Datasets:

Hellisotherpeople

/

OpenCaseList-Deduplicated

like 0

Internal conflict within Syria is flaring up as Al Jazeera warrants in 2022 that:

Al Jazeera 2022

Al Jazeera, 9-14-2022, “Syria could return ‘to larger-scale fighting’, UN warns,” Al Jazeera https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/14/syria-headed-to-to-larger-scale-fighting-un-warns-in-report Date Accessed 12-8-2022//JE

Syria is on the verge of another flare-up that could spell a return to large-scale combat . Millions are suffering and dying in displacement camps, while resources are becoming scarcer and donor fatigue is rising Hundreds of thousands of people have died

Syria is on the verge of another flare-up that could spell a return to large-scale combat . Millions are suffering and dying in displacement camps, while resources are becoming scarcer and donor fatigue is rising Hundreds of thousands of people have died

Syria is on the verge of another flare-up that could spell a return to large-scale combat, the United Nations has warned in a new report. “Today, Syrians face increasing and intolerable hardships, living among the ruins of this lengthy conflict. Millions are suffering and dying in displacement camps, while resources are becoming scarcer and donor fatigue is rising,” said Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, chair of the UN’s Syria commission. “Syria cannot afford a return to larger-scale fighting, but that is where it may be heading,” he said on Wednesday. In recent months, an intensification along Syria’s northern front has increased the suffering of citizens, warned the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic in its report. Hundreds of thousands of people have died and millions have been made homeless since protests against President Bashar al-Assad in 2011 escalated into a civil war that drew in foreign powers and left Syria carved into zones controlled by rival parties. The commission’s latest 50-page report on the human rights situation in Syria, which covers the period January 1 to June 30, said that many parties are complicit. Under the threat of another Turkish ground operation, the commission recorded continued mobilisation and fighting between Turkish and Turkish-backed forces and Kurdish-led forces in the north. “We also see continued operations by Israel, as well as the US, Turkey and Iran-backed forces, in this protracted conflict,” commissioner Lynn Welchman warned. In addition, Russia is still actively supporting the Syrian government, particularly concerning air strikes that have killed civilians and targeted food and water sources. Families living in front-line areas have borne the brunt of pro-government forces’ ground-to-ground shelling in these areas, the report documented, with “children killed on their way to school, men killed as they tended to their shops, and an entire family killed as they gathered outside their home for afternoon tea.” “Tens of thousands of Syrians remain forcibly disappeared or missing to date. Government forces continue to inflict cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment on the relatives of the missing by deliberately concealing the fate and whereabouts of the missing,” the report outlined. Families’ search for their loved ones in Syria – often undertaken by women – is fraught with the danger of being arrested, extorted and abused. The United Nations said fault lines between various areas are now starting to heat up again.“We had an idea at some point that the war was completely finished in Syria,” Pinheiro told journalists in Geneva, adding that incidents documented in the report proved this was not the case. The report found that “grave violations of fundamental human rights and humanitarian law” had increased across the country in the first six months of this year. Russian air raids over opposition-held areas had increased in the last few months, said commissioner Hanny Megally. “We are seeing increasing violence,” Megally told reporters. The report also documented more than a dozen Israeli strikes across Syria in the first six months of 2022, including an attack on Damascus International Airport that put the site out of commission for nearly two weeks. The UN revealed on Wednesday that it had been unable to fly in humanitarian assistance to Syria during that time. Across the country, the UN also documented cases of people and families who have been unable to return to their hometowns and villages because their properties were confiscated by forces, or because they cannot return to their properties and land, fearing arbitrary detention. Against this backdrop, the commission noted that some neighbouring countries are creating concrete plans for mass returns of Syrian refugees. “Returns must be a choice and take place in a safe, dignified, and voluntary manner,” Pinheiro said.

<h4>Internal conflict within Syria is flaring up as Al Jazeera warrants in 2022 that:</h4><p><u><strong>Al Jazeera</u></strong>, 9-14-<u><strong>2022</u></strong>, “Syria could return ‘to larger-scale fighting’, UN warns,” Al Jazeera https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/9/14/syria-headed-to-to-larger-scale-fighting-un-warns-in-report Date Accessed 12-8-2022//JE</p><p><u><strong><mark>Syria is on the verge of another flare-up that could spell a return to large-scale combat</u></strong></mark>, the United Nations has warned in a new report. “Today, Syrians face increasing and intolerable hardships, living among the ruins of this lengthy conflict<u><strong><mark>. Millions are suffering and dying in displacement camps, while resources are becoming scarcer and donor fatigue is rising</u></strong></mark>,” said Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, chair of the UN’s Syria commission. “Syria cannot afford a return to larger-scale fighting, but that is where it may be heading,” he said on Wednesday. In recent months, an intensification along Syria’s northern front has increased the suffering of citizens, warned the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic in its report. <u><strong><mark>Hundreds of thousands of people have died</u></strong></mark> and millions have been made homeless since protests against President Bashar al-Assad in 2011 escalated into a civil war that drew in foreign powers and left Syria carved into zones controlled by rival parties. The commission’s latest 50-page report on the human rights situation in Syria, which covers the period January 1 to June 30, said that many parties are complicit. Under the threat of another Turkish ground operation, the commission recorded continued mobilisation and fighting between Turkish and Turkish-backed forces and Kurdish-led forces in the north. “We also see continued operations by Israel, as well as the US, Turkey and Iran-backed forces, in this protracted conflict,” commissioner Lynn Welchman warned. In addition, Russia is still actively supporting the Syrian government, particularly concerning air strikes that have killed civilians and targeted food and water sources. Families living in front-line areas have borne the brunt of pro-government forces’ ground-to-ground shelling in these areas, the report documented, with “children killed on their way to school, men killed as they tended to their shops, and an entire family killed as they gathered outside their home for afternoon tea.” “Tens of thousands of Syrians remain forcibly disappeared or missing to date. Government forces continue to inflict cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment on the relatives of the missing by deliberately concealing the fate and whereabouts of the missing,” the report outlined. Families’ search for their loved ones in Syria – often undertaken by women – is fraught with the danger of being arrested, extorted and abused. The United Nations said fault lines between various areas are now starting to heat up again.“We had an idea at some point that the war was completely finished in Syria,” Pinheiro told journalists in Geneva, adding that incidents documented in the report proved this was not the case. The report found that “grave violations of fundamental human rights and humanitarian law” had increased across the country in the first six months of this year. Russian air raids over opposition-held areas had increased in the last few months, said commissioner Hanny Megally. “We are seeing increasing violence,” Megally told reporters. The report also documented more than a dozen Israeli strikes across Syria in the first six months of 2022, including an attack on Damascus International Airport that put the site out of commission for nearly two weeks. The UN revealed on Wednesday that it had been unable to fly in humanitarian assistance to Syria during that time. Across the country, the UN also documented cases of people and families who have been unable to return to their hometowns and villages because their properties were confiscated by forces, or because they cannot return to their properties and land, fearing arbitrary detention. Against this backdrop, the commission noted that some neighbouring countries are creating concrete plans for mass returns of Syrian refugees. “Returns must be a choice and take place in a safe, dignified, and voluntary manner,” Pinheiro said.</p>

C1: Syria

./documents/hspf22/MaristSchool/EsHo1/MaristSchool-EsHo1-Pro-Sunvite-All-Rounds.docx

A

Sunvite

All

All Aff Rounds

Aff Rounds

hspf22/MaristSchool/EsHo1/MaristSchool-EsHo1-Pro-Sunvite-All-Rounds.docx

2023-01-20 22:31:31

EsHo1

Marist School EsHo1

Ka.....

Es.....

Ma.....

Ho.....

MaristSchool

Marist School

GA

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Human trafficking (HT) has been described as modern-day slavery and affects women and children as the industry reinforces women as inferior in society

M’Cormack 11, writer for GSDRC, 2011

M’Cormack 11, writer for GSDRC, 2011 [Freida. Governance and Social Development Resource Centre. Helpdesk Research Report: The impact of human trafficking on people and countries. August 12, 2011. http://gsdrc.org/docs/open/hd780.pdf

The impacts of human trafficking fall disproportionately on women and children, who are the main victims, largely trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation That this is a billion dollar industry is a continued expression of unequal power relations that reinforce women’s secondary status in society It goes without saying that trafficked victims are stripped of their human rights. Trafficked people are subject to all manner of human rights violations, not least of all the rights to life, liberty and freedom from slavery. Trafficked children are deprived of the right to grow up in a protective environment, and to be free from sexual exploitation and abuse

The impacts of human trafficking fall disproportionately on women and children, who are the main victims . That this is a billion dollar industry , is a continued expression of unequal power relations that reinforce women’s secondary status Trafficked people are subject to all manner of human rights violations, not least of all the rights to life, liberty and freedom from slavery

Gender equity and human rights The impacts of human trafficking fall disproportionately on women and children, who are the main victims, largely trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation. That this is a billion dollar industry, worldwide, and growing, is a continued expression of unequal power relations that reinforce women’s secondary status in society. It goes without saying that trafficked victims are stripped of their human rights. Trafficked people are subject to all manner of human rights violations, not least of all the rights to life, liberty and freedom from slavery. Trafficked children are deprived of the right to grow up in a protective environment, and to be free from sexual exploitation and abuse (US State Department 2004). Less considered are the rights to adequate healthcare, education, a decent work environment, and freedom from discrimination, to name a few (Todres 2006).

<h4>Human trafficking (HT) has been described as modern-day slavery and affects women and children as the industry reinforces women as inferior in society</h4><p><u><strong>M’Cormack 11</u>, writer for GSDRC, 2011</strong> [Freida. Governance and Social Development Resource Centre. Helpdesk Research Report: The impact of human trafficking on people and countries. August 12, 2011. http://gsdrc.org/docs/open/hd780.pdf </p><p>Gender equity and human rights <u><strong><mark>The impacts of human trafficking fall disproportionately on women and children, who are the main victims</mark>, largely trafficked for commercial sexual exploitation</u></strong><mark>. <u><strong>That this is a billion dollar industry</u></strong></mark>, worldwide, and growing<mark>, <u><strong>is a continued expression of unequal power relations that reinforce women’s secondary status</mark> in society</u></strong>. <u><strong>It goes without saying that trafficked victims are stripped of their human rights.</u></strong> <u><strong><mark>Trafficked people are subject to all manner of human rights violations, not least of all the rights to life, liberty and freedom from slavery</mark>. Trafficked children are deprived of the right to grow up in a protective environment, and to be free from sexual exploitation and abuse</u></strong> (US State Department 2004). Less considered are the rights to adequate healthcare, education, a decent work environment, and freedom from discrimination, to name a few (Todres 2006).</p>

130- Contention 1 is Human Trafficking

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-2.docx

N

Tournament of Champions

2

Princeton LT

Horne

hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-2.docx

2023-04-15 16:41:38

GlLa

NSU GlLa

Re.....

Gl.....

Al.....

La.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Unfortunately, a ban on personal data collection wrecks anti-trafficking efforts

Osoba and Yeung 20

Osoba and Yeung 20 (Osonde A. Osoba -- Codirector, Center for Scalable Computing and Analysis; Senior Information Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School, Douglas Yeung -- Associate Director, Management, Technology, and Capabilities Program, RAND Homeland Security Research Division; Senior Behavioral and Social Scientist; Faculty Member, Pardee RAND Graduate School, “Bans on Facial Recognition Are Naive. Hold Law Enforcement Accountable for Its Abuse,” 06-17-20, https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/06/bans-on-facial-recognition-are-nave-hold-law-enforcement.html //AL)

banning facial recognition isn't necessarily the best response. Facial recognition has useful government applications as well including identifying missing children or trafficked people

banning facial recognition isn't necessarily the best response. Facial recognition has useful government applications as well including identifying missing children or trafficked people

Facial recognition technologies—with the assumptions of their developers embedded in their code—often perform poorly at recognizing women, older people, and those with darker skin. There's little question that these flaws exist. But banning facial recognition isn't necessarily the best response. We do not blind ourselves just because our eyes are imperfect. We learn to calibrate our trust in our vision—or we buy glasses. Technology is not so different. Even systems with known weaknesses remain important for scaling up public services. Many of us file taxes or apply for benefits on the internet, for example, even though we know such sites are vulnerable to inadvertent or malicious disruptions. Facial recognition has useful government applications as well, including airport security screening, contract tracing, and identifying missing children or trafficked people.

<h4>Unfortunately, a ban on personal data collection wrecks anti-trafficking efforts</h4><p><strong>Osoba and Yeung 20</strong> (Osonde A. Osoba -- Codirector, Center for Scalable Computing and Analysis; Senior Information Scientist; Professor, Pardee RAND Graduate School, Douglas Yeung -- Associate Director, Management, Technology, and Capabilities Program, RAND Homeland Security Research Division; Senior Behavioral and Social Scientist; Faculty Member, Pardee RAND Graduate School, “Bans on Facial Recognition Are Naive. Hold Law Enforcement Accountable for Its Abuse,” 06-17-20, https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/06/bans-on-facial-recognition-are-nave-hold-law-enforcement.html //AL)</p><p>Facial recognition technologies—with the assumptions of their developers embedded in their code—often perform poorly at recognizing women, older people, and those with darker skin. There's little question that these flaws exist. But <u><strong><mark>banning facial recognition isn't necessarily the best response.</strong></mark> </u>We do not blind ourselves just because our eyes are imperfect. We learn to calibrate our trust in our vision—or we buy glasses. Technology is not so different. Even systems with known weaknesses remain important for scaling up public services. Many of us file taxes or apply for benefits on the internet, for example, even though we know such sites are vulnerable to inadvertent or malicious disruptions. <u><strong><mark>Facial recognition has useful government applications as well</u></strong></mark>, <u><strong><mark>including</u></strong></mark> airport security screening, contract tracing, and <u><strong><mark>identifying missing children or trafficked people</u></mark>.</p></strong>

130- Contention 1 is Human Trafficking

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-2.docx

N

Tournament of Champions

2

Princeton LT

Horne

hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-2.docx

2023-04-15 16:41:38

GlLa

NSU GlLa

Re.....

Gl.....

Al.....

La.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Empirics prove this as

RecFaces 22

RecFaces 22(RecFaces is a biometric company that tries to help businesses) Not by passport, but by face»: industries in which facial biometrics become indispensable” 04-21-22, https://recfaces.com/articles/no-passport-only-face )//RG

Since 2015, the nonprofit group Thorn uses facial recognition to help find underage sex trafficking victims in online ads was used in 40,000 cases in North America,[and] helped save 15,000 children and identify 17,000 traffickers Facial recognition helps investigators narrow the range of suspects faster, find missing children, rescue trafficking victims,

Since 2015, the nonprofit group Thorn uses facial recognition to help find underage sex trafficking victims in online ads was used in 40,000 cases in North America,[and] helped save 15,000 children and identify 17,000 traffickers Facial recognition helps investigators narrow the range of suspects faster, find missing children, rescue trafficking victims,

Since 2015, the nonprofit group Thorn has been providing a tool called Spotlight, which uses facial recognition among other technologies to help find underage sex trafficking victims in online ads. Spotlight was used in 40,000 cases in North America,[and] helped save 15,000 children and identify 17,000 traffickers, according to reports. n 2019, a California law enforcement officer saw a missing child report on social media from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The officer took advantage of Spotlight to return a list of online sexual services ads involving the girl. As it turned out, the girl was «sold for several weeks,» and the actions of the authorities laid the foundation for a process that «saved the girl from injury. The past decade has seen the successful introduction and use of facial recognition technology as an effective tool in thousands of state and local law enforcement authorities' investigations across the globe. Many members of public safety agencies believe that this technology is becoming a decisive factor in ensuring the safety of society, pointing to cases where, without it, crimes would not have been solved or prevented. Facial recognition helps investigators narrow the range of suspects faster, find missing children, rescue trafficking victims, exonerate innocent people, seek justice for victims, identify the dead and benefit our society in many other ways. In law enforcement authorities the technology helps analysts in cases where they cannot use other means to verify identity and establish sufficient legal basis of the arrest.

<h4>Empirics prove this as </h4><p><strong>RecFaces 22</strong>(RecFaces is a biometric company that tries to help businesses) Not by passport, but by face»: industries in which facial biometrics become indispensable” 04-21-22, https://recfaces.com/articles/no-passport-only-face )//RG</p><p><u><strong><mark>Since 2015, the nonprofit group Thorn</u></strong></mark> has been providing a tool called Spotlight, which <u><strong><mark>uses facial recognition</mark> </u></strong>among other technologies <u><strong><mark>to help find underage sex trafficking victims in online ads</u></strong></mark>. Spotlight <u><strong><mark>was used in 40,000 cases in North America,[and] helped save 15,000 children and identify 17,000 traffickers</u></strong></mark>, according to reports. n 2019, a California law enforcement officer saw a missing child report on social media from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The officer took advantage of Spotlight to return a list of online sexual services ads involving the girl. As it turned out, the girl was «sold for several weeks,» and the actions of the authorities laid the foundation for a process that «saved the girl from injury. The past decade has seen the successful introduction and use of facial recognition technology as an effective tool in thousands of state and local law enforcement authorities' investigations across the globe. Many members of public safety agencies believe that this technology is becoming a decisive factor in ensuring the safety of society, pointing to cases where, without it, crimes would not have been solved or prevented. <u><strong><mark>Facial recognition helps investigators narrow the range of suspects faster, find missing children, rescue trafficking victims,</u></strong></mark> exonerate innocent people, seek justice for victims, identify the dead and benefit our society in many other ways. In law enforcement authorities the technology helps analysts in cases where they cannot use other means to verify identity and establish sufficient legal basis of the arrest.</p>

130- Contention 1 is Human Trafficking

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-1.docx

N

Tournament of Champions

1

University AW

Shi

hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-1.docx

2023-04-15 15:05:26

GlLa

NSU GlLa

Re.....

Gl.....

Al.....

La.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Indeed, Patient misidentification costs each hospital almost 20 million dollars per year.

Landi 16

Landi 16( Heather Landi- author for healthcare innovation. “or Hospitals, Patient Misidentification Impacts Patient Safety, Productivity and the Bottom Line” 12-14-2016, https://www.hcinnovationgroup.com/finance-revenue-cycle/article/13027873/for-hospitals-patient-misidentification-impacts-patient-safety-productivity-and-the-bottom-line )//RG

Patient misidentification costs the average clinician close to 30 minutes in wasted time per shift and contributes to 35 percent of all medical claims being denied, which is an estimated loss of $17.4 million per year per hospital, This is a productivity hit for healthcare, which also impacts the speed with which patient care is provided,” the researchers wrote in the report. Survey participants also provided insights into what they see as the root causes of patient misidentification. It seems that misidentification starts at the beginning of the patient’s experience, at registration. Sixty-three percent of respondents cited incorrect identification of patients at registration, such as incorrect armband placement, as a root cause of the problem. Respondents also cited the time pressure when treating patients as a major contributor to patient misidentification (cited by 60 percent of respondents)

Patient misidentification costs the average clinician close to 30 minutes in wasted time per shift and contributes to 35 percent of all medical claims being denied, which is an estimated loss of $17.4 million per year per hospital, This is a productivity hit for healthcare, which also impacts the speed with which patient care is provided,”

Patient misidentification costs the average clinician close to 30 minutes in wasted time per shift and contributes to 35 percent of all medical claims being denied, which is an estimated loss of $17.4 million per year per hospital, according to research by The Ponemon Institute. The Ponemon Institute sought to examine the root causes of patient misidentification and its impact on healthcare organizations and their patients. The findings of the survey are presented in the “2016 National Patient Misidentification Report,” in collaboration with Imprivata, a healthcare IT security company.As the healthcare industry has transitioned to digital health records, patient misidentification has become a widespread problem and one that carries significant consequences that negatively impact patient care and the hospital’s financial performance. Patient misidentification can result in medical errors, financial loss, loss in clinical productivity and a negative impact on the patient experience. The patient care experience is also impacted through misidentification as it results in delays of care. Sixty-nine percent of respondents agree that up to or more than 30 minutes per shift are spent contacting medical records or HIM departments to get critical information about their patients. Further, 37 percent of healthcare professionals say up to an hour or more than one hour is spent contacting medical records to get critical patient information. “This is a productivity hit for healthcare, which also impacts the speed with which patient care is provided,” the researchers wrote in the report. Survey participants also provided insights into what they see as the root causes of patient misidentification. It seems that misidentification starts at the beginning of the patient’s experience, at registration. Sixty-three percent of respondents cited incorrect identification of patients at registration, such as incorrect armband placement, as a root cause of the problem. Respondents also cited the time pressure when treating patients as a major contributor to patient misidentification (cited by 60 percent of respondents)

<h4><strong>Indeed, Patient misidentification costs each hospital almost 20 million dollars per year.</h4><p>Landi 16</strong>( Heather Landi- author for healthcare innovation. “or Hospitals, Patient Misidentification Impacts Patient Safety, Productivity and the Bottom Line” 12-14-2016, https://www.hcinnovationgroup.com/finance-revenue-cycle/article/13027873/for-hospitals-patient-misidentification-impacts-patient-safety-productivity-and-the-bottom-line )//RG</p><p><u><strong><mark>Patient misidentification costs the average clinician close to 30 minutes in wasted time per shift and contributes to 35 percent of all medical claims being denied, which is an estimated loss of $17.4 million per year per hospital,</u></strong></mark> according to research by The Ponemon Institute. The Ponemon Institute sought to examine the root causes of patient misidentification and its impact on healthcare organizations and their patients. The findings of the survey are presented in the “2016 National Patient Misidentification Report,” in collaboration with Imprivata, a healthcare IT security company.As the healthcare industry has transitioned to digital health records, patient misidentification has become a widespread problem and one that carries significant consequences that negatively impact patient care and the hospital’s financial performance. Patient misidentification can result in medical errors, financial loss, loss in clinical productivity and a negative impact on the patient experience. The patient care experience is also impacted through misidentification as it results in delays of care. Sixty-nine percent of respondents agree that up to or more than 30 minutes per shift are spent contacting medical records or HIM departments to get critical information about their patients. Further, 37 percent of healthcare professionals say up to an hour or more than one hour is spent contacting medical records to get critical patient information. “<u><strong><mark>This is a productivity hit for healthcare, which also impacts the speed with which patient care is provided,”</mark> the researchers wrote in the report. Survey participants also provided insights into what they see as the root causes of patient misidentification. It seems that misidentification starts at the beginning of the patient’s experience, at registration. Sixty-three percent of respondents cited incorrect identification of patients at registration, such as incorrect armband placement, as a root cause of the problem. Respondents also cited the time pressure when treating patients as a major contributor to patient misidentification (cited by 60 percent of respondents)</p></u></strong>

Contention X is Healthcare

Extra on rare diseases

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-1.docx

N

Tournament of Champions

1

University AW

Shi

hspf22/NSU/GlLa/NSU-GlLa-Con-Tournament-of-Champions-Round-1.docx

2023-04-15 15:05:26

GlLa

NSU GlLa

Re.....

Gl.....

Al.....

La.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Deportation is terrible, particularly for children

Parmet 18

Parmet, Sharon 8/1/18 “Effects of deportation, forced separation extend beyond individuals, families” UIC today, https://today.uic.edu/effects-of-deportation-forced-separation-extend-beyond-individuals-families///DOA:3/20/23 NSD

The deportation and forced separation of immigrant families crossing into the United States has psychological effects on individuals and families and gives rise to a public health crisis that can affect entire communities Children who lose a parent to sudden, forced deportation experience anxiety, anger, aggression, withdrawal, a heightened sense of fear, eating and sleeping disturbances, isolation, trauma and depression. Children also experience housing instability, academic withdrawal and family dissolution. Almost 6 million children have at least one caregiver who lacks the authorization to live in the country. Several mental health consequences unfold when immigrants are fearful of being targeted, including withdrawal from civic engagement, according to Rusch. They are also less likely to report abuse, seek medical or mental health treatment, or access other needed programs

Children who lose a parent to deportation experience anxiety, aggression, withdrawal, a heightened sense of fear and sleeping disturbances, isolation, trauma and depression. Children also experience housing instability, academic withdrawal and family dissolution. Almost 6 million children have at least one caregiver who lacks the authorization to live in the country

The deportation and forced separation of immigrant families crossing into the United States has psychological effects on individuals and families and gives rise to a public health crisis that can affect entire communities, according to a new report published in the American Journal of Community Psychology. The statement is from the Society for Community Research and Action of Division 27 of the American Psychological Association. “We wanted to create a document that lawyers, community advocates, elected officials and others could use that summarizes the research on the impact of deportation and family separation of immigrants to support more humane policies and programs,” said Dana Rusch, assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine, and a co-author of the report. The authors of the report looked at scientific literature from the last 30 years that examined U.S. immigration policy and described the psychosocial and economic impacts of deportation on children, families and communities. They found that: Children who lose a parent to sudden, forced deportation experience anxiety, anger, aggression, withdrawal, a heightened sense of fear, eating and sleeping disturbances, isolation, trauma and depression. Children also experience housing instability, academic withdrawal and family dissolution. Older children often need to take on jobs to help support the family. Ten percent of U.S. families with children have at least one family member who lacks citizenship. Almost 6 million children have at least one caregiver who lacks the authorization to live in the country. In the mid-1990s, there were approximately 180,000 deportations each year — a number that has since increased to 340,000 deportations in 2017.Immigration raids and deportations generate fear and mistrust that have ripple effects. Fearful of being targeted, community members become less likely to participate in churches, schools, health clinics, cultural activities and social services. “The fear, depression and trauma that children and parents experience when separated because of immigration policies are normal reactions to a very abnormal situation,” Rusch said of family separations that leave children without a parent, even if temporarily. “And the psychological effects of separation reverberate throughout the community for a long time.” “Separating families and deporting adults has an incredible toll on youth and families,” says Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar, professor of occupational therapy in the UIC College of Applied Health Sciences and a co-author of the report. “These children are growing up without their parents and loved ones and are affected by psychological and social trauma, which can have life-long impacts. This is also inhumane and not consistent with our moral values.” Suarez-Balcazar is also president of the Society for Community Research and Action (Division 27 of the American Psychological Association). Several mental health consequences unfold when immigrants are fearful of being targeted, including withdrawal from civic engagement, according to Rusch. They are also less likely to report abuse, seek medical or mental health treatment, or access other needed programs, she explained.

<h4>Deportation is terrible, particularly for children</h4><p><u><strong><mark>Parmet</u></strong></mark>, Sharon 8/1/<u><strong><mark>18</u></strong> </mark>“Effects of deportation, forced separation extend beyond individuals, families” UIC today, https://today.uic.edu/effects-of-deportation-forced-separation-extend-beyond-individuals-families///DOA:3/20/23 NSD</p><p><u><strong>The deportation and forced separation of immigrant families crossing into the United States has psychological effects on individuals and families and gives rise to a public health crisis that can affect entire communities</u></strong>, according to a new report published in the American Journal of Community Psychology. The statement is from the Society for Community Research and Action of Division 27 of the American Psychological Association. “We wanted to create a document that lawyers, community advocates, elected officials and others could use that summarizes the research on the impact of deportation and family separation of immigrants to support more humane policies and programs,” said Dana Rusch, assistant professor of clinical psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine, and a co-author of the report. The authors of the report looked at scientific literature from the last 30 years that examined U.S. immigration policy and described the psychosocial and economic impacts of deportation on children, families and communities. They found that: <u><strong><mark>Children who lose a parent to </mark>sudden, forced <mark>deportation experience anxiety,</mark> anger, <mark>aggression, withdrawal, a heightened sense of fear</mark>, eating<mark> and sleeping disturbances, isolation, trauma and depression. Children also experience housing instability, academic withdrawal and family dissolution.</u></strong></mark> Older children often need to take on jobs to help support the family. Ten percent of U.S. families with children have at least one family member who lacks citizenship.<u><strong> <mark>Almost 6 million children have at least one caregiver who lacks the authorization to live in the country</mark>. </u></strong>In the mid-1990s, there were approximately 180,000 deportations each year — a number that has since increased to 340,000 deportations in 2017.Immigration raids and deportations generate fear and mistrust that have ripple effects. Fearful of being targeted, community members become less likely to participate in churches, schools, health clinics, cultural activities and social services. “The fear, depression and trauma that children and parents experience when separated because of immigration policies are normal reactions to a very abnormal situation,” Rusch said of family separations that leave children without a parent, even if temporarily. “And the psychological effects of separation reverberate throughout the community for a long time.” “Separating families and deporting adults has an incredible toll on youth and families,” says Yolanda Suarez-Balcazar, professor of occupational therapy in the UIC College of Applied Health Sciences and a co-author of the report. “These children are growing up without their parents and loved ones and are affected by psychological and social trauma, which can have life-long impacts. This is also inhumane and not consistent with our moral values.” Suarez-Balcazar is also president of the Society for Community Research and Action (Division 27 of the American Psychological Association). <u><strong>Several mental health consequences unfold when immigrants are fearful of being targeted, including withdrawal from civic engagement, according to Rusch. They are also less likely to report abuse, seek medical or mental health treatment, or access other needed programs</u></strong>, she explained.</p>

Contention one is deportation

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should ban the collection of personal data through biometric recognition technology.

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

A

tournament of champions

1

Taipei America YH

Andy Wang

hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

2023-04-15 14:52:28

SiDa

Lakeville SiDa

Au.....

Si.....

Na.....

Da.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Second is targeting children in schools.

Kofman 18

Kofman 18 (Ava Kofman, The Intercept, 5-30-2018, [“Face Recognition is Now Being Used in Schools, But it Won’t Stop Mass Shootings” https://theintercept.com/2018/05/30/face-recognition-schools-school-shootings/] DOA: 3-20-2023 MRC)

purchase of surveillance technology appears inefficient and expensive. All of the major school shootings in the last five years in the U.S. have been carried out by current students or alumnae of the school in question. “These are students for whom the school wouldn’t have a reason to have their face entered into the face recognition system’s blacklist,” The object recognition system seems similarly pointless Most shooters don’t brandish their guns before opening fire; and by the time they do, an object-detection algorithm that could specify the exact type of weapon they’re firing would not be of much use. the technology would give a school, at best, only a few extra seconds in response time to a shooting. most shootings typically end within seconds — so that face or weapon recognition would provide about as much real-time value as a 911 call. privacy experts fear that the primary function of the technology will be to expand the surveillance and criminalization of adolescents. administrators will be able to use the system to “follow” those who commit infractions. surveillance powers are likely to be wielded disproportionately against students of color, who already face disciplinary bias at school. black and Latino children are routinely viewed as more dangerous than their white peers, regardless of their behavior Black students are not more likely to misbehave than white students, yet they are more likely to be suspended, receive corporal punishment, or have a school-related arrest Civil rights attorneys raised questions about whether biometric data collected at schools like Lockport might fuel not only the school-to-prison pipeline, but also deportations. Schools might share their biometric data with law enforcement and, in turn, with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) ICE has arrested undocumented parents as they dropped their kids off at school, and ICE was recently granted access to at least one automatic license plate reader database. Face recognition has already been installed in high schools in Magnolia, Arkansas, and St. Louis. A school district in New Mexico deploys shot-spotter technology, which notifies police at the first sound of gunfire, while another district in New York has acquired automatic license plate readers In Iowa and Texas, among others, school districts have equipped law enforcement and school resource officers with body-worn cameras. Privacy advocates are also concerned about the kind of lessons that early, invasive surveillance teaches students about the society we live in. “Communities and schools need to think hard about what type [of] message they are sending to our kids when they monitor them in school like they were prisoners in a detention facility,” The technology’s cost becomes particularly troubling when one considers that it may not even work. Some facial recognition software performs poorly. U.K. police made headlines recently when documents revealed that one system in Wales turned up false matches 92 percent of the time. the technology is more prone to err when dealing with black faces, as several studies have shown. darker-skinned women were up to 35 percent more likely to be misrecognized by some face recognition algorithms the technology is less effective on children schools are emphasizing policing at the expense of teaching. “In a time when we cannot afford to pay our teachers a decent wage,” said Andrew Ferguson, a policing and civil rights expert, “I cannot fathom any school district paying money for this type of security theater.”

biometric data collected at schools might fuel deportations. Schools might share their biometric data with (ICE) ICE has arrested undocumented parents as they dropped their kids off at school,

OFFICIALS AT THE Lockport, New York, school district have purchased face recognition technology as part of a purported effort to prevent school shootings. Starting in September, all 10 of Lockport District’s school buildings, just north of Buffalo, will be outfitted with a surveillance system that can identify faces and objects. The software, known as Aegis, was developed by SN Technologies Corp., a Canadian biometrics firm that specifically advertises to schools. It can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school’s “blacklist” enters the premises. Aegis also sends alerts any time one of the “top 10” most popular guns used in school shootings appears in view of a camera. The district is spending most of its recent $4 million state “Smart School” grant on these and other enhancements to its security systems, including bullet-proof greeter windows and a mass notification system, according to the Niagra Gazette. “We always have to be on our guard. We can’t let our guard down,” Lockport Superintendent Michelle T. Bradley told the Buffalo News. “For the Board of Education and the Lockport City School District, this is the No. 1 priority: school security.” Yet given the nature of gun violence at schools, Lockport’s purchase of surveillance technology appears inefficient and expensive. All of the major school shootings in the last five years in the U.S. have been carried out by current students or alumnae of the school in question. “These are students for whom the school wouldn’t have a reason to have their face entered into the face recognition system’s blacklist,” explained Rachel Levinson-Waldman, a security and policing expert at the Brennan Center for Justice. The object recognition system seems similarly pointless, she said. Most shooters don’t brandish their guns before opening fire; and by the time they do, an object-detection algorithm that could specify the exact type of weapon they’re firing would not be of much use. As Jim Shultz, a Lockport parent, pointed out to the Buffalo News, the technology would give a school, at best, only a few extra seconds in response time to a shooting. What’s more, most shootings typically end within seconds — so that face or weapon recognition would provide about as much real-time value as a 911 call. Lockport schools, Shultz added, have already instituted preventative — albeit less flashy — measures, such as keeping doors locked and requiring visitors to check in. Because face recognition appears uniquely ill-suited to respond directly to school shootings — which are themselves statistically rare events — privacy experts fear that the primary function of the technology will be to expand the surveillance and criminalization of adolescents. “Whether it was intended to be this way or not, Lockport’s technology is effectively going to be a surveillance system and not a safety system,” Levinson-Waldman said. Lockport’s system will store data for up to 60 days. Students will not be automatically entered into its database, but administrators will be able to use the system to “follow” those who commit infractions. “If we had a student who committed some type of offense against the code of conduct, we can follow that student throughout the day to see maybe who they interacted with,” one school official said. Levinson-Waldman says that such surveillance powers are likely to be wielded disproportionately against students of color, who already face disciplinary bias at school. Several studies have shown that black and Latino children are routinely viewed as more dangerous than their white peers, regardless of their behavior. Black students are not more likely to misbehave than white students, yet they are more likely to be suspended, receive corporal punishment, or have a school-related arrest, according to a Government Accountability Office report released in April. “This is going to exacerbate the racial disparities you already see, whether it’s about monitoring or enforcement,” said John Cusick, a fellow at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Students who are already subject to police surveillance in their neighborhoods, he added, will now have to face the same environment at their school. Research by the NAACP LDF and others suggests that putting police officers in schools increases the number of students who end up incarcerated for harmless incidents. “Face recognition might curtail how students interact. They might be afraid of being linked to other students or engaging in adolescent behavior,” Cusick continued. “It has the ability to criminalize friendships.” Civil rights attorneys raised questions about whether biometric data collected at schools like Lockport might fuel not only the school-to-prison pipeline, but also deportations. Schools might share their biometric data with law enforcement and, in turn, with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — or vice versa. In California and New Jersey, ICE has arrested undocumented parents as they dropped their kids off at school, and ICE was recently granted access to at least one automatic license plate reader database. Levinson-Waldman wonders which faces will be put into the system to flag a response and whether schools will connect to a law enforcement database. “Will they give ICE information about that parent’s movements, intentionally or not?” she asked. Lockport is not the first school district to deploy the kind of advanced surveillance technology typically used by prisons, airports, and border checkpoints. Face recognition has already been installed in high schools in Magnolia, Arkansas, and St. Louis. A school district in New Mexico deploys shot-spotter technology, which notifies police at the first sound of gunfire, while another district in New York has acquired automatic license plate readers. In Iowa and Texas, among others, school districts have equipped law enforcement and school resource officers with body-worn cameras. “This is part of a bigger trend of school districts, as well as police departments, touting cost-benefit savings in the name of expanding surveillance,” Cusick noted. Privacy advocates are also concerned about the kind of lessons that early, invasive surveillance teaches students about the society we live in. “Communities and schools need to think hard about what type [of] message they are sending to our kids when they monitor them in school like they were prisoners in a detention facility,” Rita Sklar, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, said in a statement. “We urge the Magnolia School Board, and all Arkansas school districts, to avoid these expensive, harmful gimmicks and consider more sensible approaches to keeping schools safe.” Of course, these surveillance systems do not come cheaply — and it’s possible that companies will make money from the data they collect from students. “I would be shocked if a vendor was not going to use video as a way to train and ‘improve’ the algorithm,” said Philip Hagen, a technologist who went to school in Lockport. “That’s inherent in any machine learning operation. From an ethical standpoint, I would definitely be concerned about that.” It is not evident who owns the data, how long it is retained, and whether parents have a right to opt-out of the system. The technology’s cost becomes particularly troubling when one considers that it may not even work. Some facial recognition software performs poorly. U.K. police made headlines recently when documents revealed that one system in Wales turned up false matches 92 percent of the time. In particular, the technology is more prone to err when dealing with black faces, as several studies have shown. In one of the most recent, MIT Media Lab researcher Joy Buolamwini showed that darker-skinned women were up to 35 percent more likely to be misrecognized by some face recognition algorithms. Other studies have shown that the technology is less effective on children. Hagen and Levinson-Waldman have asked whether the technology will be independently audited for accuracy. By investing in this technology, as opposed to other resources, Levinson-Waldman says that schools are emphasizing policing at the expense of teaching. As the Buffalo News reported, the Lockport District may face a shortfall of nearly $1 million in the 2018-2019 school year. If aid does not materialize, it is possible that the district will “cut transportation and sports programs, reduce kindergarten to half days and close elementary school libraries.” “In a time when we cannot afford to pay our teachers a decent wage,” said Andrew Ferguson, a policing and civil rights expert, “I cannot fathom any school district paying money for this type of security theater.”

<h4>Second is targeting children in schools. </h4><p><u><strong><mark>Kofman 18</u></strong> </mark>(Ava Kofman, The Intercept, 5-30-2018, [“Face Recognition is Now Being Used in Schools, But it Won’t Stop Mass Shootings” https://theintercept.com/2018/05/30/face-recognition-schools-school-shootings/] DOA: 3-20-2023 MRC) </p><p>OFFICIALS AT THE Lockport, New York, school district have purchased face recognition technology as part of a purported effort to prevent school shootings. Starting in September, all 10 of Lockport District’s school buildings, just north of Buffalo, will be outfitted with a surveillance system that can identify faces and objects. The software, known as Aegis, was developed by SN Technologies Corp., a Canadian biometrics firm that specifically advertises to schools. It can be used to alert officials to whenever sex offenders, suspended students, fired employees, suspected gang members, or anyone else placed on a school’s “blacklist” enters the premises. Aegis also sends alerts any time one of the “top 10” most popular guns used in school shootings appears in view of a camera. The district is spending most of its recent $4 million state “Smart School” grant on these and other enhancements to its security systems, including bullet-proof greeter windows and a mass notification system, according to the Niagra Gazette. “We always have to be on our guard. We can’t let our guard down,” Lockport Superintendent Michelle T. Bradley told the Buffalo News. “For the Board of Education and the Lockport City School District, this is the No. 1 priority: school security.” Yet given the nature of gun violence at schools, Lockport’s <u><strong>purchase of surveillance technology appears inefficient and expensive.</u></strong> <u><strong>All of the major school shootings in the last five years in the U.S. have been carried out by current students or alumnae of the school in question.</u></strong> <u><strong>“These are students for whom the school wouldn’t have a reason to have their face entered into the face recognition system’s blacklist,”</u></strong> explained Rachel Levinson-Waldman, a security and policing expert at the Brennan Center for Justice. <u><strong>The object recognition system seems similarly pointless</u></strong>, she said. <u><strong>Most shooters don’t brandish their guns before opening fire; and by the time they do, an object-detection algorithm that could specify the exact type of weapon they’re firing would not be of much use.</u></strong> As Jim Shultz, a Lockport parent, pointed out to the Buffalo News, <u><strong>the technology would give a school, at best, only a few extra seconds in response time to a shooting.</u></strong> What’s more, <u><strong>most shootings typically end within seconds — so that face or weapon recognition would provide about as much real-time value as a 911 call.</u></strong> Lockport schools, Shultz added, have already instituted preventative — albeit less flashy — measures, such as keeping doors locked and requiring visitors to check in. Because face recognition appears uniquely ill-suited to respond directly to school shootings — which are themselves statistically rare events — <u><strong>privacy experts fear that the primary function of the technology will be to expand the surveillance and criminalization of adolescents.</u></strong> “Whether it was intended to be this way or not, Lockport’s technology is effectively going to be a surveillance system and not a safety system,” Levinson-Waldman said. Lockport’s system will store data for up to 60 days. Students will not be automatically entered into its database, but <u><strong>administrators will be able to use the system to “follow” those who commit infractions.</u></strong> “If we had a student who committed some type of offense against the code of conduct, we can follow that student throughout the day to see maybe who they interacted with,” one school official said. Levinson-Waldman says that such <u><strong>surveillance powers are likely to be wielded disproportionately against students of color, who already face disciplinary bias at school.</u></strong> Several studies have shown that <u><strong>black and Latino children are routinely viewed as more dangerous than their white peers, regardless of their behavior</u></strong>. <u><strong>Black students are not more likely to misbehave than white students, yet they are more likely to be suspended, receive corporal punishment, or have a school-related arrest</u></strong>, according to a Government Accountability Office report released in April. “This is going to exacerbate the racial disparities you already see, whether it’s about monitoring or enforcement,” said John Cusick, a fellow at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Students who are already subject to police surveillance in their neighborhoods, he added, will now have to face the same environment at their school. Research by the NAACP LDF and others suggests that putting police officers in schools increases the number of students who end up incarcerated for harmless incidents. “Face recognition might curtail how students interact. They might be afraid of being linked to other students or engaging in adolescent behavior,” Cusick continued. “It has the ability to criminalize friendships.” <u><strong>Civil rights attorneys raised questions about whether <mark>biometric data collected at schools</mark> like Lockport <mark>might fuel </mark>not only the school-to-prison pipeline, but also<mark> deportations.</u></strong></mark> <u><strong><mark>Schools might share their biometric data with </mark>law enforcement and, in turn, with<mark> </mark>Immigration and Customs Enforcement <mark>(ICE)</u></strong></mark> — or vice versa. In California and New Jersey,<mark> <u><strong>ICE has arrested undocumented parents as they dropped their kids off at school,</mark> and ICE was recently granted access to at least one automatic license plate reader database.</u></strong> Levinson-Waldman wonders which faces will be put into the system to flag a response and whether schools will connect to a law enforcement database. “Will they give ICE information about that parent’s movements, intentionally or not?” she asked. Lockport is not the first school district to deploy the kind of advanced surveillance technology typically used by prisons, airports, and border checkpoints. <u><strong>Face recognition has already been installed in high schools in Magnolia, Arkansas, and St. Louis. A school district in New Mexico deploys shot-spotter technology, which notifies police at the first sound of gunfire, while another district in New York has acquired automatic license plate readers</u></strong>. <u><strong>In Iowa and Texas, among others, school districts have equipped law enforcement and school resource officers with body-worn cameras.</u></strong> “This is part of a bigger trend of school districts, as well as police departments, touting cost-benefit savings in the name of expanding surveillance,” Cusick noted. <u><strong>Privacy advocates are also concerned about the kind of lessons that early, invasive surveillance teaches students about the society we live in. “Communities and schools need to think hard about what type [of] message they are sending to our kids when they monitor them in school like they were prisoners in a detention facility,”</u></strong> Rita Sklar, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas, said in a statement. “We urge the Magnolia School Board, and all Arkansas school districts, to avoid these expensive, harmful gimmicks and consider more sensible approaches to keeping schools safe.” Of course, these surveillance systems do not come cheaply — and it’s possible that companies will make money from the data they collect from students. “I would be shocked if a vendor was not going to use video as a way to train and ‘improve’ the algorithm,” said Philip Hagen, a technologist who went to school in Lockport. “That’s inherent in any machine learning operation. From an ethical standpoint, I would definitely be concerned about that.” It is not evident who owns the data, how long it is retained, and whether parents have a right to opt-out of the system. <u><strong>The technology’s cost becomes particularly troubling when one considers that it may not even work. Some facial recognition software performs poorly. U.K. police made headlines recently when documents revealed that one system in Wales turned up false matches 92 percent of the time.</u></strong> In particular, <u><strong>the technology is more prone to err when dealing with black faces, as several studies have shown.</u></strong> In one of the most recent, MIT Media Lab researcher Joy Buolamwini showed that <u><strong>darker-skinned women were up to 35 percent more likely to be misrecognized by some face recognition algorithms</u></strong>. Other studies have shown that <u><strong>the technology is less effective on children</u></strong>. Hagen and Levinson-Waldman have asked whether the technology will be independently audited for accuracy. By investing in this technology, as opposed to other resources, Levinson-Waldman says that <u><strong>schools are emphasizing policing at the expense of teaching.</u></strong> As the Buffalo News reported, the Lockport District may face a shortfall of nearly $1 million in the 2018-2019 school year. If aid does not materialize, it is possible that the district will “cut transportation and sports programs, reduce kindergarten to half days and close elementary school libraries.” <u><strong>“In a time when we cannot afford to pay our teachers a decent wage,” said Andrew Ferguson, a policing and civil rights expert, “I cannot fathom any school district paying money for this type of security theater.”</p></u></strong>

Contention one is deportation

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should ban the collection of personal data through biometric recognition technology.

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

A

tournament of champions

1

Taipei America YH

Andy Wang

hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

2023-04-15 14:52:28

SiDa

Lakeville SiDa

Au.....

Si.....

Na.....

Da.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

This surveillance disproportionately targets civil rights activists.

Lee & Chin 22

Lee & Chin 22 (Nicol Turner Lee is a Senior Fel1low of Governance Studies and Director at the Center for Technology Innovation & Caitlin Chin is a Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former research analyst for the Brookings Institution, Brookings Institute, 4-12-2022, [“Police surveillance and facial recognition: Why data privacy is imperative for communities of color” https://www.brookings.edu/research/police-surveillance-and-facial-recognition-why-data-privacy-is-an-imperative-for-communities-of-color/] DOA: 3-12-2023 MRC)

surveillance and data collection have disproportionately affected communities of color under both past and current circumstances and political regimes. The oversurveillance of communities of color dates back decades to the civil rights movement and beyond. the FBI tracked Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and other civil rights activists through its Racial Matters and COINTELPRO programs, without clear guardrails to prevent the agency from collecting intimate details about home life and relationships that were unrelated to law enforcement BLM has highlighted racial biases in policing that disproportionately lead to unwarranted deaths, improper arrests, and the excessive use of force against Black individuals. In 2015, the Baltimore Police Department reportedly used aerial surveillance, location tracking, and facial recognition to identify individuals who publicly protested the death of Freddie Gray.[3] after George Floyd was murdered in 2020, the Department of Homeland Security deployed drones and helicopters to survey the subsequent protests in at least 15 cities. The consequences of mass government surveillance were evident in programs like the China Initiative, which the Department of Justice launched in 2018 to prevent espionage and intellectual property theft and formally ceased in February 2022 manufactured wider distrust and racial profiling of Chinese American academics, including those who were U.S. citizens or who lacked ties with the Chinese Communist Party. It led to several false arrests the U.S. government monitored the broader Japanese American community for years even prior to World War II, including by accessing private communications and bank accounts, and eventually used census data after 1941 to locate and detain 120,000 people in internment camps. the (NYPD) and (CIA) surveilled Muslim neighborhoods, restaurants, mosques, stores, and student groups for over six years after September 11, 2001, listening in on conversations, recording license plates, and taking videos. 18% of Muslim American respondents still experience being “singled out by airport security.”[9] Moreover, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has deployed planes, boats, and radios to track and identify people along the U.S.-Mexico border—continuing a long tradition of hostility toward immigrants, especially those from Latino communities. ICE purchased surveillance technology from private companies and used vehicle, insurance, tax, social media, and phone records to track undocumented immigrants throughout the country the indiscriminate deployment and public vigilantism have contributed to and been fueled by deep-rooted discrimination that affects communities of color in the United States. new developments like facial recognition technologies (FRT) and machine learning algorithms have drastically enlarged the precision and scope of potential surveillance. Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies rely upon tools developed within the private sector, and can access massive amounts of data either stored on private cloud servers or hardware In the general absence of stronger privacy protections at the federal or state levels to account for such advancements in technology, enhanced forms of surveillance used by police officers pose significant risks to civilians already targeted in the criminal justice system and further the historical biases affecting communities of color.

surveillance and data collection disproportionately affect communities of color The oversurveillance of communities of color dates back decades to the civil rights movement the FBI tracked civil rights activists In 2015, the Baltimore Police Department used facial recognition to identify individuals who publicly protested the death of Freddie Gray. The consequences of mass government surveillance were evident in programs like the China Initiative, which manufactured wider distrust and racial profiling of Chinese American academics new developments like facial recognition technologies have drastically enlarged the precision and scope of surveillance

Governments and private companies have a long history of collecting data from civilians, often justifying the resulting loss of privacy in the name of national security, economic stability, or other societal benefits. But it is important to note that these trade-offs do not affect all individuals equally. In fact, surveillance and data collection have disproportionately affected communities of color under both past and current circumstances and political regimes. From the historical surveillance of civil rights leaders by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to the current misuse of facial recognition technologies, surveillance patterns often reflect existing societal biases and build upon harmful and virtuous cycles. Facial recognition and other surveillance technologies also enable more precise discrimination, especially as law enforcement agencies continue to make misinformed, predictive decisions around arrest and detainment that disproportionately impact marginalized populations. In this paper, we present the case for stronger federal privacy protections with proscriptive guardrails for the public and private sectors to mitigate the high risks that are associated with the development and procurement of surveillance technologies. We also discuss the role of federal agencies in addressing the purposes and uses of facial recognition and other monitoring tools under their jurisdiction, as well as increased training for state and local law enforcement agencies to prevent the unfair or inaccurate profiling of people of color. We conclude the paper with a series of proposals that lean either toward clear restrictions on the use of surveillance technologies in certain contexts, or greater accountability and oversight mechanisms, including audits, policy interventions, and more inclusive technical designs. The oversurveillance of communities of color dates back decades to the civil rights movement and beyond. During the 1950s and 1960s, the FBI tracked Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and other civil rights activists through its Racial Matters and COINTELPRO programs, without clear guardrails to prevent the agency from collecting intimate details about home life and relationships that were unrelated to law enforcement.[1] More recently, the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, initially sparked in 2013 after the murder of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by a local vigilante, has highlighted racial biases in policing that disproportionately lead to unwarranted deaths, improper arrests, and the excessive use of force against Black individuals.[2] Over the years, the government’s response to public protests over egregious policing patterns has raised various concerns over the appropriate use of surveillance, especially when primarily focused on communities of color. In 2015, the Baltimore Police Department reportedly used aerial surveillance, location tracking, and facial recognition to identify individuals who publicly protested the death of Freddie Gray.[3] Similarly, after George Floyd was murdered in 2020, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) deployed drones and helicopters to survey the subsequent protests in at least 15 cities.[4] But African Americans are not the only population that has been subjected to overt tracking and profiling. The consequences of mass government surveillance were evident in programs like the China Initiative, which the Department of Justice (DOJ) launched in 2018 to prevent espionage and intellectual property theft and formally ceased in February 2022.[5] Although the China Initiative aimed to address national security threats from the Chinese government, it manufactured wider distrust and racial profiling of Chinese American academics, including those who were U.S. citizens or who lacked ties with the Chinese Communist Party. It led to several false arrests, including those of Temple University professor Xi Xiaoxing, UCLA graduate student Guan Lei, University of Tennessee professor Anming Hu, and National Weather Service scientist Sherry Chen.[6] Like with other historically-disadvantaged populations, government surveillance of Asian Americans is not a new phenomenon. As an example, the U.S. government monitored the broader Japanese American community for years even prior to World War II, including by accessing private communications and bank accounts, and eventually used census data after 1941 to locate and detain 120,000 people in internment camps.[7] Demonstrating similar profiling of an entire community, the New York Police Department (NYPD) and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) surveilled Muslim neighborhoods, restaurants, mosques, stores, and student groups for over six years after September 11, 2001, listening in on conversations, recording license plates, and taking videos.[8] Over a decade after 9/11, a 2017 Pew Research Center survey found that 18% of Muslim American respondents still experienced being “singled out by airport security.”[9] From 2015 to 2020, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) records exposed over 75 complaints sparked by intrusive airport searches or Islamophobic comments from Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers toward people who were perceived to be of Middle Eastern descent.[10] Both the NYPD’s “Demographic Unit” surveillance and TSA’s profiling of Muslim travelers are widely considered to be inaccurate and ineffective in preventing violent crime.[11] Moreover, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has deployed planes, boats, and radios to track and identify people along the U.S.-Mexico border—continuing a long tradition of hostility toward immigrants, especially those from Latino communities. Immigrant-focused surveillance extends far beyond a physical border; during the Obama and Trump administrations, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) purchased surveillance technology from private companies like Palantir and Thomson Reuters and used vehicle, insurance, tax, social media, and phone records to track undocumented immigrants throughout the country.[12] As early as 1992, the Drug Enforcement Administration surveilled phone call records to over 100 countries in bulk, which, over the years, may have gathered a significant amount of information from immigrants who called home to Mexico and countries in Central or South America.[13] In these and other cases, government entities directed surveillance with the stated goals of maintaining public order, preventing cyber theft, and protecting Americans more broadly—but the indiscriminate deployment and public vigilantism have contributed to and been fueled by deep-rooted discrimination that affects communities of color in the United States. In order to stop ongoing injustice, we need greater attention to this issue and concrete steps to protect personal privacy. Although suspicion toward communities of color has historical roots that span decades, new developments like facial recognition technologies (FRT) and machine learning algorithms have drastically enlarged the precision and scope of potential surveillance.[14] Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies often rely upon tools developed within the private sector, and, in certain cases, can access massive amounts of data either stored on private cloud servers or hardware (e.g., smartphones or hard drives) or available in public places like social media or online forums.[15] In particular, several government agencies have purchased access to precise geolocation history from data aggregators that compile information from smartphone apps or wearable devices. In the general absence of stronger privacy protections at the federal or state levels to account for such advancements in technology, enhanced forms of surveillance used by police officers pose significant risks to civilians already targeted in the criminal justice system and further the historical biases affecting communities of color. Next, we present tangible examples of how the private and public sectors both play a critical role in amplifying the reach of law enforcement through facial recognition and other surveillance technologies.

<h4>This surveillance disproportionately targets civil rights activists. </h4><p><u><strong><mark>Lee & Chin 22</u></strong></mark> (Nicol Turner Lee is a Senior Fel1low of Governance Studies and Director at the Center for Technology Innovation & Caitlin Chin is a Fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former research analyst for the Brookings Institution, Brookings Institute, 4-12-2022, [“Police surveillance and facial recognition: Why data privacy is imperative for communities of color” https://www.brookings.edu/research/police-surveillance-and-facial-recognition-why-data-privacy-is-an-imperative-for-communities-of-color/] DOA: 3-12-2023 MRC) </p><p>Governments and private companies have a long history of collecting data from civilians, often justifying the resulting loss of privacy in the name of national security, economic stability, or other societal benefits. But it is important to note that these trade-offs do not affect all individuals equally. In fact, <u><strong><mark>surveillance and data collection</mark> have <mark>disproportionately affect</mark>ed <mark>communities of color</mark> under both past and current circumstances and political regimes.</u></strong> From the historical surveillance of civil rights leaders by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to the current misuse of facial recognition technologies, surveillance patterns often reflect existing societal biases and build upon harmful and virtuous cycles. Facial recognition and other surveillance technologies also enable more precise discrimination, especially as law enforcement agencies continue to make misinformed, predictive decisions around arrest and detainment that disproportionately impact marginalized populations. In this paper, we present the case for stronger federal privacy protections with proscriptive guardrails for the public and private sectors to mitigate the high risks that are associated with the development and procurement of surveillance technologies. We also discuss the role of federal agencies in addressing the purposes and uses of facial recognition and other monitoring tools under their jurisdiction, as well as increased training for state and local law enforcement agencies to prevent the unfair or inaccurate profiling of people of color. We conclude the paper with a series of proposals that lean either toward clear restrictions on the use of surveillance technologies in certain contexts, or greater accountability and oversight mechanisms, including audits, policy interventions, and more inclusive technical designs. <u><strong><mark>The oversurveillance of communities of color dates back decades to the civil rights movement</mark> and beyond.</u></strong> During the 1950s and 1960s, <u><strong><mark>the FBI tracked</mark> Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and other <mark>civil rights activists</mark> through its Racial Matters and COINTELPRO programs, without clear guardrails to prevent the agency from collecting intimate details about home life and relationships that were unrelated to law enforcement</u></strong>.[1] More recently, the Black Lives Matter (<u><strong>BLM</u></strong>) movement, initially sparked in 2013 after the murder of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by a local vigilante, <u><strong>has highlighted racial biases in policing that disproportionately lead to unwarranted deaths, improper arrests, and the excessive use of force against Black individuals.</u></strong>[2] Over the years, the government’s response to public protests over egregious policing patterns has raised various concerns over the appropriate use of surveillance, especially when primarily focused on communities of color. <u><strong><mark>In 2015, the Baltimore Police Department</mark> reportedly <mark>used </mark>aerial surveillance, location tracking, and <mark>facial recognition to identify individuals who publicly protested the death of Freddie Gray.</mark>[3]</u></strong> Similarly, <u><strong>after George Floyd was murdered in 2020, the</u></strong> U.S. <u><strong>Department of Homeland Security </u></strong>(DHS) <u><strong>deployed drones and helicopters to survey the subsequent protests in at least 15 cities.</u></strong>[4] But African Americans are not the only population that has been subjected to overt tracking and profiling. <u><strong><mark>The consequences of mass government surveillance were evident in programs like the China Initiative, which </mark>the Department of Justice</u></strong> (DOJ) <u><strong>launched in 2018 to prevent espionage and intellectual property theft and formally ceased in February 2022</u></strong>.[5] Although the China Initiative aimed to address national security threats from the Chinese government, it <u><strong><mark>manufactured wider distrust and racial profiling of Chinese American academics</mark>, including those who were U.S. citizens or who lacked ties with the Chinese Communist Party.</u></strong> <u><strong>It led to several false arrests</u></strong>, including those of Temple University professor Xi Xiaoxing, UCLA graduate student Guan Lei, University of Tennessee professor Anming Hu, and National Weather Service scientist Sherry Chen.[6] Like with other historically-disadvantaged populations, government surveillance of Asian Americans is not a new phenomenon. As an example, <u><strong>the U.S. government monitored the broader Japanese American community for years even prior to World War II, including by accessing private communications and bank accounts, and eventually used census data after 1941 to locate and detain 120,000 people in internment camps.</u></strong>[7] Demonstrating similar profiling of an entire community, <u><strong>the</u></strong> New York Police Department <u><strong>(NYPD) and</u></strong> Central Intelligence Agency <u><strong>(CIA) surveilled Muslim neighborhoods, restaurants, mosques, stores, and student groups for over six years after September 11, 2001, listening in on conversations, recording license plates, and taking videos.</u></strong>[8] Over a decade after 9/11, a 2017 Pew Research Center survey found that <u><strong>18% of Muslim American respondents still experience</u></strong>d <u><strong>being “singled out by airport security.”[9]</u></strong> From 2015 to 2020, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) records exposed over 75 complaints sparked by intrusive airport searches or Islamophobic comments from Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers toward people who were perceived to be of Middle Eastern descent.[10] Both the NYPD’s “Demographic Unit” surveillance and TSA’s profiling of Muslim travelers are widely considered to be inaccurate and ineffective in preventing violent crime.[11] <u><strong>Moreover, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has deployed planes, boats, and radios to track and identify people along the U.S.-Mexico border—continuing a long tradition of hostility toward immigrants, especially those from Latino communities.</u></strong> Immigrant-focused surveillance extends far beyond a physical border; during the Obama and Trump administrations, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (<u><strong>ICE</u></strong>) <u><strong>purchased surveillance technology from private companies</u></strong> like Palantir and Thomson Reuters <u><strong>and used vehicle, insurance, tax, social media, and phone records to track undocumented immigrants throughout the country</u></strong>.[12] As early as 1992, the Drug Enforcement Administration surveilled phone call records to over 100 countries in bulk, which, over the years, may have gathered a significant amount of information from immigrants who called home to Mexico and countries in Central or South America.[13] In these and other cases, government entities directed surveillance with the stated goals of maintaining public order, preventing cyber theft, and protecting Americans more broadly—but <u><strong>the indiscriminate deployment and public vigilantism have contributed to and been fueled by deep-rooted discrimination that affects communities of color in the United States.</u></strong> In order to stop ongoing injustice, we need greater attention to this issue and concrete steps to protect personal privacy. Although suspicion toward communities of color has historical roots that span decades, <u><strong><mark>new developments like facial recognition technologies</mark> (FRT) and machine learning algorithms <mark>have drastically enlarged the precision and scope of</mark> potential <mark>surveillance</mark>.</u></strong>[14] <u><strong>Federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies</u></strong> often <u><strong>rely upon tools developed within the private sector, and</u></strong>, in certain cases, <u><strong>can access massive amounts of data either stored on private cloud servers or hardware </u></strong>(e.g., smartphones or hard drives) or available in public places like social media or online forums.[15] In particular, several government agencies have purchased access to precise geolocation history from data aggregators that compile information from smartphone apps or wearable devices. <u><strong>In the general absence of stronger privacy protections at the federal or state levels to account for such advancements in technology, enhanced forms of surveillance used by police officers pose significant risks to civilians already targeted in the criminal justice system and further the historical biases affecting communities of color.</u></strong> Next, we present tangible examples of how the private and public sectors both play a critical role in amplifying the reach of law enforcement through facial recognition and other surveillance technologies.</p>

Contention Two is Police Surveillance

Resolved: The United States Federal Government should ban the collection of personal data through biometric recognition technology.

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

A

tournament of champions

1

Taipei America YH

Andy Wang

hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Pro-tournament-of-champions-Round-1.docx

2023-04-15 14:52:28

SiDa

Lakeville SiDa

Au.....

Si.....

Na.....

Da.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

And, although run by foreign actors, all data collected is stored in US databases – so a ban would eliminate the program. Bonner argues in 2020 that:

Bonner & Fresco 2020

Robert Bonner & Leon Fresco, 11-12-2020, “HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL: Final Report of the Biometrics Subcommittee,” https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/final_hsac_biometrics_subcommittee_report_11-12-2020.pdf, Date Accessed 4-13-2023 // JM

Via BITMAP, ICE is able to track U.S. bound illegal migration patterns, take joint action with partner countries through South and Central America In order to accomplish this BITMAP data exchange process foreign law enforcement partners electronically transmit enrollments using a one-way portal that goes directly to CBP for processing

Via BITMAP, ICE is able to track U.S. bound illegal migration . In order to accomplish this foreign law enforcement transmit enrollments using a one-way portal that goes directly to CBP for processing

DHS international data sharing is largely, but not exclusively, conducted through OBIM. ICE/HSI has 69 offices located in foreign countries, far more than any other DHS agency, and 8 Department of Defense liaisons in 51 countries. For decades, HSI attaché offices have been able to collect important investigative information from the host nation’s law enforcement counterparts. The ability to be effective requires an ability to exchange information. In this vein, HSI created a program in 2011 called the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP), briefly described earlier. BITMAP58 was established to equip international partner-country law enforcement officers to collect and share biometric and biographic data on special interest individuals and to identify potential threat actors transiting through participating countries. Via BITMAP, ICE is able to track U.S. bound illegal migration patterns, take joint action with partner countries, and deter human smuggling through South and Central America. BITMAP has been credited with identifying several hundred known or suspected terrorists, in addition to criminals, drug smugglers, human traffickers, murderers, child predators and gangs like MS-13. In order to accomplish this BITMAP data exchange process, foreign law enforcement partners electronically transmit enrollments using a one-way portal that goes directly to CBP for processing. Search and enrollments then automatically occur in the three primary USG biometric databases (IDENT, NGI, and the Department of Defense’s Automated Biometric Identification System [ABIS]). Then, a consolidated biometric response is transmitted to in-country HSI personnel who oversee the BITMAP program. That official coordinates a response59, if one is deemed necessary, back to the foreign partner.60

<h4>And, although run by foreign actors, all data collected is stored in US databases – so a ban would eliminate the program. Bonner argues in 2020 that:</h4><p>Robert <u><strong>Bonner &</u></strong> Leon <u><strong>Fresco</u></strong>, 11-12-<u><strong>2020</u></strong>, “HOMELAND SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL: Final Report of the Biometrics Subcommittee,” https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/final_hsac_biometrics_subcommittee_report_11-12-2020.pdf, Date Accessed 4-13-2023 // JM </p><p>DHS international data sharing is largely, but not exclusively, conducted through OBIM. ICE/HSI has 69 offices located in foreign countries, far more than any other DHS agency, and 8 Department of Defense liaisons in 51 countries. For decades, HSI attaché offices have been able to collect important investigative information from the host nation’s law enforcement counterparts. The ability to be effective requires an ability to exchange information. In this vein, HSI created a program in 2011 called the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP), briefly described earlier. BITMAP58 was established to equip international partner-country law enforcement officers to collect and share biometric and biographic data on special interest individuals and to identify potential threat actors transiting through participating countries. <u><mark>Via BITMAP, ICE is able to track U.S. bound illegal migration </mark>patterns, take joint action with partner countries</u>, and deter human smuggling <u>through South and Central America</u>. BITMAP has been credited with identifying several hundred known or suspected terrorists, in addition to criminals, drug smugglers, human traffickers, murderers, child predators and gangs like MS-13<mark>. <u><strong>In order to accomplish this </mark>BITMAP data exchange process</u></strong>,<mark> <u><strong>foreign law enforcement</mark> partners electronically <mark>transmit enrollments using a one-way portal that goes directly to CBP for processing</u></strong></mark>. Search and enrollments then automatically occur in the three primary USG biometric databases (IDENT, NGI, and the Department of Defense’s Automated Biometric Identification System [ABIS]). Then, a consolidated biometric response is transmitted to in-country HSI personnel who oversee the BITMAP program. That official coordinates a response59, if one is deemed necessary, back to the foreign partner.60</p>

Marist EK – TOC Round 4 vs Brentwood GS

1NC - BITMAP

./documents/hspf22/MaristSchool/EsKa/MaristSchool-EsKa-Con-00----TOC-Round-4.docx

N

00 -- TOC

4

Brentwood GS

Booth, Jack

NC - BITMAP (new impact) + Quantum Attacks AC - EU + Democracy + Cyber + LAWS Neg FF - Quantum Attacks Aff FF - Dedev + LAWS

hspf22/MaristSchool/EsKa/MaristSchool-EsKa-Con-00----TOC-Round-4.docx

2023-04-16 01:17:37

EsKa

Marist School EsKa

Jo.....

Es.....

El.....

Ka.....

MaristSchool

Marist School

GA

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

One of these investments includes a biometric data partnership known as BITMAP – Privacy International argues in 2019 that:

Privacy International 2019

Privacy International, 7-29-2019, "Here’s the Surveillance the US Exports to Central America as Aid," https://privacyinternational.org/news-analysis/3011/heres-surveillance-us-exports-central-america-aid-and-its-surviving-trumps-cuts, Date Accessed 4-6-2023 // JM

BITMAP allows ICE agents to provide biometric training and equipment to foreign agencies. The collected data is then shared with US biometric databases, which will scoop up a whopping 180 million new biometric transactions per year by 2022 BITMAP was deployed to 14 countries, “with near-term plans to expand to additional countries.”

BITMAP allows agents to provide biometric training and equipment to foreign agencies. The collected data is then shared with US databases which scoop up 180 million biometric transactions per year BITMAP was deployed to 14 countries, “with near-term plans to expand

The agreement also aims to “increase the collection of biometric data of individuals who cross borders in the Northern Triangle countries without valid documents” and “Align technology platforms to meet information sharing and operational needs”. One such programme is the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (BITMAP). Passed last year despite failing to require adequate privacy protections, it allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents to provide biometric training and equipment to foreign agencies. The collected data is then shared with US biometric databases, including a new system known as HART developed by arms company Northrop Grumman, which according to a DHS presentation seen by Privacy International will scoop up a whopping 180 million new biometric transactions per year by 2022. For example, under BITMAP, the State Department in Costa Rica spent nearly $60,000 last year on Jump Kits for capturing and sharing biometric data, according to US procurement records. As of last year, BITMAP was deployed to 14 countries, “with near-term plans to expand to additional countries.”

<h4>One of these investments includes a biometric data partnership known as BITMAP – Privacy International argues in 2019 that:</h4><p><u><strong>Privacy International</u></strong>, 7-29-<u><strong>2019</strong>, "Here’s the Surveillance the US Exports to Central America as Aid," https://privacyinternational.org/news-analysis/3011/heres-surveillance-us-exports-central-america-aid-and-its-surviving-trumps-cuts, Date Accessed 4-6-2023 // JM</p><p></u>The agreement also aims to “increase the collection of biometric data of individuals who cross borders in the Northern Triangle countries without valid documents” and “Align technology platforms to meet information sharing and operational needs”. One such programme is the Biometric Identification Transnational Migration Alert Program (<u><strong><mark>BITMAP</u></strong></mark>). Passed last year despite failing to require adequate privacy protections, it <u><mark>allows</u></mark> Immigration and Customs Enforcement (<u>ICE</u>) <u><mark>agents to provide biometric training and equipment to foreign agencies. <strong>The collected data is then shared with US </mark>biometric<mark> databases</mark>,</u></strong> including a new system known as HART developed by arms company Northrop Grumman, <u><mark>which</u></mark> according to a DHS presentation seen by Privacy International <u><strong>will</u></strong> <u><mark>scoop</u> <u>up </mark>a whopping <mark>180 million </mark>new <mark>biometric transactions per year</mark> by 2022</u>. For example, under BITMAP, the State Department in Costa Rica spent nearly $60,000 last year on Jump Kits for capturing and sharing biometric data, according to US procurement records. As of last year, <u><mark>BITMAP was deployed to 14 countries, “with near-term plans to expand </mark>to additional countries.”</p></u>

Marist EK – TOC Round 4 vs Brentwood GS

1NC - BITMAP

./documents/hspf22/MaristSchool/EsKa/MaristSchool-EsKa-Con-00----TOC-Round-4.docx

N

00 -- TOC

4

Brentwood GS

Booth, Jack

NC - BITMAP (new impact) + Quantum Attacks AC - EU + Democracy + Cyber + LAWS Neg FF - Quantum Attacks Aff FF - Dedev + LAWS

hspf22/MaristSchool/EsKa/MaristSchool-EsKa-Con-00----TOC-Round-4.docx

2023-04-16 01:17:37

EsKa

Marist School EsKa

Jo.....

Es.....

El.....

Ka.....

MaristSchool

Marist School

GA

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Union corruption has increased in recent years

WSJ 18. Editorial Board of the WSJ. “Organized Labor’s Lawbreakers”. WSJ. 1/15/2018. https://www.wsj.com/articles/organized-labors-lawbreakers-1516058283

WSJ 18. Editorial Board of the WSJ. “Organized Labor’s Lawbreakers”. WSJ. 1/15/2018. https://www.wsj.com/articles/organized-labors-lawbreakers-1516058283

Organized labor has a long history of corruption, but federal records show it’s not improving 143 labor leaders and staffers have pleaded guilty or been convicted of federal crimes presidents of more than 30 union locals, as well as more than 60 officials who held a treasurer or secretary-treasurer post Public companies face internal and external audits and scrutiny by multiple regulators Labor Department conducts organized-labor audits, and in 2016 nearly one in five led to a criminal case explain the continuing decline in union membership when workers have a choice about joining ? This crime spree is one more reason for more states to pass right-to-work laws that let workers decide if they want to pay those dues.

Organized labor has a long history of corruption, but federal records show it’s not improving. 143 labor leaders and staffers have pleaded guilty or been convicted of federal crimes, Labor Department conducts organized-labor audits, and in 2016 nearly one in five led to a criminal case. This crime spree is one more reason for more states to pass right-to-work laws

Organized labor has a long history of corruption, but federal records show it’s not improving. In the past two years a total of 143 labor leaders and staffers have pleaded guilty or been convicted of federal crimes, according to the Labor Department’s recently updated disclosures on criminal enforcement actions. The federal government’s felonious list includes the presidents of more than 30 union locals, as well as more than 60 officials who held a treasurer or secretary-treasurer post. The crimes overwhelmingly involve top brass stealing from the union, and the incidents range from pilfered thousands to multi-million-dollar embezzlements. Union members are the victims. For instance, Tamika Bullock was a secretary-treasurer for the boilermakers union in Chesapeake, Virginia, who last November pleaded guilty to embezzlement. She had stolen more than $20,000 from an account that was supposed to aid workers coping with a serious illness or economic crisis. She used some of that money to go on a cruise. Raymond Ventrone of the boilermakers Pittsburgh local embezzled at least $1.5 million from the union. Ventrone dropped $527,000 on Louis Vuitton purses and $38,000 on drums, and a U.S. Attorney recounted how the former business manager’s house was “literally lined with Best Buy purchases.” David Fleury, president of a bricklayers local in Rockford, Illinois, stole more than $250,000 from the union, spending heavily on gambling and vacations. David Sager, president of the steelworkers union in Middleburg Heights, Ohio, embezzled hundreds of thousands, which he used in part for tickets to see Carrie Underwood, Disney on Ice and Sesame Street Live. The list goes on, and the extent suggests problems that go beyond temptation and human nature. One issue is probably the lack of adequate financial controls, especially given how much money unions get in member dues. The cash is handled by union locals, which means many opportunities for corruption. National union outfits like the AFL-CIO should provide education and technology to help locals keep track of the money. Public companies face internal and external audits and scrutiny by multiple regulators. The Labor Department conducts organized-labor audits, and in 2016 nearly one in five led to a criminal case. Corruption stories spread by word of mouth, and they may help explain the continuing decline in union membership when workers have a choice about joining. Why pay dues for minimal benefits if there’s a good chance the money will be stolen? This crime spree is one more reason for more states to pass right-to-work laws that let workers decide if they want to pay those dues.

<h4>Union corruption has <u>increased</u> in recent years</h4><p><strong>WSJ 18<u>. Editorial Board of the WSJ. “Organized Labor’s Lawbreakers”. WSJ. 1/15/2018. https://www.wsj.com/articles/organized-labors-lawbreakers-1516058283</p><p><mark>Organized labor has a long history of corruption, but federal records show it’s not improving</u></strong>.</mark> In the past two years a total of <u><mark>143 labor leaders and staffers have pleaded guilty or been convicted of federal crimes</u>,</mark> according to the Labor Department’s recently updated disclosures on criminal enforcement actions. The federal government’s felonious list includes the <u>presidents of more than 30 union locals, as well as more than 60 officials who held a treasurer or secretary-treasurer post</u>. The crimes overwhelmingly involve top brass stealing from the union, and the incidents range from pilfered thousands to multi-million-dollar embezzlements. Union members are the victims. For instance, Tamika Bullock was a secretary-treasurer for the boilermakers union in Chesapeake, Virginia, who last November pleaded guilty to embezzlement. She had stolen more than $20,000 from an account that was supposed to aid workers coping with a serious illness or economic crisis. She used some of that money to go on a cruise. Raymond Ventrone of the boilermakers Pittsburgh local embezzled at least $1.5 million from the union. Ventrone dropped $527,000 on Louis Vuitton purses and $38,000 on drums, and a U.S. Attorney recounted how the former business manager’s house was “literally lined with Best Buy purchases.” David Fleury, president of a bricklayers local in Rockford, Illinois, stole more than $250,000 from the union, spending heavily on gambling and vacations. David Sager, president of the steelworkers union in Middleburg Heights, Ohio, embezzled hundreds of thousands, which he used in part for tickets to see Carrie Underwood, Disney on Ice and Sesame Street Live. The list goes on, and the extent suggests problems that go beyond temptation and human nature. One issue is probably the lack of adequate financial controls, especially given how much money unions get in member dues. The cash is handled by union locals, which means many opportunities for corruption. National union outfits like the AFL-CIO should provide education and technology to help locals keep track of the money. <u>Public companies face internal and external audits and scrutiny by multiple regulators</u>. The <u><strong><mark>Labor Department conducts organized-labor audits, and in 2016 nearly one in five led to a criminal case</u></strong>.</mark> Corruption stories spread by word of mouth, and they may help <u>explain the continuing decline in union membership when workers have a choice about joining</u>. Why pay dues for minimal benefits if there’s a good chance the money will be stolen<u><strong>? <mark>This crime spree is one more reason for more states to pass right-to-work laws</mark> that let workers decide if they want to pay those dues.</p></u></strong>

NEG CASE

Contention 1 is Corruption

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

N

FLL Regionals

2

hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

2023-02-11 16:46:47

GrTe

NSU GrTe

Je.....

Gr.....

Av.....

Te.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

RTW laws dramatically bolster manufacturing

Motors 17. Autonomous mobile robot company. “Right-to-Work: How Policy Affects Manufacturers”. 5/18/2017. https://ottomotors.com/blog/right-to-work-policy-manufacturers

Otto Motors 17. Autonomous mobile robot company. “Right-to-Work: How Policy Affects Manufacturers”. 5/18/2017. https://ottomotors.com/blog/right-to-work-policy-manufacturers

Forty-one years ago, 19 states prohibited the termination of employees for refusal to join or pay fees to an unwanted union* the share of U.S. employment at manufacturing facilities in those 19 states rose by 4.5% from 1985 to 2005. By 2006, the total manufacturing-establishment employment share of the then-22 right to work states was 36.9%. The growth of manufacturing in these states reveals a link between areas that feature pro-business policies and the increase in manufacturing jobs. His comparison of states, some with right-to-work laws and some without, found substantially [there is] more manufacturing job growth in [states] those with right-to-work laws.

the share of U.S. employment at manufacturing facilities in those states rose by 4.5% The growth of manufacturing in these states reveals a link between areas that feature pro-business policies and the increase in manufacturing jobs [there is] more manufacturing job growth in [states] with right-to-work laws.

Forty-one years ago, 19 states prohibited the termination of employees for refusal to join or pay fees to an unwanted union*. According to the U.S. Labor Department, 26.4% of nationwide employment in manufacturing at that time was located within those 19 states. All of these states have since continuously offered right-to-work protections for employees. To correlate the protections, the share of U.S. employment at manufacturing facilities in those 19 states rose by 4.5% from 1985 to 2005. By 2006, the total manufacturing-establishment employment share of the then-22 right to work states was 36.9%. The growth of manufacturing in these states reveals a link between areas that feature pro-business policies and the increase in manufacturing jobs. Thomas Holmes of the University of Minnesota, for example, once described the academic evidence on the proposition that pro-business policies help build jobs as mixed. His comparison of states, some with right-to-work laws and some without, found substantially [there is] more manufacturing job growth in [states] those with right-to-work laws.

<h4>RTW laws <u>dramatically</u> bolster manufacturing</h4><p>Otto <strong>Motors 17<u><mark>. Autonomous mobile robot company. “Right-to-Work: How Policy Affects Manufacturers”. 5/18/2017. https://ottomotors.com/blog/right-to-work-policy-manufacturers</p><p></strong></mark>Forty-one years ago, 19 states prohibited the termination of employees for refusal to join or pay fees to an unwanted union*</u>. According to the U.S. Labor Department, 26.4% of nationwide employment in manufacturing at that time was located within those 19 states. All of these states have since continuously offered right-to-work protections for employees. To correlate the protections, <u><mark>the share of U.S. employment at manufacturing facilities in those </mark>19 <mark>states rose by 4.5% </mark>from 1985 to 2005. By 2006, the total manufacturing-establishment employment share of the then-22 right to work states was 36.9<strong>%. <mark>The growth of manufacturing in these states reveals a link between areas that feature pro-business policies and the increase in manufacturing jobs</mark>.</u></strong> Thomas Holmes of the University of Minnesota, for example, once described the academic evidence on the proposition that pro-business policies help build jobs as mixed. <u>His comparison of states, some with right-to-work laws and some without, found <strong>substantially <mark>[there is] more manufacturing job growth in [states] </mark>those <mark>with right-to-work laws. </p></u></strong></mark>

NEG CASE

Contention 2 is Manufacturing

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

N

FLL Regionals

2

hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

2023-02-11 16:46:47

GrTe

NSU GrTe

Je.....

Gr.....

Av.....

Te.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Unions have stolen billions of dollars and fewer than 5% of unions pass inspections.

UnionFacts 20

UnionFacts 20. Facts and Statics about the Labor Movement. “Crime and Corruption”. 2020. https://www.unionfacts.com/article/crime-and-corruption/

American labor movement, it is still plagued by rampant corruption, embezzlement, racketeering and influence from numerous organized crime organizations In fact, in just the last five years, hundreds (maybe thousands) of labor leaders at all levels of the movement have been convicted of embezzlement, corruption, racketeering, or engaging in organized crime. The problem is rampant, getting worse, and yet the unions seemingly refuse to address it. During fiscal years 2000–2019, OLMS investigations led to over $156.3 million dollars of restitution in over 2,100 criminal cases; 2,297 indictments and 2166 convictions; self-government, public disclosure, and ultimately deterrence has failed; union leaders for embezzling more than $100 million in union dues since 2001; has resulted in more than $1 billion in fines, restitutions, and forfeitures; Fewer than 5 percent of unions audited by the DOL received unqualified passes.

in just the last five years, hundreds (maybe thousands) of labor leaders at all levels of the movement have been convicted of embezzlement, corruption, racketeering, or engaging in organized crime. The problem is rampant, getting worse, and yet the unions seemingly refuse to address it union leaders for embezzling more than $100 million in union dues since 2001 has resulted in more than $1 billion in fines, restitutions, and forfeitures; Fewer than 5 percent of unions audited by the DOL received unqualified passes.

Nearly fifty years after John F. Kennedy first condemned corrupt leadership in the American labor movement, it is still plagued by rampant corruption, embezzlement, racketeering and influence from numerous organized crime organizations. From penny-ante theft to multi-million dollar embezzlement schemes, labor leaders continue to violate the trust of the members they claim to represent. The labor movement is nothing but the sum of its many parts—millions of working Americans who’ve entrusted union leaders to spend a portion of their hard earned salary for the benefit of the collective good. Financially speaking, the sum of the movement’s parts totals more than $10 billion dollars annually in mandatory dues and controls another $400 billion in financial assets in strike funds, pension plans, and health care benefits. In fact, in just the last five years, hundreds (maybe thousands) of labor leaders at all levels of the movement have been convicted of embezzlement, corruption, racketeering, or engaging in organized crime. The problem is rampant, getting worse, and yet the unions seemingly refuse to address it. KEY FINDINGS: During fiscal years 2000–2019, OLMS investigations led to over $156.3 million dollars of restitution in over 2,100 criminal cases; OLMS investigations also led to 2,297 indictments and 2166 convictions; The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act’s (LMRDA) reliance on self-government, public disclosure, and ultimately deterrence has failed; The Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) has investigated and prosecuted union leaders for embezzling more than $100 million in union dues since 2001; Investigations by the DOL’s Office of Inspector General, which investigates labor racketeering and organized crime’s influence within the labor movement, has resulted in more than $1 billion in fines, restitutions, and forfeitures; Fewer than 5 percent of unions audited by the DOL received unqualified passes.

<h4>Unions have stolen <u>billions</u> of dollars and fewer than 5% of unions <u>pass</u> <u>inspections</u>.</h4><p><strong>UnionFacts 20<u></strong>. Facts and Statics about the Labor Movement. “Crime and Corruption”. 2020. https://www.unionfacts.com/article/crime-and-corruption/</p><p></u>Nearly fifty years after John F. Kennedy first condemned corrupt leadership in the <u>American labor movement, it is still plagued by rampant corruption, embezzlement, racketeering and influence from numerous organized crime organizations</u>. From penny-ante theft to multi-million dollar embezzlement schemes, labor leaders continue to violate the trust of the members they claim to represent. The labor movement is nothing but the sum of its many parts—millions of working Americans who’ve entrusted union leaders to spend a portion of their hard earned salary for the benefit of the collective good. Financially speaking, the sum of the movement’s parts totals more than $10 billion dollars annually in mandatory dues and controls another $400 billion in financial assets in strike funds, pension plans, and health care benefits. <u>In fact, <mark>in just the last five years, hundreds (maybe thousands) of labor leaders at all levels of the movement have been convicted of embezzlement, corruption, racketeering, or engaging in organized crime. The problem is rampant, getting worse, and yet the unions seemingly refuse to address it</mark>. </u>KEY FINDINGS:<u> During fiscal years 2000–2019, OLMS investigations led to over $156.3 million dollars of restitution in over 2,100 criminal cases; </u>OLMS investigations also led to <u>2,297 indictments and 2166 convictions; </u>The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act’s (LMRDA) reliance on <u>self-government, public disclosure, and ultimately deterrence has failed; </u>The Department of Labor’s (DOL) Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) has investigated and prosecuted <u><mark>union leaders for embezzling more than $100 million in union dues since 2001</mark>; </u>Investigations by the DOL’s Office of Inspector General, which investigates labor racketeering and organized crime’s influence within the labor movement, <u><mark>has resulted in more than $1 billion in fines, restitutions, and forfeitures; Fewer than 5 percent of unions audited by the DOL received unqualified passes.</p></u></mark>

NEG CASE

C1: Corruption

./documents/hspf22/NSU/EiMo/NSU-EiMo-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

N

FLL Regionals

2

hspf22/NSU/EiMo/NSU-EiMo-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

2023-02-11 16:30:04

EiMo

NSU EiMo

Lu.....

Ei.....

Ar.....

Mo.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

RTW States have higher manufacturing employment rates compared to those without RTW Laws

Shannon 14

Shannon 14 (Erin Shannon - Director of the Center for Worker Rights at Washington Policy Center, “Right-to-Work: What it is and how it works”, Oct 21, 2014, https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/right-to-work-what-it-is-and-how-it-works) // JG

states with right-to-work laws attract more new business Right-to-work states typically have a better business climate than non-right-to-work states, and employers value the labor-management predictability inherent in stable right-to-work states. Manufacturing companies look for reasons to scratch off states when considering where to build major facilities—and no right-to-work law is at the top of the list. I can’t underscore how critical right-to-work status is Nationally, the top three states for new manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states (Michigan, Texas and Indiana), and four of the five top states for total manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states (Indiana, Arkansas, Michigan and Alabama). A study of bordering counties located in right-to-work and non-right-to-work states found right-to-work counties have one-third more manufacturing jobs than their non-right-to-work neighbor across the state line

states with right-to-work laws attract more new business Nationally, the top three states for new manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states A study found right-to-work counties have one-third more manufacturing jobs than their non-right-to-work neighbor across the state line

Studies show that states with right-to-work laws attract more new business than states without such laws. Right-to-work states typically have a better business climate than non-right-to-work states, and employers value the labor-management predictability inherent in stable right-to-work states. Employers in right-to-work states are not encumbered by disputes or the threat of work stoppages from unions. Right-to-work laws ensure companies and workers will enjoy labor peace over the long term. In fact, right-to-work status is considered a major factor in a business’s decision about where to locate. One professional site consultant, whose clients include AT&T, Chevron, Dell, Honda, PepsiCo and Verizon Wireless, says, “Manufacturing companies look for reasons to scratch off states when considering where to build major facilities—and no right-to-work law is at the top of the list. I can’t underscore how critical right-to-work status is.” Another professional site consultant agrees, saying that 50% of manufacturers automatically screen out any non-right-to-work state. Nationally, the top three states for new manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states (Michigan, Texas and Indiana), and four of the five top states for total manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states (Indiana, Arkansas, Michigan and Alabama). A study of bordering counties located in right-to-work and non-right-to-work states found right-to-work counties have one-third more manufacturing jobs than their non-right-to-work neighbor across the state line. It is not coincidence that foreign automobile brands have located their U.S. plants primarily in right-to-work states like Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi and Indiana. According to the National Institute of Labor Relations Research, between 2002 and 2012, before Indiana and Michigan passed right-to-work laws, the 22 states with right-to-work laws saw their share of nationwide automotive manufacturing output increase from 36% to 52%. Real manufacturing GDP in those 22 right-to-work states grew by 87% during that decade, but fell by 2% in non-right-to-work states.

<h4>RTW States have higher manufacturing employment rates compared to those without RTW Laws</h4><p><strong>Shannon 14</strong> (Erin Shannon - Director of the Center for Worker Rights at Washington Policy Center, “Right-to-Work: What it is and how it works”, Oct 21, 2014, https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/right-to-work-what-it-is-and-how-it-works) // JG</p><p>Studies show that <u><mark>states with right-to-work laws attract more new business</u></mark> than states without such laws. <u>Right-to-work states typically have a better business climate than non-right-to-work states, and employers value the labor-management predictability inherent in stable right-to-work states.</u> Employers in right-to-work states are not encumbered by disputes or the threat of work stoppages from unions. Right-to-work laws ensure companies and workers will enjoy labor peace over the long term. In fact, right-to-work status is considered a major factor in a business’s decision about where to locate. One professional site consultant, whose clients include AT&T, Chevron, Dell, Honda, PepsiCo and Verizon Wireless, says, “<u>Manufacturing companies look for reasons to scratch off states when considering where to build major facilities—and no right-to-work law is at the top of the list. I can’t underscore how critical right-to-work status is</u>.” Another professional site consultant agrees, saying that 50% of manufacturers automatically screen out any non-right-to-work state. <u><mark>Nationally, the top three states for new manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states</mark> (Michigan, Texas and Indiana), and four of the five top states for total manufacturing jobs are right-to-work states (Indiana, Arkansas, Michigan and Alabama).</u> <u><mark>A study </mark>of bordering counties located in right-to-work and non-right-to-work states <mark>found right-to-work counties have one-third more manufacturing jobs than their non-right-to-work neighbor across the state line</u></mark>. It is not coincidence that foreign automobile brands have located their U.S. plants primarily in right-to-work states like Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi and Indiana. According to the National Institute of Labor Relations Research, between 2002 and 2012, before Indiana and Michigan passed right-to-work laws, the 22 states with right-to-work laws saw their share of nationwide automotive manufacturing output increase from 36% to 52%. Real manufacturing GDP in those 22 right-to-work states grew by 87% during that decade, but fell by 2% in non-right-to-work states.</p>

NEG CASE

Contention 2 is Manufacturing

./documents/hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

N

FLL Regionals

2

hspf22/NSU/GrTe/NSU-GrTe-Con-FLL-Regionals-Round-2.docx

2023-02-11 16:46:47

GrTe

NSU GrTe

Je.....

Gr.....

Av.....

Te.....

NSU

NSU

FL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Further, preferential trade agreements cause structural violence against womxn health inequities

Lappin ‘18

Lappin ‘18 [Kate Lappin, regional coordinator of the Asia Pacific Forum on Womxn, Law and Development, “Free Trade or Womxn's Rights?” https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/free-trade-or-womxns-rights, *changed inherently masculine language to womxn]

A central purpose of trade agreements is to open up agriculture and land to foreign investment 19 million hectares of land in Asia has been acquired in deals involving foreign investors in the last decade expansion of export-oriented crops has led to decreasing availability of land used for subsistence agriculture that is primarily tilled by womxn. Small-scale, subsistence farms of womxn are unable to compete with huge agrobusiness monopolies that means womxn are less likely to have access to inputs, credit, technology and information they are less likely to be able to fulfill the regulatory requirements that come with cross-border, digitalized trade removal of tariffs on imports means that subsidized food can flood a local market and displace womxn's produce Nafta) was associated with two million farmers losing their land, resulting in high levels of internal and external migration. For womxn, this meant migrating into dangerous special economic zones where labor exploitation and violence against womxn has been well documented, or across borders to become migrant domestic workers these large-scale projects are often undertaken without sufficient consultation of womxn in local communities and without their free, prior and informed consent. Forced evictions and reductions of land and forest cause shifts in labor and migration patterns. Womxn leave their homes and work as laborers rural womxn in the Global South, 80 percent of the total seed supply is produced on farms They now face penalties for practicing seed saving and sharing methods Womxn's health outcomes are threatened by trade agreements that enable the privatization of health services and reduce access to generic and subsidized medicines. Trade agreements increasingly include service chapters that require state services to be opened to foreign investment Womxn's access to affordable medicines is threatened, particularly by the inclusion of the two largest providers of generic medicines, India and China, in RCEP. Monopoly protections awarded to pharmaceutical companies will significantly increase the costs of medicines, which will particularly impact on the poorest

Womxn's health are threatened by trade agreements that enable privatization and reduce access to subsidized medicines Monopoly protections significantly increase the costs of medicines

A central purpose of trade agreements is to open up agriculture and land to foreign investment. Many countries restrict foreign investment in land and provide leases or concessions to investors on a case-by-case basis. It is likely that RCEP, such as other trade agreements, will incorporate a "national treatment" provision that requires governments to provide foreign investors with the same rights and privileges as local investors. Consequently, unless governments provide a specific exemption in the agreement, land can be purchased by foreign corporations and individuals. Among the attractions of Asian countries to foreign investors is the apparent abundance of cheap land. In fact, approximately 19 million hectares of land in Asia has been acquired in deals involving foreign investors in the last decade. In the period following the financial crisis, speculative finance rushed to the security of land, resulting in a 334 percent increase in cross-border real estate investments between 2008 and 2015, and investors intensified pressure on governments to enable foreign land investments. This makes small land holdings vulnerable, particularly where documentation of land tenure is not secured. Furthermore, the expansion of export-oriented crops has led to decreasing availability of land used for subsistence agriculture that is primarily tilled by womxn. Small-scale, subsistence farms of womxn are unable to compete with huge agrobusiness monopolies because of economies of scale and the benefits of large capital, coupled with pre-existing discrimination that means womxn are less likely to have access to inputs, credit, technology and information. Further, they are less likely to be able to fulfill the regulatory requirements that come with cross-border, digitalized trade. In addition, the removal of tariffs on imports means that subsidized food can flood a local market and displace womxn's produce. The North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) was associated with two million farmers losing their land, resulting in high levels of internal and external migration. For womxn, this meant migrating into dangerous special economic zones where labor exploitation and violence against womxn has been well documented, or across borders to become migrant domestic workers. While foreign investment has led to large areas of arable land being developed for the production of food crops, far from enhancing the food security of local communities, investment in the agricultural sector has frequently been for the purpose of developing export industries that largely benefit large corporations. The expansion of commercial agriculture also leads to the depletion of communal land and resources, which womxn frequently rely on for the collection of fuel, water and fodder for medicinal purposes. Further, these large-scale projects are often undertaken without sufficient consultation of womxn in local communities and without their free, prior and informed consent. Forced evictions and reductions of land and forest cause shifts in labor and migration patterns. Womxn leave their homes and work as laborers in factories or plantations or as domestic workers with substandard labor conditions. Militarization of land concessions, which allows intimidation and violence by armed security guards (including private security, state police and military), has also threatened the security of womxn human rights defenders involved in land disputes. Intellectual Property Rights for Corporations For generations, womxn have saved seeds, shared them and developed a wealth of information around plant varieties and uses. This practice enables sustainability and biodiversity and reduces costs. For rural womxn in the Global South, 80 percent of the total seed supply is produced on farms. The popularity of cash crops and high yields means farmers are increasingly dependent on commercial seeds. They now face penalties, including criminal penalties, for practicing seed saving and sharing methods. RCEP and other trade agreements currently being negotiated include intellectual property protections that go well beyond the requirements of the WTO agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). If the TPP provisions are replicated in RCEP, states will be required to sign the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV91). The convention provides intellectual property protection for seeds and plants, which generally prohibits farmers from saving and sharing protected seeds, including seeds that they had been freely using prior to the protection being granted. UPOV91 allows agrifood companies to utilize both the plant breeder rights restrictions and patent protection. Effectively, it means that farmers must purchase new seeds every year. While an exemption exists for small landholders who grow subsistence crops, the exemption applies only to landowners. The vast majority of womxn farmers are not landowners. Consequently, the provision exacerbates existing discrimination that precludes womxn from land ownership. Currently developed countries within the RCEP — Australia, Japan, South Korea and Singapore — are signatories to UPOV91, while Vietnam is the only "developing" country within RCEP to have signed on to the convention. However, after years of pressure from both multinational seed corporations and developed countries seeking to impose the convention through trade agreements, Thailand has also recently drafted laws to comply with UPOV91. The draft law makes seed saving and sharing subject to criminal sanctions that can include imprisonment or a fine or both. Womxn farmers are faced with the choice of risking prison or going into debt annually to buy seeds that, if crops fail, could bankrupt them. Womxn's Health and Access to Medicines Trade agreements seek to harmonize intellectual property rights awarded to corporations and remove hard-fought TRIPS provisions designed to give developing countries flexibilities in the implementation of intellectual property rules. The intellectual property provisions within the TPP, if replicated within RCEP, would have a profound impact on womxn's rights. The provisions within the TPP extend the period of protection for medicines and protections for small variations, and provide additional periods for testing and licensing. Womxn's health outcomes are threatened by trade agreements that enable the privatization of health services and reduce access to generic and subsidized medicines. Trade agreements increasingly include service chapters that require state services to be opened to foreign investment if any part of the industry is currently provided by the private sector. Womxn's access to affordable medicines is threatened, particularly by the inclusion of the two largest providers of generic medicines, India and China, in RCEP. Monopoly protections awarded to pharmaceutical companies will significantly increase the costs of medicines, which will particularly impact on the poorest. One study found that the TPP will drastically reduce the percentage of HIV-positive Vietnamese with access to antiretroviral therapy from 68 percent to 30 percent. In Malaysia, the price of the breast cancer drug Herceptin could go from $2,600 to $44,000. Evidence suggests that when health care is privatized or becomes more costly, rural and low-income families are less likely to spend on womxn's reproductive health care. Intellectual property rights have been awarded for traditional plants and medicines used by rural and indigenous womxn for generations, but "discovered" by foreign corporations (or foreign corporations who have purchased the rights from researchers). For example, womxn in northern Thailand have used a traditional root, pueraria mirifica, for various hormonal problems, including those related to menstruation, menopause and fertility, and, consequently, have some of the lowest breast cancer rates in the world. They often sell the product at local markets. In 2004, the United States was awarded a patent for the plant, including for simply drying or pulverizing it.

<h4>Further, preferential trade agreements cause structural violence against womxn health inequities</h4><p><strong>Lappin ‘18</strong> [Kate Lappin, regional coordinator of the Asia Pacific Forum on Womxn, Law and Development, “Free Trade or Womxn's Rights?” https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/free-trade-or-womxns-rights, *changed inherently masculine language to womxn]</p><p><u>A central purpose of trade agreements is to open up agriculture and land to foreign investment</u>. Many countries restrict foreign investment in land and provide leases or concessions to investors on a case-by-case basis. It is likely that RCEP, such as other trade agreements, will incorporate a "national treatment" provision that requires governments to provide foreign investors with the same rights and privileges as local investors. Consequently, unless governments provide a specific exemption in the agreement, land can be purchased by foreign corporations and individuals. Among the attractions of Asian countries to foreign investors is the apparent abundance of cheap land. In fact, approximately <u>19 million hectares of land in Asia has been acquired in deals involving foreign investors in the last decade</u>. In the period following the financial crisis, speculative finance rushed to the security of land, resulting in a 334 percent increase in cross-border real estate investments between 2008 and 2015, and investors intensified pressure on governments to enable foreign land investments. This makes small land holdings vulnerable, particularly where documentation of land tenure is not secured. Furthermore, the <u>expansion of export-oriented crops has led to decreasing availability of land used for subsistence agriculture that is primarily tilled by womxn. Small-scale, subsistence farms of womxn are unable to compete with huge agrobusiness monopolies</u> because of economies of scale and the benefits of large capital, coupled with pre-existing discrimination <u>that means womxn are less likely to have access to inputs, credit, technology and information</u>. Further, <u>they are less likely to be able to fulfill the regulatory requirements that come with cross-border, digitalized trade</u>. In addition, the <u>removal of tariffs on imports means that subsidized food can flood a local market and displace womxn's produce</u>. The North American Free Trade Agreement (<u>Nafta) was associated with two million farmers losing their land, resulting in high levels of internal and external migration. For womxn, this meant migrating into dangerous special economic zones where labor exploitation and violence against womxn has been well documented, or across borders to become migrant domestic workers</u>. While foreign investment has led to large areas of arable land being developed for the production of food crops, far from enhancing the food security of local communities, investment in the agricultural sector has frequently been for the purpose of developing export industries that largely benefit large corporations. The expansion of commercial agriculture also leads to the depletion of communal land and resources, which womxn frequently rely on for the collection of fuel, water and fodder for medicinal purposes. Further, <u>these large-scale projects are often undertaken without sufficient consultation of womxn in local communities and without their free, prior and informed consent. Forced evictions and reductions of land and forest cause shifts in labor and migration patterns. Womxn leave their homes and work as laborers </u>in factories or plantations or as domestic workers with substandard labor conditions. Militarization of land concessions, which allows intimidation and violence by armed security guards (including private security, state police and military), has also threatened the security of womxn human rights defenders involved in land disputes. Intellectual Property Rights for Corporations For generations, womxn have saved seeds, shared them and developed a wealth of information around plant varieties and uses. This practice enables sustainability and biodiversity and reduces costs. For<u> rural womxn in the Global South, 80 percent of the total seed supply is produced on farms</u>. The popularity of cash crops and high yields means farmers are increasingly dependent on commercial seeds. <u>They now face penalties</u>, including criminal penalties, <u>for practicing seed saving and sharing methods</u>. RCEP and other trade agreements currently being negotiated include intellectual property protections that go well beyond the requirements of the WTO agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). If the TPP provisions are replicated in RCEP, states will be required to sign the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV91). The convention provides intellectual property protection for seeds and plants, which generally prohibits farmers from saving and sharing protected seeds, including seeds that they had been freely using prior to the protection being granted. UPOV91 allows agrifood companies to utilize both the plant breeder rights restrictions and patent protection. Effectively, it means that farmers must purchase new seeds every year. While an exemption exists for small landholders who grow subsistence crops, the exemption applies only to landowners. The vast majority of womxn farmers are not landowners. Consequently, the provision exacerbates existing discrimination that precludes womxn from land ownership. Currently developed countries within the RCEP — Australia, Japan, South Korea and Singapore — are signatories to UPOV91, while Vietnam is the only "developing" country within RCEP to have signed on to the convention. However, after years of pressure from both multinational seed corporations and developed countries seeking to impose the convention through trade agreements, Thailand has also recently drafted laws to comply with UPOV91. The draft law makes seed saving and sharing subject to criminal sanctions that can include imprisonment or a fine or both. Womxn farmers are faced with the choice of risking prison or going into debt annually to buy seeds that, if crops fail, could bankrupt them. Womxn's Health and Access to Medicines Trade agreements seek to harmonize intellectual property rights awarded to corporations and remove hard-fought TRIPS provisions designed to give developing countries flexibilities in the implementation of intellectual property rules. The intellectual property provisions within the TPP, if replicated within RCEP, would have a profound impact on womxn's rights. The provisions within the TPP extend the period of protection for medicines and protections for small variations, and provide additional periods for testing and licensing. <u><mark>Womxn's health</mark> outcomes <mark>are threatened by trade agreements that enable</mark> the <mark>privatization</mark> of health services <mark>and reduce access to</mark> generic and <mark>subsidized medicines</mark>. Trade agreements increasingly include service chapters that require state services to be opened to foreign investment</u> if any part of the industry is currently provided by the private sector. <u>Womxn's access to affordable medicines is threatened, particularly by the inclusion of the two largest providers of generic medicines, India and China, in RCEP. <mark>Monopoly protections</mark> awarded to pharmaceutical companies will <mark>significantly increase the costs of medicines</mark>, which will particularly impact on the poorest</u>. One study found that the TPP will drastically reduce the percentage of HIV-positive Vietnamese with access to antiretroviral therapy from 68 percent to 30 percent. In Malaysia, the price of the breast cancer drug Herceptin could go from $2,600 to $44,000. Evidence suggests that when health care is privatized or becomes more costly, rural and low-income families are less likely to spend on womxn's reproductive health care. Intellectual property rights have been awarded for traditional plants and medicines used by rural and indigenous womxn for generations, but "discovered" by foreign corporations (or foreign corporations who have purchased the rights from researchers). For example, womxn in northern Thailand have used a traditional root, pueraria mirifica, for various hormonal problems, including those related to menstruation, menopause and fertility, and, consequently, have some of the lowest breast cancer rates in the world. They often sell the product at local markets. In 2004, the United States was awarded a patent for the plant, including for simply drying or pulverizing it.</p>

Contention 2 is economic exploitation

Subpoint B is trade

./documents/hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

N

2023 Ivy Street Round Robin

1

Blake

Berthiaume,Dyar

trigger warning - there are non-graphic descriptions of violence against womxn in the doc and cites 1NC - fem framing, C1 peacekeepers, C2 economic exploitation 1AC - Russian pivot, Turkey 2NC - womxn IVI, Turkey leverage turn 2AC - like a million turns on everything 1NR - everything 1AR - Turkey, womxn IVI 2NR - IVI, trade, Turkey turn 2AR - Turkey, womxn IVI

hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

2023-01-26 16:56:29

LiHa

Mountain Brook LiHa

So.....

Li.....

Pa.....

Ha.....

MountainBrook

Mountain Brook

AL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

US diplomacy is rigged for economic exploitation and harmful trade agreements – new legal requirements prove

Hunt ’22

Hunt ’22 [Edward Hunt holds a PhD in American Studies from the College of William & Mary, “Trump-Era Law Pushes U.S. Diplomacy Toward Imperialism,” 1-13-22, https://progressive.org/latest/trump-law-us-diplomacy-imperialism-hunt-220113/]

U.S. diplomats are now legally required to open markets for U.S. businesses U.S. diplomats have a legal obligation to help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets, a main feature of imperialism U.S. diplomats are facing new legal pressures to open markets wherever they are stationed around the world Departments of] State efforts support U.S. businesses seeking to enter or expand in overseas markets the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act included several new requirements for U.S. diplomats, primarily in the area of economic and commercial diplomacy Each chief of mission to a foreign country shall have as a principal duty the promotion of U S economic interests in such country,” the law says. U.S. diplomats now receive increased training in economic and commercial diplomacy and are required to consult with business leaders on trade expansion An archive of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables provides extensive documentation of how U.S. diplomats serve the interests of U.S. businesses under the 2019 law, U.S. diplomats now appear to be legally required to engage in imperial practices Biden has remained silent about the changes

U.S. diplomats have a legal obligation to help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets, a main feature of imperialism the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act included new requirements for diplomats Each chief of mission shall have a principal duty the promotion of economic interests the law says diplomats are required to consult with business leaders on trade expansion diplomats serve the interests of businesses

A report published last month by the U.S. Government Accountability Office indicates that U.S. diplomats are now legally required to open markets for U.S. businesses. In a review of a little-noticed act that was signed into law in 2019 by then-President Donald Trump, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) interpreted the law to mean that U.S. diplomats have a legal obligation to help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets, a practice that is a main feature of imperialism. Since the time of the Open Door Policy, when U.S. diplomats sought to open the door to the markets of China in the early twentieth century, critics have viewed the approach as the guiding doctrine of U.S. imperialism. Only now, U.S. diplomats are facing new legal pressures to open markets wherever they are stationed around the world. “We focused on activities that [the Departments of] State and Commerce identified as key to their efforts to support U.S. businesses seeking to enter or expand in overseas markets,” the GAO explained. In December 2019, Trump signed the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act, a bill in a broader legislative package approved by Congress. Receiving little attention at the time, the act included several new requirements for U.S. diplomats, primarily in the area of economic and commercial diplomacy. The act amends the Foreign Service Act of 1980 to require diplomats to promote U.S. economic and commercial interests. This amendment complements an already existing legal requirement that diplomats prioritize the promotion of U.S. products for export. “Each chief of mission to a foreign country shall have as a principal duty the promotion of United States economic and commercial interests in such country,” the law says. U.S. diplomats now receive increased training in economic and commercial diplomacy, are subject to new reporting on economic and commercial activities, and are required to consult with business leaders on trade expansion. New training for diplomats, the law notes, must focus on “market access and other elements of an enabling framework for United States businesses, commercial advocacy, and United States foreign economic policy.” The GAO interprets these requirements to mean that U.S. diplomats must help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets. The act’s language of “economic and commercial diplomacy” is defined by the GAO as “efforts to promote U.S. economic and commercial interests abroad and to create an enabling environment for U.S. businesses to enter or expand in an overseas market.” This interpretation of the law is consistent with imperialism, which political theorists and advocates alike have long defined as economic expansion into new markets. “New markets and new opportunities for investment must be found if surplus capital is to be profitably employed,” Charles A. Conant wrote in his 1898 essay “The Economic Basis of ‘Imperialism’.” At the time of the law’s passage, the Trump Administration was pushing to open markets for U.S. businesses. Its Trade Policy Agenda prioritized the use of U.S. economic power to open markets around the world. “I’m opening up markets like nobody has ever opened markets before,” Trump boasted. At the State Department, Trump’s Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, directed a major effort to focus U.S. diplomacy on the task of opening markets. After informing U.S. diplomats of his plans in a November 2018 cable titled “Boosting Commercial Diplomacy around the World,” Pompeo went on a speaking tour in which he repeatedly informed business leaders that the State Department was working on their behalf. “Economic diplomacy is very much at the core of what the State Department does,” Pompeo explained at a gathering of business leaders. The State Department, he said, can help them “attack markets all around the world.” A key vehicle of the Trump Administration’s approach was its “Deal Teams,” which Pompeo introduced to U.S. diplomats in a February 2020 cable. This effort brought together officials from the Departments of State and Commerce to help U.S. businesses pursue new investment opportunities abroad. As of mid-2021, Deal Teams were operating in 179 countries. Of course, the Trump Administration’s focus on economic and commercial diplomacy was nothing new for the United States. Arguably, a core mission of the U.S. Foreign Service has always been to support U.S. businesses. “It is foundational to our purpose,” Barbara Stephenson wrote in a 2019 article, when she was the president of the American Foreign Service Association, a professional association of U.S. diplomats. “It is a major reason why the U.S. Foreign Service was created, why we exist.” A great deal of evidence for the long history of U.S. imperial diplomacy comes from the scholarly literature on U.S. diplomatic history. The Wisconsin School of diplomatic history, an influential school of thought among U.S. diplomatic historians, is famous for showing how U.S. diplomats have worked to open markets for U.S. businesses. The scholars of the Wisconsin School “did more than anyone else to transform U.S. imperialism into a valuable field of research,” notes James G. Morgan in his 2014 book, Into New Territory. An archive of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables that WikiLeaks published in 2010 and 2011 provides extensive documentation of how U.S. diplomats serve the interests of U.S. businesses. In the words of Chelsea Manning, the whistleblower who sent the cables to WikiLeaks, the archive shows “how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective.” But, under the 2019 law, U.S. diplomats now appear to be legally required to engage in imperial practices. The Biden Administration has remained silent about the Trump-era changes. Nothing in the GAO’s report indicates that anyone in Washington has a problem with the new legal requirements. The State Department officials who reviewed the report raised no objections to the GAO’s interpretation of the law. Two years after the passage of the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act, it appears that nobody in Washington is concerned about a law that seemingly requires U.S. diplomats to be imperialists.

<h4>US diplomacy is rigged for economic exploitation and harmful trade agreements – new legal requirements prove</h4><p><strong>Hunt ’22</strong> [Edward Hunt holds a PhD in American Studies from the College of William & Mary, “Trump-Era Law Pushes U.S. Diplomacy Toward Imperialism,” 1-13-22, https://progressive.org/latest/trump-law-us-diplomacy-imperialism-hunt-220113/]</p><p>A report published last month by the U.S. Government Accountability Office indicates that <u>U.S. diplomats are now legally required to open markets for U.S. businesses</u>. In a review of a little-noticed act that was signed into law in 2019 by then-President Donald Trump, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) interpreted the law to mean that <u><mark>U.S. diplomats have a legal obligation to help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets, <strong>a</u></strong></mark> practice that is a <u><strong><mark>main feature of imperialism</u></strong></mark>. Since the time of the Open Door Policy, when U.S. diplomats sought to open the door to the markets of China in the early twentieth century, critics have viewed the approach as the guiding doctrine of U.S. imperialism. Only now, <u>U.S. diplomats are facing new legal pressures to open markets wherever they are stationed around the world</u>. “We focused on activities that [the <u>Departments of] State</u> and Commerce identified as key to their <u>efforts</u> to <u>support U.S. businesses seeking to enter or expand in overseas markets</u>,” the GAO explained. In December 2019, Trump signed <u><mark>the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act</u></mark>, a bill in a broader legislative package approved by Congress. Receiving little attention at the time, the act <u><mark>included</mark> several <mark>new requirements for</mark> U.S. <mark>diplomats</mark>, primarily in the area of economic and commercial diplomacy</u>. The act amends the Foreign Service Act of 1980 to require diplomats to promote U.S. economic and commercial interests. This amendment complements an already existing legal requirement that diplomats prioritize the promotion of U.S. products for export. “<u><mark>Each chief of mission</mark> to a foreign country <mark>shall have</mark> as <mark>a principal duty the promotion of</mark> U</u>nited <u>S</u>tates <u><mark>economic</u></mark> and commercial <u><mark>interests</mark> in such country,” <mark>the law says</mark>. U.S. <mark>diplomats</mark> now receive increased training in economic and commercial diplomacy</u>, are subject to new reporting on economic and commercial activities, <u>and <mark>are required to consult with business leaders on trade expansion</u></mark>. New training for diplomats, the law notes, must focus on “market access and other elements of an enabling framework for United States businesses, commercial advocacy, and United States foreign economic policy.” The GAO interprets these requirements to mean that U.S. diplomats must help U.S. businesses gain access to overseas markets. The act’s language of “economic and commercial diplomacy” is defined by the GAO as “efforts to promote U.S. economic and commercial interests abroad and to create an enabling environment for U.S. businesses to enter or expand in an overseas market.” This interpretation of the law is consistent with imperialism, which political theorists and advocates alike have long defined as economic expansion into new markets. “New markets and new opportunities for investment must be found if surplus capital is to be profitably employed,” Charles A. Conant wrote in his 1898 essay “The Economic Basis of ‘Imperialism’.” At the time of the law’s passage, the Trump Administration was pushing to open markets for U.S. businesses. Its Trade Policy Agenda prioritized the use of U.S. economic power to open markets around the world. “I’m opening up markets like nobody has ever opened markets before,” Trump boasted. At the State Department, Trump’s Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, directed a major effort to focus U.S. diplomacy on the task of opening markets. After informing U.S. diplomats of his plans in a November 2018 cable titled “Boosting Commercial Diplomacy around the World,” Pompeo went on a speaking tour in which he repeatedly informed business leaders that the State Department was working on their behalf. “Economic diplomacy is very much at the core of what the State Department does,” Pompeo explained at a gathering of business leaders. The State Department, he said, can help them “attack markets all around the world.” A key vehicle of the Trump Administration’s approach was its “Deal Teams,” which Pompeo introduced to U.S. diplomats in a February 2020 cable. This effort brought together officials from the Departments of State and Commerce to help U.S. businesses pursue new investment opportunities abroad. As of mid-2021, Deal Teams were operating in 179 countries. Of course, the Trump Administration’s focus on economic and commercial diplomacy was nothing new for the United States. Arguably, a core mission of the U.S. Foreign Service has always been to support U.S. businesses. “It is foundational to our purpose,” Barbara Stephenson wrote in a 2019 article, when she was the president of the American Foreign Service Association, a professional association of U.S. diplomats. “It is a major reason why the U.S. Foreign Service was created, why we exist.” A great deal of evidence for the long history of U.S. imperial diplomacy comes from the scholarly literature on U.S. diplomatic history. The Wisconsin School of diplomatic history, an influential school of thought among U.S. diplomatic historians, is famous for showing how U.S. diplomats have worked to open markets for U.S. businesses. The scholars of the Wisconsin School “did more than anyone else to transform U.S. imperialism into a valuable field of research,” notes James G. Morgan in his 2014 book, Into New Territory. <u>An archive of more than 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables</u> that WikiLeaks published in 2010 and 2011 <u>provides extensive documentation of how U.S. <mark>diplomats serve the interests of</mark> U.S. <mark>businesses</u></mark>. In the words of Chelsea Manning, the whistleblower who sent the cables to WikiLeaks, the archive shows “how the first world exploits the third, in detail, from an internal perspective.” But, <u>under the 2019 law, U.S. diplomats now appear to be legally required to engage in imperial practices</u>. The <u>Biden</u> Administration <u>has remained silent about the</u> Trump-era <u>changes</u>. Nothing in the GAO’s report indicates that anyone in Washington has a problem with the new legal requirements. The State Department officials who reviewed the report raised no objections to the GAO’s interpretation of the law. Two years after the passage of the Championing American Business Through Diplomacy Act, it appears that nobody in Washington is concerned about a law that seemingly requires U.S. diplomats to be imperialists. </p>

Contention 2 is economic exploitation

Subpoint B is trade

./documents/hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

N

2023 Ivy Street Round Robin

1

Blake

Berthiaume,Dyar

trigger warning - there are non-graphic descriptions of violence against womxn in the doc and cites 1NC - fem framing, C1 peacekeepers, C2 economic exploitation 1AC - Russian pivot, Turkey 2NC - womxn IVI, Turkey leverage turn 2AC - like a million turns on everything 1NR - everything 1AR - Turkey, womxn IVI 2NR - IVI, trade, Turkey turn 2AR - Turkey, womxn IVI

hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

2023-01-26 16:56:29

LiHa

Mountain Brook LiHa

So.....

Li.....

Pa.....

Ha.....

MountainBrook

Mountain Brook

AL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Education - utilitarian logic shifts the conversation to unrealistic events we learn nothing from, but centering structural violence combats this

Jackson 12

Jackson 12 [Richard Jackson is the director of the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, the University of Otago. Former. Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University, 8-5-12, The Great Con of National Security, http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/the-great-con-of-national-security/, *changed inherently masculine language to womxn]

For the most part, however, most of what you’ve been told about national security and all the big threats is one big con designed to distract you from the things that can really hurt you, such as poverty, inequality and structural violence and the proliferation of weapons The facts are simple and irrefutable you’re far more likely to die from lack of health care than terrorism Iran North Korea computer hackers from domestic violence than from asylum seekers; yet, politicians and the servile media spend most of their time talking about the threats posed by terrorism, immigration, asylum seekers, the drug trade, the nuclear programmes of Iran and North Korea computer hackers, the threat of China and a host of other issues all about as equally unlikely to affect the well-being of you and your family Along with this obsessive and perennial discussion of national security issues’ the state spends vast sums on security measures which have virtually no impact on the actual risk of dying from these threats This display is meant to convince you that these threats are really, really serious while this is going on the rulers are hoping that you won’t notice that increasing social and economic inequality in society leads to increased ill health for a growing underclass; that workplaces remain highly dangerous and kill and maim hundreds of people that there are preventable diseases which plague the poorer sections of society; that domestic violence kills and injures thousands and that globally, poverty and preventable disease kills tens of millions of people they are hoping that you won’t notice how much structural violence there is in the world. they are hoping that you won’t notice that while literally trillions of dollars are spent on military weapons, foreign wars and security theatre that domestic violence programmes struggle to provide even minimal support that welfare measures have been inadequate for decades that health measures remain insufficiently the ongoing danger of terrorists. is more exciting for the media than stories about how poor people and people of colour are discriminated against national security is one massive confidence trick misdirection on an epic scale. Its primary function is to distract you from the structures and inequalities in society which are the real threat and to convince you to be permanently afraid so that you will keep the m i c ticking if you think that terrorists or immigrants or Iran are a greater threat to your safety than the capitalist system you have conned you’re much more likely to die from any one of several forms of structural violence than terrorism

what you’ve been told about the big threats is one big con to distract you from poverty, inequality structural violence rulers are hoping you won’t notice increasing inequality domestic violence poverty and preventable disease kills tens of millions terrorists is more exciting than stories about how poor people are discriminated against

It may have once been the case that being attacked by another country was a major threat to the lives of ordinary people. It may also be true that there are still some pretty serious dangers out there associated with the spread of nuclear weapons. For the most part, however, most of what you’ve been told about national security and all the big threats which can supposedly kill you is one big con designed to distract you from the things that can really hurt you, such as the poverty, inequality and structural violence of capitalism, global warming, and the manufacture and proliferation of weapons – among others. The facts are simple and irrefutable: you’re far more likely to die from lack of health care provision than you are from terrorism; from stress and overwork than Iranian or North Korean nuclear missiles; from lack of road safety than from illegal immigrants; from mental illness and suicide than from computer hackers; from domestic violence than from asylum seekers; from the misuse of legal medicines and alcohol abuse than from international drug lords. And yet, politicians and the servile media spend most of their time talking about the threats posed by terrorism, immigration, asylum seekers, the international drug trade, the nuclear programmes of Iran and North Korea, computer hackers, animal rights activism, the threat of China, and a host of other issues which are all about as equally unlikely to affect the health and well-being of you and your family. Along with this obsessive and perennial discussion of so-called ‘national security issues’, the state spends truly vast sums on security measures which have virtually no impact on the actual risk of dying from these threats, and then engages in massive displays of ‘security theatre’ designed to show just how seriously the state takes these threats – such as the x-ray machines and security measures in every public building, surveillance cameras everywhere, missile launchers in urban areas, drones in Afghanistan, armed police in airports, and a thousand other things. This display is meant to convince you that these threats are really, really serious. And while all this is going on, the rulers of society are hoping that you won’t notice that increasing social and economic inequality in society leads to increased ill health for a growing underclass; that suicide and crime always rise when unemployment rises; that workplaces remain highly dangerous and kill and maim hundreds of people per year; that there are preventable diseases which plague the poorer sections of society; that domestic violence kills and injures thousands of womxn and children annually; and that globally, poverty and preventable disease kills tens of millions of people needlessly every year. In other words, they are hoping that you won’t notice how much structural violence there is in the world. More than this, they are hoping that you won’t notice that while literally trillions of dollars are spent on military weapons, foreign wars and security theatre (which also arguably do nothing to make any us any safer, and may even make us marginally less safe), that domestic violence programmes struggle to provide even minimal support for womxn and children at risk of serious harm from their partners; that underfunded mental health programmes mean long waiting lists to receive basic care for at-risk individuals; that drug and alcohol rehabilitation programmes lack the funding to match the demand for help; that welfare measures aimed at reducing inequality have been inadequate for decades; that health and safety measures at many workplaces remain insufficiently resourced; and that measures to tackle global warming and developing alternative energy remain hopelessly inadequate. Of course, none of this is surprising. Politicians are a part of the system; they don’t want to change it. For them, all the insecurity, death and ill-health caused by capitalist inequality are a price worth paying to keep the basic social structures as they are. A more egalitarian society based on equality, solidarity, and other non-materialist values would not suit their interests, or the special interests of the lobby groups they are indebted to. It is also true that dealing with economic and social inequality, improving public health, changing international structures of inequality, restructuring the military-industrial complex, and making the necessary economic and political changes to deal with global warming will be extremely difficult and will require long-term commitment and determination. For politicians looking towards the next election, it is clearly much easier to paint immigrants as a threat to social order or pontificate about the ongoing danger of terrorists. It is also more exciting for the media than stories about how poor people and people of colour are discriminated against and suffer worse health as a consequence. Viewed from this vantage point, national security is one massive confidence trick – misdirection on an epic scale. Its primary function is to distract you from the structures and inequalities in society which are the real threat to the health and wellbeing of you and your family, and to convince you to be permanently afraid so that you will acquiesce to all the security measures which keep you under state control and keep the military-industrial complex ticking along. Keep this in mind next time you hear a politician talking about the threat of uncontrolled immigration, the risk posed by asylum seekers or the threat of Iran, or the need to expand counter-terrorism powers. The question is: when politicians are talking about national security, what is that they don’t want you to think and talk about? What exactly is the misdirection they are engaged in? The truth is, if you think that terrorists or immigrants or asylum seekers or Iran are a greater threat to your safety than the capitalist system, you have been well and truly conned, my friend. Don’t believe the hype: you’re much more likely to die from any one of several forms of structural violence in society than you are from immigrants or terrorism. Somehow, we need to challenge the politicians on this fact.

<h4>Education - utilitarian logic shifts the conversation to unrealistic events we learn nothing from, but centering structural violence combats this </h4><p><strong>Jackson 12</strong> [Richard Jackson is the director of the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, the University of Otago. Former. Professor of International Politics at Aberystwyth University, 8-5-12, The Great Con of National Security, http://richardjacksonterrorismblog.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/the-great-con-of-national-security/, *changed inherently masculine language to womxn]</p><p>It may have once been the case that being attacked by another country was a major threat to the lives of ordinary people. It may also be true that there are still some pretty serious dangers out there associated with the spread of nuclear weapons. <u>For the most part, however, most of</u> <u><mark>what you’ve been told about</mark> national security</u> <u>and all <mark>the big threats</u></mark> which can supposedly kill you <u><mark>is <strong>one big con</strong> </mark>designed <mark>to <strong>distract you</strong> from </mark>the things that can really hurt you, such as</u> the <u><strong><mark>poverty, inequality </mark>and <mark>structural violence</u></strong></mark> of capitalism, global warming, <u>and the</u> manufacture and <u>proliferation of weapons</u> – among others. <u>The facts are simple and irrefutable</u>: <u>you’re far more likely to die from lack of health care</u> provision <u>than</u> you are from <u>terrorism</u>; from stress and overwork than <u>Iran</u>ian or <u>North Korea</u>n nuclear missiles; from lack of road safety than from illegal immigrants; from mental illness and suicide than from <u>computer hackers</u>; <u>from domestic violence than from</u> <u>asylum seekers; </u>from the misuse of legal medicines and alcohol abuse than from international drug lords. And <u>yet, politicians and the servile media</u> <u>spend most of their time talking about</u> <u>the threats posed by terrorism, immigration, asylum seekers, the </u>international <u>drug trade, the</u> <u>nuclear programmes of Iran and North Korea</u>, <u>computer hackers,</u> animal rights activism, <u>the</u> <u>threat of China</u>, <u>and a host of other issues</u> which are <u>all about as</u> <u><strong>equally unlikely to affect</strong> the</u> health and <u>well-being of <strong>you</strong> and your family</u>. <u>Along with this obsessive and perennial</u> <u>discussion of </u>so-called ‘<u>national security issues’</u>, <u>the state spends </u>truly<u> vast</u> <u>sums on security measures which have <strong>virtually no impact on the actual risk of dying from these threats</u></strong>, and then engages in massive displays of ‘security theatre’ designed to show just how seriously the state takes these threats – such as the x-ray machines and security measures in every public building, surveillance cameras everywhere, missile launchers in urban areas, drones in Afghanistan, armed police in airports, and a thousand other things. <u>This display is meant to convince you that these threats are really, really serious</u>. And <u>while</u> all <u>this is going on</u>, <u>the <mark>rulers</u></mark> of society <u><mark>are <strong>hoping </mark>that <mark>you won’t notice</strong></mark> that</u> <u><mark>increasing </mark>social and economic <mark>inequality</mark> in society leads to increased ill health for a growing underclass; </u>that suicide and crime always rise when unemployment rises; <u>that workplaces remain highly dangerous and kill and maim hundreds of people</u> per year; <u>that there are preventable diseases which plague the poorer sections of society;</u> <u>that <mark>domestic violence</mark> kills and injures thousands</u> of womxn and children annually; <u>and that globally, <mark>poverty and preventable disease kills tens of millions</mark> of people</u> needlessly every year. In other words, <u>they are hoping that you won’t notice how much structural violence there is in the world.</u> More than this, <u>they are hoping that you won’t notice that while <strong>literally trillions of dollars are spent on military weapons</strong>, foreign wars and security theatre</u> (which also arguably do nothing to make any us any safer, and may even make us marginally less safe), <u>that domestic</u> <u>violence programmes struggle to provide even minimal support</u> for womxn and children at risk of serious harm from their partners; that underfunded mental health programmes mean long waiting lists to receive basic care for at-risk individuals; that drug and alcohol rehabilitation programmes lack the funding to match the demand for help; <u>that</u> <u>welfare measures</u> aimed at reducing inequality <u>have been inadequate for decades</u>; <u>that</u> <u>health</u> and safety <u>measures</u> at many workplaces <u>remain insufficiently</u> resourced; and that measures to tackle global warming and developing alternative energy remain hopelessly inadequate. Of course, none of this is surprising. Politicians are a part of the system; they don’t want to change it. For them, all the insecurity, death and ill-health caused by capitalist inequality are a price worth paying to keep the basic social structures as they are. A more egalitarian society based on equality, solidarity, and other non-materialist values would not suit their interests, or the special interests of the lobby groups they are indebted to. It is also true that dealing with economic and social inequality, improving public health, changing international structures of inequality, restructuring the military-industrial complex, and making the necessary economic and political changes to deal with global warming will be extremely difficult and will require long-term commitment and determination. For politicians looking towards the next election, it is clearly much easier to paint immigrants as a threat to social order or pontificate about <u>the ongoing danger of <mark>terrorists</mark>.</u> It <u><mark>is</u></mark> also <u><strong><mark>more exciting</strong> </mark>for the media <mark>than stories about how poor</u> <u>people</mark> and people of colour <mark>are discriminated against</u></mark> and suffer worse health as a consequence. Viewed from this vantage point, <u>national security is one massive confidence trick</u> – <u><strong>misdirection on an epic scale</strong>.</u> <u>Its primary function is to distract you from the structures and inequalities in society which are the real threat</u> to the health and wellbeing of you and your family, <u>and to convince you to be permanently afraid so that you</u> <u>will</u> acquiesce to all the security measures which keep you under state control and <u>keep</u> <u>the <strong>m</u></strong>ilitary-<u><strong>i</u></strong>ndustrial <u><strong>c</u></strong>omplex <u>ticking</u> along. Keep this in mind next time you hear a politician talking about the threat of uncontrolled immigration, the risk posed by asylum seekers or the threat of Iran, or the need to expand counter-terrorism powers. The question is: when politicians are talking about national security, what is that they don’t want you to think and talk about? What exactly is the misdirection they are engaged in? The truth is, <u>if you think that terrorists or immigrants</u> or asylum seekers <u>or Iran are a greater threat to your safety than the capitalist system</u>, <u>you have</u> been well and truly <u>conned</u>, my friend. Don’t believe the hype: <u>you’re much more likely to die from any one of several forms of structural violence</u> in society <u>than</u> you are from immigrants or <u>terrorism</u>. Somehow, we need to challenge the politicians on this fact.</p>

First is framing – prefer impacts regarding womxn– 2 warrants

./documents/hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

N

2023 Ivy Street Round Robin

1

Blake

Berthiaume,Dyar

trigger warning - there are non-graphic descriptions of violence against womxn in the doc and cites 1NC - fem framing, C1 peacekeepers, C2 economic exploitation 1AC - Russian pivot, Turkey 2NC - womxn IVI, Turkey leverage turn 2AC - like a million turns on everything 1NR - everything 1AR - Turkey, womxn IVI 2NR - IVI, trade, Turkey turn 2AR - Turkey, womxn IVI

hspf22/MountainBrook/LiHa/MountainBrook-LiHa-Con-2023-Ivy-Street-Round-Robin-Round-1.docx

2023-01-26 16:56:29

LiHa

Mountain Brook LiHa

So.....

Li.....

Pa.....

Ha.....

MountainBrook

Mountain Brook

AL

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

RTW positive effect on wages

Reed, W. R. (2003). How right-to-work laws affect wages. Journal of Labor Research, 24(4), 713–730. doi:10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1 // https://sci-hub.ru/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1

Reed, W. R. (2003). How right-to-work laws affect wages. Journal of Labor Research, 24(4), 713–730. doi:10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1 // https://sci-hub.ru/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1

Using state-level data RTW states have average wages that are significantly higher than non-RTW states . An important distinctive of this study is that it controls for state economic conditions at the time states adopted RTW. States that adopted RTW were generally poorer than other states Failure to control for these initial conditions may be the reason that previous studies have not identified a positive wage impact for RTW.

Using state-level data, , RTW states have average wages that are significantly higher than non-RTW states. this study it controls for state economic conditions . Failure to control for these initial conditions may be the reason that previous studies have not identified a positive wage impact for RTW.

I examine the wage effects of Right-To-Work (RTW). Using state-level data, I estimate that, ceteris paribus, RTW states have average wages that are significantly higher than non-RTW states. This result is robust is across a wide variety of specifications. An important distinctive of this study is that it controls for state economic conditions at the time states adopted RTW. States that adopted RTW were generally poorer than other states. Failure to control for these initial conditions may be the reason that previous studies have not identified a positive wage impact for RTW.

<h4><strong>RTW positive effect on wages</h4><p><u><mark>Reed, W. R. (2003). How right-to-work laws affect wages. Journal of Labor Research, 24(4), 713–730. doi:10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1 // https://sci-hub.ru/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12122-003-1022-1</p><p></u></strong></mark>I examine the wage effects of Right-To-Work (RTW). <u><strong><mark>Using state-level data</u></strong>,</mark> I estimate that, ceteris paribus<mark>, <u><strong>RTW states have average wages that are significantly higher than non-RTW states</u></strong>.</mark> This result is robust is across a wide variety of specifications<u><strong>. An important distinctive of <mark>this study</strong></mark> <strong>is that <mark>it controls for state economic conditions</strong></mark> <strong>at the time states adopted RTW. States that adopted RTW were generally poorer than other states</u></strong><mark>. <u><strong>Failure to control for these initial conditions may be the reason that previous studies have not identified a positive wage impact for RTW.</p></u></strong></mark>

Rebuttal

Contention Two: Police Unions

./documents/hspf22/TheQuarryLaneSchool/YaLi/TheQuarryLaneSchool-YaLi-Con-37th-Annual-Stanford-Invitational-Round-6.docx

N

37th Annual Stanford Invitational

6

Miramonte RA

Rusk, Gabe

1AC - Wages, Healthcare 1NC - Presumption, Police Unions 2AC - All 2NC - All 1AR - Wages, Healthcare 1NR - Presumption, Turn 2AR - Same 2NR - Same

hspf22/TheQuarryLaneSchool/YaLi/TheQuarryLaneSchool-YaLi-Con-37th-Annual-Stanford-Invitational-Round-6.docx

2023-02-12 20:18:56

YaLi

The Quarry Lane School YaLi

Ti.....

Ya.....

Ti.....

Li.....

TheQuarryLaneSchool

The Quarry Lane School

CA

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Empirically, unions decrease OSHA violations

Ford and Freund 22

Ford and Freund 22 [Leah Ford and Jeffrey Freund, 5-11-2022, "The Connection Between Unions and Worker Safety," US Department of Labor Blog, https://blog.dol.gov/2022/05/11/the-connection-between-unions-and-worker-safety //DOA: 2-24-2023 AGM]

A recent report surveying the construction industry published by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute based on publicly reported OSHA data found that union worksites are 19% less likely to have an OSHA violation and had 34% fewer violations per OSHA inspection than non-union worksites. Overall, while unions represent 14% of the construction industry employees, their employers account for only 5% of the industry’s OSHA violations.

union worksites are 19% less likely to have an OSHA violation and had 34% fewer violations per OSHA inspection than non-union worksites.

The solidarity shown for these fallen workers was both inspiring and revealing. For while the church was filled with union members, none of the 19 memorialized were union-represented workers. They all worked – and died – on job sites without union contracts and their negotiated safety and health protocols, without union representatives to police their working conditions for safety violations, and without grievance procedures to challenge and correct any unsafe working conditions. They had no union representatives to exercise walkaround rights during OSHA inspections. While union representation is not a magic bullet to workplace safety problems, there is little doubt that it makes a positive difference. A recent report surveying the construction industry published by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute based on publicly reported OSHA data found that union worksites are 19% less likely to have an OSHA violation and had 34% fewer violations per OSHA inspection than non-union worksites. Overall, while unions represent 14% of the construction industry employees, their employers account for only 5% of the industry’s OSHA violations. Despite our best efforts, there will always be some workplace accidents and deaths. But all of us – employers, unions, workers, and the government – need to recommit ourselves to fully reducing the number of those occurrences possible and to eliminating preventable injuries and deaths entirely—making workplace safety a core value that is respected in all industries and for all workers. A safe workplace should be ingrained in all of us and something we think about as a matter of course each day. Union representation is one important step in that direction.

<h4>Empirically, unions decrease OSHA violations</h4><p><u><strong><mark>Ford and Freund 22</u></strong></mark> [Leah Ford and Jeffrey Freund, 5-11-2022, "The Connection Between Unions and Worker Safety," US Department of Labor Blog, https://blog.dol.gov/2022/05/11/the-connection-between-unions-and-worker-safety //DOA: 2-24-2023 AGM]</p><p>The solidarity shown for these fallen workers was both inspiring and revealing. For while the church was filled with union members, none of the 19 memorialized were union-represented workers. They all worked – and died – on job sites without union contracts and their negotiated safety and health protocols, without union representatives to police their working conditions for safety violations, and without grievance procedures to challenge and correct any unsafe working conditions. They had no union representatives to exercise walkaround rights during OSHA inspections. While union representation is not a magic bullet to workplace safety problems, there is little doubt that it makes a positive difference. <u><strong>A recent report surveying the construction industry published by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute based on publicly reported OSHA data found that <mark>union worksites are 19% less likely to have an OSHA violation and had 34% fewer violations per OSHA inspection than non-union worksites.</mark> Overall, while unions represent 14% of the construction industry employees, their employers account for only 5% of the industry’s OSHA violations.</u></strong> Despite our best efforts, there will always be some workplace accidents and deaths. But all of us – employers, unions, workers, and the government – need to recommit ourselves to fully reducing the number of those occurrences possible and to eliminating preventable injuries and deaths entirely—making workplace safety a core value that is respected in all industries and for all workers. A safe workplace should be ingrained in all of us and something we think about as a matter of course each day. Union representation is one important step in that direction. </p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 3

1

Saratoga SR

Phuong Doan

c1/ protecting workers, c2/ climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

2023-03-11 03:34:58

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Unfortunately, workplace deaths have increased because of RTW laws

Zoorob 18

Zoorob 18 (Michael Zoorob is a PhD Candidate in Government at Harvard University, Scholars Strategy Network, 9-25-2018, [“How Unions Help Prevent Workplace Deaths in the United States” https://scholars.org/contribution/how-unions-help-prevent-workplace-deaths-united-states] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC)

Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths. In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. This reversal has coincided with the uptick in adoption of anti-union legislation, such as so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members of the collective bargaining units they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions. the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions. unions also organize and work to improve safety and health Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. Unions make complaints to [OSHA and] the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets. After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, a one-percentage point increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in the rate of occupational fatalities. By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs. falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job.

the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years This reversal has coincided with the adoption of anti-union legislation, such as “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions. Unions make complaints to [OSHA and] Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; a one-percent increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in occupational fatalities.

Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents, an important if overlooked topic in public health. Worryingly, the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths. In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. This reversal has coincided with the uptick in adoption of anti-union legislation, such as so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members of the collective bargaining units they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions. Right to work laws have recently proliferated across the United States. Since 2000, seven states – Oklahoma (2001), Michigan (2012), Indiana (2012), Wisconsin (2015), West Virginia (2016), Kentucky (2017) and Missouri (2017) have implemented this legislation. The U.S. South, a region with high rates of workplace fatalities, has had such laws for decades, and now twenty-eight states have right to work rules. Overall, the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions. So what? Negative effect of union losses on wages and benefits are well established. But unions also organize and work to improve safety and health. My research explores how union declines – and right to work laws in particular – shape rates of workplace mortality at the state level. Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. Unions make complaints to [OSHA and] the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations. Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets. My research tracks changes in unionization rates and rates of workplace fatalities across the 50 U.S. states over the 25-year period from 1992 to 2016, the years for which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries has been conducted. After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, a one-percentage point increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in the rate of occupational fatalities. By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. These results held even when I took into account the industry patterns in states and included an overall index of policy liberalism that can account for variations in state openness to regulation. Though workplace fatalities have declined overall in the United States, the declines were greater in states with more robust unions. The implications of my study are stark. In Wisconsin, for example, from 2000 to 2016 the percentage of the workforce that was part of a union declined from about 18% to about 8%. According to the statistical model, a change of this magnitude corresponds to an increase in the predicted rate of workplace fatalities from about 3.5 to about 5 deaths per 100,000 workers. The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs. As scholars have pinpointed in detail, unions make the workplace safer, and my new study suggests that falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job. Union organizers, social reformers, and lawmakers alike would do well to consider how laws that hinder unionization might have harmful consequences for safety on the job.

<h4>Unfortunately, workplace deaths have increased because of RTW laws</h4><p><u><strong><mark>Zoorob 18</u></strong> </mark>(Michael Zoorob is a PhD Candidate in Government at Harvard University, Scholars Strategy Network, 9-25-2018, [“How Unions Help Prevent Workplace Deaths in the United States” https://scholars.org/contribution/how-unions-help-prevent-workplace-deaths-united-states] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC) </p><p><u><strong>Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents</u></strong>, an important if overlooked topic in public health. Worryingly, <u><strong><mark>the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years</mark>, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths.</u></strong> <u><strong>In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. <mark>This reversal has coincided with the</mark> uptick in <mark>adoption of anti-union legislation, such as</mark> so-called <mark>“right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members</mark> of the collective bargaining units <mark>they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions.</u></strong></mark> Right to work laws have recently proliferated across the United States. Since 2000, seven states – Oklahoma (2001), Michigan (2012), Indiana (2012), Wisconsin (2015), West Virginia (2016), Kentucky (2017) and Missouri (2017) have implemented this legislation. The U.S. South, a region with high rates of workplace fatalities, has had such laws for decades, and now twenty-eight states have right to work rules. Overall, <u><strong>the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions.</u></strong> So what? Negative effect of union losses on wages and benefits are well established. But <u><strong>unions also organize and work to improve safety and health</u></strong>. My research explores how union declines – and right to work laws in particular – shape rates of workplace mortality at the state level. <u><strong>Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. <mark>Unions make complaints to [OSHA and]</mark> the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations</u></strong>. <u><strong><mark>Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected;</mark> and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets.</u></strong> My research tracks changes in unionization rates and rates of workplace fatalities across the 50 U.S. states over the 25-year period from 1992 to 2016, the years for which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries has been conducted. <u><strong>After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, <mark>a one-percent</mark>age point <mark>increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in</mark> the rate of <mark>occupational fatalities. </mark>By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. </u></strong>These results held even when I took into account the industry patterns in states and included an overall index of policy liberalism that can account for variations in state openness to regulation. Though workplace fatalities have declined overall in the United States, the declines were greater in states with more robust unions. The implications of my study are stark. In Wisconsin, for example, from 2000 to 2016 the percentage of the workforce that was part of a union declined from about 18% to about 8%. According to the statistical model, a change of this magnitude corresponds to an increase in the predicted rate of workplace fatalities from about 3.5 to about 5 deaths per 100,000 workers. <u><strong>The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs.</u></strong> As scholars have pinpointed in detail, unions make the workplace safer, and my new study suggests that <u><strong>falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job.</u></strong> Union organizers, social reformers, and lawmakers alike would do well to consider how laws that hinder unionization might have harmful consequences for safety on the job.</p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 3

1

Saratoga SR

Phuong Doan

c1/ protecting workers, c2/ climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

2023-03-11 03:34:58

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Empirically, fatalities increase with right to work laws

Fox & Parsons 16

Fox & Parsons 16 (Nick Fox & Travis Parsons are the OSH Division’s Senior Safety & Health Specialist, Laborers’ Health & Safety Fund of North America, August 2016, [“Why ‘Right-to-Work’ Is Wrong for Safety” https://www.lhsfna.org/why-right-to-work-is-wrong-for-safety/] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC)

right-to-work laws decrease job safety, increase income inequality and weaken the voice of working families. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), workers in right-to-work states earn almost $6000 less per year on average. But worker health and safety suffers too. The BLS reports the rate of fatalities in the workplace is 54 percent higher in states with right-to-work laws. That is a staggering difference in the level of safety provided to workers. right-to-work laws are “designed to hurt unions and lower wages.” Unions give workers a voice in the workplace, allowing them to speak up about hazards on the job without fear of retaliation. When right-to-work laws weaken this system of checks and balances, workers may no longer feel comfortable speaking up about safety. Unions also pour lots of resources into training workers to do their jobs safely. When unions aren’t able to provide this training, such as through apprenticeship programs, workplace safety suffers. for every five percent that union density increases, states can expect a one percent decrease in deaths on the job. public health is also better overall in states without right-to-work laws eight of the top 10 healthiest states were free from right-to-work laws, while nine of the 10 unhealthiest states were right-to-work.

the rate of fatalities in the workplace is 54 percent higher in states with right-to-work laws. Unions give workers a voice in the workplace, allowing them to speak up about hazards on the job without fear of retaliation.

In February, West Virginia became the 26th state in the U.S. to enact deceptively named “right-to-work” laws after the state’s House and Senate overrode a veto from Governor Ray Tomblin. In recent years, similar battles have been fought in Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio, with mixed results. Corporate interests winning out over the working class in a state like West Virginia was shocking to many – especially when the downsides are so well-documented. “These laws are nothing more than an attack on good, family-supporting middle class jobs,” says LIUNA General President Terry O’Sullivan. “So-called right-to-work laws decrease job safety, increase income inequality and weaken the voice of working families. LIUNA will continue to fight against these laws across the U.S. and Canada in all their forms.” According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), workers in right-to-work states earn almost $6000 less per year on average. They’re also less likely to be offered health insurance at their jobs and more likely to pay higher premiums when it is offered. The effect on workers’ wages is clear. But worker health and safety suffers too. The BLS reports the rate of fatalities in the workplace is 54 percent higher in states with right-to-work laws. That is a staggering difference in the level of safety provided to workers. What’s behind this increase in workplace fatalities? As the Economic Policy Institute notes, right-to-work laws are “designed to hurt unions and lower wages.” Unions give workers a voice in the workplace, allowing them to speak up about hazards on the job without fear of retaliation. When right-to-work laws weaken this system of checks and balances, workers may no longer feel comfortable speaking up about safety. Unions also pour lots of resources into training workers to do their jobs safely. When unions aren’t able to provide this training, such as through apprenticeship programs, workplace safety suffers. This trend can also be seen in states with low union density, where fatality rates are about twice as high compared to states with high union density. In fact, a University of Michigan study found that for every five percent that union density increases, states can expect a one percent decrease in deaths on the job. Increasing evidence shows that public health is also better overall in states without right-to-work laws. Each year, the United Health Foundation (UHF) publishes America’s Health Rankings, which give a comprehensive, state-by-state view of the nation’s health. While personal behavioral choices contribute to rankings like these, the UHF also factors in health policies and the availability of clinical care in each state. As the chart below shows, there’s a strong correlation between right-to-work laws and poorer health for workers and their families. In 2016, eight of the top 10 healthiest states were free from right-to-work laws, while nine of the 10 unhealthiest states were right-to-work. When workers’ paychecks shrink and they don’t have reliable, affordable access to health care, there are real consequences. Public health professionals know that factors like education and income are part of building healthy communities. For example, families with extra income are more likely to choose healthier food options. A Harvard study found that the difference between a healthy and an unhealthy diet is about $1.50 a day. For a family of four, that’s about $180 a month. Having the ability to make healthier food choices is just one area where income can directly impact the health of workers and their families. Public school funding lags behind in right-to-work states, too. These states spend $3,300 less per student on elementary and secondary education, driving away good teachers and leading many right-to-work states to be among the lowest performing in the country. As U.S. Secretary of Labor Tom Perez said earlier this year, “If you are a member of a union, your median weekly income is roughly $200 more than if you are a nonunion member, and that doesn’t include benefits.” Right-to-work laws aren’t just the right to work for less. They’re also the right to work in unsafe conditions and the right to poor health for workers and their families.

<h4>Empirically, fatalities increase with right to work laws</h4><p><u><strong><mark>Fox & Parsons 16</u></strong> </mark>(Nick Fox & Travis Parsons are the OSH Division’s Senior Safety & Health Specialist, Laborers’ Health & Safety Fund of North America, August 2016, [“Why ‘Right-to-Work’ Is Wrong for Safety” https://www.lhsfna.org/why-right-to-work-is-wrong-for-safety/] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC) </p><p>In February, West Virginia became the 26th state in the U.S. to enact deceptively named “right-to-work” laws after the state’s House and Senate overrode a veto from Governor Ray Tomblin. In recent years, similar battles have been fought in Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio, with mixed results. Corporate interests winning out over the working class in a state like West Virginia was shocking to many – especially when the downsides are so well-documented. “These laws are nothing more than an attack on good, family-supporting middle class jobs,” says LIUNA General President Terry O’Sullivan. “So-called <u><strong>right-to-work laws decrease job safety, increase income inequality and weaken the voice of working families.</u></strong> LIUNA will continue to fight against these laws across the U.S. and Canada in all their forms.” <u><strong>According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), workers in right-to-work states earn almost $6000 less per year on average.</u></strong> They’re also less likely to be offered health insurance at their jobs and more likely to pay higher premiums when it is offered. The effect on workers’ wages is clear. <u><strong>But worker health and safety suffers too.</u></strong> <u><strong>The BLS reports <mark>the rate of fatalities in the workplace is 54 percent higher in states with right-to-work laws.</mark> That is a staggering difference in the level of safety provided to workers. </u></strong>What’s behind this increase in workplace fatalities? As the Economic Policy Institute notes, <u><strong>right-to-work laws are “designed to hurt unions and lower wages.”<mark> Unions give workers a voice in the workplace, allowing them to speak up about hazards on the job without fear of retaliation.</mark> When right-to-work laws weaken this system of checks and balances, workers may no longer feel comfortable speaking up about safety. Unions also pour lots of resources into training workers to do their jobs safely. When unions aren’t able to provide this training, such as through apprenticeship programs, workplace safety suffers. </u></strong>This trend can also be seen in states with low union density, where fatality rates are about twice as high compared to states with high union density. In fact, a University of Michigan study found that <u><strong>for every five percent that union density increases, states can expect a one percent decrease in deaths on the job.</u></strong> Increasing evidence shows that <u><strong>public health is also better overall in states without right-to-work laws</u></strong>. Each year, the United Health Foundation (UHF) publishes America’s Health Rankings, which give a comprehensive, state-by-state view of the nation’s health. While personal behavioral choices contribute to rankings like these, the UHF also factors in health policies and the availability of clinical care in each state. As the chart below shows, there’s a strong correlation between right-to-work laws and poorer health for workers and their families. In 2016, <u><strong>eight of the top 10 healthiest states were free from right-to-work laws, while nine of the 10 unhealthiest states were right-to-work. </u></strong>When workers’ paychecks shrink and they don’t have reliable, affordable access to health care, there are real consequences. Public health professionals know that factors like education and income are part of building healthy communities. For example, families with extra income are more likely to choose healthier food options. A Harvard study found that the difference between a healthy and an unhealthy diet is about $1.50 a day. For a family of four, that’s about $180 a month. Having the ability to make healthier food choices is just one area where income can directly impact the health of workers and their families. Public school funding lags behind in right-to-work states, too. These states spend $3,300 less per student on elementary and secondary education, driving away good teachers and leading many right-to-work states to be among the lowest performing in the country. As U.S. Secretary of Labor Tom Perez said earlier this year, “If you are a member of a union, your median weekly income is roughly $200 more than if you are a nonunion member, and that doesn’t include benefits.” Right-to-work laws aren’t just the right to work for less. They’re also the right to work in unsafe conditions and the right to poor health for workers and their families.</p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-2-Round-3.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 2

3

Upper St Clair BC

Apollo Wang

c1/protecting workers c2/climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-2-Round-3.docx

2023-02-25 18:31:27

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

The impact is death

Zoorob 18 (Michael Zoorob is a PhD Candidate in Government at Harvard University, Scholars Strategy Network, 9-25-2018, [“How Unions Help Prevent Workplace Deaths in the United States” https://scholars.org/contribution/how-unions-help-prevent-workplace-deaths-united-states] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC)

Zoorob 18 (Michael Zoorob is a PhD Candidate in Government at Harvard University, Scholars Strategy Network, 9-25-2018, [“How Unions Help Prevent Workplace Deaths in the United States” https://scholars.org/contribution/how-unions-help-prevent-workplace-deaths-united-states] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC)

Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths. In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. This reversal has coincided with the uptick in adoption of anti-union legislation, such as so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members of the collective bargaining units they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions. the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions. unions also organize and work to improve safety and health Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. Unions make complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets. After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, a one-percentage point increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in the rate of occupational fatalities. By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs. falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job.

Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents

Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents, an important if overlooked topic in public health. Worryingly, the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths. In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. This reversal has coincided with the uptick in adoption of anti-union legislation, such as so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members of the collective bargaining units they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions. Right to work laws have recently proliferated across the United States. Since 2000, seven states – Oklahoma (2001), Michigan (2012), Indiana (2012), Wisconsin (2015), West Virginia (2016), Kentucky (2017) and Missouri (2017) have implemented this legislation. The U.S. South, a region with high rates of workplace fatalities, has had such laws for decades, and now twenty-eight states have right to work rules. Overall, the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions. So what? Negative effect of union losses on wages and benefits are well established. But unions also organize and work to improve safety and health. My research explores how union declines – and right to work laws in particular – shape rates of workplace mortality at the state level. Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. Unions make complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations. Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets. My research tracks changes in unionization rates and rates of workplace fatalities across the 50 U.S. states over the 25-year period from 1992 to 2016, the years for which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries has been conducted. After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, a one-percentage point increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in the rate of occupational fatalities. By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. These results held even when I took into account the industry patterns in states and included an overall index of policy liberalism that can account for variations in state openness to regulation. Though workplace fatalities have declined overall in the United States, the declines were greater in states with more robust unions. The implications of my study are stark. In Wisconsin, for example, from 2000 to 2016 the percentage of the workforce that was part of a union declined from about 18% to about 8%. According to the statistical model, a change of this magnitude corresponds to an increase in the predicted rate of workplace fatalities from about 3.5 to about 5 deaths per 100,000 workers. The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs. As scholars have pinpointed in detail, unions make the workplace safer, and my new study suggests that falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job. Union organizers, social reformers, and lawmakers alike would do well to consider how laws that hinder unionization might have harmful consequences for safety on the job.

<h4>The impact is death</h4><p><u><strong><mark>Zoorob 18</u></strong> <strong></mark>(Michael Zoorob is a PhD Candidate in Government at Harvard University, Scholars Strategy Network, 9-25-2018, [“How Unions Help Prevent Workplace Deaths in the United States” https://scholars.org/contribution/how-unions-help-prevent-workplace-deaths-united-states] DOA: 2-17-2023 MRC) </p><p><u><mark>Between 1992 and 2016, about 138,000 workers in the United States died in on-the-job accidents</u></strong></mark>, an important if overlooked topic in public health. Worryingly, <u><strong>the number of workplace deaths has risen in recent years, reversing earlier trends toward fewer deaths.</u></strong> <u><strong>In 2016, 5,190 US workers died on the job, marking the third consecutive year of increasing occupational mortality, and reaching the highest number of workplace fatalities since 2008. This reversal has coincided with the uptick in adoption of anti-union legislation, such as so-called “right-to-work” laws that prohibit labor unions from charging fees to members of the collective bargaining units they represent. If workers who benefit from union-bargained improvements do not join and pay dues, union finances suffer and so do their abilities to perform key functions.</u></strong> Right to work laws have recently proliferated across the United States. Since 2000, seven states – Oklahoma (2001), Michigan (2012), Indiana (2012), Wisconsin (2015), West Virginia (2016), Kentucky (2017) and Missouri (2017) have implemented this legislation. The U.S. South, a region with high rates of workplace fatalities, has had such laws for decades, and now twenty-eight states have right to work rules. Overall, <u><strong>the accelerated passage of right to work laws has exacerbated U.S. union decline, a trend sure to be furthered by the recent Supreme Court decision in Janus vs American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees to ban membership fees for all government employee unions.</u></strong> So what? Negative effect of union losses on wages and benefits are well established. But <u><strong>unions also organize and work to improve safety and health</u></strong>. My research explores how union declines – and right to work laws in particular – shape rates of workplace mortality at the state level. <u><strong>Scholars have identified several ways that unions promote workplace safety. Unions make complaints to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the federal agency charged with enforcing workplace safety regulations and investigating and fining companies for violations</u></strong>. <u><strong>Unionized workplaces are more likely to be inspected; and the threat of unionization may prod employers to improve workplace safety. Unionized workplaces tend to have better health insurance, which could improve the overall health of workers and reduce employee stress about medical expenses. Union collective bargaining agreements frequently contain language that restricts excessive shifts and requires safety equipment like gloves, goggles, and helmets.</u></strong> My research tracks changes in unionization rates and rates of workplace fatalities across the 50 U.S. states over the 25-year period from 1992 to 2016, the years for which the Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries has been conducted. <u><strong>After controlling for other variables, the statistical model finds that unions have a protective effect on workplace fatalities across the states. Specifically, a one-percentage point increase in the unionized workforce was associated with a 2.8% decline in the rate of occupational fatalities. By weakening unions, right to work legislation has been associated with about a 14% increase in the rate of occupational fatalities. </u></strong>These results held even when I took into account the industry patterns in states and included an overall index of policy liberalism that can account for variations in state openness to regulation. Though workplace fatalities have declined overall in the United States, the declines were greater in states with more robust unions. The implications of my study are stark. In Wisconsin, for example, from 2000 to 2016 the percentage of the workforce that was part of a union declined from about 18% to about 8%. According to the statistical model, a change of this magnitude corresponds to an increase in the predicted rate of workplace fatalities from about 3.5 to about 5 deaths per 100,000 workers. <u><strong>The decline of unionization – stemming, in part, from anti-union policies like “right-to-work” legislation as adopted by Wisconsin – may undermine workplace safety at the cost of human lives and limbs.</u></strong> As scholars have pinpointed in detail, unions make the workplace safer, and my new study suggests that <u><strong>falling unionization rates are associated with higher rates of death on the job.</u></strong> Union organizers, social reformers, and lawmakers alike would do well to consider how laws that hinder unionization might have harmful consequences for safety on the job.</p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 3

1

Saratoga SR

Phuong Doan

c1/ protecting workers, c2/ climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

2023-03-11 03:34:58

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

This is terrible as unions are key to receiving benefits

EPI 21

EPI 21 [Economic Policy Institute, 4-23-2021, "Unions help reduce disparities and strengthen our democracy," Economic Policy Institute, https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-help-reduce-disparities-and-strengthen-our-democracy/ //DOA: 2-7-23 AGM]

Unions improve wages and benefits for all workers, not just union members. They help reduce income inequality by making sure all Americans, and not just the wealthy elite, share in the benefits of their labor. Unions also reduce racial disparities in wages and raise women’s wages, helping to counteract disparate labor market outcomes by race and gender that result from occupational segregation, discrimination, and other labor market inequities related to structural racism and sexism. By bringing workers’ collective power to the bargaining table, unions are able to win better wages and benefits for working people—reducing income inequality as a result. As seen in Figure A, there was less income inequality in the decades following World War II than there is today. Not coincidentally, union membership was at its highest rate in 1945, just as the war was ending. But as union strength steadily declined—particularly after 1979—income inequality got worse, and it is now at its worst point since the Great Depression. Deunionization depressed the wages of middle-wage earners but had little impact on high-wage earners and therefore greatly increased wage inequality between these two groups. When unions are strong, they set wage standards for entire industries and occupations; they make wages more equal within occupations; and they close pay gaps between white workers and workers of color. While union workers receive higher wages than nonunion workers, nonunion workers also benefit immensely from the presence of unions Union workers earn more than nonunion workers. On average, a worker covered by a union contract earns 10.2% more in hourly wages than someone with similar education, occupation, and experience in a nonunionized workplace in the same sector.3 When union density is high, nonunion workers benefit from higher wages. When the share of workers who are union members in an industry or occupation is relatively high, as it was in 1979, wages of nonunion workers are higher than they would otherwise be. Recent research examining the direct effect on wages of union workers and the spillover effect on wages of nonunion workers has demonstrated that the median worker’s wages would have been much higher, and inequality between middle- and high-wage workers much lower, had there not been an erosion of collective bargaining. For instance, the “typical” or median worker would have earned $1.56 more, a 7.9% increase (0.2% annually), in 2017 had unionization not declined since 1979

By bringing workers’ collective power to the bargaining table, unions are able to win better wages and benefits for working people

Unions improve wages and benefits for all workers, not just union members. They help reduce income inequality by making sure all Americans, and not just the wealthy elite, share in the benefits of their labor. Unions also reduce racial disparities in wages and raise women’s wages, helping to counteract disparate labor market outcomes by race and gender that result from occupational segregation, discrimination, and other labor market inequities related to structural racism and sexism. Finally, unions help win progressive policies at the federal, state, and local levels that benefit all workers. And conversely, where unions are weak, wealthy corporations and their allies are more successful at pushing through policies and legislation that hurt working people. A strong labor movement protects workers, reduces disparities, and strengthens our democracy. Unions lower inequality By bringing workers’ collective power to the bargaining table, unions are able to win better wages and benefits for working people—reducing income inequality as a result. As seen in Figure A, there was less income inequality in the decades following World War II than there is today. Not coincidentally, union membership was at its highest rate in 1945, just as the war was ending. But as union strength steadily declined—particularly after 1979—income inequality got worse, and it is now at its worst point since the Great Depression. Deunionization depressed the wages of middle-wage earners but had little impact on high-wage earners and therefore greatly increased wage inequality between these two groups. For instance, deunionization explains a third of the growth of the wage gap between high- and middle-wage earners over the 1979–2017 period.1 The erosion of collective bargaining is the second largest factor that suppressed wage growth and fueled wage inequality over the last four decades—only excessive unemployment had a larger impact.2 When unions are strong, they set wage standards for entire industries and occupations; they make wages more equal within occupations; and they close pay gaps between white workers and workers of color. The reasons unions are such a major force for equality are set out more fully below. Unions raise wages for both union and nonunion workers While union workers receive higher wages than nonunion workers, nonunion workers also benefit immensely from the presence of unions. This raises wages for working people and reduces wage inequality. We explain below. Union workers earn more than nonunion workers. On average, a worker covered by a union contract earns 10.2% more in hourly wages than someone with similar education, occupation, and experience in a nonunionized workplace in the same sector.3 When union density is high, nonunion workers benefit from higher wages. When the share of workers who are union members in an industry or occupation is relatively high, as it was in 1979, wages of nonunion workers are higher than they would otherwise be. For example, had union density remained at its 1979 level, weekly wages of nonunion men in the private sector would be 5% higher (that’s an additional $2,704 in earnings for year-round workers), while weekly wages for nonunion men in the private sector without a college education would be 8%, or $3,016 per year, higher.4 Figure B shows how much more nonunion workers would earn had union density remained the same, by gender. Figure C shows the numbers for nonunion workers without a college degree. In states where unions are strong, wages are higher for workers—union and nonunion alike. Wages are lower in states with low union density compared with states with high union density—$1,121.70 a week versus $942.70 a week in 2020.5 Unions bring living wages to low-wage jobs. Unions have transformed once-low-wage jobs in hospitality, nursing, and janitorial services into positions with living wages and opportunities for advancement. For example, after unionizing, dishwashers in Las Vegas hotels made $4 per hour more than the national average for that job, and they were offered excellent benefits. In Houston, a 2006 first-ever union contract for 5,300 janitors resulted in a 47% pay increase and an increase in guaranteed weekly hours of work.6 If unionization hadn’t eroded, wages for the middle class would be much higher. Recent research examining the direct effect on wages of union workers and the spillover effect on wages of nonunion workers has demonstrated that the median worker’s wages would have been much higher, and inequality between middle- and high-wage workers much lower, had there not been an erosion of collective bargaining. For instance, the “typical” or median worker would have earned $1.56 more, a 7.9% increase (0.2% annually), in 2017 had unionization not declined since 1979 (Figure D). This translates to an equivalent gain of $3,250 for a full-time, full-year worker.7

<h4>This is terrible as unions are key to receiving benefits</h4><p><u><strong><mark>EPI 21</u></strong></mark> [Economic Policy Institute, 4-23-2021, "Unions help reduce disparities and strengthen our democracy," Economic Policy Institute, https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-help-reduce-disparities-and-strengthen-our-democracy/ //DOA: 2-7-23 AGM]</p><p><u><strong>Unions improve wages and benefits for all workers, not just union members. They help reduce income inequality by making sure all Americans, and not just the wealthy elite, share in the benefits of their labor. Unions also reduce racial disparities in wages and raise women’s wages, helping to counteract disparate labor market outcomes by race and gender that result from occupational segregation, discrimination, and other labor market inequities related to structural racism and sexism. </u></strong>Finally, unions help win progressive policies at the federal, state, and local levels that benefit all workers. And conversely, where unions are weak, wealthy corporations and their allies are more successful at pushing through policies and legislation that hurt working people. A strong labor movement protects workers, reduces disparities, and strengthens our democracy. Unions lower inequality <u><strong><mark>By bringing workers’ collective power to the bargaining table, unions are able to win better wages and benefits for working people</mark>—reducing income inequality as a result. As seen in Figure A, there was less income inequality in the decades following World War II than there is today. Not coincidentally, union membership was at its highest rate in 1945, just as the war was ending. But as union strength steadily declined—particularly after 1979—income inequality got worse, and it is now at its worst point since the Great Depression. Deunionization depressed the wages of middle-wage earners but had little impact on high-wage earners and therefore greatly increased wage inequality between these two groups.</u></strong> For instance, deunionization explains a third of the growth of the wage gap between high- and middle-wage earners over the 1979–2017 period.1 The erosion of collective bargaining is the second largest factor that suppressed wage growth and fueled wage inequality over the last four decades—only excessive unemployment had a larger impact.2 <u><strong>When unions are strong, they set wage standards for entire industries and occupations; they make wages more equal within occupations; and they close pay gaps between white workers and workers of color.</u></strong> The reasons unions are such a major force for equality are set out more fully below. Unions raise wages for both union and nonunion workers <u><strong>While union workers receive higher wages than nonunion workers, nonunion workers also benefit immensely from the presence of unions</u></strong>. This raises wages for working people and reduces wage inequality. We explain below. <u><strong>Union workers earn more than nonunion workers. On average, a worker covered by a union contract earns 10.2% more in hourly wages than someone with similar education, occupation, and experience in a nonunionized workplace in the same sector.3 When union density is high, nonunion workers benefit from higher wages. When the share of workers who are union members in an industry or occupation is relatively high, as it was in 1979, wages of nonunion workers are higher than they would otherwise be. </u></strong>For example, had union density remained at its 1979 level, weekly wages of nonunion men in the private sector would be 5% higher (that’s an additional $2,704 in earnings for year-round workers), while weekly wages for nonunion men in the private sector without a college education would be 8%, or $3,016 per year, higher.4 Figure B shows how much more nonunion workers would earn had union density remained the same, by gender. Figure C shows the numbers for nonunion workers without a college degree. In states where unions are strong, wages are higher for workers—union and nonunion alike. Wages are lower in states with low union density compared with states with high union density—$1,121.70 a week versus $942.70 a week in 2020.5 Unions bring living wages to low-wage jobs. Unions have transformed once-low-wage jobs in hospitality, nursing, and janitorial services into positions with living wages and opportunities for advancement. For example, after unionizing, dishwashers in Las Vegas hotels made $4 per hour more than the national average for that job, and they were offered excellent benefits. In Houston, a 2006 first-ever union contract for 5,300 janitors resulted in a 47% pay increase and an increase in guaranteed weekly hours of work.6 If unionization hadn’t eroded, wages for the middle class would be much higher. <u><strong>Recent research examining the direct effect on wages of union workers and the spillover effect on wages of nonunion workers has demonstrated that the median worker’s wages would have been much higher, and inequality between middle- and high-wage workers much lower, had there not been an erosion of collective bargaining. For instance, the “typical” or median worker would have earned $1.56 more, a 7.9% increase (0.2% annually), in 2017 had unionization not declined since 1979 </u></strong>(Figure D). This translates to an equivalent gain of $3,250 for a full-time, full-year worker.7 </p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 3

1

Saratoga SR

Phuong Doan

c1/ protecting workers, c2/ climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

2023-03-11 03:34:58

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

RTW harms union membership

DiSalvo 20

DiSalvo 20 (Daniel DiSalvo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and professor of political science at the City College of New York, National Affairs, Spring 2020, [“The Future of Public-Employee Unions” https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-future-of-public-employee-unions] DOA: 2-6-2023 MRC)

Republicans sought to roll back what they saw as overly powerful public-sector unions in hopes of reducing the cost of government, improving its performance, and weakening a key organizational supporter of progressive causes. Over the next few years, several states enacted "right-to-work" laws, which prohibit both public- and private-sector unions from collecting fees from nonmembers. he U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 in June 2018. The Court ruled that state laws obliging non-union employees to pay "agency fees" to the unions that are their "exclusive bargaining representative" are unconstitutional; the laws violated the First Amendment rights of such employees by "compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern." No longer can a state- or local-government employee be forced, in order to take or keep a job, to pay anything to a union unless he "affirmatively consents" to do so. Public-sector agency fees are now illegal in all 50 states. public unions' membership will fall and their political power will decline

"right-to-work" laws prohibit unions from collecting fees from nonmembers public unions' membership will fall and their power will decline

After remaining dormant for three decades, the issue of labor unions in state and local government erupted onto the national stage in 2011. Wisconsin governor Scott Walker introduced legislation to reduce the scope of public-sector collective bargaining, end government collection of union dues from employee paychecks, and require unions representing public employees to hold annual elections to legitimate themselves. Tens of thousands of people descended on the state capitol in protest. Democratic legislators fled the state in an effort to prevent a vote on Walker's "Budget Repair Bill," known as Act 10. After much wrangling, Walker prevailed, and Act 10 became law. In the ensuing decade, government-labor relations has been a subject of intense political controversy. It has been at the top of many state legislative agendas and the subject of litigation in state and federal court, including the Supreme Court. Republicans sought to roll back what they saw as overly powerful public-sector unions in hopes of reducing the cost of government, improving its performance, and weakening a key organizational supporter of progressive causes. Democrats fought these initiatives because they believe well-paid public workers are a bulwark of the middle class, and because public-sector unions are among the biggest contributors to the party and are deeply embedded in its network. Between 2011 and 2018, more than a dozen states passed laws to constrain public-employee unions. These developments shook up the status quo in public-sector labor law, which had endured for 30 years. By the late 1970s, state laws provided the majority of the nation's public employees with collective-bargaining rights. These laws required government employers to negotiate with unions regarding pay, benefits, and working conditions. They also compelled nonmembers to pay fees to the union for its representation, and government employers to collect the dues and fees paid by workers in a bargaining unit. Then in 2011, New Jersey eliminated health benefits as a subject of collective bargaining. Wisconsin passed Act 10 the same year. Over the next few years, several states enacted "right-to-work" laws, which prohibit both public- and private-sector unions from collecting fees from nonmembers. Indiana and Michigan passed such laws in 2012, Wisconsin in 2015, West Virginia in 2016, and Kentucky and Missouri in 2017 (though voters in Missouri later struck theirs down). A number of states also enacted "paycheck-protection" laws, which require government workers to opt in to the withdrawal of part of their dues for political purposes. And some states prohibited public employers from deducting union dues from workers' paychecks and sending those funds to the unions. To cap things off, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 in June 2018. The Court ruled that state laws obliging non-union employees to pay "agency fees" to the unions that are their "exclusive bargaining representative" are unconstitutional; the laws violated the First Amendment rights of such employees by "compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern." The decision overturned a 41-year-old precedent set by Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which permitted compulsory union fees for non-union public workers. No longer can a state- or local-government employee be forced, in order to take or keep a job, to pay anything to a union unless he "affirmatively consents" to do so. Public-sector agency fees are now illegal in all 50 states. The last decade has been a critical juncture for public-sector unions, one that will likely have lasting political and economic effects. Liberals argue that public unions' membership will fall and their political power will decline, which will harm the Democratic Party. But there are compelling reasons to be skeptical about these claims. And they overlook conservatives' principled reasons for seeking the changes, as well as their already tangible benefits in reducing the costs of government.

<h4>RTW harms union membership</h4><p><u><strong><mark>DiSalvo 20</u></strong></mark> (Daniel DiSalvo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and professor of political science at the City College of New York, National Affairs, Spring 2020, [“The Future of Public-Employee Unions” https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-future-of-public-employee-unions] DOA: 2-6-2023 MRC) </p><p>After remaining dormant for three decades, the issue of labor unions in state and local government erupted onto the national stage in 2011. Wisconsin governor Scott Walker introduced legislation to reduce the scope of public-sector collective bargaining, end government collection of union dues from employee paychecks, and require unions representing public employees to hold annual elections to legitimate themselves. Tens of thousands of people descended on the state capitol in protest. Democratic legislators fled the state in an effort to prevent a vote on Walker's "Budget Repair Bill," known as Act 10. After much wrangling, Walker prevailed, and Act 10 became law. In the ensuing decade, government-labor relations has been a subject of intense political controversy. It has been at the top of many state legislative agendas and the subject of litigation in state and federal court, including the Supreme Court. <u><strong>Republicans sought to roll back what they saw as overly powerful public-sector unions in hopes of reducing the cost of government, improving its performance, and weakening a key organizational supporter of progressive causes.</u></strong> Democrats fought these initiatives because they believe well-paid public workers are a bulwark of the middle class, and because public-sector unions are among the biggest contributors to the party and are deeply embedded in its network. Between 2011 and 2018, more than a dozen states passed laws to constrain public-employee unions. These developments shook up the status quo in public-sector labor law, which had endured for 30 years. By the late 1970s, state laws provided the majority of the nation's public employees with collective-bargaining rights. These laws required government employers to negotiate with unions regarding pay, benefits, and working conditions. They also compelled nonmembers to pay fees to the union for its representation, and government employers to collect the dues and fees paid by workers in a bargaining unit. Then in 2011, New Jersey eliminated health benefits as a subject of collective bargaining. Wisconsin passed Act 10 the same year. <u><strong>Over the next few years, several states enacted <mark>"right-to-work" laws</mark>, which <mark>prohibit </mark>both public- and private-sector <mark>unions from collecting fees from nonmembers</mark>. </u></strong>Indiana and Michigan passed such laws in 2012, Wisconsin in 2015, West Virginia in 2016, and Kentucky and Missouri in 2017 (though voters in Missouri later struck theirs down). A number of states also enacted "paycheck-protection" laws, which require government workers to opt in to the withdrawal of part of their dues for political purposes. And some states prohibited public employers from deducting union dues from workers' paychecks and sending those funds to the unions. To cap things off, t<u><strong>he U.S. Supreme Court handed down its decision in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31 in June 2018. The Court ruled that state laws obliging non-union employees to pay "agency fees" to the unions that are their "exclusive bargaining representative" are unconstitutional; the laws violated the First Amendment rights of such employees by "compelling them to subsidize private speech on matters of substantial public concern."</u></strong> The decision overturned a 41-year-old precedent set by Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, which permitted compulsory union fees for non-union public workers. <u><strong>No longer can a state- or local-government employee be forced, in order to take or keep a job, to pay anything to a union unless he "affirmatively consents" to do so. Public-sector agency fees are now illegal in all 50 states.</u></strong> The last decade has been a critical juncture for public-sector unions, one that will likely have lasting political and economic effects. Liberals argue that <u><strong><mark>public unions' membership will fall and their </mark>political<mark> power will decline</u></strong></mark>, which will harm the Democratic Party. But there are compelling reasons to be skeptical about these claims. And they overlook conservatives' principled reasons for seeking the changes, as well as their already tangible benefits in reducing the costs of government. </p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-2-Round-3.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 2

3

Upper St Clair BC

Apollo Wang

c1/protecting workers c2/climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-2-Round-3.docx

2023-02-25 18:31:27

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Empirically, RTW states have lower healthcare coverage

IUPAT, 22

IUPAT, 2022, "Right to Work (for Less)," https://www.iupat.org/campaigns/right-to-work-for-less/ // DOA:2/13/23 AMS

states with right to work laws are less likely to have job-based health insurance than people in other states 46.8 percent of employers in states with these laws offer insurance coverage compared with 52.6 percent in other states

states with right to work laws are less likely to have job-based health insurance than people in other states 46.8 percent of employers in states with these laws offer insurance coverage compared with 52.6 percent in other states

The average worker in states with right to work laws makes $5,971 (12.2 percent) less annually than workers in states without right to when all other factors are removed than workers in other states.2 Median household income in states with these laws is $6,568 (11.8 percent) less than in other states ($49,220 vs. $55,788).3 In states with right to work laws, 25.9 percent of jobs are in low-wage occupations, compared with 18.0 percent of jobs in other states.4 Lower Rates of Health Insurance Coverage People under the age of 65 in states with right to work laws are more likely to be uninsured (16.3 percent, compared with 12.4 percent in free-bargaining states).5 They’re less likely to have job-based health insurance than people in other states (53.9 percent, compared with 57.1 percent)6 and pay a larger share of their health insurance premiums (29.9 percent compared with 26.1 percent).7 Only 46.8 percent of private-sector employers in states with these laws offer insurance coverage to their employees, compared with 52.6 percent in other states. That difference is even more pronounced among small employers (with fewer than 50 workers)—only 30.3 percent offer workers health insurance, compared with 38.8 percent of small employers in other states.8 Higher Poverty and Infant Mortality Rates Poverty rates are higher in states with right to work laws (14.8 percent overall and 20.2 percent for children), compared with poverty rates of 13.1 percent overall and 18.3 percent for children in states without these laws.9 The infant mortality rate is 14.2 percent higher in states with these laws.10 Less Investment in Education States with right to work laws spend 31.3 percent less per pupil on elementary and secondary education than other states.11

<h4>Empirically, RTW states have lower healthcare coverage</h4><p><u><strong><mark>IUPAT,</u></strong></mark> 20<u><strong><mark>22</u></strong></mark>, "Right to Work (for Less)," https://www.iupat.org/campaigns/right-to-work-for-less/ // DOA:2/13/23 AMS</p><p> The average worker in states with right to work laws makes $5,971 (12.2 percent) less annually than workers in states without right to when all other factors are removed than workers in other states.2 Median household income in states with these laws is $6,568 (11.8 percent) less than in other states ($49,220 vs. $55,788).3 In states with right to work laws, 25.9 percent of jobs are in low-wage occupations, compared with 18.0 percent of jobs in other states.4 Lower Rates of Health Insurance Coverage People under the age of 65 in <u><strong><mark>states with right to work laws are</u></strong></mark> more likely to be uninsured (16.3 percent, compared with 12.4 percent in free-bargaining states).5 They’re <u><strong><mark>less likely to have job-based health insurance than people in other states</u></strong></mark> (53.9 percent, compared with 57.1 percent)6 and pay a larger share of their health insurance premiums (29.9 percent compared with 26.1 percent).7 Only <u><strong><mark>46.8 percent of </u></strong></mark>private-sector <u><strong><mark>employers in states with these laws offer insurance coverage</u></strong></mark> to their employees, <u><strong><mark>compared with 52.6 percent in other states</u></strong></mark>. That difference is even more pronounced among small employers (with fewer than 50 workers)—only 30.3 percent offer workers health insurance, compared with 38.8 percent of small employers in other states.8 Higher Poverty and Infant Mortality Rates Poverty rates are higher in states with right to work laws (14.8 percent overall and 20.2 percent for children), compared with poverty rates of 13.1 percent overall and 18.3 percent for children in states without these laws.9 The infant mortality rate is 14.2 percent higher in states with these laws.10 Less Investment in Education States with right to work laws spend 31.3 percent less per pupil on elementary and secondary education than other states.11</p>

contention 1 is protecting workers

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

A

TOC Digital Speech and Debate Series 3

1

Saratoga SR

Phuong Doan

c1/ protecting workers, c2/ climate change

hspf22/Lakeville/McMc/Lakeville-McMc-Pro-TOC-Digital-Speech-and-Debate-Series-3-Round-1.docx

2023-03-11 03:34:58

McMc

Lakeville McMc

hi! if there's any interps you would like us to meet please contact us before the round abby - a.g.mc1357@gmail.com ellie - e.j.mc703@gmail.com

Ab.....

Mc.....

El.....

Mc.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Innovation can solve.

Levin & Steer 21

Levin & Steer 21 (Kelly Levin is chief of Science, Data, and Systems Change at the Bezos Earth Fund and Andrew Steer is president and chief executive officer at the Bezos Earth Fund, September 2021, [“Fighting Climate Change with Innovation” https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2021/09/bezos-earth-fund-climate-change-innovation-levin] DOA: 2-8-2023 MRC)

Even if pledges are fully implemented, there remains a wide gulf between our current emissions path and one that achieves the Paris Agreement’s goals. The future world will be increasingly unrecognizable unless we transform our actions. The share of renewables in power generation must move from about 25 percent today to almost 100 percent by 2050, and unabated coal will need to be phased out six times faster than it is today. We must renovate our buildings with zero-carbon heating and cooling and improved energy efficiency at a rate of 2.5–3.5 percent by 2030—significantly higher than today’s rate of 1–2 percent. Innovation will be critical to achieving these goals. the needed decarbonization by 2030 is largely achievable with readily available technologies, Three innovation opportunities alone—direct air capture and storage, advanced batteries, and hydrogen electrolyzers—can deliver roughly 15 percent of cumulative emissions reductions between 2030 and 2050. Some trends already show incredible promise. Battery pack prices have fallen almost 90 percent over the past decade. We have seen exponential growth in renewables, now the technologies of choice in many places. And electric vehicle (EV) sales have accelerated, with a growing number of governmental phaseouts of internal combustion engines, subsidies to increase EV demand, and car companies’ embrace of EV fleet targets.

Innovation will be critical decarbonization by 2030 is achievable with readily available technologies We have seen exponential growth in renewables And electric vehicle (EV) sales have accelerated, with a growing number of governmental subsidies to increase EV demand

Despite this good progress, we are far from an emissions trajectory that avoids even worse effects of climate change. Even if pledges are fully implemented, there remains a wide gulf between our current emissions path and one that achieves the Paris Agreement’s goals. Communities around the world are seeing the impact of just 1°C of warming, from extreme heat to uncontrollable fires to withering food crops to disappearing ice. The future world will be increasingly unrecognizable unless we transform our actions. Consider the scale of transformation required to limit dangerous warming. The share of renewables in power generation must move from about 25 percent today to almost 100 percent by 2050, and unabated coal will need to be phased out six times faster than it is today. We must renovate our buildings with zero-carbon heating and cooling and improved energy efficiency at a rate of 2.5–3.5 percent by 2030—significantly higher than today’s rate of 1–2 percent. While crop yields are expected to rise in the coming decades, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, they must do so even more quickly on existing lands in order to meet a growing population’s food needs without encroaching upon forests, doubling recent rates over the next 10 years. This growth must at the same time avoid agricultural expansion and maintain soil health as well as water quantity and quality. Innovation will be critical to achieving these goals. The International Energy Agency’s (IEA’s) new net zero roadmap notes that the needed decarbonization by 2030 is largely achievable with readily available technologies, but by mid-century almost half of required emissions reductions will call for technologies that are not yet on the market. Reliance on technologies still under development is even higher for harder-to-abate sectors, such as long-distance transportation and heavy industry. Three innovation opportunities alone—direct air capture and storage, advanced batteries, and hydrogen electrolyzers—can deliver roughly 15 percent of cumulative emissions reductions between 2030 and 2050. Efforts to spur innovation must focus not only on research and development of these technologies but also on the technologies and infrastructure these solutions depend on, such as integrated grids and battery storage. Some trends already show incredible promise. Battery pack prices have fallen almost 90 percent over the past decade. We have seen exponential growth in renewables, now the technologies of choice in many places. And electric vehicle (EV) sales have accelerated, with a growing number of governmental phaseouts of internal combustion engines, subsidies to increase EV demand, and car companies’ embrace of EV fleet targets.

<h4><strong>Innovation can solve. </h4><p><u><mark>Levin & Steer 21</u></strong></mark> (Kelly Levin is chief of Science, Data, and Systems Change at the Bezos Earth Fund and Andrew Steer is president and chief executive officer at the Bezos Earth Fund, September 2021, [“Fighting Climate Change with Innovation” https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/fandd/issues/2021/09/bezos-earth-fund-climate-change-innovation-levin] DOA: 2-8-2023 MRC) </p><p>Despite this good progress, we are far from an emissions trajectory that avoids even worse effects of climate change. <u><strong>Even if pledges are fully implemented, there remains a wide gulf between our current emissions path and one that achieves the Paris Agreement’s goals.</u></strong> Communities around the world are seeing the impact of just 1°C of warming, from extreme heat to uncontrollable fires to withering food crops to disappearing ice. <u><strong>The future world will be increasingly unrecognizable unless we transform our actions.</u></strong> Consider the scale of transformation required to limit dangerous warming. <u><strong>The share of renewables in power generation must move from about 25 percent today to almost 100 percent by 2050, and unabated coal will need to be phased out six times faster than it is today.</u></strong> <u><strong>We must renovate our buildings with zero-carbon heating and cooling and improved energy efficiency at a rate of 2.5–3.5 percent by 2030—significantly higher than today’s rate of 1–2 percent.</u></strong> While crop yields are expected to rise in the coming decades, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, they must do so even more quickly on existing lands in order to meet a growing population’s food needs without encroaching upon forests, doubling recent rates over the next 10 years. This growth must at the same time avoid agricultural expansion and maintain soil health as well as water quantity and quality. <u><strong><mark>Innovation will be critical</mark> to achieving these goals.</u></strong> The International Energy Agency’s (IEA’s) new net zero roadmap notes that <u><strong>the needed <mark>decarbonization by 2030 is </mark>largely<mark> achievable with readily available technologies</mark>,</u></strong> but by mid-century almost half of required emissions reductions will call for technologies that are not yet on the market. Reliance on technologies still under development is even higher for harder-to-abate sectors, such as long-distance transportation and heavy industry. <u><strong>Three innovation opportunities alone—direct air capture and storage, advanced batteries, and hydrogen electrolyzers—can deliver roughly 15 percent of cumulative emissions reductions between 2030 and 2050.</u></strong> Efforts to spur innovation must focus not only on research and development of these technologies but also on the technologies and infrastructure these solutions depend on, such as integrated grids and battery storage. <u><strong>Some trends already show incredible promise. Battery pack prices have fallen almost 90 percent over the past decade. <mark>We have seen exponential growth in renewables</mark>, now the technologies of choice in many places.</u></strong> <u><strong><mark>And electric vehicle (EV) sales have accelerated, with a growing number of governmental</mark> phaseouts of internal combustion engines, <mark>subsidies to increase EV demand</mark>, and car companies’ embrace of EV fleet targets.</p></u></strong>

Contention 2 – Innovation that Excites.

Thankfully, RTW laws benefit the econ in 2 ways

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

N

TOC DIGITAL SPEECH AND DEBATE SERIES 2

2

Lynbrook MJ

Yawen Zhang

hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

2023-02-25 04:31:36

LeMa

Lakeville LeMa

if anyone needs anything feel free to hit us up devin - devinlest1@gmail.com and yezuls - yezulmaharjan13@gmail.com here are interps we've read that we'd like you to meet: Debaters must disclose all previously read case positions with citations, taglines, and first and last three words of each card read, under their name and school on the 2022/2023 NDCA PF Wiki at least 15 minutes before the round.

De.....

Le.....

Ye.....

Ma.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Unionization inhibits innovation through creating underinvestment in R&D and reducing wage gaps that reward innovative employees.

Bradley et al. 13

Bradley et al. 13 (Daniel Bradley from the University of South Florida, Incheol Kim from the University of New Orleans, and Xuan Tian from Indiana University, December 2013, [“The causal effect of labor unions on innovation” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiV46a724T9AhUKkYkEHWNACdwQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeaweb.org%2Fconference%2F2014%2Fretrieve.php%3Fpdfid%3D427&usg=AOvVaw1az9RCZ1qmTEPRbC8gglUk] DOA: 2-7-2023 MRC)

Unionization may create misaligned incentives among employees, impeding firm innovation. since innovation requires considerable investment in intangible assets such as research and development (R&D), contracts that effectively motivate innovation are almost always incomplete. Once the innovation process begins, workers may have incentives to demand higher wage concessions recognizing that the costs are sunk. This leads to underinvestment in R&D which ultimately impedes innovation. unionization reduces the probability of dismissal, so it lowers the cost of shirking and could lead to lower productivity among workers. unions alter the distribution of worker wages, leading to a reduction in wage inequality among workers reduced wage gaps may force out innovative employees, which contributes to the decline in innovation in unionized firms. unionization creates misaligned incentives and impedes innovation.

Unionization may create misaligned incentives among employees, impeding firm innovation. since innovation requires considerable investment in intangible assets contracts that effectively motivate innovation are almost always incomplete. workers may have incentives to demand higher wage concessions recognizing that the costs are sunk. This leads to underinvestment in R&D which impedes innovation.

An alternative hypothesis makes the opposite empirical prediction. Unionization may create misaligned incentives among employees, impeding firm innovation. There are at least three plausible reasons for such a reduction in innovation. First, since innovation requires considerable investment in intangible assets such as research and development (R&D), contracts that effectively motivate innovation are almost always incomplete. Once the investment has been made and the innovation process begins, workers may have incentives to expropriate rents by demanding higher wage concessions recognizing that the costs are sunk. This ex-post holdup problem on the part of employees in turn leads to an ex-ante underinvestment in R&D (Grout, 1984; Malcomson, 1997), which ultimately impedes innovation. Second, unionizing the workforce could encourage shirking because the negative consequences for supplying less effort are reduced. That is, unionization reduces the probability of dismissal, so it lowers the cost of shirking and could lead to lower productivity among workers. Third, unions alter the distribution of worker wages, leading to a reduction in wage inequality among workers (Frandsen, 2012). To the extent that innovative and talented workers are in demand in the labor market, reduced wage gaps may force out innovative employees, which contributes to the decline in innovation in unionized firms. While the three underlying mechanisms discussed are different, they are all related in the sense that unionization creates misaligned incentives and impedes innovation. We refer to the general decline in innovation after unionization stemming from any one or all of these potential consequences as the misaligned incentives hypothesis.

<h4><strong>Unionization inhibits innovation through creating underinvestment in R&D and reducing wage gaps that reward innovative employees.</h4><p><u><mark>Bradley et al. 13</u></strong></mark> (Daniel Bradley from the University of South Florida, Incheol Kim from the University of New Orleans, and Xuan Tian from Indiana University, December 2013, [“The causal effect of labor unions on innovation” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiV46a724T9AhUKkYkEHWNACdwQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeaweb.org%2Fconference%2F2014%2Fretrieve.php%3Fpdfid%3D427&usg=AOvVaw1az9RCZ1qmTEPRbC8gglUk] DOA: 2-7-2023 MRC) </p><p>An alternative hypothesis makes the opposite empirical prediction. <u><strong><mark>Unionization may create misaligned incentives among employees, impeding firm innovation.</u></strong></mark> There are at least three plausible reasons for such a reduction in innovation. First, <u><strong><mark>since innovation requires considerable investment in intangible assets</mark> such as research and development (R&D), <mark>contracts that effectively motivate innovation are almost always incomplete.</u></strong></mark> <u><strong>Once the</u></strong> investment has been made and the <u><strong>innovation process begins, <mark>workers may have incentives to</u></strong></mark> expropriate rents by <u><strong><mark>demand</u></strong></mark>ing <u><strong><mark>higher wage concessions recognizing that the costs are sunk. This</u></strong></mark> ex-post holdup problem on the part of employees in turn <u><strong><mark>leads to</u></strong></mark> an ex-ante <u><strong><mark>underinvestment in R&D</u></strong></mark> (Grout, 1984; Malcomson, 1997), <u><strong><mark>which</mark> ultimately <mark>impedes innovation.</u></strong></mark> Second, unionizing the workforce could encourage shirking because the negative consequences for supplying less effort are reduced. That is, <u><strong>unionization reduces the probability of dismissal, so it lowers the cost of shirking and could lead to lower productivity among workers.</u></strong> Third, <u><strong>unions alter the distribution of worker wages, leading to a reduction in wage inequality among workers</u></strong> (Frandsen, 2012). To the extent that innovative and talented workers are in demand in the labor market, <u><strong>reduced wage gaps may force out innovative employees, which contributes to the decline in innovation in unionized firms.</u></strong> While the three underlying mechanisms discussed are different, they are all related in the sense that <u><strong>unionization creates misaligned incentives and impedes innovation.</u> We refer to the general decline in innovation after unionization stemming from any one or all of these potential consequences as the misaligned incentives hypothesis. </p></strong>

Contention 2 – Innovation that Excites.

Thankfully, RTW laws benefit the econ in 2 ways

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

N

TOC DIGITAL SPEECH AND DEBATE SERIES 2

2

Lynbrook MJ

Yawen Zhang

hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

2023-02-25 04:31:36

LeMa

Lakeville LeMa

if anyone needs anything feel free to hit us up devin - devinlest1@gmail.com and yezuls - yezulmaharjan13@gmail.com here are interps we've read that we'd like you to meet: Debaters must disclose all previously read case positions with citations, taglines, and first and last three words of each card read, under their name and school on the 2022/2023 NDCA PF Wiki at least 15 minutes before the round.

De.....

Le.....

Ye.....

Ma.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

Fortunately, right-to-work laws stall unionization efforts.

Page 22

Lucy E. Page, 8-8-2022, "Impacts of Right-to-Work Laws on Unionization and Wages," https://www.nber.org/digest/202208/impacts-right-work-laws-unionization-and-wages DOA 2/6/23 YRM

These laws can create a “free-rider” problem in union membership, undermining unions’ financing and ability to organize workers. these laws significantly reduce unionization rates and wages. researchers find that right-to-work laws are associated with a drop of about 4 percentage points in unionization rates five years after adoption, as well as a wage drop of about 1 percent. These impacts are almost entirely driven by three industries with high unionization rates at baseline — construction, education, and public administration — where right-to-work laws reduce unionization by almost 13 percentage points and wages by more than 4 percent, again over five years. unionization appears to raise wages by approximately 40 percent.

These laws can create a “free-rider” problem in union membership, undermining unions’ financing and ability to organize workers. these laws significantly reduce unionization rates researchers find that right-to-work laws reduce unionization by almost 13 percentage points over five years

Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, all workers covered by collective-bargaining agreements receive the full benefits of those agreements, such as wages and grievance redress, whether they are union members or not. In keeping with this approach, in most US states all covered workers must pay union dues regardless of union membership. However, the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, better known as the Taft-Hartley Act, allowed states to introduce “right-to-work” laws under which covered workers cannot be legally required to pay union dues. These laws can create a “free-rider” problem in union membership, undermining unions’ financing and ability to organize workers. Some states passed right-to-work laws before 1980. Six additional states have adopted these provisions since 2001. In Right-to-Work Laws, Unionization, and Wage Setting (NBER Working Paper 30098), Nicole Fortin, Thomas Lemieux, and Neil Lloyd find that these laws significantly reduce unionization rates and wages. They first test the impacts of right-to-work laws using data from five states — Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Kentucky — between 2011 and 2017. They use worker-level data from the Current Population Survey to test for differential trends in a state’s wage and unionization rates in the years after it adopted a right-to-work law, relative to states that had never done so. Using this event-study design, the researchers find that right-to-work laws are associated with a drop of about 4 percentage points in unionization rates five years after adoption, as well as a wage drop of about 1 percent. These impacts are almost entirely driven by three industries with high unionization rates at baseline — construction, education, and public administration — where right-to-work laws reduce unionization by almost 13 percentage points and wages by more than 4 percent, again over five years. The impact of right-to-work laws on wages and unionization rates is also larger for women and public-sector workers, two groups that are overrepresented in highly unionized industries. The researchers complement these results with a second approach based on the differential effects of right-to-work laws on the highly unionized industries. This strategy rests on the assumption that without right-to-work laws all states would have the same relative distribution of unionization rates and wage levels across industries. They estimate the impacts of these laws by testing whether right-to-work states have especially low unionization rates and wages in highly unionized industries. They find a difference of nearly 20 percent in the unionization rate between states with and without right-to-work laws. Right-to-work laws are also associated with 7.5 percent lower wages. Finally, the researchers use both of these empirical strategies to examine a key labor-market question: how does unionization affect workers’ wages? If right-to-work laws only affect wages by lowering unionization rates, the causal effects of unions on wages can be estimated by dividing the effects of right-to-work laws on wages by their effects on unionization. Under this assumption, unionization appears to raise wages by approximately 40 percent.

<h4><strong>Fortunately, right-to-work laws stall unionization efforts. </h4><p></strong>Lucy E. <u><strong><mark>Page</u></strong></mark>, 8-8-20<u><strong><mark>22</u></strong></mark>, "Impacts of Right-to-Work Laws on Unionization and Wages," https://www.nber.org/digest/202208/impacts-right-work-laws-unionization-and-wages DOA 2/6/23 YRM</p><p>Under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, all workers covered by collective-bargaining agreements receive the full benefits of those agreements, such as wages and grievance redress, whether they are union members or not. In keeping with this approach, in most US states all covered workers must pay union dues regardless of union membership. However, the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947, better known as the Taft-Hartley Act, allowed states to introduce “right-to-work” laws under which covered workers cannot be legally required to pay union dues. <u><strong><mark>These laws can create a “free-rider” problem in union membership, undermining unions’ financing and ability to organize workers.</u></strong></mark> Some states passed right-to-work laws before 1980. Six additional states have adopted these provisions since 2001. In Right-to-Work Laws, Unionization, and Wage Setting (NBER Working Paper 30098), Nicole Fortin, Thomas Lemieux, and Neil Lloyd find that <u><strong><mark>these laws significantly reduce unionization rates </mark>and wages. </u></strong>They first test the impacts of right-to-work laws using data from five states — Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Kentucky — between 2011 and 2017. They use worker-level data from the Current Population Survey to test for differential trends in a state’s wage and unionization rates in the years after it adopted a right-to-work law, relative to states that had never done so. Using this event-study design, the<u><strong> <mark>researchers find that </mark>right-to-work laws are associated with a drop of about 4 percentage points in unionization rates five years after adoption, as well as a wage drop of about 1 percent. These impacts are almost entirely driven by three industries with high unionization rates at baseline — construction, education, and public administration — where <mark>right-to-work laws reduce unionization by almost 13 percentage points</mark> and wages by more than 4 percent, again <mark>over five years</mark>. </u></strong>The impact of right-to-work laws on wages and unionization rates is also larger for women and public-sector workers, two groups that are overrepresented in highly unionized industries. The researchers complement these results with a second approach based on the differential effects of right-to-work laws on the highly unionized industries. This strategy rests on the assumption that without right-to-work laws all states would have the same relative distribution of unionization rates and wage levels across industries. They estimate the impacts of these laws by testing whether right-to-work states have especially low unionization rates and wages in highly unionized industries. They find a difference of nearly 20 percent in the unionization rate between states with and without right-to-work laws. Right-to-work laws are also associated with 7.5 percent lower wages. Finally, the researchers use both of these empirical strategies to examine a key labor-market question: how does unionization affect workers’ wages? If right-to-work laws only affect wages by lowering unionization rates, the causal effects of unions on wages can be estimated by dividing the effects of right-to-work laws on wages by their effects on unionization. Under this assumption, <u><strong>unionization appears to raise wages by approximately 40 percent.</p></u></strong>

Contention 2 – Innovation that Excites.

Thankfully, RTW laws benefit the econ in 2 ways

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

N

TOC DIGITAL SPEECH AND DEBATE SERIES 2

2

Lynbrook MJ

Yawen Zhang

hspf22/Lakeville/LeMa/Lakeville-LeMa-Con-TOC-DIGITAL-SPEECH-AND-DEBATE-SERIES-2-Round-2.docx

2023-02-25 04:31:36

LeMa

Lakeville LeMa

if anyone needs anything feel free to hit us up devin - devinlest1@gmail.com and yezuls - yezulmaharjan13@gmail.com here are interps we've read that we'd like you to meet: Debaters must disclose all previously read case positions with citations, taglines, and first and last three words of each card read, under their name and school on the 2022/2023 NDCA PF Wiki at least 15 minutes before the round.

De.....

Le.....

Ye.....

Ma.....

Lakeville

Lakeville

MN

hspf22

HS PF 2022-23

pf

hs

This is empirically proven.

Bradley et al. 13

Bradley et al. 13 (Daniel Bradley from the University of South Florida, Incheol Kim from the University of New Orleans, and Xuan Tian from Indiana University, December 2013, [“The causal effect of labor unions on innovation” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiV46a724T9AhUKkYkEHWNACdwQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeaweb.org%2Fconference%2F2014%2Fretrieve.php%3Fpdfid%3D427&usg=AOvVaw1az9RCZ1qmTEPRbC8gglUk] DOA: 2-7-2023 MRC)

We use RDD to establish a causal link from unionization to innovation. Second, our proxy for innovativeness is patenting activity, the output of innovation whereas most other studies in this literature proxy for innovation using R&D. Third, we attempt to pinpoint the mechanisms in which unionization impacts innovation patent counts and citations decline significantly after firms elect to unionize. passing a union election leads to an 8.7% decline in patent counts and a 12.5% decline in the number of citations per patent three years after the election. the results are statistically insignificant in states with right-to-work legislation where unions have less bargaining power to expropriate rents. a reduction in R&D expenditures, reduced productivity of existing and newly hired inventors, and the departure of innovative individuals appear plausible underlying mechanisms through which unionization impedes innovation. the percentage of innovation output generated in states where unions win decline significantly. firms may shift their innovation activities to states where the workforce is not unionized. This type of behavior is somewhat consistent with Boeing’s experience to build their Dreamliner jet in South Carolina, which has more business-friendly labor laws than Washington’s where its existing plants are located. providing “too much” protection to employees such as those afforded to employees by powerful labor unions leads to potential misaligned incentive problems and stifles firm innovation.

patent counts and citations decline significantly after firms elect to unionize. passing a union election leads to an 8.7% decline in patent counts and a 12.5% decline in the number of citations per patent providing protection to employees such as those afforded by powerful labor unions leads to potential misaligned incentive problems and stifles firm innovation.

In this paper, we examine the causal effect of unionization on the innovation activities of firms. Our main contribution to the literature is threefold. We use RDD to establish a causal link from unionization to innovation. Second, our proxy for innovativeness is patenting activity, the output of innovation whereas most other studies in this literature proxy for innovation using R&D. Third, we attempt to pinpoint the mechanisms in which unionization impacts innovation. We find patent counts and citations decline significantly after firms elect to unionize. Economically, passing a union election leads to an 8.7% decline in patent counts and a 12.5% decline in the number of citations per patent three years after the election. We provide a battery of diagnostic and robustness tests and find our conclusions are unchanged. Next, we show that the results are statistically insignificant in states with right-to-work legislation where unions have less bargaining power to expropriate rents. Finally, a reduction in R&D expenditures, reduced productivity of existing and newly hired inventors, and the departure of innovative individuals appear plausible underlying mechanisms through which unionization impedes innovation. How do firms respond to union election wins? While this is beyond the scope of this paper, we make an initial attempt to address this question. In Appendix B, we consider the locality of innovation activities within a firm. That is, we compute the percentage of local patents to total patents and citations to total citations generated by firms in states where union elections are held, estimated in a local linear RDD framework. As the results indicate, the percentage of innovation output generated in states where unions win decline significantly. This finding suggests that firms may shift their innovation activities to states where the workforce is not unionized. This type of behavior is somewhat consistent with Boeing’s experience to build their Dreamliner jet in South Carolina, which has more business-friendly labor laws than Washington’s where its existing plants are located. While our preliminary results are consistent with this view, we leave a thorough analysis of this question to future research. While the existing literature suggests that to effectively motivate firm innovation, employees need to be tolerated for failures and be provided protection against dismissal in bad faith, our paper shows that providing “too much” protection to employees such as those afforded to employees by powerful labor unions leads to potential misaligned incentive problems and stifles firm innovation. Our study has important implications for policy makers when they alter union regulations or labor laws to encourage innovation, which is perhaps the most important driver of economic growth.

<h4>This is empirically proven. </h4><p><u><strong>Bradley et al. 13</u></strong> (Daniel Bradley from the University of South Florida, Incheol Kim from the University of New Orleans, and Xuan Tian from Indiana University, December 2013, [“The causal effect of labor unions on innovation” https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiV46a724T9AhUKkYkEHWNACdwQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeaweb.org%2Fconference%2F2014%2Fretrieve.php%3Fpdfid%3D427&usg=AOvVaw1az9RCZ1qmTEPRbC8gglUk] DOA: 2-7-2023 MRC) </p><p>In this paper, we examine the causal effect of unionization on the innovation activities of firms. Our main contribution to the literature is threefold. <u><strong>We use RDD to establish a causal link from unionization to innovation. Second, our proxy for innovativeness is patenting activity, the output of innovation whereas most other studies in this literature proxy for innovation using R&D. Third, we attempt to pinpoint the mechanisms in which unionization impacts innovation</u></strong>. We find <u><strong><mark>patent counts and citations decline significantly after firms elect to unionize.</u></strong></mark> Economically, <u><strong><mark>passing a union election leads to an 8.7% decline in patent counts and a 12.5% decline in the number of citations per patent</mark> three years after the election.</u></strong> We provide a battery of diagnostic and robustness tests and find our conclusions are unchanged. Next, we show that <u><strong>the results are statistically insignificant in states with right-to-work legislation where unions have less bargaining power to expropriate rents.</u></strong> Finally, <u><strong>a reduction in R&D expenditures, reduced productivity of existing and newly hired inventors, and the departure of innovative individuals appear plausible underlying mechanisms through which unionization impedes innovation.</u></strong> How do firms respond to union election wins? While this is beyond the scope of this paper, we make an initial attempt to address this question. In Appendix B, we consider the locality of innovation activities within a firm. That is, we compute the percentage of local patents to total patents and citations to total citations generated by firms in states where union elections are held, estimated in a local linear RDD framework. As the results indicate, <u><strong>the percentage of innovation output generated in states where unions win decline significantly.</u></strong> This finding suggests that <u><strong>firms may shift their innovation activities to states where the workforce is not unionized.</u></strong> <u><strong>This type of behavior is somewhat consistent with Boeing’s experience to build their Dreamliner jet in South Carolina, which has more business-friendly labor laws than Washington’s where its existing plants are located.</u></strong> While our preliminary results are consistent with this view, we leave a thorough analysis of this question to future research. While the existing literature suggests that to effectively motivate firm innovation, employees need to be tolerated for failures and be provided protection against dismissal in bad faith, our paper shows that <u><strong><mark>providing</mark> “too much” <mark>protection to employees such as those afforded</mark> to employees <mark>by powerful labor unions leads to potential misaligned incentive problems and stifles firm innovation.</u></strong></mark> Our study has important implications for policy makers when they alter union regulations or labor laws to encourage innovation, which is perhaps the most important driver of economic growth. </p>

Contention 2 is Innovation that Excites.

./documents/hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Con-Millard-north-cup-Round-1.docx

N

Millard north cup

1

lincoln east CO

Christian Vasquez

hspf22/Lakeville/SiDa/Lakeville-SiDa-Con-Millard-north-cup-Round-1.docx

2023-02-17 20:33:40

SiDa

Lakeville SiDa

Au.....

Si.....

Na.....

Da.....

Lakeville