Points of Entry Affirmative
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Mexico Points of Entry Affirmative JV Table of Contents 1/2Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Glossary......................................................................................................................................... 4
1AC .......................................................................................................................................... 5-11
Trade Advantage
Modernizing Points of Entry Boost Economy ............................................................................... 12
US Economic Decline Bad- Military Withdrawal ........................................................................... 13
Answers to: Mexico Not Key to US Growth .................................................................................. 14
Answers to: Mexican Economy is Broken .................................................................................... 15
Answers to: Jobs Turn .............................................................................................................. 16-7
Answers to: Maquiladora Turn- Alternate Causality ..................................................................... 18
Maquiladoras Good- Economy .................................................................................................... 19
Maquiladora Good- Poverty ......................................................................................................... 20
Answers to: Emissions Turn ....................................................................................................... 21
Relations Advantage
US-Mexico Relations Add-On 1/2 ............................................................................................. 22-3
Mexico Relations Impact: Growth ................................................................................................ 24
US- Mexico Relations Hegemony Impact ................................................................................ 25-6
Answers to: US- Mexico Relations are Resilient .......................................................................... 27
Answers to: Drug trade hurts relations ......................................................................................... 28
Terrorism Advantage
Terrorism Add-On 1/2 .................................................................................................................. 29
Terrorism Add-On 2/2 .................................................................................................................. 30
Answers to: Border Secure Now .................................................................................................. 31
Solvency
Answers to: No Solvency – Coordination ..................................................................................... 32
Regan, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, 2011 ........................................................................... 32
Answers to: No Solvency- Regulatory Issues .............................................................................. 33
Answers to: No Solvency- Infrastructure Investment Fails ........................................................... 34
1
Points of Entry Affirmative
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Mexico Points of Entry Affirmative JV Table of Contents 2/2Off Case Answers
Answers to: China Disadvantage
United States engagement in Latin America is durable ............................................................... 35
US Economic Engagement with Mexico now ............................................................................... 36
United States won’t crowd out China ........................................................................................... 37
United States won’t crowd out China- Extensions ....................................................................... 38
Turn- Chinese Influence Bad- Latin America growth and stability ............................................... 39
Chinese Influence Bad- US leadership ........................................................................................ 40
Chinese Soft Power Fails............................................................................................................. 41
Chinese Soft Power Fails- Extension ........................................................................................... 42
Answers to Immigration Disadvantage
Mexico’s Economy Growing/Immigration Rates Declining ........................................................... 43
Mexico’s Economy Growing/Immigration Rates Declining – Fewer Farm Workers ..................... 44
Plan Wouldn’t Stop all Migration .................................................................................................. 45
US Farms Will Adapt to Labor Shortages .................................................................................... 46
US Agriculture Stable Without Immigrant Labor .......................................................................... 47
US Farms Exploit Immigrants ...................................................................................................... 48
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – General ............................................................................... 49
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Lower Wages ...................................................................... 50
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Drain Welfare ...................................................................... 51
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Remittances ........................................................................ 52
2
Points of Entry Affirmative
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Summary
This affirmative argues that the United States should work with Mexico to modernize points of
entry along the US-Mexico border.
The file supports three separate arguments for modernization:
First, , it will increase trade between the United States and Mexico by allowing goods to travel
more swiftly between each country. This trade is necessary for economic growth and job
creation, improving the quality of life for residents in both countries.
Second, cooperation on modernizing the border will improve relations with Mexico. Strong
relations are critical for the US and Mexico to cooperate on solving issues that face both
countries like terrorism, global warming and immigration. In addition, strong relations with
Mexico are necessary to help the Unites States retain its geographic location as an asset in its
efforts to be a global leader. US leadership helps to maintain a stable global order that
promotes peace.
Third, more efficient borders will allow border patrol to secure the border and stop illegal
crossings. Terrorist groups are looking for ways to piggyback on illegal immigration
networks to sneak a weapon of mass destruction into the United States. Modernized border
crossings allow border patrol to more easily secure the border and prevent a terrorist attack.
3
Points of Entry Affirmative
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Glossary
Competitiveness- the ability of a country to sell goods in a given market
“Gang of Eight”- a bipartisan group of 8 Senators working together in Congress to craft an
immigration bill that can gain enough Democratic and Republican support to pass
Hegemony- leadership exercised by one nation over others
Illicit- another word for illegal or against the law
Life expectancy- how long a member of a community is predicted to live based on their
likelihood of dying from various causes like disease or other factors
Membranes- A thin, pliable layer of tissue covering surfaces or separating or connecting
regions, structures, or organs of an animal or a plant.
Petroleum- a naturally occurring thick black substance that can be distilled into gasoline,
motor oil, jet fuel and many other uses
Points of entry- A place where people and goods can legally cross from one country to
another
Regulatory- a system of rules set up by the government to guide operations of a specific
industry or activity
4
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (1/7)
Contention 1 is Inherency:
The United States’ focus on security along the entire border leads to neglecting points of
entry along the Mexican border. These low resource crossing points cause delays for goods
traveling and slow- downs in the economy on both sides of the border.
Bloomberg News May 2013
“Border Delays Cost U.S. $7.8 Billion as Fence Is Focus” By Amanda J. Crawford 5/14/13
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-15/border-delays-cost-u-s-7-8-billion-as-fence-is-focus.html
U.S. investment has remained focused on controlling the rest of the border between the
crossings, including remote areas such as the Arizona desert. In the past decade, the number of
Border Patrol agents more than doubled while the number of Customs and Border Protection
officers, who staff the ports of entry, has remained at about the same level, according to a
report by the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center’s Mexico Institute and partner institutions.
Congressional funding for the areas between the ports has eclipsed that for the authorized
entry points since 2007, even though the crossings have faced enhanced security
requirements, increasing trade and evidence that drugs and dangerous individuals are more
likely to cross there, according to the Mexico Institute report. That focus continues in the current
immigration debate in the Senate. The plan crafted by the so-called Gang of Eight bipartisan
senators, which is being considered by the Judiciary Committee today, aims to secure Republican
support by tying immigrants’ path to citizenship to the ability of the U.S. Border Patrol to stop
90 percent of illegal traffic across the southern border between the official ports of entry.
There is no similar metric for the efficiency or security of the land ports. ‘Less Attention ’ “The
way the border is currently run is costing the U.S. a lot in terms of jobs and the economy,”
said Christopher Wilson, an associate with the Mexico Institute and co-author of his group’s report
on border trade. “In the context of the current immigration debate, we are very focused on what
is going on between the ports of entry while this major issue, which is about security but also
about jobs and the economy, is getting a lot less attention.” Focusing politically on the rest of
the border is easier than facing the challenges of running effective ports of entry, said Steven
Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based group
critical of increased immigration. While the land ports probably do need more investment in
infrastructure, there also should be much more stringent security, including entry and exit checks to
catch those who overstay legal visits, he said. “It seems to some extent we put too much emphasis
on the ease of movement across the border,” Camarota said. “The border is not simply an
obstacle to be overcome by businesses and travelers. It is the part where our country begins,
and it is vitally important for security and immigration control.”
5
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (2/7)
Growing traffic at US-Mexico points of entry will cause a crippling slowdown in North
American trade.
Ramos, New Democracy Network’s Policy Director of the 21st Century Border Initiative, 2013
Kristian Ramos is New Democracy Network’s Policy Director of the 21st Century Border Initiative,
“Realizing the Strategic National Value of our Trade, Tourism and Ports of Entry with Mexico” The
New Policy Institute is the educational affiliate of the NDN, a think tank based in Washington, DC.
May 2013 http://ndn.org/sites/default/files/blog_files/NPI%20U%20S%20Mexico%20Trade%20Tourism%20POE%20Report_0.pdf
Investment in ports of entry is key Key policies and infrastructure can either help or hinder this
enormous economic exchange. Forty-seven U.S.-Mexico land ports of entry facilitate several
hundreds of billions dollars in U.S.-Mexico trade every year. Ideally, ports of entry should act
as membranes, facilitating healthy interactions (such as legitimate trade and travel) and
preventing unhealthy ones (such as illicit drugs, firearms and human smuggling). And ideally
much of the actual inspection and clearance should occur “upstream” from the ports. Broad
bipartisan agreement has developed on the need to improve our land ports of entry with
Mexico. This is because over seventy percent of NAFTA trade flows through these ports of
entry as well as an enormous flow of visitors who have a major economic impact on the
United States. Twenty-three states have Mexico as their number one or number two trading partner,
multiplying jobs in both countries. Significant investments of various types are badly needed for
our shared land ports of entry with Mexico. Greatly increased security at the ports of entry since
September 11, 2001 coupled with inadequate staffing and infrastructure have significantly
increased border wait times. And with continued Congressional gridlock on funding and U.S.
Customs and Border Protection projecting a $6 billion shortfall in infrastructure investment on both
our southern and northern borders, we may be headed for a debilitating slowdown in North
American trade. The regional border infrastructure master planning process is a step in the
right direction of formally recognizing the vast bottom-up nature of interaction at the border by
thousands of key stakeholders. But this more inclusive infrastructure planning system has not
been met with increased funding for ports of entry staffing or infrastructure. The North
American Development Bank may offer a model for funding border infrastructure projects.
6
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (3/7)
Effective and efficient border crossings are necessary to expand US exports to Mexico – these
are a crucial drive renewed US job growth.
O’Neil, Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, 2013
(Shannon, “U.S. Exports Depend on Mexico ” Latin America’s Moment January 11
http://blogs.cfr.org/oneil/2013/01/11/u-s-exports-depend-on-mexico/)
Surprising to many Americans is the importance of the United States’ trade with Mexico. While
Asia captures the headlines, U.S. exports to Mexico are double those to China, and second only
to Canada. And while many of these goods come from border states—Texas, Arizona, New Mexico,
and California—Mexico matters for much more of the union. Seventeen states send more than 10
percent of their exports to Mexico , and it is the number one or two destination for U.S. goods
for nearly half the country. The graph below shows those states most economically dependent on
our southern neighbor–notice that South Dakota and Nebraska outpace New Mexico and California.
These flows are only accelerating. During the first ten months of 2012 exports heading south grew
by $17 billion dollars (or 10 percent) compared to 2011, reaching a total of $181 billion. They include
petroleum products (some $17 billion worth) and intermediate goods such as vehicle parts,
electrical apparatuses, industrial supplies, metals, and chemicals (over $40 billion combined).
Spurred on by deep supply chains, these pieces and parts move fluidly back and forth across the
border (often quite a few times) before ending up as finished goods on store shelves in both
countries. The uptick should be seen as a good thing. According to economic studies, these
exports support some six million American jobs (directly and indirectly). But to continue this
dynamism, the United States and Mexico need to improve border infrastructure and facilitate
flows. This means expanding border crossings and highways, and harmonizing regulations
and customs to make the process easier and faster. Prioritizing and investing in bilateral trade
will provide greater opportunity and security–for U.S. companies and workers alike.
7
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (4/7)
US-Mexico economic cooperation is the only hope for sustaining the global economic
recovery – growth in Europe, China, and Japan are too soft to keep the world economy afloat
Schiffer 2013
Michael Schiffer President of the Inter-American Dialogue “A More Ambitious Agenda: A Report of the
Inter-American Dialogue’s commission on Mexico-US relations.” February
http://www.thedialogue.org/PublicationFiles/IAD9042_USMexicoReportEnglishFinal.pdf
The first is to reinforce and deepen economic cooperation. That includes increasing the
productivity and international competitiveness of both nations, opening opportunities for
longterm growth and job creation, and setting the stage for further economic integration. In a
world of persistent, widespread economic insecurity, the more the United States and Mexico
coordinate and integrate their economies, the more ably they can compete for global markets.
Their economic cooperation is more vital than ever as drivers of the global economy falter—as
the European financial crisis persists, as China enters a period of slower growth, as Japan
remains stalled, and as many emerging markets appear increasingly vulnerable. Among the
concrete objectives the two countries should consider are development of a framework to make their
shared labor markets more efficient and equitable; formation of a coherent North American energy
market (which could help meet the needs of energy-poor Central America); and coordination among
the United States, Mexico, and Canada in negotiations toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
8
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (5/7)
Economic growth is good for everyone. Growth increases life expectancy, education and
quality of life while allowing the government to fund programs for the public good.
Furchtgott-Roth, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and former chief economist of the
U.S. Department of Labor, 2013
(Diana, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and former chief economist of the U.S. Department
of Labor, “Only Growth Can Sustain Us” New York Times, February 14,
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/01/16/when-growth-is-not-a-good-goal/only-growth-cansustain-us)
Economic growth raises standards of living for rich and poor countries alike. The more
growth, the better.
In developing countries, higher G.D.P. growth results in lower infant mortality, running water,
sewer systems, electricity, better schools and education for children, as can be seen from
comparative World Bank data. As electric power plants replace wood stoves, the air is cleared of
smog. As girls receive more education, birth rates naturally decline as women choose to make use of
their human capital by entering the labor force.
In developed countries, economic growth gives us the tax revenue for cleaner air and water,
for missile defense, for health and education programs. Stringent Environmental Protection
Agency regulations do not come cheap. Republicans and Democrats both have extensive wish
lists for favorite government programs, and the only way to pay for these is from the tax
revenue from economic growth.
Here in America, we have all the food we can eat, and more clothes than we can fit in our closets. At
the same time, we’re seeing deteriorating family structures that reduce educational
performance. About three-quarters of poor families with children are headed by a single parent. Poor
children may have cellphones, but they need competitive schools (like KIPP) to make sure they do
not fall behind.
Our parents and grandparents are requiring more support as their life expectancies increase.
People who live into their 80s and 90s need not just more medical services, but more technology
and health aides to be comfortable at home. This also takes economic growth.
Henry Thoreau may be right that we can find God in nature. But it takes economic growth to keep
nature pristine and all of us healthy enough to enjoy it.
Thus, we propose the following plan:
The United States federal government should cooperate with the government of Mexico to
modernize points of entry along the US-Mexico border.
9
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (6/7)
Contention 3 is Solvency:
Mexico is a ready and willing partner for border infrastructure improvements, but the United
States has to be the first mover – plan would catalyze growth in legal trade
O’Neil, Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations , 2013
(Shannon, “Mexico Makes It: A Transformed Society, Economy, and Government” March/April 2013
Foreign Affairs http://www.cfr.org/mexico/mexico-makes/p30098)
. Admittedly, this process has sent some U.S. jobs south, but overall, cross-border production is
good for U.S. employment. There is evidence that U.S. companies with overseas operations
are more likely to create domestic jobs than those based solely in the United States. Using
data collected confidentially from thousands of large U.S. manufacturing firms, the scholars
Mihir Desai, C. Fritz Foley, and James Hines upended the conventional wisdom in a 2008 study,
which found that when companies ramp up their investment and employment internationally,
they invest more and hire more people at home, too. Overseas operations make companies
more productive and competitive, and with improved products, lower prices, and higher sales,
they are able to create new jobs everywhere. Washington should welcome the expansion of U.S.
companies in Mexico because increasing cross-border production and trade between the two
countries would boost U.S. employment and growth. Mexico is a ready, willing, and able
economic partner, with which the United States has closer ties than it does with any other
emerging-market country. Familial and communal ties also unite the United States and Mexico. The
number of Mexican immigrants in the United States doubled in the 1980s and then doubled again in
the 1990s. Fleeing poor economic and employment conditions in Mexico and attracted by labor
demand and family and community members already in the United States, an estimated ten million
Mexicans have come north over the past three decades. This flow has recently slowed, thanks to
changing demographics and economic improvements in Mexico and a weakening U.S. economy.
Still, some 12 million Mexicans and over 30 million Mexican Americans call the United States home.
For all these reasons, the United States should strengthen its relationship with its neighbor,
starting with immigration laws that support the binational individuals and communities that already
exist in the United States and encourage the legal immigration of Mexican workers and their families.
U.S. President Barack Obama has promised to send such legislation to Congress, but a strong antiimmigrant wing within the Republican Party and the slow U.S. economic recovery pose significant
barriers to a comprehensive and far-reaching deal. Nevertheless, the United States and Mexico
urgently need to invest in border infrastructure, standardize their customs forms, and work to
better facilitate legal trade between them. Furthermore, getting Americans to recognize the
benefits of cross-border production will be an uphill battle, but it is one worth fighting in order to
boost the United States' exports, jobs, and overall economic growth.
10
Points of Entry Affirmative
1AC
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
1AC (7/7)
Modernizing border crossing would fix these problems. Minor investments on speeding up
border crossing would reap massive economic returns
Bonner & Rozental, Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Former
Deputy Foreign Minister of Mexico, 2009
Robert C., Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Former Administrator, Drug
Enforcement Administration, Andrés, Former Deputy Foreign Minister of Mexico; Former President
and Founder Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI) “Managing the United States-Mexico
Border: Cooperative Solutions to Common Challenges “ Report of the Binational Task Force on the
United States-Mexico Border http://www.pacificcouncil.org/document.doc?id=30
Congestion at crossing points imposes considerable costs on tourists, commuters,
consumers, business owners, and border communities; the financial price alone of delays at
the border reaches billions of dollars per year. In some areas along the border, including the San
Diego-Tijuana corridor, expediting cross-border commerce is the single most important measure that
the governments could take to promote economic development. Although facilitation is often viewed
as the flip side of security, there are ways to simultaneously expedite trade and improve
security. For instance, new detection technologies and intelligent risk management strategies
enhance public safety while facilitating cross-border travel and commerce. One crucial barrier
to trade facilitation is the deficit in border infrastructure, which simply has not kept pace with
massive increases in trade and transit since ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement.
Federal spending on ports of entry would have a very high rate of return; for this reason, both
countries should make a long-term commitment to fund border infrastructure and (in the short
run) disproportionately direct stimulus money toward the ports of entry. Even with additional
stimulus spending, however, federal funding will remain insufficient to address the infrastructure
deficit; both countries must find other sources of financing for border crossing points and the roads
that feed into them. This money can come in part from the private sector, with the market rather than
the state determining the magnitude of private investment in border infrastructure. Beyond
infrastructure, better exploitation of technology, refined risk-based segmentation of traffic,
and operational changes at the ports of entry (including staffing) can all reduce transit time.
Because the marginal cost of operating an existing port of entry is extremely low compared to
both the cost of building a new port of entry and the marginal benefit of more rapid transit,
inadequate staffing of the ports of entry should never become a bottleneck So far neither
government has articulated a goal for wait times. The Task Force believes that average wait times
at the border should not exceed 20 minutes in either direction, at any port of entry, with
minimal variation about this average.
11
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Modernizing Points of Entry Boost Economy
[
] Infrastructure related POE delays cause billions of economic losses across all
economic sectors
Immigration Policy Center 5/12/13
“A border fence will hurt the economic relationship of Mexico and U.S.” Posted on VOXXI
http://www.voxxi.com/border-fence-economic-relation-mexico-us/#ixzz2TJmDyq16
Longer wait times at land ports of entry, due in part to heightened security along the border, can
have a number of economic effects. Longer border crossing wait times may deter people from
choosing to cross the border in terms of shopping trips or other optional crossings (particularly the
case for the busiest crossing areas in bi-national metropolitan regions such as San Ysidro and Otay
Mesa, both near San Diego/Tijuana, El Paso/Ciudad Juarez, Laredo/Nuevo Laredo and
McAllen/Hidalgo/Reynosa). Longer wait times equate to fewer border crossings, less spending in
cross-border communities and potentially fewer job opportunities in service industries in
those communities. Manufacturers and production facilities in the United States who rely upon a
just-in-time delivery model of inventory management can be significantly impacted by delays their
cargo carriers encounter at the border. In some cases, severe delays of needed components can
cause production-line shutdowns and a subsequent backlog of orders. Long wait times also
lead to more congestion, and more air pollution, at border stations. Such outcomes have
significant social, economic and environmental health concerns for border crossers, port of
entry employees and border residents. 47 land ports of entry facilitate hundreds of billions of
dollars in U.S.-Mexico trade every year. Improved infrastructure at the land ports of entry
along the southern border, including additional traffic lanes and processing personnel, would
allow more efficient border crossing. These improvements translate into direct economic
benefits to border communities and states.
12
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Economic Decline Bad- Military Withdrawal
[
] US economic decline undermines our ability to maintain global peace – it would force
US military withdrawal.
Duncan, Chief Economist at Blackhorse Asset Management and analyst for Bloomberg, 2012
(Richard, The New Depression, pg. 129)
The political battle over America’s future would be bitter, and quite possibly bloody. It cannot be
guaranteed that the U.S. Constitution would survive. Foreign affairs would also confront the United
States with enormous challenges. During the Great Depression, the United States did not have a
global empire. Now it does. The United States maintains hundreds of military bases across
dozens of countries around the world. Added to this is a fleet of 11 aircraft carriers and 18 nucleararmed submarines. The country spends more than $650 billion a year on its military. If the U.S.
economy collapses into a New Great Depression, the United States could not afford to maintain
its worldwide military presence or to continue in its role as global peacekeeper. Or, at least, it
could not finance its military in the same way it does at present. Therefore, either the United States
would have to find an alternative funding method for its global military presence or else it would have
to radically scale it back. Historically, empires were financed with plunder and territorial
expropriation. The estates of the vanquished ruling classes were given to the conquering generals,
while the rest of the population was forced to pay imperial taxes. The U.S. model of empire has been
unique. It has financed its global military presence by issuing government debt, thereby taxing future
generations of Americans to pay for this generation’s global supremacy. That would no longer be
possible if the economy collapsed. Cost–benefit analysis would quickly reveal that much of America’s
global presence was simply no longer affordable. Many—or even most—of the outposts that did not
pay for themselves would have to be abandoned.
13
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Mexico Not Key to US Growth
[
]
[
] Opening up transport between the US and Mexico can help bring jobs back to
America and increase manufacturing in the both countries
Hernandez, logistics expert and former central Mexico regional director at Autotransportes de
Carga Tresguerras SA de CV 2012
(Enrique Almanza, “Mexican Logistics Expert Discusses NAFTA Roadblocks and Cross-Border
Trucking Restrictions”, June 26, http://www.supplychainbrain.com/content/world-regions/latinamerica/single-article-page/article/director-of-mexican-carrier-discusses-nafta-roadblocks-and-crossborder-trucking-restrictions/)
SLATON: Your company is a Mexican nationwide less-than-truckload and full truckload carrier. You
maintain interchange freight agreements with U.S carriers and offer border crossing and full service
coverage throughout the United States and Canada. What are your thoughts on how NAFTA or other
U.S. or Mexican transportation legislation might affect your long-term opportunities and prospects?
HERNANDEZ: Ground transportation is of significant economic and strategic importance to
North American trade - especially as reshoring and nearshoring start to take hold. In 1995,
NAFTA was set up to liberalize freight transport across Mexico, the United States and Canada;
encourage infrastructure investment; and secure speedy, efficient flow of goods across North
America. But NAFTA's limited success has led to a partial and inadequate integration of the
supply chains between Mexico and the rest of North America, where goods do circulate, but
without the necessary speed or efficiency. Today, transporting a product amongst the NAFTA
countries can easily involve freight handling or information exchange between three to four different
stakeholders (carriers, brokers, custom-house agents, etc.), each of which adds to delays and
higher supply chain costs. This ultimately increases overall inventory levels and the final
product prices. These repercussions affect both the competitiveness of the products
transported between NAFTA regions and the transportation services; impede opportunities to
reach new markets; and eliminate the incentives for transport companies to be more efficient,
innovative and competitive - a goal any company should strive towards if they want to excel in a
larger market with tougher competition.
14
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Mexican Economy is Broken
[
]
[
] Sustained growth opportunities can transform the Mexican economy.
Rubio, director general of CIDAC (Center of Research for Development) 2013
(Luis, “Mexico Matters: Change in Mexico and Its Impact Upon the United States”, Wilson Center
April 12 http://wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/rubio_mexico_matters.pdf)
Thoughts about how to overturn the status quo often end up with proposals for reform that do not
solve the problems but nonetheless have the effect of raising expectations to untenable levels. Many
of the proposed economic reforms do not address the relevant problems. The same is true in the
political arena: most reform proposals are not designed to give access to citizenship but to
redistribute power among those who are already powerful and in control of key levers of power or
wealth. There is a direct link between democracy and markets but, as Carlos Heredia argues, “In
Mexico we have something, but not a free market.”2 The country is stuck between the remains of the
old political system and a protected industrial sector next to a highly modern, productive and
successful forward-looking export sector oriented toward the global economy. This cohabitation has
not been a happy one and the government has been incapable of creating a competitive environment
where all companies, as well as citizens and their organizations, have a reasonable chance of
success. Mexico’s true challenge dwells in stopping contesting the past and moving on to the
future. An improved economic outlook would help move the country away from endless
ideological bickering and, as Einstein would have it, once one starts riding a bicycle, “to keep
your balance you must keep moving”. The key to the future lies in breaking the inertia and
creating a momentum. The recipe for success lies not in specific changes, but in creating
conditions that make it not only possible, but inevitable. All successful nations share three
common denominators: effective leadership within proper counterweights, clarity of purpose, and
continuity. A new administration is always an opportunity to break away from both the real and the
mental hindrances to change. Peña-Nieto has before him a huge challenge, but also an immense
opportunity.
15
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Jobs Turn
[
]
[
] Increased border efficiency stimulates manufacturing growth in the US
O’Neil, Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR),
2013
(Shannon, “Economic Change on Mexico’s Horizon”, Latin America’s Moment,
http://blogs.cfr.org/oneil/2013/03/26/economic-change-on-mexicos-horizon/)
And we’ve already seen a lot of investment, particularly with U.S. manufacturers in Mexico,
despite many of the country’s problems. Many factories in the United States depend on those in
Mexico—there are pieces and parts that are crossing the border every day that allow a
company, in the end, to create a globally competitive product. This is already the reality, but
the question going forward is: Can the United States make the most of this and make it even
easier for these companies to grow by facilitating trade with Mexico? Rather than thinking about
cutting back this trade, we should recognize that Mexico helps support U.S. workers because
trade grows the overall pie for these companies. A rising tide on both sides of the border lifts
all boats.
16
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Jobs Turn
[
] Border improvements would have a multiplier effect – they could stimulate economic
growth across multiple sectors
Wilson & Lee 2013
Erik, Associate Director at the North American Center for Transborder Studies (NACTS) at Arizona
State University, Christopher E, Associate at the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International
Center for Scholars “INTRODUCTION” The State of The Border report: A Comprehensive Analysis of
the U.S.-Mexico Border Border Research Partnership May 2013
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/mexico_state_of_border.pdf
Though far from easy to achieve, success in managing the intense interaction and incredible
diversity that make up the border is invaluable. It ripples outward. Of course, the 15 million
people that live in the counties and municipalities along the border benefit enormously when the
border is working. So do the 91 million residents of the border states who depend on the air, water
and commerce that flow across the border. But far beyond the border, the six million people
throughout the United States and many millions more in Mexico with jobs supported by
bilateral trade depend in a very real way on the border’s ability to safely facilitate binational
flows of people and goods. For them, an efficient border means a steady job, and an even more
efficient border can lead to greater employment opportunities. Indeed, the competitiveness of the
entire North American economy depends on the border. Should major advances in border
management take root, the benefits of a better border have the potential to ripple out even
further. Cross-border cooperation could send a signal that the complex transnational
challenges that characterize the 21st century are better met in a context of mutual respect and
shared responsibility than one of conflict and nationalism. Border management is difficult, but it
is worth the effort.
17
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Maquiladora Turn- Alternate Causality
[
]
[
] Companies are relocating due to cheaper labor costs, not production costs.
Ruelas-Gossi, Professor of Strategy and Director of Adolfo Ibañez School of Management ,
2010
(Alejandro, “Mexico's Maquiladora Syndrome”, Harvard Business Review Blog Network, 10-15,
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/10/mexicos_maquiladora_syndrome.html)
In recent times, Mexico's maquiladora industry has started losing out to countries with even
cheaper labor forces such as China, Malaysia, India, and Vietnam. Policy-makers in those
nations may want to remember Mexico's experience, but the change may not be a bad thing if it
forces Mexican companies to increase the numerator by becoming more innovative and strategic for
the next 200 years.
18
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Maquiladoras Good- Economy
[
] Maquiladoras boost economies and provide jobs for Mexican growing work force.
Beck, Proferssor of International Business at UT- Pan American, 2012
(Allan, “Forces Driving Maquiladoras Along The Border Of Mexico And The United States: A Short
Communication, December”,
http://www.cluteonline.com/journals/index.php/IBER/article/view/7415/7483, date accessed 7/2/13,)
By 1965, the Bracero, or guest worker, program ended in the United States and the Border
Industrialization Program was established by Mexico as a means of replacing lost jobs by attracting
investments and creating opportunities by setting up a process that allowed temporary import duty
free and only taxing the value of added portion of transactions (Eldenberg, Roman, & Teruya, 2007).
The Border Industrialization Program laid the groundwork for the maquiladora program, which was
legally established in 1971. Many U.S. companies started manufacturing on the northern border of Mexico
because the arrangement allowed companies to take advantage of the lower Mexico wage rate.¶ The
arrangement worked well and manufacturing became an important part of the Mexican economy. The
maquiladoras represent a good source of foreign direct investment and earnings for many Mexican citizens
(Truett and Truett, 2007). Recent downturns in maquiladora employment has hurt the economy because
the continual growth experienced until 2000 was creating the required one million jobs a year to keep up
with the new young worker additions from population growth (Walkkirch, Nunnenkamp, & Alatorre
Bremont, 2009). The border area also had an abundance of workers as it attracted laborers from well
within the interior (Mendoza, 2010).
[
] Manufacturing jobs lift Mexican workers out of poverty.
Sterman, investment analyst, 2012
(David, “Forget China: Mexico Is A Better Investment”, Seeking Alpha, February 12,
http://seekingalpha.com/article/359721-forget-china-mexico-is-a-better-investment)
Rising exports are creating myriad benefits from Mexico. First, thousands of workers are
finding jobs in factories each year, pushing them from subsistence living into the lower
middle class. That boosts demand for all consumer-facing businesses. Second, the firms that
transport goods are seeing a rise in business. Lastly, the government is able to secure rising tax
receipts, which is crucial when you consider that government-owned energy giant Pemex is seeing
falling output in key energy fields, leading to reduced remittances to the government.
19
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Maquiladora Good- Poverty
[
] Maquiladora’s help raise wage levels for entire region, overall improvement for
workers in border region.
Coleman, Department of Geography at UCLA, 2005
(M., “U.S. statecraft and the U.S.–Mexico border as security/economy nexus”, Political Geography,
Vol. 24, Issue 2, February, p. 185-209,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096262980400126X)
Our analysis has demonstrated that foreign investment and export production have a positive
effect on wages in Mexico: Not only do foreign and export-oriented firms pay workers
significantly more than other firms even after controlling for other relevant firm and worker
characteristics, but they also appear to raise regional wage levels.15 It might at first seem difficult
to reconcile these positive effects of foreign and export firms on workers’ wages in Mexico with the
harmful effects of foreign investment and export production found by researchers using cross-national
research methods. Over the past two decades, researchers in the dependency theory tradition and
many others have found foreign direct investment and export production to be associated with
increasing levels of inequality at the national level (Bornschier and Chase-Dunn, 1985 and Alderson
and Nielsen, 1999). However, the results of our statistical analysis are actually consistent with those
of researchers using cross-national research methods. As we noted earlier, foreign firms may
increase income inequality even while they raise wages. They may increase inequality in three
different ways: First, by paying higher wages, foreign firms create a gap between workers employed
in the foreign and domestic sectors. Second, our analysis further revealed higher wage premiums for
workers in higher occupational groups. By raising the wages of white-collar workers and managers
more than those of blue-collar workers, foreign firms may therefore be worsening an already unequal
income distribution. Finally, the results of our spillover models suggest that workers in regions
of the country with a greater presence of foreign investment receive higher wages. Since
foreign firms are more likely to operate in certain states such as those located near the US
border, foreign investment flows may also be increasing inequality across regions. All these findings
are highly suggestive of a positive association between foreign investment and income inequality in
Mexico. However, a proper test of the effect that foreign firms have on the income distribution
requires more detailed information than currently available in our surveys. Our study does, however,
demonstrate that foreign investment may simultaneously raise average wage levels and increase
inequality, thereby reconciling findings from previous studies.
20
Points of Entry Affirmative
Trade Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Emissions Turn
[
]
[
] Decreasing wait times and efficiency measures will reduce emissions outputs.
Federal Highway Administration, 2012
(“United States-Mexico Land Ports of Entry Emissions and Border Wait-Time White Paper and
Analysis Template”, January, p. 1-5
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/border_planning/us_mexico/publications/emissions_and_border/em
sbrdr.pdf)
Recommended best management practices focus on minimizing queue delay and congestion
at the border.
Minimize the number of booths and combine inspections. Each point where a vehicle
needs to stop for a specific check has stop-and-go queuing leading up to the booth and
idling at the booth itself. Emissions from each of these processes may be as much as
five percent of the controllable emissions at the port of entry.
Minimize queue vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and/or minimize delay. For queued
vehicles, gram-per-mile emission rates are generally on the order of two times the
emission rate for uncongested VMT. Minimizing delay is analogous to minimizing
queue VMT; but time spent parked should not be included in the tabulation of delay.
k vehicles. Some new border crossing designs include a storage
parking lot where vehicles can be parked rather than idle/creep while waiting for
cargo inspections. For commercial vehicles, the amount of creeping VMT inside of the
cargo inspection areas may be similar to the queue lengths approaching the border.
-, U.S.-, and statelevel cargo
inspections and safety checks).
21
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US-Mexico Relations Add-On 1/2
Successful cooperation on border crossing for goods spills over into other areas of relations
– it’s the best opportunity to improve relations.
Bonner & Rozental, Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and Former
Deputy Foreign Minister of Mexico, 2009
Robert C. Bonner Former Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Former
Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, Andrés Rozental Former Deputy Foreign Minister of
Mexico; Former President and Founder Mexican Council on Foreign Relations (COMEXI) “Managing
the United States-Mexico Border: Cooperative Solutions to Common Challenges “ Report of the
Binational Task Force on the United States-Mexico Border
http://www.pacificcouncil.org/document.doc?id=30
The 1,952-mile land boundary between the United States and Mexico is the place where the
most contentious and difficult issues in the bilateral relationship play out – from
undocumented migration and contraband trafficking to the allocation of water in a thirsty
region. Nevertheless, the border region remains poorly understood – both by policymakers in
distant federal capitals and by the public at large. Most people who do not live along the border or
cross it frequently are unaware of the challenges of border management or of the ways in which
Mexico and the United States are attempting to meet those challenges. Changes on the ground – and
local responses to them – frequently outpace both national policies and public perceptions. The
conjunction of a technologically advanced, capital-rich society and a modernizing, laborexporting country creates the potential for both synergy and strife. The challenge confronting
Mexico and the United States is to mitigate the conflicts that inevitably arise from this
dichotomy while seizing all potential opportunities the differences generate. We envision a
system of border management that moves people and goods between the United States and
Mexico far more quickly and efficiently than the present arrangement but that also enhances the
security of both nations. This new system would facilitate trade, encourage the emergence of
regional economic clusters, promote wise stewardship of shared natural resources, and enhance
efforts to preserve ecosystems that cross the national boundary. Perhaps most importantly, it would
invite communities that dot and span the frontier to exploit opportunities for mutual benefit.
Ultimately, the border should be as “thin” and transparent as technologically and politically
possible for those engaged in legitimate travel or commerce but difficult to penetrate for those
engaged in criminal activity or unauthorized transit. Management of this shared boundary
should serve as a model for binational collaboration in confronting shared challenges.
22
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Mexico Relations Add-On 2/2
Strong US Mexico relations are essential to solving a host of issues – immigration, the drug
trade, the environment and terrorism.
Storrs, Specialist in Latin American Affairs at the Congressional Research Service, 2006
(K. Larry, , “Mexico’s Importance and Multiple Relationships with the United States,” Congressional
Research Service, Jan 18 http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl33244.pdf]
Sharing a 2,000-mile border and extensive interconnections through the Gulf of Mexico, the United
States and Mexico are so intricately linked together in an enormous multiplicity of ways that
President George W. Bush and other U.S. officials have stated that no country is more important
to the United States than Mexico. At the same time, Mexican President Vicente Fox (2000-2006),
the first president to be elected from an opposition party in 71 years, has sought to strengthen the
relationship with the United States through what some have called a “grand bargain.” Under this
proposed bargain, the United States would regularize the status of undocumented Mexican workers
in the United States and economically assist the less developed partner in the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA), while Mexico would be more cooperative in efforts to control the illegal
traffic of drugs, people, and goods into the United States. The southern neighbor is linked with the
United States through trade and investment, migration and tourism, environment and health
concerns, and family and cultural relationships. It is the second most important trading partner
of the United States, and this trade is critical to many U.S. industries and border communities.
It is a major source of undocumented migrants and illicit drugs and a possible avenue for the
entry of terrorists into the United States. As a result, cooperation with Mexico is essential to deal
effectively with migration, drug trafficking, and border, terrorism, health, environment, and energy
issues. The United States and Mexico have developed a wide variety of mechanisms for
consultation and cooperation on the range of issues in which the countries interact. These
include (1) periodical presidential meetings; (2) annual cabinet-level Binational Commission meetings
with 10 Working Groups on major issues; (3) annual meetings of congressional delegations in the
Mexico-United States Interparliamentary Group Conferences; (4) NAFTA-related trilateral trade
meetings under various groups; (5) regular meetings of the Attorneys General and the Senior Law
Enforcement Plenary to deal with law enforcement and counter-narcotics matters; (6) a wide variety
of bilateral border area cooperation meetings dealing with environment, health, transportation, and
border crossing issues; and (7) trilateral meetings under the “Security and Prosperity Partnership
(SPP) of North America” launched in Waco, Texas, in March 2005.
23
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Mexico Relations Impact: Growth
[
] Strong Mexican exports are key to US-Mexico economic relations – solves US
economy long-term
Roseman, Research Associate, Council On Hemispheric Affairs, 2012 [
Ethan, , “Enhanced Reciprocity for the U.S.-Mexico Relationship?” 12-17-12,
http://www.coha.org/enhanced-reciprocity-for-the-u-s-mexico-relationship/]
The economy in the United States is currently in turmoil, as evident by the “fiscal cliff”
negotiations that may result in an overall tax adjustment. As such, a stronger bi-lateral trade
relationship with Mexico might turn out to be a vital factor in the restoration of the U.S.
economy in the months to come. President Obama’s relentless efforts to find a solution to the
deficit problem may be more productively directed towards a collaborative relationship with
newly elected Mexican President, Enrique Peña Nieto. This revived North American
relationship between the two leaders, tied together by increasing cross-border trade, has the
potential to mutually stimulate both the United States and Mexican economies. However, as the
Mexican economy continues to rise, it is likely that powerful Mexican drug cartels, along with
perpetuated violence and corrupt public officials associated with these criminal organizations, could
witness a concurrent expansion as well. On December 2, Enrique Peña Nieto assumed office as
the President of Mexico and began the tedious process of reestablishing Mexico as a country
of economic distinction and global importance, rather than continue to bear its current stigma
as a narco-state that has seen nearly 60,000 drug related deaths since 2006.[1] In an attempt to
redirect international focus away from the bloodshed, President Peña Nieto has been showcasing
the brighter side of Mexico while on a recent White House visit in which President Obama
praised him for his “ambitious reform agenda”. Domestically, Peña Nieto has been promoting
this own 13-point plan that emphasizes his party’s focus on optimistic economic growth in
Mexico’s future, rather than one in the hands of corrupt agencies and drug cartels.
[
] US Mexico relations crucial to continued growth of both nations and solving
international crises.
O’neal, Senior Fellow for Latin America Studies at Council on Foreign Relations , 2011
(Shannon, “A Crucial U.S.-Mexico Summit”, Feb 28, http://www.cfr.org/mexico/crucial-us-mexicosummit/p24249)
There is a real possibility that U.S.-Mexico relations could fall into a downward spiral. That
would be dire for both nations. Much more than security cooperation hangs in the balance.
Mexico is the second largest U.S. export market, the largest source of U.S.-bound migrants,
the ancestral home of over thirty million Mexican Americans, and an important partner in
multilateral negotiations ranging from world financial markets to climate change. With
economies, societies, and communities indelibly intertwined, whether it likes it or not, the
United States' future is tied to Mexico's.
24
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US- Mexico Relations Hegemony Impact 1/2
Growing a strong US-Mexican relationship is a prerequisite to national security and continued
US power projection.
Pastor, director of the Center for North American Studies at American University, 2012
(Robert, “Beyond the Continental Divide”, July/August , The American Interest http://www.theamerican-interest.com/article.cfm?piece=1269)
From the perspective of U.S. national security, too, recall for a moment that Mexico and
Canada made an historic gamble in signing NAFTA. Already dependent on the behemoth next
door and wary of the imbalance of power, both countries feared that NAFTA could make them
more vulnerable. Still, they hoped that the United States would be obligated to treat them on an
equal and reciprocal basis and that they would prosper from the agreement. Canadians and
Mexicans have begun to question whether they made the right choice. There are, of course, a
wealth of ways to measure the direct and indirect impact of NAFTA, but political attention, not without
justification, tends to focus on violations of the agreement. The U.S. government violated NAFTA
by denying Mexican trucks the right to enter the United States for 16 years, relenting in the most
timid way, and only after Mexico was permitted by the World Trade Organization to retaliate in
October 2011. And for more than a decade, Washington failed to comply with decisions made by a
dispute-settlement mechanism regarding imports of soft-wood lumber from Canada. More recently,
the United States decided to build a huge wall to keep out Mexicans, and after a three-year
process of reviewing the environmental impact of the Keystone XL pipeline from western Canada to
the Gulf of Mexico, this past December 2011 President Obama decided to postpone the decision for
another year. This is the sort of treatment likely to drive both Canada and Mexico to conclude
that depending on the United States was the wrong decision. Imagine for a moment what
might happen if Canada and Mexico came to such a conclusion. Canada might divert its energy
exports to China, especially if China guaranteed a long-term relationship at a good price. Mexico
would diversify with South America and China and might be less inclined to keep America’s
rivals, like Iran, at arm’s length. Is there anyone who thinks these developments would not set off
national security alarms? A very old truth would quickly reassert itself: The United States can
project its power into Asia, Europe and the Middle East in part because it need not worry
about its neighbors. A new corollary of that truth would not be far behind: Canada and Mexico are
far more important to the national security of the United States than Iraq and Afghanistan. Beyond the
economy and national security, our two neighbors have societal ties to the United States that make all
other ethnic connections seem lean in comparison. By 2015, there will be about 35 million people
in the United States who were either born in Mexico or whose parents were born in Mexico;
that number exceeds the total population of Canada. Canadians in the United States don’t stand out
as much as do Mexicans, but nearly a million Canadians live in the United States. And more
Americans live in Mexico than in any other foreign country. In sum, the economy, national security
and society of the United States, Mexico and Canada are far more intertwined than most U.S.,
Canadian and Mexican citizens realize. Most Americans haven’t worried about Mexico in
strategic terms since the days of Pancho Villa, or about Canada since the 1814 Battle of
Plattsburgh. That’s unwise. Bad relations with either country, let alone both, would be
disastrous. On the other hand, deeper relations could be vastly beneficial. We don’t seem ready
to recognize that truth either.
25
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US- Mexico Relations Hegemony Impact 2/2
US hegemony solves global conflict and prevents mass violence across the globe.
Barnett, Former Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor at U.S. Naval War College, 2011
(Thomas P.M,. Former Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor in the Warfare Analysis &
Research Department, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, U.S. Naval War College American military
geostrategist and Chief Analyst at Wikistrat., worked as the Assistant for Strategic Futures in the
Office of Force Transformation in the Department of Defense, “The New Rules: Leadership Fatigue
Puts U.S., and Globalization, at Crossroads,” March 7
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/8099/the-new-rules-leadership-fatigue-puts-u-s-andglobalization-at-crossroads)
It is worth first examining the larger picture: We live in a time of arguably the greatest structural
change in the global order yet endured, with this historical moment's most amazing feature
being its relative and absolute lack of mass violence. That is something to consider when
Americans contemplate military intervention in Libya, because if we do take the step to prevent
larger-scale killing by engaging in some killing of our own, we will not be adding to some fantastically
imagined global death count stemming from the ongoing "megalomania" and "evil" of American
"empire." We'll be engaging in the same sort of system-administering activity that has marked our
stunningly successful stewardship of global order since World War II. Let me be more blunt: As the
guardian of globalization, the U.S. military has been the greatest force for peace the world has
ever known. Had America been removed from the global dynamics that governed the 20th
century, the mass murder never would have ended. Indeed, it's entirely conceivable there
would now be no identifiable human civilization left, once nuclear weapons entered the killing
equation. But the world did not keep sliding down that path of perpetual war. Instead, America
stepped up and changed everything by ushering in our now-perpetual great-power peace. We
introduced the international liberal trade order known as globalization and played loyal
Leviathan over its spread. What resulted was the collapse of empires, an explosion of
democracy, the persistent spread of human rights, the liberation of women, the doubling of
life expectancy, a roughly 10-fold increase in adjusted global GDP and a profound and
persistent reduction in battle deaths from state-based conflicts. That is what American "hubris"
actually delivered. Please remember that the next time some TV pundit sells you the image of
"unbridled" American military power as the cause of global disorder instead of its cure. With selfdeprecation bordering on self-loathing, we now imagine a post-American world that is anything but.
Just watch who scatters and who steps up as the Facebook revolutions erupt across the Arab world.
While we might imagine ourselves the status quo power, we remain the world's most vigorously
revisionist force.
26
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: US- Mexico Relations are Resilient
[
]
[
] Cooperation and government interactions necessary to capitalize on these natural
links between countries.
Hakim and Litan, senior fellow of the Inter-American Dialogue and Senior Fellow in Economic
Studies at the Brookings Institution, 2002
(Peter and Robert, “Introduction”, Future of North American Integration. Brookings Institution Press,
2002. p 28)
Even if the three governments take no further steps, the economies, societies, cultures, and
institutions of three countries should continue to integrate on their own accord. The three
countries now face a decision of whether and how they should seek to accelerate, smooth,
and institutionalize this integration process. This will not be a simple challenge. Much more
dialogue between the three governments and their citizens will be required to reach consensus
on the broad goals and specific policies that any such further integration may entail. The
major objective of this volume and of the North American project is to begin this dialogue and
the search for ways to develop “win-win-win” strategies for all three countries and their
citizens.
27
Points of Entry Affirmative
Relations Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Drug trade hurts relations
[
]
[
] Too much focus on security issues actually weakens relations, trade issues like
points of entry offer a chance for long term cooperation to overcome other issues.
Olson & Lee, Associate Director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International
Center and Associate Director at the North American Center for Transborder Studies (NACTS)
at Arizona State University, 2012
Eric L. & Erik, serves as Associate Director at the North American Center for Transborder Studies
(NACTS) at Arizona State University. “The State of Security in the U.S.-Mexico Border Region”
Working Paper Series on the State of the U.S.-Mexico Border August 2012
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/State_of_Border_Security_Olson_Lee.pdf
Lasting progress in U.S.-Mexico border security can only come from increased bilateral
collaboration and independent domestic progress on key issues affecting security in the United
States and Mexico. Significant progress has been made in increasing and improving bilateral
security collaboration between federal agencies on both sides of the border. While a welcome
development, these advances can, in some cases, weakened the long-standing cooperation
between local U.S. and Mexican law enforcement agencies. While it is important to continue
strong federal coordination, encouraging local collaboration can also yield significant and important
dividends in fighting crime affecting cross-border cities. Improved border management, a challenge
during normal fiscal times, is particularly difficult in the United States’ constrained fiscal
environment and thus requires increased attention and creative solutions. For example, the
two governments—in close collaboration with border communities—should focus their efforts on
making the land ports of entry from San Diego to Brownsville as safe and efficient as possible
to enhance both our physical and economic security. One such effort has been the highly
controversial experimental deployment of the SBInet system on the Arizona-Sonora border. While this
technology has been deployed on the border between the ports of entry, the governments have not
deployed technology in a game-changing way that could convert the ports of entry
themselves into true platforms for economic security rather than highly congested and
bureaucratized nodes in our North American commercial network.
28
Points of Entry Affirmative
Terrorism Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Terrorism Add-On 1/2
Terrorists are looking for weak spots on the US Mexico border to smuggle a dirty bomb and
attack the United States..
McCaul, Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, 2012
(Michael Thomas, . “A LINE IN THE SAND: COUNTERING CRIME, VIOLENCE AND TERROR AT
THE SOUTHWEST BORDER A MAJORITY REPORT BY THE UNITED STATES HOUSE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, INVESTIGATIONS,
AND MANAGEMENT REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL T. McCAUL, CHAIRMAN ONE HUNDRED
TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION NOVEMBER 2012”
http://mccaul.house.gov/uploads/Final%20PDF%20Line%20in%20the%20Sand.pdf)
During the period of May 2009 through July 2011, federal law enforcement made 29 arrests for
violent terrorist plots against the United States, most with ties to terror networks or Muslim extremist
groups in the Middle East. The vast majority of the suspects had either connections to special interest
countries, including those deemed as state sponsors of terrorism or were radicalized by terrorist
groups such as al Qaeda. American-born al Qaeda Imam Anwar al Awlaki, killed in 2011, was
personally responsible for radicalizing scores of Muslim extremists around the world. The list includes
American-born U.S. Army Major Nidal Hassan, the accused Fort Hood gunman; “underwear bomber”
Umar Faruk Abdulmutallab; and Barry Bujol of Hempstead, TX, convicted of providing material
support to al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. In several documented cases, al Awlaki moved his
followers to commit “jihad” against the United States. These instances, combined with recent events
involving the Qods Forces, the terrorist arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, and Hezbollah,
serve as a stark reminder the United States remains in the crosshairs of terrorist
organizations and their associates.
In May of 2012, the Los Angeles Times reported that intelligence gleaned from the 2011 raid on
Osama bin Laden’s compound indicated the world’s most wanted terrorist sought to use
operatives with valid Mexican passports who could illegally cross into the United States to
conduct terror operations.3 The story elaborated that bin Laden recognized the importance of al
Qaeda operatives blending in with American society but felt that those with U.S. citizenship who then
attacked the United States would be violating Islamic law. Of equal concern is the possibility to
smuggle materials, including uranium, which can be safely assembled on U.S. soil into a
weapon of mass destruction.
Further, the standoff with Iran over its nuclear program, and the uncertainty of whether Israel
might attack Iran drawing the United States into a confrontation, only heightens concern that
Iran or its agents would attempt to exploit the porous Southwest border for retaliation.
Confronting the threat at the Southwest border has a broader meaning today than it did six years ago.
As this report explains, the United States tightened security at airports and land ports of entry in the
wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, but the U.S.-Mexico border is an obvious weak
link in the chain. Criminal elements could migrate down this path of least resistance, and with
them the terrorists who continue to seek our destruction. The federal government must meet
the challenge to secure America’s unlocked back door from the dual threat of drug cartels and
terrorist organizations who are lined up, and working together, to enter.
29
Points of Entry Affirmative
Terrorism Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Terrorism Add-On 2/2
Plan solves border security – the majority of illegal immigration and illicit trafficking happens
at legitimate POEs
Wilson, Associate at the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for
Scholars, 2013
(Christopher E,.. “Focus immigration security on official border crossings” Dallas Morning News April
11 http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/latest-columns/20130411-christopher-wilson-focusimmigration-security-on-official-border-crossings.ece?action=reregister)
Statistics about drug smuggling, aspiring terrorists and unauthorized immigrants are naturally
difficult to collect. In the absence of clear metrics to guide our border strategy and funding, we
have given ever more resources to the Border Patrol, which operates in the areas between
official border crossings. Comparatively little attention has been paid to the staffing,
infrastructure and technology needs of ports of entry themselves, both leaving them less secure
and undermining America’s economic competitiveness in the process.¶ A close reading of the
senators’ framework gives the impression that the next round of strengthening border
security might look a lot like previous rounds. That would be a mistake. Staffing and budgets for
areas between the ports of entry have doubled since 2004 and are now at a level where even major
increases would produce only marginal security gains.¶ Instead, greater attention should be placed
on improving security and efficiency at official border crossings, where the greatest security
risks actually are. Almost half of all unauthorized immigrants in the United States entered
through official ports of entry with visas, only to lose legal status when their visas expired.
Intelligence reports suggest that most hard drugs, like cocaine and methamphetamine, are
trafficked through, rather than around, the official border crossings. While it is hard to predict
the future strategies of terrorists, it is worth noting that all of the 9/11 attackers entered the U.S.
through official ports of entry — though none at the U.S.-Mexico border.¶ One way to make ports
of entry better at blocking dangerous traffic while letting legitimate travelers and commerce
through quickly would be to increase participation in trusted traveler and trusted shipper
programs. It is a problem of needles and haystacks. With over a half-million people and a billion
dollars’ worth of goods crossing the border with Mexico each day, there is a whole lot of haystack in
which dangerous individuals and shipments can hide. ¶ Trusted programs (SENTRI for individuals,
FAST for commercial vehicles) expedite the passage of vetted, low-risk travelers and shippers so
that law enforcement can focus its limited resources on the unknown and suspicious traffic.
Despite the fact that the vast majority of border crossers do so regularly, only 18 percent of
individuals use the express lanes available to vetted trusted travelers, suggesting the potential for
such programs is much greater than their current level of use.¶ Investments in port of entry
infrastructure and technology are also needed. Strengthening the capacity to identify crossers
with certainty using biometrics like fingerprints, iris scans or facial recognition would prevent
lookalikes from fraudulently using someone else’s passport or visa. Inadequate infrastructure
currently causes long lineups at the border, which encourages officials to rush the screening
process and possibly miss suspicious crossers while increasing the risk that drugs or other
illegal goods could be planted in idled vehicles
30
Points of Entry Affirmative
Terrorism Advantage
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: Border Secure Now
[
]
[
] Land POEs are the key weak link in border enforcement – long wait times cause
inspectors to flush traffic, ignoring inspections
Meissner, et al , Senior Fellow and Director, MPI US Immigration Policy Program , 2013
(Doris, “Immigration Enforcement in the United States: The Rise of a Formidable Machinery”
Migration Policy Institute http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/enforcementpillars.pdf)
Meeting the physical infrastructure needs at POEs has not kept pace with advances in
documentation and screening developments. Communities such as Nogales, AZ, for example, have
two ports that typically handle 15,000 pedestrian and 20,000 vehicle crossings daily (3.5 million
pedestrians and 4.7 million vehicles annually). The POEs are equipped with technology that
permits 100 percent license plate reading and document scanning. However, when traffic wait
times exceed 60 minutes, inspectors typically “flush” traffic through, pulling aside only obvious
high-risk crossers, in an effort to reconcile their facilitation and enforcement missions under
trying conditions. Despite significant advances, land ports have not experienced improvements
on par with those realized between ports. As a result, the potential for land POE inspections to
be a weak link remains a critical enforcement challenge.
31
Points of Entry Affirmative
Solvency
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: No Solvency – Coordination
[
]
[
] Cooperation on border crossing can overcome coordination issues.
Regan, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, 2011
(Sean, Commander, “U.S. – MEXICO POLICY COORDINATION AN ASSESSMENT OF THE
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY BORDER POLICY COORDINATION EFFORT” A paper submitted to the
Faculty of the Naval War College in partial satisfaction of the requirements of the Department of Joint
Military Operations, http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a555536.pdf)
Each department and agency has distinct purposes and authorities that span issues ranging from
law enforcement to commerce management. Sporadic and disjointed efforts result in departments
working toward common end-states (i.e. improved POE development) but doing so in an
uncoordinated and non-supporting manner. National efforts to synchronize a whole-ofgovernment approach have been haphazard. Across the border, the GoM has its own
bureaucratic structure but suffers from the same challenges. These federal-level challenges are
both independent of and repeated within, the numerous state and local agencies that have their own
policies and processes. Enhancing coordination among the stakeholders involved in the
crossing process provides an opportunity to achieve many benefits including increased
security, and reduced system costs through a predictable and coordinated policy structure.
32
Points of Entry Affirmative
Solvency
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: No Solvency- Regulatory Issues
[
]
[
]
Border delays impose a higher cost on business than truck regulations.
United States-Mexico Chamber of Commerce, 2011
(“U.S.-MEXICO TRUCKING ISSUE WHITE PAPER”, http://www.usmcoc.org/papers-current/4Trucking-Issue-White-Paper.pdf)
The U.S.-México Chamber of Commerce strongly supports the passage and implementation of
the 2011 Trucking Pilot Program. We believe that any barriers to trade are harmful to the
economic well-being of both countries and thus should be removed. This pilot program,
however, is just one piece of the puzzle for making the border more efficient and agile. There
are still severe wait times for cargo trucks crossing from México into the United States,
costing
both countries billions of dollars every year. Some ideas for addressing this issue include, but
are not limited to:
• Opening up more border crossings for both people and goods;
• Extending the already existing crossings’ operating times to include evening hours;
• Requiring customs brokers on both sides to be open for business and to carry out the
export and import procedures at all times when the border is open;
• Altering the trusted shipper (such as C-TPAT) lanes so that they are completely separate
from the rest of the crossings, thus truly making them express lanes;
• Increasing the number of pre-border inspection and clearance sites, where cargo destined
for the United States is inspected in Mexico.
Finally, we would stress that border security should not be compromised by the implementation
of any of these next steps.
33
Points of Entry Affirmative
Solvency
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Answers to: No Solvency- Infrastructure Investment Fails
[
]
[
] Increasing resources for border infrastructure will allow effective transit and
security.
Pacheco, Executive Director of the International Business Accelerator, 2012
(Jerry “Efficient border crossings crucial to trade” ABQ Journal
http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/08/06/biz/outlook/efficient-border-crossings-crucial-totrade.html)
The U.S., Mexico and Canada are trade partners under the North American Free Trade Agreement
(NAFTA), which has helped create a trade bloc of 460 million people with a combined output of more
than $17 trillion. Since its implementation in 1994, trade among the NAFTA partners has grown
by 460 percent, making North America one of the most successful and dynamic trade blocs in
the world. However, wait times to cross the U.S.-Mexico border result in billions of dollars of
lost revenues and time every year, impinging on our region’s competitiveness. This happens
both at the commercial and retail level, as millions of Mexicans cross the border into the U.S.
for shopping, entertainment and visiting family. Excessive crossing delays dissuade these
trips. The Port of Santa Teresa has traditionally been a port known for rapid crossings, but as trade
volume and the number of people crossing increases, it is becoming as congested as other busy
ports along the U.S.-Mexico border. A renovation is currently taking place at this port to add two more
private vehicle lanes and one more commercial crossing lane, which should help alleviate waits in the
future. Expediting trade and border crossings is an issue discussed by politicians less than
the hot-button issue of security. However, for the economic future of all three NAFTA countries
this is an issue that merits more focus. It behooves the U.S. government to provide CBP with
the tools, personnel and infrastructure it needs to continue guarding our nation’s borders,
while working with this group to develop quicker ways of moving people and merchandise.
34
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
United States engagement in Latin America is durable
[
] US influence in Latin America’s resilient and the theory of their argument is wrong
Duddy and Mora, Former US Ambassador to Venezuela and former Assistant Secretary of
Defense,Western Hemisphere, 2013
[Patrick and Frank, “Latin America: Is U.S. influence waning?” Miami Herald, 5/1/13
http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/01/3375160/latin-america-is-us-influence.html#storylink=cpy]
Finally, one should not underestimate the resiliency of U.S. soft power in the region. The
power of national reputation, popular culture, values and institutions continues to contribute
to U.S. influence in ways that are difficult to measure and impossible to quantify. Example:
Despite 14 years of strident anti-American rhetoric during the Chávez government, tens of thousand
of Venezuelans apply for U.S. nonimmigrant visas every year, including many thousands of Chávez
loyalists.¶ Does this mean we can feel comfortable relegating U.S. relations with the hemisphere to
the second or third tier of our international concerns? Certainly not. We have real and proliferating
interests in the region. As the president and his team head to Mexico and Costa Rica, it is important
to recognize the importance of our ties to the region.¶ We have many individual national partners
in the Americas. We don’t need a new template for relations with the hemisphere as a whole or
another grand U.S.-Latin America strategy. A greater commitment to work more intensely with
the individual countries on the issues most relevant to them would be appropriate. The United
States still has the economic and cultural heft in the region to play a fundamental role and to
advance its own interests.
35
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Economic Engagement with Mexico now
[
] Economic with Mexico engagement now
Valencia, contributing writer for Global Voices Online, 2013
(Robert, “U.S. and Latin America – Economic Cooperation Without Militarization?”, 5/20/13
www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2013/05/20/us-and-latin-america-economic-cooperation-withoutmilitarization)¶
President Obama’s meeting with Mexico’s President Enrique Peña Nieto centered on the
historic economic relationship between the two countries, and furthered their conversation on
economic and commercial initiatives as well as immigration issues. Additionally, Peña Nieto
highlighted Mexico’s economic growth and the necessity for bolstering student exchange. Both
leaders agreed to create an economic team led by Vice President Joe Biden and Mexican
Secretary of the Treasury Luis Videgaray. They resolved to create projects to improve
infrastructure and security along the 3,000 kilometer-long border, one of the world’s largest.
[
] Trans Pacific Partnership makes increased economic engagement inevitable
Sarukhan, Mexican Ambassador to the U.S, 2012
(Arturo, “Viewpoints: What Should the Top Priority Be for U.S. – Mexican Relations?” American
Society/Council of the Americas, 12/3/12, www.as-coa.org/articles/viewpoints-what-should-toppriority-be-us-mexican-relations)
¶
Over the past two decades, NAFTA has dramatically altered the way Mexico and the United States
engage with one another. However, much more can and should be done to bring North American
competitiveness back to a starring role on the global stage. This is why the participation of all three
North American countries in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) will be so important. The TPP will
enable us to discuss measures that meet the needs and challenges of twenty-first-century free and
fair trade, such as compatibility of regulatory systems, new environmental provisions, strong
protection for intellectual property rights, and emerging areas such as digital technologies and
e-commerce. The TPP will further deepen and strengthen the integrated supply and
production chains between our two countries. And as a true coalition of the free-trade willing
in the Americas and across the Pacific Rim, the TPP therefore represents the next step in a
North American Grand Strategy. In addition to the TPP, we need to continue strengthening the
participation and commitment of civil society and the private sector across our common
border, as they are true co-stakeholders in our bilateral efforts toward economic progress.
36
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
United States won’t crowd out China
[
] No trade-off – the plan facilitates a three way relationship – that helps all countries.
Shaiken et al, Professor in the Center for Latin American Studies at UC-Berkeley, 2013
[Harley, and Enrique Peters – Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Miami. And
Adrian Hearn – Centro de Estudios China-Mexixo at Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.
China and the New Triangular Relationships in the Americas: China and the Future of US-Mexico
Relations, 2013. Pg 7-8]
The analysis of Ping Wang highlights that in the Mexico-US-China triangular trade relationship,
the United States is the key player. While China’s presence has increased, the United States
remains a critical influence on both Mexico and China. Furthermore, the author suggests that
China’s rise and emergence in terms of trade and investments in LAC, and specifically in
regards to this triangular relationship, will slow increasingly in the future, considering its
specialization in industrial commodities and products, rising wages in China, and the high number of
multinational corporations involved in Chinese exports. For Ping Wang, the politically and
historically subordinated role of Mexico with the United States, in contrast to China’s
increasing regional and global status, is a basis for understanding future scenarios in which
the Mexico-United States relationship is more stable in comparison to that of China and the
United States (where the US, for example, views China as a threat).
37
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
United States won’t crowd out China- Extensions
[
]
[
]US and China influences do not trade off in Mexico.
Xiaoxia, Staff Writer for the Economic Observer, 5-6
[Wang.. “In America's Backyard: China's Rising Influence In Latin America” The Economic Observer,
5/6/13 http://worldcrunch.com/china-2.0/in-america-039-s-backyard-china-039-s-rising-influence-inlatin-america/foreign-policy-trade-economy-investments-energy/c9s11647/ ]
For South America, China and the United States, this is not a zero-sum game, but a multiple
choice of mutual benefits and synergies. Even if China has become the Latin American
economy’s new upstart, it is still not in a position to challenge the strong and diverse
influence that the United States has accumulated over two centuries in the region.
[
] No competition for regional influence
Xiaoxia, reporter, 2013
(Wang, Translated by Laura Lin, “In America’s Backyard: China in Latin America”, Economic
Observer Oneline, 4/27, http://www.eeo.com.cn/ens/2013/0507/243704.shtml, CMR)
China's involvement in Latin America doesn’t constitute a threat to the United States, but
brings benefits. It is precisely because China has reached "loans-for-oil" swap agreements with
Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador and other countries that it brings much-needed funds to these oilproducing countries in South America. Not only have these funds been used in the field of oil
production, but they have also safeguarded the energy supply of the United States, as well as
stabilized these countries' livelihood; and to a certain extent reduced the impact of illegal immigration
and the drug trade on the U.S.¶ For South America, China and the United States, this is not a
zero-sum game, but a multiple choice of mutual benefits and synergies. Even if China has
become the Latin American economy’s new upstart, it is still not in a position to challenge the
strong and diverse influence that the United States has accumulated over two centuries in the
region.
38
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Turn- Chinese Influence Bad- Latin America growth and stability
[
] Chinese influence in Latin America is bad – trade deficits, income inequality and
political instability would spread across the region.
Shaiken et al, Professor in the Center for Latin American Studies at UC-Berkeley, 2013
[Harley, and Enrique Peters – Center for Latin American Studies at the University of Miami. And
Adrian Hearn – Centro de Estudios China-Mexixo at Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico.
China and the New Triangular Relationships in the Americas: China and the Future of US-Mexico
Relations, 2013. Pg 7-8]
However, closer ties to China also have signifi-cant disadvantages for both Latin America and
the United States:¶ Growing trade deficits. Latin American lead-ers who sign trade and
investment deals with the PRC have noticed that China's exports are more affordable than their
own goods, which contributes to trade deficits. Chinese goods are made by laborers who work for
one-third of the wages of Latin American counterparts and who tolerate worse working
conditions. Officials in Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico have signaled their unease about trade with
such a hot com-petitor. In September 2005, Mexican President Vicente Fox made it clear to visiting
President Hu Jintao that dumping electronics and cloth-ing was unacceptable. For every dollar that
Mexico makes from exports to China, the PRC makes $31 from exports to Mexico.[9]¶
Disinterest in economic reform. Some ana-lysts believe that the commodities-based trade model
used by China will undermine the progress that Latin America has made toward
industrialization. While countries like Chile and Brazil have moved beyond raw materials exports,
others with powerful presidents or rul-ing oligarchies may be tempted to fall back on plantation
economics. Income gaps between the rich and poor may widen as a result. More-over, such
narrowly focused economies are vul-nerable to downturns in commodity prices. Some 44
percent of Latin Americans already live below the poverty line. If these countries fail to adopt
reforms, social inequality and political instability could depress U.S. exports to the region and
increase migration problems
39
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Chinese Influence Bad- US leadership
[
] Increased Chinese influence in Mexico would be disastrous; it would cause the
decline of American power by eliminating America’s geographic buffer.
Clarkson and Mildenberger, professor of political economy, University of Toronto and Ph.D.
student, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies 2011
(Stephen and Matto, Dependent America?: How Canada and Mexico Construct Us Power p. 272)
The United States’ relationship with Canada and Mexico thus presents a paradox. Does North
America Exist? showed that globalization was reducing the salience of North America as an
economic entity, whether in the steel sector ‘s global restructuring or in the international consolidation
of banking regulations. However, even as North American regionalism falters, the United States’
immediate periphery is becoming a more important partner in sustaining its material power.
Constrained by its global partners’ superior growth rates, the United States can still count on
the unusually beneficial economic relationship it quietly maintains with its continental
periphery. Although it normally ignores its neighbours’ interests when dealing with other
countries, its gradual decline no longer affords Washington this luxury without having to pay
a price. That price is its two neighbours expanding their strategic gaze from the continent to
the world. Canada and Mexico are endeavouring to strengthen their economic links with other
countries. Indian capital is already investing in iron-ore extraction in Quebec, while Chinese firms are
staking out Alberta’s tar sands. Even with disputes over Newfound land’s seal industry and its visa
restrictions on Czech visitors, Canada has busily negotiated a comprehensive economic trade
agreement with the European Union. Hosting the G-20 Economic Summit in 2012, Mexico is
positioning itself as the champion of emerging economies and the developing world. This
economic internationalization could mitigate Canada’s and Mexico’s lopsided dependencies
on a US market to which their access has been curtailed since 9/11. Should they succeed in
diversifying their economic links by attracting more FDI from overseas and should their extraregional imports and exports abroad begin to expand more than their intra-regional trade, the
United States’ economic perimeter in North America will contract, and their construction of US
material strength will ipso facto diminish. The North American periphery has been Uncle
Sam’s gold-laying goose for as long as most can remember. It would make an ironic epitaph
for the United States’ hegemonic decline if alienating its most valuable and easily cultivated
foreign asset accelerated its self-induced fall.
40
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Chinese Soft Power Fails
[
] Chinese soft power fails, seen as an international bully not facilitator.
Boot, Senior Fellow Council on Foreign Relations, 2001
(Max, “The Rising Dragon and ‘Smart’ Diplomacy”, 27 September 2010,
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/category/contentions?author_name=boot)
For years we have been hearing about how effective Chinese diplomacy is — a supposed
contrast with a ham-handed, distracted Uncle Sam who was letting the rising dragon take over East
Asia while we weren’t paying attention. No one should underestimate the rising military challenge
posed by China. As Robert Kaplan notes in this Washington Post op-ed: China has the world’s
second-largest naval service, after only the United States. Rather than purchase warships across the
board, it is developing niche capacities in sub-surface warfare and missile technology designed to hit
moving targets at sea. At some point, the U.S. Navy is likely to be denied unimpeded access to the
waters off East Asia. China’s 66 submarines constitute roughly twice as many warships as the entire
British Royal Navy. But a funny thing happened on the way to Chinese hegemony: its rise has
alarmed pretty much all its neighbors, ranging from India and Australia to Japan and South Korea.
The latest sign of how Chinese hectoring and bullying is souring other countries is the flap
over a Chinese fishing trawler that collided with Japanese coast-guard vessels near a disputed
island in the East China Sea that is claimed by both countries. The Japanese agreed to release the
fishing captain on Friday after what the New York Times described as “a furious diplomatic
assault from China,” which included the cut-off of “ministerial-level talks on issues like joint
energy development, and curtailed visits to Japan by Chinese tourists.” In the short term, this is
a victory for China. But for the long term, it leaves hard feelings behind and convinces many more
Japanese — and other Asians — that China’s rise poses a threat to them. Keep in mind that the
Democrats, the current Japanese ruling party, came to power talking about weakening the U.S.Japanese alliance and strengthening ties with China. If China were better behaved, that might have
come to pass. But Chinese assertiveness is rubbing the Japanese the wrong way. The same is
true with South Koreans, Australians, and other key Chinese trade partners. In those countries,
too, hopes of a closer relationship with China have been frustrated; instead, they are drawing
closer to the U.S. The fundamental problem is that China’s ruling oligarchy has no Marxist
legitimacy left; its only claim to power is to foster an aggressive Chinese nationalism. That
may do wonders for support on the home front, but it is doomed to antagonize its neighbors
and possibly bring into being a de facto coalition to contain Beijing. That, at least, should be the goal
of American policy. Even as we continue to trade with China, we should make sure to curb its geopolitical ambitions. That is a goal in which we should be able to get the cooperation of many of
China’s neighbors — if we actually practice the sort of “smart power” diplomacy that the Obama-ites
came into office promising.
41
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: China DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Chinese Soft Power Fails- Extension
[
] Alternative causes to Chinese soft power loss and they won’t use it effectively
Walker, Senior Director of the Global Business Policy Council, 2011
(Martin, Martin, “China's soft-power hurdle”, United Press International. 28 June 2011
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis/Walker/2011/06/28/Walkers-World-Chinas-soft-powerhurdle/UPI-39731309267283/)
It is far from clear that this will succeed. Three years ago, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, the
goodwill for what China called its "peaceful rise" was widespread. The World Bank's Robert
Zoellick was talking of China as a fellow stakeholder in the global economy, ready to play by the
common rules of international commerce and behavior.
That was then. This is now. Surging with self-confidence after navigating the global financial crisis,
China has been throwing its weight around in the South China Sea, alarming Vietnam, the
Philippines, Indonesia and Brunei with its insistence that the whole sea and its mineral wealth belong
to China. Japan has been shaken by some minor clashes over other disputed islands, and India
frets over China's apparent plans to start building dams in Tibet near the source of the
Brahmaputra River, which supplies about a third of northern India's water.
China's impressive investments in Africa have become controversial, since so many of the jobs
in construction are going to imported Chinese workers rather than Africans. China's readiness
to do business with unsavory regimes does not go down quite as well in the age of the democratic
upsurge of the Arab Spring as it did before.
China's latest clampdown on various dissidents and on the Internet (while also being blamed for
many cyberattacks) has caused alarm. The United Nations startled Chinese diplomats with its recent
press release expressing concerns over China's "recent wave of enforced disappearances."
Doubtless China will learn from this, even as it navigates the preliminary phases of the transition of
power to the next generation of leaders, a process that may help explain the latest crackdown on
dissidents, human-rights lawyers and other activists. And doubtless China's astute deployment of its
massive wealth to investments and various causes overseas will also pay dividends.
But the fact remains that China may well be influencing people, and it has a highly impressive
record of economic management to flaunt, but it is not exactly winning friends. Joseph Nye of
Harvard's Kennedy School of Government invented the concept of soft power, as opposed to the hard
power of coercion. He defined it as the ability to get other people and countries to want what
you want. China has yet to show it understands the distinction. It is in Beijing's own interest -- as
well as the world's -- that the Chinese leadership learns this quickly.
42
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Mexico’s Economy Growing/Immigration Rates Declining
[
]
[
] Immigration from Mexico is at its lowest levels in 50 years.
Hull, former consultant to USAID and World Bank, 2012
(Galen, “Immigration: Push and Pull Factors,” Feb 29, Online: http://www.atlantadarpan.com/articledetail/immigration-push-and-pull-factors.htm)
According to a lengthy article in the New York Times (July 6, 2011) the Mexican emigration to U.S.
that over the past three decades contributed to the vast majority of illegal immigrants has slowed to
trickle in recent years. It turns out that domestic changes in Mexico are such that staying home
is becoming more attractive. A mix of developments - such as expanding economic and
educational opportunities at home, rising border crime, and shrinking families - are
suppressing illegal traffic as much as economic slowdowns or immigrant crackdowns on the U.S.
border. The Mexican Migration Project at Princeton - an extensive, long-term survey in Mexican
emigration hubs - reports that interest in coming to the U.S. for the first time has fallen to its
lowest level since the 1950s. The Pew Hispanic Center indicates that the illegal Mexican
population in the U.S. shrank to fewer than 100,000 border-crossers and visa-violators in 2010,
down from about 525,000 annually from 2000 to 2004. But Mexican immigration has always been
defined by both the push (from Mexico) and the pull (of the U.S). The decision to leave home involves
a wrenching cost-benefit analysis. Just as a Mexican baby boom and economic crises provoked the
emigration waves in the 1980s and ’90s, the easing of demographic and economic pressures in
Mexico is helping keep emigration in check.
43
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Mexico’s Economy Growing/Immigration Rates Declining – Fewer Farm Workers
[
]
[
] Farm worker shortages are already occurring.
Plumer, Washington Post Staff Writer, 2013
(Brad, We’re running out of farm workers. Immigration reform won’t help, January 29,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-u-s-is-running-out-of-farmworkers-immigration-reform-may-not-help/)
But looser immigration laws may not be able to keep our food cheap forever. A recent study suggests
that U.S. farms could well face a shortage of low-cost labor in the years ahead no matter what
Congress does on immigration. That’s because Mexico is getting richer and can no longer supply
as many rural farm workers to the United States. And it won’t be nearly as easy to import lowwage agricultural workers from elsewhere.
44
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Plan Wouldn’t Stop all Migration
[
]
[
] The plan wouldn’t eliminate all immigration, just eliminate the desire to come illegally
Wainer, immigration policy analyst for Bread for the World Institute, 11
(Andrew, Rural development and migration in Mexico, Development in Practice, 23:2, 232-248)
So while the USA has not yet implemented an integrated development and migration agenda, it has
certainly been part of discussions and could be revived, particularly when security concerns in Mexico
ease. A reorientation of US development priorities to include migration could also appeal to
businesses in the USA by linking this development to new avenues of legal migration that
would ensure that US businesses’ labour needs would not be endangered. Over the long- term,
development would reduce the need for Mexicans to migrate to USA illegally but some level of
legal migration between the two countries would be preserved.
45
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Farms Will Adapt to Labor Shortages
[
]
[
] Farmers will adapt to labor shortages.
Plumer, Washington Post Staff Writer, 2013
(Brad, We’re running out of farm workers. Immigration reform won’t help, January 29,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/29/the-u-s-is-running-out-of-farmworkers-immigration-reform-may-not-help/)
So the labor shortages will keep getting worse. And that leaves several choices. American farmers
could simply stop growing crops that need a lot of workers to harvest, such as fruits and
vegetables. Given the demand for fresh produce, that seems unlikely. ¶ Alternatively, U.S. farms
could continue to invest in new labor-saving technologies, such as “shake-and-catch” machines
to harvest fruits and nuts. “Under this option,” the authors write, “capital improvements in farm
production would increase the marginal product of farm labor; U.S. farms would hire fewer
workers and pay higher wages.” That could be a boon to domestic workers — studies have
found that 23 percent of U.S. farm worker families are below the poverty line.
46
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Agriculture Stable Without Immigrant Labor
[
]
[
] Congressional studies prove that the agricultural sector would remain more than
profitable without immigrant labor – fluid labor pool and high profit margins protect the
industry.
Walshe, Staff writer and Columnist for CBS and the Gaurdian, 2013
(Sadhbh, "Field work's dirty secret: agribusiness exploitation of undocumented labor," The Guardian,
Jan 31, Online: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/31/agribusiness-exploitationundocumented-labor)
The agribusiness sector has gotten away with exploitative and illegal practices because of
ridiculous threats, like the suggestion that should the supply of cheap labor dry up in the US, they
will outsource our food production to China. This idle threat is based on the absurd notion that if they
have to pay workers higher wages, somehow there will be fewer people willing to do the jobs. The
other scare tactic is spreading talk that if they have to increase their expenditure on labor, those
costs will have to be passed on to the American consumer. Several studies have been
conducted, however, that expose these hollow threats for the nonsense that they are. A report
by the Congressional Research Service (pdf) found no evidence of a labor shortage in the
agricultural sector. On the contrary, it found that between 1994 and 2008, the unemployment rate
for farm workers was consistently higher than for all other occupations. In other words, agriculture
has had a surplus of available workers for decades. During this period, the agricultural
industry has recorded a nearly 80% average annual increase in profits – more than all other
major industries. No doubt, these record profits have something to do with the fact that real wages
for farm workers have remained stagnant throughout this time. Finally, a 2011 report by the
Economic Policy Institute found that an increase in farm workers' wages of 40% would result
in an annual rise in household spending by the American consumer of just $16. Clearly, the
economic argument for allowing one industry a workforce of virtually indentured labor does
not hold water. But there is a humanitarian argument to be made, as well, that should be
enough to put an end to this exploitative practice immediately. In 2009, the New York Times'
Bob Herbert wrote an article about the horrible treatment of farm workers in upstate New York – in
this case, hired to feed and care for ducks farmed to be slaughtered for foie gras.
47
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
US Farms Exploit Immigrants
[
]
[
] The agriculture industry sustains absurd profits by exploiting millions of immigrants –
their labor conditions are deplorable.
Walshe, Staff writer and Columnist for CBS and the Gaurdian, 2013
(Sadhbh, "Field work's dirty secret: agribusiness exploitation of undocumented labor," The Guardian,
Jan 31, Online: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/31/agribusiness-exploitationundocumented-labor)
Most farm work in America is performed by immigrants, most of whom are undocumented and
therefore exploitable. The big agribusinesses that hire these immigrants will tell you that they
need an unfettered supply of cheap foreign labor, because they cannot find Americans willing to
do these jobs. When you consider what these jobs entail – hours of backbreaking work in
terrible and often dangerous conditions, subsistence wages with little or no time off, and none
of the protections or perks that most of us enjoy (like paid sick days, for instance) – it's hard
to see why anyone with other options would subject themselves to a life that is barely a step
above slavery. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan signed a bill into law which introduced some
protections for these imported serfs, under what has become known as the guest-worker program.
These protections include a minimum wage guarantee, housing that meets an acceptable standard
for the duration of the contract, and a guarantee that the worker be paid three-quarters of their full pay
should should a season end early. Most employers would be delighted to get away with all this:
being able to hire low-wage workers at will, without the hassle of paying disability insurance or
other niceties. But agribusinesses find the guest-worker program's pitiful protections such a burden
that they have mounted a relentless campaign to undermine them, and for the most part, work around
them anyway; they hire undocumented workers instead. According to a report compiled by Eric Ruark
(pdf), the director of research at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (Fair), as of 2006,
only 27% of workers hired by agribusinesses are American citizens, 21% are green card
holders, around 1% are part of the guest worker program … and a whopping 51% are
unauthorized immigrants. It's agriculture's worst kept secret that farm owners routinely break
the law by hiring undocumented workers, but the crime receives tacit approval from
lawmakers sympathetic to the plight of major agribusinesses, which seem to consider cheap
labor their right. In South Carolina, for instance, lawmakers passed their version of Arizona's
draconian bill, and have mandated that employers use an e-verify system to check the immigration
status of employees. Farm workers, however, were exempted from verification.
48
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – General
[
]
[
] Illegal immigrants drain the US economy – in spite of filling job openings, they are a
burden on the welfare system – which they don’t add money to.
Barnes, FOX News Reporter, 2010
(Ed, “Illegal Immigration Costs U.S. $113 Billion a Year, Study Finds,” FOX, July 6, Online:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/02/immigration-costs-fair-amnesty-educations-costs-reform/)
The cost of harboring illegal immigrants in the United States is a staggering $113 billion a year
-- an average of $1,117 for every “native-headed” household in America -- according to a study
conducted by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The study, a copy of which
was provided to FoxNews.com, “is the first and most detailed look at the costs of illegal
immigration ever done,” says Bob Dane, director of communications at FAIR, a conservative
organization that seeks to end almost all immigration to the U.S. FAIR's opponents in the bitter
immigration debate describe the organization as "extremist," though it is regularly called upon to
testify before Congress. Groups that support immigration reform immediately attacked FAIR's report
and pointed out that it is the polar opposite of the Perryman Report, a 2008 study that found illegal
immigration was actually a boon to the American economy. It estimated that illegal immigrants add
$245 billion in Gross Domestic Product to the economy and account for 2.8 million jobs. The
FAIR report comes as President Obama moves immigration reform to the top of his agenda, and it is
likely to be a rallying point for those who oppose the president. At a speech Thursday at American
University in Washington, D.C., Obama argued that the entire immigration system is broken and
needs sweeping reforms. Among the changes he said are needed is "a path for [farm] workers to
earn legal status," which the president's critics called an opening for a new amnesty program. FAIR's
report argues that there are two choices in the immigration debate: “One choice is pursuing a strategy
that discourages future illegal migration and increasingly diminishes the current illegal alien
population through denial of job opportunities and deportations. The other choice,” it says, “would
repeat the unfortunate decision made in 1986 to adopt an amnesty that invited continued illegal
migration.” The report states that an amnesty program wouldn’t appreciably increase tax revenue and
would cost massive amounts in Social Security and public assistance expenses. An amnesty “would
therefore be an accentuation of the already enormous fiscal burden,” the report concludes. The
single largest cost to the government of illegal immigration, according to the report, is an
estimated $52 billion spent on schooling the children of illegals. “Nearly all those costs are
absorbed by state and local governments,’ the report states. Moreover, the study’s breakdown of
costs on a state-by-state basis shows that in states with the largest number of illegals, the costs
of illegal immigration are often greater than current, crippling budget deficits. In Texas, for
example, the additional cost of immigration, $16.4 billion, is equal to the state’s current budget
deficit; in California the additional cost of illegal immigration, $21.8 billion, is $8 billion more than
the state’s current budget deficit of $13.8 billion; and in New York, the $6.8 billion deficit is roughly
two-thirds the $9.5 billion yearly cost of its illegal population, according to Jack Martin, the researcher
who completed the study.
49
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Lower Wages
[
]
[
] Immigration drives down wages for American jobs – the most comprehensive studies
prove.
Borjas, Professor of Economics and Social Policy at Harvard, 2003
(George, “THE LABOR DEMAND CURVE IS DOWNWARD SLOPING: REEXAMINING THE IMPACT
OF IMMIGRATION ON THE LABOR MARKET,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, November, Lexis)
In contrast to the confusing array of results that now permeate the literature, the evidence
consistently suggests that immigration has indeed harmed the employment opportunities of
competing native workers. II. MEASURING THE LABOR MARKET IMPACT OF IMMIGRATION
The laws of supply and demand have unambiguous implications for how immigration should
affect labor market conditions in the short run. The shift in supply lowers the real wage of
competing native workers. Further, as long as the native supply curve is upward sloping,
immigration should also reduce the amount of labor supplied by the native workforce. If one could
observe a number of closed labor markets that immigrants penetrate randomly, one could then relate
the change in the wage of workers in a particular skill group to the immigrant share in the relevant
population. A negative correlation (i.e., native wages are lower in those markets penetrated by
immigrants) would indicate that immigrants worsen the employment opportunities of competing native
workers. In the United States, immigrants cluster in a small number of geographic areas. In
1990, for example, 32.5 percent of the immigrant population lived in only three metropolitan areas
(Los Angeles, New York, and Miami). In contrast, only 11.6 percent of the native population clustered
in the three largest metropolitan areas housing natives (New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago).
Practically all empirical studies in the literature, beginning with Grossman [1982], exploit this
demographic feature to identify the labor market impact of immigration. The typical study defines a
metropolitan area as the labor market that is being penetrated by immigrants. The study then goes on
to calculate a "spatial correlation" measuring the relation between the native wage in a locality and
the relative number of immigrants in that locality. These correlations are usually negative, but very
weak. n2 The best known spatial correlations are reported in Card's [1990] influential study of the
Mariel flow. Card compared labor market conditions in Miami and in other cities before and after the
Marielitos increased Miami's workforce by 7 percent. Card's difference-indifferences estimate of the
spatial correlation indicated that this sudden and unexpected immigrant influx did not have a
discernible effect on employment and wages in Miami's labor market. n3 Recent studies have
raised two questions about the validity of interpreting weak spatial correlations as evidence
that immigration has no labor market impact. First, immigrants may not be randomly
distributed across labor markets. If immigrants endogenously cluster in cities with thriving
economies, there would be a spurious positive correlation between immigration and wages. n4
Second, natives may respond to the wage impact of immigration on a local labor market by
moving their labor or capital to other cities. These factor flows would reequilibrate the market.
As a result, a comparison of the economic opportunities facing native workers in different cities would
show little or no difference because, in the end, immigration affected every city, not just the ones
that actually received immigrants. n5
50
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Drain Welfare
[
]
[
] Immigrants are a burden on taxpayers – the don’t pay as much in taxes as citizens do,
but take out even more than the average American.
Camarota, Director of Research at the Center for Immigration Studies, 2004
(Steven, “The High Cost of Cheap Labor,” Center for Immigration Studies, August, Online:
http://www.cis.org/High-Cost-of-Cheap-Labor)
It is often suggested that "matching a willing worker with a willing employer" is all that matters when it
comes to immigration policy. The fiscal costs of illegal immigration indicate that focusing only on
workers and employers is grossly inadequate. If the presence of large numbers of unskilled
workers lowers prices for some goods and services, but at the same time increases the burden on
taxpayers, then this may not be a good deal for the country. Put simply, the mere fact that
employers want more workers, and foreigners wish to work in this country, does not mean
that Americans necessarily benefit from their coming. This fact must be considered when
formulating policy. Low Levels of Education Create Deficit. The findings of this study show that the
primary reason illegal households create a fiscal deficit at the federal level is that their much
lower levels of education result in low incomes and tax payments that are only 28 percent that
of other households. Thus, even though the costs they impose are estimated to be only 46 percent
those of other households on average, there remains a significant net deficit. Whether one considers
their use of services low is a matter of perspective. Because illegals are not even supposed to be in
the country, many Americans are angered by the fact that they receive any services at all. This is
especially true of transfers to households like food stamps or cash payments from the Child Tax
Credit. Although many Americans are upset about their use of public services, there is little evidence
that illegals come to America to take advantage of public benefits. Most illegal aliens come for
jobs, and the vast majority are in fact employed. But low levels of education mean they
unavoidably create large costs for taxpayers. As Long as Illegals Remain, So Will Costs. The
relatively low receipt of services by illegals is important from a policy perspective because it
means that the amount of money that can be saved by further efforts to curtail their use of
public services is probably very limited. As already discussed, the average illegal household is
estimated to receives less than half as much in services from the federal government as do
other households, even though their households are 17 percent larger on average. This, coupled
with the fact that benefits are often received on behalf of their U.S.-born children who are awarded
citizenship at birth under current law, means that it is very difficult to avoid many of the costs as
long as the illegal aliens remain in the country. In addition, if they are allowed to stay, most of
the costs they impose will be for programs whose use is difficult to prevent politically or as a
practical matter. For example, denying illegals benefits such as the Women, Infants, and
Children nutrition program might encounter significant political opposition. And incarcerating
illegals who have been convicted of crimes is an unavoidable cost of having a large illegal
population. Thus, if we want to avoid the costs, we must look to alternatives other than trying to cut
them off from public services.
51
Points of Entry Affirmative
AT: Immigration DA
Urban Debate League 2013-14
Varsity
Immigrants Hurt the US Economy – Remittances
[
]
[
] Immigrants send the money they make back to Mexico instead of to the government.
Hanson, senior fellow at the Hoover Institute of Stanford University, 2006
(Victor, “Are remittances as bad as oil?,” Chicago Tribune, May 12, Online:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-05-12/news/0605120296_1_remittances-exporting-illegalimmigrants)
It may be counterintuitive to think that checks from hard-working expatriates are pernicious. But for a
developing nation, remittances can prove as problematic as the proverbial plight of the lottery
winner--sudden winnings that were not earned. In short, remittances, along with oil and tourism--not
agriculture, engineering, education, manufacturing or finance--prop up an otherwise ailing
Mexican economy. This helps explain why half of the country's 106 million citizens still live in
poverty. The billions of dollars Mexicans in the U.S. send back to their country pose another
economic and ethical dilemma. Many illegal immigrants in the U.S. allot nearly half their
weekly paychecks to relatives in Mexico. But such deductions come right out of the workers'
food, housing and transportation budgets here. So to survive, illegal immigrants in the U.S.
must endure cheap, substandard and often overcrowded housing. They cannot easily
purchase their own health care or invest in safe and reliable cars. Because the United States is a
caring nation, the state often intervenes to offer illegal immigrants costly entitlements-emergency-room medicine, legal help and subsidized housing and food--that provide some
sort of parity to all its residents. And when immigrants are often paid in cash--that is off the
books--the problem of remittances only worsens: The beneficiary Mexico still gets help from
workers' pay, while the benefactor United States does not collect taxes.
52