Obama Agenda DA-Affirmative
JV
Non-Unique
1
Link Turn
2
No Internal Link
3
Internal Link Turn
4
No Impact
5
Impact Turn
6
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
Non-Unique
(___)
(___)
(___) N/U- CTBT Won’t pass- Obama is four votes short of passage- Senate
worried about verification and Russia/China tests
Hindustan Times 06-10-2009
[“Obama anti-nuke czar calls for CTBT,
eventually”)
Arundhati Ghose, the ambassador who led India's opposition to the CTBT, termed
Tauscher's statement as basically "harmless." Additionally, US ratification remained
problematic. A key reason there still remains no Senate consensus on the CTBT is that
China and Russia have the ability to carry out low-yield "hydrodynamic nuclear tests"
that cannot be detected. Even with a Democratic majority, "the administration remains
four votes short of the 60 needed for ratification," she said. Tauscher listed advancing
the promotion of "missile defence cooperation" among US allies as her first priority. This
was followed by reforming the present defence trade export licensing system, extending
the START arms control treaty with Russia, and addressing the nuclear ambitions of
North Korea and Iran.Published by HT Syndication with permission from Hindustan
Times.
(___) N/U- Obama will spend political capital on Energy and Health
INSIDE POLITICS DAILY 07-08
[“Obama to World: We‟re Back and Ready to
Ratify”, http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/07/08/obamas-mission-reviving-stalledtreaties/]
The push to revive stalled treaties comes as the Senate is already dealing with health
care, energy, financial regulation, the economy and a Supreme Court nominee. And if
you think it's hard to find 60 votes to stop a filibuster, imagine the challenge of rounding
up the two-thirds majority of 67 that's needed to ratify a treaty.
Beyond that, Obama has only so much political capital. He's already used up some on his
stimulus bill and auto company rescues, and he is preparing to part with a whole lot
more to win changes in health and energy policy.
1| Page
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
Link Turn
(___)
(___)
(___) Link Turn- The public supports paying for major anti-poverty programs
Gerstein–Agne 08 Strategic Communications December 2008
[National Survey on Poverty,-- Key Findings, 12.12.2008 http://halfinten.org/pollamericans-support-tackling-poverty]
More than 3-in-4 Americans express support for the fundamental goal of the Half in Ten
Campaign – Congress and the next President setting a national goal to cut poverty in the
United States in half within 10 years. But what about the costs? Support for this poverty
reduction goal remains surprisingly strong even when respondents are told that it will
„require businesses to pay their workers higher wages and contribute more for benefits
like health care‟ and that it will „require higher taxes for the wealthy and new
government spending.‟ After both of these challenges, support for the goal remains at 54
percent. The tax-and-spend critique was the more effective critique in peeling away
supporters, but both show clear majorities still in „solid support‟ of the larger goal.
(___)Link Turn - The economy has changed people’s view on poverty- our plan
wouldn’t be controversial.
Gerstein–Agne 08 Strategic Communications December 2008
[National Survey on Poverty,-- Key Findings, 12.12.2008 http://halfinten.org/pollamericans-support-tackling-poverty]
At this pivotal moment in energy and health care and taxes dominating so much of the
debate in the presidential campaign – there is a strong temptation for policy experts and
political pundits alike to forget the issue of poverty. But the American people have not
forgotten about this issue. In fact, the current economic crisis has brought poverty very
much into focus on a national level and much closer to many Americans on a personal
level. And it has increased their commitment to address poverty in our country as part of
a larger economic agenda that drives economic growth by creating quality jobs and
investing in working Americans and their families. Poverty is not viewed as a separate,
competing priority, but as a fundamental part of our economy‟s failure and its eventual
recovery.
2| Page
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
No Internal Link
(___)
(___)
(___) No Internal Link- Obama is Super-Teflon Man. Nothing we do can hurt
him.
Ververs 09 Vaughn Ververs, senior political editor, CBS News, Real Clear Politics
1.19.09
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/01/stumbles_wont_derail_the_honey.htm
l
If Ronald Reagan was the original "Teflon president," Obama has to be the 5.0 version of
the same. Consider the hurdles he overcame to get where he is, all with nary a dent in
his political armor: The combative Clinton campaign (and all its drama); Tony Rezko; the
Rev. Jeremiah Wright; a relatively shallow resume; William Ayers and the Republican
campaign tactics. That's not even accounting for the issue of race, once thought to be
the ultimate hurdle for him. Yet Obama emerged from it all with the largest presidential
victory in the last 20 years (yes, Bill Clinton won more Electoral Votes but did not get a
majority of the popular vote). That's given him a real, modern-day version of a political
mandate, one that doesn't look to be in danger of fading anytime soon.
3| Page
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
Internal Link Turn
(___)
(___)
(___) Internal Link Turn- Winners win- spending political capital successfully
yields more
SINGER 03-03-2009
[Jonathan, editor of MyDD and JD candidate @ Berkeley Law,
“By expending capital, Obama grows his capital, My directDemocracy,
http://www.mydd.com/story/2009/3/3/191825/0428]
Peter Hart gets at a key point. Some believe that political capital is finite, that it can be
used up. To an extent that's true. But it's important to note, too, that political capital can
be regenerated -- and, specifically, that when a President expends a great deal of capital
on a measure that was difficult to enact and then succeeds, he can build up more capital.
Indeed, that appears to be what is happening with Barack Obama, who went to the mat
to pass the stimulus package out of the gate, got it passed despite near-unanimous
opposition of the Republicans on Capitol Hill, and is being rewarded by the American
public as a result. Take a look at the numbers. President Obama now has a 68 percent
favorable rating in the NBC-WSJ poll, his highest ever showing in the survey. Nearly half
of those surveyed (47 percent) view him very positively. Obama's Democratic Party
earns a respectable 49 percent favorable rating. The Republican Party, however, is in the
toilet, with its worst ever showing in the history of the NBC-WSJ poll, 26 percent
favorable. On the question of blame for the partisanship in Washington, 56 percent place
the onus on the Bush administration and another 41 percent place it on Congressional
Republicans. Yet just 24 percent blame Congressional Democrats, and a mere 11 percent
blame the Obama administration. So at this point, with President Obama seemingly
benefiting from his ambitious actions and the Republicans sinking further and further as
a result of their knee-jerked opposition to that agenda, there appears to be no reason
not to push forward on anything from universal healthcare to energy reform to ending
the war in Iraq.
4| Page
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
No Impact
(___)
(___)
(___) CTBT can’t solve rogue proliferation- norms created won’t have enough
to deter
HAINE 09 [Thomas, summer researcher @ American Enterprise Institute, 6/20/09, “Is
it time to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty?”, GLOBAL GOVERNANCE WATCH,
http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/in_the_spotlight/is-it-time-to-ratify-thecomprehensive-test-ban-treaty]
Some say the CTBT would provide a strong disincentive for nuclear aspirants like Iran in
their development of nuclear weapons. The treaty would enable a stronger and quicker
response to rogue nuclear tests by clarifying the international community's consensus
against such activities. Yet it is unlikely the CTBT would significantly improve the world
community‟s ability to negotiate with rogue nuclear nations. All too often, nuclear crime
pays . For example, in 1994 Clinton ended its policy of regime change in North Korea
and even gave them nuclear energy technology, all for their promise to cease plutonium
reprocessing. In response, North Korea withdrew from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty (NPT) in 2003, and exploded their first nuclear weapon in 2006 . After this
debacle, North Korea once again duped the world into fruitless negotiations. Bush
dropped economic sanctions and gave North Korea aid in return for more dubious North
Korean feints towards nuclear disarmament. Of course, then they exploded another
bomb in 2009 and heightened the rhetoric of nuclear war. Even with the CTBT in force, a
newborn nuclear power (Iran?) would be able to follow the same reckless diplomacy and
force a frightened world to eventually replace the diplomatic stick with a carrot.
5| Page
BDL 2009-2010
Obama Agenda DA- Affirmative
2AC Answers
1/1
Impact Turn
(___)
(___)
(___) Impact Turn- Our nuclear arsenal is aging- testing key to an effective
nuclear deterrent.
GAFFNEY 09
[Frank, president for Center for Security Policy, 7/6/09, “Your
Deterrent: What‟s at stake at Moscow Summit”, CANADA FREE PRESS,
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12640]
For example, since 1992, we have chosen not to conduct any underground detonations,
the only sort of test of our nuclear weapons certain to confirm that they work, and that
any defects detected are successfully corrected. Now, President Obama wants us to
make this arrangement permanent by ratifying the unverifiable Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT). Never mind that a majority of the Senate rejected this accord a decade
ago on the grounds that it is not consistent with maintaining an effective deterrent on
behalf of the American people. Disregard, too, the fact that that the Russians routinely
conduct underground “hydrodynamic” tests Mr. Obama considers to be impermissible
under the CTBT - and therefore eschews.
Moreover, we alone among the world‟s nuclear powers have not modernized your arsenal
in nearly two decades. The Russians, by contrast, are estimated to be on track to
upgrading 80% of their strategic forces. Yet, President Obama wants to foreclose even
the replacement of your obsolescing weapons with one that promises to provide a safe
and reliable deterrent in the absence of nuclear testing.
Not least, Getting it Right warns that - in the sustained absence of testing and
modernization, the industrial complex (both the technical experts and the physical plant)
required to maintain your deterrent is atrophying at an alarming rate. There are now
only a handful of physicists still working for the government who have had first-hand
experience with the design and realistic testing of nuclear weapons, and they soon will
retire from government service. Even if advanced computers and other sophisticated
gizmos could offset the knowledge and infrastructure your deterrent must have - and
they cannot - there is no reason to believe they will be acquired by a president who is
determined to lead by example to a nuclear-free world.
6| Page