter speech) what I could do if I lived in the southern U.S. and had a field overtaken by invasive kudzu, he said very slowly and calmly, “Well… first… I would say ‘Andrew, what do you want out of this land? For yourself… for your children… for your children’s children…’ ” It was at this point I felt my own high energy settle down, and I understood how much of a shift in attitude Allan’s approach to problem solving in conservation really is. People tell him he should put rhinos on the land he has restored. But with poor quality land all around, and a lack of value on conservation, people would just come and poach the rhinos for their horns, he said. When the land is restored, and people’s basic needs are met, and an appreciation of wildlife is the norm, then he’s willing to bring rhinos in. Not before. Allan Savory may be in his seventies, but he’s in no rush to force changes. A holistic view of the problem. A natural source for the solution. Patience. These are the tools Allan Savory works with now. Cows to the Rescue So the failure of earlier attempts combined with his estimation that two-thirds of Earth is now desertifying inspired Savory to search for a new approach to protecting and restoring grasslands. And he found it by thinking naturally and looking backward, not forward. It makes no sense that land that once supported untold millions of grazing animals on massive migrations should be destroyed by the overgrazing of fewer or comparable numbers of livestock in more recent years. And there were areas of the U.S. where cattle had been removed for decades, but the grasslands were still desertifying. Allan Savory says the key to restoring grasslands is to manage livestock to mimic the role once played by vast migrating herds. (Photo by James Duncan Davidson) “Clearly we have never understood desertification,” he said. “What we had failed to understand was that these areas developed with huge numbers of grazing animals [pursued by lots of huge carnivores]. Movement kept them from overgrazing.” This way of the past could also hold the key to the future. “The only option left,” according to Savory, is “to use livestock on the move to mimic the ancient herds.” Keeping cattle more densely packed on smaller plots of land and moving them frequently keeps them from exhausting the supply of living plants, turns scattered droppings into a full blanket of high-quality fertilizer, and keeps the repeated trod of untold tons from packing down the dirt. He’s done it for decades, and the results (seen in the video above) are impressive. “Holistic grazing” keeps more plants alive, adds nutrients to the soil, and creates soil conditions that hold and use water instead of letting it evaporate or run off. It is now practiced by thousands on five continents, and is the focus of the work of the Africa Centre for Holistic Management in Zimbabwe, as well as the Savory Institute in Boulder, Colorado. The Bigger Picture In closing his TED talk, Allan Savory pointed out a critical part of this story beyond preserving complex grassland ecosystems to sustain livestock, agriculture, and wildlife. The amount of plant life lost through desertification over decades has severely compromised Earth’s ability to take carbon dioxide out of the air. Just as we have increased the amount we’re putting into the atmosphere, we’re reducing the amount we take out. There is a remarkable upside to this however. With all of the difficulties of maintaining a productive economy while reducing our carbon output, and mitigating the effects of a warming climate, if we can implement holistic grazing on half of the Earth’s grasslands, according to Allan, “we can take us back to pre-industrial [CO2] levels… and feed people.” It would be wrong to think of changing the way we herd cattle as a silver buller that will solve all of Earth and humanity’s challenges, but as a key step in promoting the kind of long-term, holistic view that Allan Savory has taken, it could go a long way towards repairing the land and our relationship to it.

Howley 13 – Andrew Howley is a member of the National Geographic Mission Programs team, working to share the stories of NG explorers, he cites Allan Savory a Zimbabwean biologist, farmer, soldier, exile, environmentalist, and winner of the 2003 Banksia International Award and the 2010 Buckminster Fuller Challenge, (Andrew, “How Cows Could Repair the World: Allan Savory at TED”, National Geograzphic, March 6, 2013, http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/06/how-cows-could-repair-the-world-allan-savory-at-ted/)//sawyer

For decades people have pointed to overgrazing by cattle as the main cause of once-fertile grasslands turning to rapidly eroding, nearly lifeless deserts These desertified landscapes are then incapable of supporting the livestock themselves, agriculture, or large wild animals who once lived in great numbers on the same land. This is leads to famine and conflict in different areas around the world. Clearly we have never understood desertification,” he added, “which now threatens us globally. This is all wrong, the way Savory sees it. True, sustainable solutions are found by looking at whole systems, holistically, unconcerned with time, and focused on the restoration of natural balances. . A natural source for the solution. Patience. These are the tools Allan Savory works with now. Cows to the Rescue So the failure of earlier attempts combined with his estimation that two-thirds of Earth is now desertifying inspired Savory to search for a new approach to protecting and restoring grasslands. And there were areas of the U.S. where cattle had been removed for decades, but the grasslands were still desertifying. Allan Savory says the key to restoring grasslands is to manage livestock to mimic the role once played by vast migrating herds. “The only option left,” according to Savory, is “to use livestock on the move to mimic the ancient herds.” Keeping cattle more densely packed on smaller plots of land and moving them frequently keeps them from exhausting the supply of living plants, turns scattered droppings into a full blanket of high-quality fertilizer, and keeps the repeated trod of untold tons from packing down the dirt. He’s done it for decades, and the results (seen in the video above) are impressive. Holistic grazing” keeps more plants alive, adds nutrients to the soil, and creates soil conditions that hold and use water instead of letting it evaporate or run off. The amount of plant life lost through desertification over decades has severely compromised Earth’s ability to take carbon dioxide out of the air. Just as we have increased the amount we’re putting into the atmosphere, we’re reducing the amount we take out. There is a remarkable upside to this however. With all of the difficulties of maintaining a productive economy while reducing our carbon output, and mitigating the effects of a warming climate if we can implement holistic grazing on half of the Earth’s grasslands, according to Allan, “we can take us back to pre-industrial [CO2] levels… and feed people .” It would be wrong to think of changing the way we herd cattle as a silver buller that will solve all of Earth and humanity’s challenges, but as a key step in promoting the kind of long-term, holistic view that Allan Savory has taken, it could go a long way towards repairing the land and our relationship to it.

Text: The United States Government should force implementation of holistic grazing throughout the United States

NAIF Neg - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5

Michigan (7-week)

Case Negatives

2013