USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
1/18
1AC 1/
Plan: The United States Federal Government should exempt foreign nationals with advanced degrees in science, technology,
engineering, and/or mathematics from numerical limits on the total number of available employment-based visas.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
2/18
1AC 2/
Contention 1 is Game Over
Warming is anthropogenic, verifiable and the most probable cause of extinction
Morgan, Professor of Current Affairs and Public Speaking, December ’09 (Dennis, Hankuk U., Futures, “World on fire: two
scenarios of the destruction of human civilization and possible extinction of the human race”, 41:10, ScienceDirect)
As horrifying as the scenario of human extinction by sudden, fast-burning nuclear fire may seem, the one consolation is that this
future can be avoided within a relatively short period of time if responsible world leaders change Cold War thinking to move away from aggressive wars over natural resources and
towards the eventual dismantlement of most if not all nuclear weapons. On the other hand, another scenario of human extinction by fire is one that may not so easily be
reversed within a short period of time because it is not a fast-burning fire; rather, a slow burning fire is gradually heating up the planet as industrial civilization progresses and develops globally. This gradual process
and course is long-lasting; thus it cannot easily be changed, even if responsible world leaders change their thinking about ‘‘progress’’ and industrial development based on the burning of fossil fuels. The way that global
warming will impact humanity in the future has often been depicted through the analogy of the proverbial frog in a pot of water who does not realize that the temperature of the water is gradually rising. Instead of trying to
escape, the frog tries to adjust to the gradual temperature change; finally, the heat of the water sneaks up on it until it is debilitated. Though it finally realizes its predicament and attempts to escape, it is too late; its feeble
attempt is to no avail— and the frog dies. Whether this fable can actually be applied to frogs in heated water or not is irrelevant; it still serves as a comparable scenario of how the slow burning fire of global warming may
eventually lead to a runaway condition and take humanity by surprise. Unfortunately, by the time the politicians finally all agree with the scientific consensus that global warming is indeed human caused, its development
could be too advanced to arrest; the poor frog has become too weak and enfeebled to get himself out of hot water. The Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) was established in 1988 by the WorldMeteorological
Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environmental Programme to ‘‘assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to
understanding the scientific basis of risk of humaninduced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.’’[16]. Since then, it has given assessments and reports every six or seven years. Thus
far, it has given four assessments.13 With all prior assessments came attacks fromsome parts of the scientific community, especially by industry scientists, to attempt to prove that the theory had no basis in planetary history
and present-day reality; nevertheless, as more andmore research continually provided concrete and empirical evidence to confirm the global warming hypothesis, that it is indeed human-caused, mostly due to the burning of
global warming is verifiable. As a matter of fact, according to Bill McKibben [17], 12
years of ‘‘impressive scientific research’’ strongly confirms the 1995 report ‘‘that humans had grown so large in numbers and
especially in appetite for energy that they were now damaging the most basic of the earth’s systems—the balance between incoming
and outgoing solar energy’’; ‘‘. . . their findings have essentially been complementary to the 1995 report – a constant strengthening of
the simple basic truth that humans were burning too much fossil fuel.’’ [17]. Indeed, 12 years later, the 2007 report not only confirms
global warming, with a stronger scientific consensus that the slow burn is ‘‘very likely’’ human caused, but it also finds that the
‘‘amount of carbon in the atmosphere is now increasing at a faster rate even than before’’ and the temperature increases would be
‘‘considerably higher than they have been so far were it not for the blanket of soot and other pollution that is temporarily helping to
cool the planet.’’ [17]. Furthermore, almost ‘‘everything frozen on earth is melting. Heavy rainfalls are becoming more common since
the air is warmer and therefore holds more water than cold air, and ‘cold days, cold nights and frost have become less frequent, while
hot days, hot nights, and heat waves have become more frequent.’’ [17]. Unless drastic action is taken soon, the average global
temperature is predicted to rise about 5 degrees this century, but it could rise as much as 8 degrees. As has already been evidenced in recent years,
fossil fuels, the scientific consensus grew stronger that human induced
the rise in global temperature is melting the Arctic sheets. This runaway polar melting will inflict great damage upon coastal areas, which could be much greater than what has been previously forecasted. However, what is
missing in the IPCC report, as dire as it may seem, is sufficient emphasis on the less likely but still plausible worst case scenarios, which could prove to have the most devastating, catastrophic consequences for the long-term
future of human civilization. In other words, the IPCC report places too much emphasis on a linear progression that does not take sufficient account of the dynamics of systems theory, which leads to a fundamentally different
premise regarding the relationship between industrial civilization and nature. As a matter of fact, as early as the 1950s, Hannah Arendt [18] observed this radical shift of emphasis in the human-nature relationship, which
starkly contrasts with previous times because the very distinction between nature and man as ‘‘Homo faber’’ has become blurred, as man no longer merely takes from nature what is needed for fabrication; instead, he now acts
into nature to augment and transform natural processes, which are then directed into the evolution of human civilization itself such that we become a part of the very processes that we make. The more human civilization
becomes an integral part of this dynamic system, the more difficult it becomes to extricate ourselves from it. As Arendt pointed out, this dynamism is dangerous because of its unpredictability. Acting into nature to transform
natural processes brings about an . . . endless new change of happenings whose eventual outcome the actor is entirely incapable of knowing or controlling beforehand. The moment we started natural processes of our own and the splitting of the atom is precisely such a man-made natural process -we not only increased our power over nature, or became more aggressive in our dealings with the given forces of the earth, but for the first time have
taken nature into the human world as such and obliterated the defensive boundaries between natural elements and the human artifice by which all previous civilizations were hedged in’’ [18]. So, in as much as we act into
nature, we carry our own unpredictability into our world; thus, Nature can no longer be thought of as having absolute or iron-clad laws. We no longer know what the laws of nature are because the unpredictability of Nature
increases in proportion to the degree by which industrial civilization injects its own processes into it; through selfcreated, dynamic, transformative processes, we carry human unpredictability into the future with a precarious
recklessness that may indeed end in human catastrophe or extinction, for elemental forces that we have yet to understand may be unleashed upon us by the very environment that we experiment with. Nature may yet have her
the Earth and its delicate ecosystems, environment, and atmosphere reach a tipping point, which could turn out to be
a point of no return. This is exactly the conclusion reached by the scientist, inventor, and author, James Lovelock. The creator of the wellknown yet controversial
revenge and the last word, as
Gaia Theory, Lovelock has recently written that it may be already too late for humanity to change course since climate centers around the world, . . . which are the
equivalent of the pathology lab of a hospital, have reported the Earth’s physical condition, and the climate specialists see it as seriously ill, and soon to pass into a
morbid fever that may last as long as 100,000 years. I have to tell you, as members of the Earth’s family and an intimate part of it, that you and
especially civilisation are in grave danger. It was ill luck that we started polluting at a time when the sun is too hot for comfort. We have given Gaia a
fever and soon her condition will worsen to a state like a coma. She has been there before and recovered, but it took more than 100,000 years. We are responsible and
will suffer the consequences: as the century progresses, the temperature will rise 8 degrees centigrade in temperate regions and 5 degrees in the tropics. Much of the
tropical land mass will become scrub and desert, and will no longer serve for regulation; this adds to the 40 per cent of the
Earth’s surface we have depleted to feed ourselves. . . . Curiously, aerosol pollution of the northern hemisphere reduces global warming by reflecting
sunlight back to space. This ‘global dimming’ is transient and could disappear in a few days like the smoke that it is, leaving us fully exposed to the heat of the global
greenhouse. We are in a fool’s climate, accidentally kept cool by smoke, and before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that
survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable. [19] Moreover, Lovelock states that the task of trying to correct our course is hopelessly impossible,
for we are not in charge. It is foolish and arrogant to think that we can regulate the atmosphere, oceans and land surface in order to
maintain the conditions right for life
{Morgan continues}
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
3/18
1AC 3/
{Morgan continued}
. It is as impossible as trying to regulate your own temperature and the composition of your blood, for those with ‘‘failing kidneys know the never-ending daily
difficulty of adjusting water, salt and protein intake. The technological fix of dialysis helps, but is no replacement for living healthy kidneys’’ [19]. Lovelock concludes
his analysis on the fate of human civilization and Gaia by saying that we will do ‘‘our best to survive, but sadly I cannot see the United States or the emerging
economies of China and India cutting back in time, and they are the main source of emissions. The worst will happen and survivors will have to adapt to a hell of a
climate’’ [19]. Lovelock’s forecast for climate change is based on a systems dynamics analysis of the interaction between humancreated processes and
natural processes. It is a multidimensional model that appropriately reflects the dynamism of industrial civilization responsible for climate change. For one thing, it
takes into account positive feedback loops that lead to ‘‘runaway’’ conditions. This mode of analysis is consistent with recent research on how ecosystems suddenly
disappear. A 2001 article in Nature, based on a scientific study by an international consortium, reported that changes in ecosystems are not just gradual but are often sudden and catastrophic [20]. Thus, a scientific consensus
is emerging (after repeated studies of ecological change) that ‘‘stressed ecosystems, given the right nudge, are capable of slipping rapidly from a seemingly steady state to something entirely different,’’ according to Stephen
Carpenter, a limnologist at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (who is also a co-author of the report). Carpenter continues, ‘‘We realize that there is a common pattern we’re seeing in ecosystems around the world, . . .
Gradual changes in vulnerability accumulate and eventually you get a shock to the system - a flood or a drought - and, boom, you’re over into another regime. It becomes a self-sustaining collapse.’’ [20]. If ecosystems are in
fact mini-models of the system of the Earth, as Lovelock maintains, then we can expect the same kind of behavior. As Jonathon Foley, a UW-Madison climatologist and another co-author of the Nature report, puts it, ‘‘Nature
isn’t linear. Sometimes you can push on a system and push on a system and, finally, you have the straw that breaks the camel’s back.’’ Also, once the ‘‘flip’’ occurs, as Foley maintains, then the catastrophic change is
‘‘irreversible.’’ [20]. When we expand this analysis of ecosystems to the Earth itself, it’s frightening. What could be the final push on a stressed system that could ‘‘break the camel’s back?’’ Recently, another factor has been
discovered in some areas of the arctic regions, which will surely compound the problem of global ‘‘heating’’ (as Lovelock calls it) in unpredictable and perhaps catastrophic ways. This disturbing development, also reported
in Nature, concerns the permafrost that has locked up who knows how many tons of the greenhouse gasses, methane and carbon dioxide. Scientists are particularly worried about permafrost because, as it thaws, it releases
these gases into the atmosphere, thus, contributing and accelerating global heating. It is a vicious positive feedback loop that compounds the prognosis of global warming in ways that could very well prove to be the tipping
Borenstein of the Associated Press describes this disturbing positive feedback loop of permafrost greenhouse gasses, as
when warming ‘‘. already under way thaws permafrost, soil that has been continuously frozen for thousands of years. Thawed
permafrost releases methane and carbon dioxide. Those gases reach the atmosphere and help trap heat on Earth in the
greenhouse effect. The trapped heat thaws more permafrost and so on.’’ [21]. The significance and severity of this problem cannot be understated since scientists have
point of no return. Seth
discovered that ‘‘the amount of carbon trapped in this type of permafrost called ‘‘yedoma’’ is much more prevalent than originally thought and may be 100 times [my emphasis] the amount of carbon released into the air each
year by the burning of fossil fuels’’ [21]. Of course, it won’t come out all at once, at least by time as we commonly reckon it, but in terms of geological time, the ‘‘several decades’’ that scientists say it will probably take to
come out can just as well be considered ‘‘all at once.’’ Surely, within the next 100 years, much of the world we live in will be quite hot and may be unlivable, as Lovelock has predicted. Professor Ted Schuur, a professor of
ecosystem ecology at the University of Florida and co-author of the study that appeared in Science, describes it as a ‘‘slow motion time bomb.’’ [21]. Permafrost under lakes will be released as methane while that which is
under dry ground will be released as carbon dioxide. Scientists aren’t sure which is worse. Whereas methane is a much more powerful agent to trap heat, it only lasts for about 10 years before it dissipates into carbon dioxide
or other chemicals. The less powerful heat-trapping agent, carbon dioxide, lasts for 100 years [21]. Both of the greenhouse gasses present in permafrost represent a global dilemma and challenge that compounds the effects of
global warming and runaway climate change. The scary thing about it, as one researcher put it, is that there are ‘‘lots of mechanisms that tend to be self-perpetuating and relatively few that tend to shut it off’’ [21].14 In an
accompanying AP article, Katey Walters of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks describes the effects as ‘‘huge’’ and, unless we have a ‘‘major cooling,’’ - unstoppable [22]. Also, there’s so much more that has not even
. Is it the end of human civilization and possible extinction of humankind?
What Jonathon Schell wrote concerning death by the fire of nuclear holocaust also applies to the slow burning death of global
warming: Once we learn that a holocaust might lead to extinction, we have no right to gamble, because if we lose, the game will be over, and neither
been discovered yet, she writes: ‘‘It’s coming out a lot and there’s a lot more to come out.’’ [22]. 4
we nor anyone else will ever get another chance. Therefore, although, scientifically speaking, there is all the difference in the world between the mere possibility that a holocaust will bring about extinction and the certainty of
it, morally they are the same, and we have no choice but to address the issue of nuclear weapons as though we knew for a certainty that their use would put an end to our species [23].15 When we consider that beyond the
, even
if some small remnant does manage to survive, what the poisonous environmental conditions would have on human evolution in the
future. A remnant of mutated, sub-human creatures might survive such harsh conditions, but for all purposes, human
civilization has been destroyed, and the question concerning human extinction becomes moot. Thus, we have no other choice but
to consider the finality of it all, as Schell does: ‘‘Death lies at the core of each person’s private existence, but part of death’s meaning is to be found in the fact
horror of nuclear war, another horror is set into motion to interact with the subsequent nuclear winter to produce a poisonous and super heated planet, the chances of human survival seem even smaller. Who knows
that it occurs in a biological and social world that survives.’’ [23].16 But what if the world itself were to perish, Schell asks. Would not it bring about a sort of ‘‘second
death’’ – the death of the species – a possibility that the vast majority of the human race is in denial about? Talbot writes in the review of Schell’s book that it is not
only the ‘‘death of the species, not just of the earth’s population on doomsday, but of countless unborn generations. They would be spared
literal death but would nonetheless be victims . . .’’ [23]. That is the ‘‘second death’’ of humanity – the horrifying, unthinkable prospect that there are no prospects – that there will be no future. In the second chapter of
Schell’s book, he writes that since we have not made a positive decision to exterminate ourselves but instead have ‘‘chosen to live on the edge of extinction, periodically lunging toward the abyss only to draw back at the last
second, our situation is one of uncertainty and nervous insecurity rather than of absolute hopelessness.’’ [23].17 In other words, the fate of the Earth and its inhabitants has not yet been determined. Yet time is not on our side
Will we relinquish the fire and our use of it to dominate the Earth and each other, or will we continue to gamble with our future at this
game of Russian roulette while time increasingly stacks the cards against our chances of survival?
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
.
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
4/18
1AC 4/
Climate change will destroy the Amazon rainforest – That will kill biodiversity and supercharge the rate of warming.
Pearce 2007 (Fred, Environmental consultant and BEMA environment journalist of the year) “With speed and violence: why scientists fear tipping points in climate change”, p. 63-66
The Amazon rainforest is the largest living reservoir of carbon dioxide one land surface of Earth. Its trees contain some 77 billion
tons of carbon, and its soils perhaps as much again. That is about twenty years' worth of an-made emissions from burning fossil fuels. The rainforest is also an engine of the world's climate
system, recycling both heat and moisture. More than half of the raindrops that fall on the forest canopy never reach the round; instead they evaporate back into the air to produce more rain downwind. The forest needs
the Amazon for maintaining climate, they are also discovering that it may itself be
under threat from climate change. We are familiar enough with the damage done to the world's biggest and lushest jungle by farmers armed with chain
saws and firebrands. But, hard as they try, they can destroy the rainforest only slowly. Despite many decades of effort, most of this jungle,
the size of Western Europe, remains intact. Climate change, on the other hand, could overwhelm it in a few years . Until recently, many
the rain, but the rain also needs the forest. But as scientists come to understand the importance of
ecologists have thought of the Amazon rainforest much as their glaciologist colleagues conceived of the Greenland ice sheet: as big and extremely stable. The Greenland ice maintained the climate that kept the ice
researchers believe that it is in reality a very dynamic place, and that the entire ecosystem may be close to a tipping point beyond which it will
suffer runaway destruction in an orgy of fire and drought. Nobody is quite sure what would happen if the Amazon rainforest disappeared. It
would certainly give an extra kick to climate change by releasing its stores of carbon dioxide. It would most likely diminish
rainfall in Brazil. It might also change weather systems right across the Northern Hemisphere . One man who is trying to find out how unstable the Amazon
securely frozen, while the Amazon rainforest maintained the rains that watered the forest. Bur, just as with the Greenland ice sheet, the idea that the Amazon is stable has taken a knock: some
rainforest might be is Dan Nepstad, a forest ecologist nominally attached to the Woods Hole Research Center, in Massachusetts, but based for more than two decades in the Amazon. He doesn't just watch the forest: he
conducts large experiments within it. In 200 I, Nepstad began creating a man-made drought in a small patch of jungle in the Tapajos National Forest, outside the river port of Santarem. Although in most years much of
the Amazon has rain virtually every day, Tapajos is on the eastern fringe of the rainforest proper, where weather cycles can shut down the rains for months. The forest here is, to some extent, adapted to drought. But
there are limits, and Nepstad has been trying to find out where they lie. He has covered the 2.5-acre plot with more than 5,000 transparent plastic panels, which let in the sunlight but divert the rain into wooden gutters
that drain to canals and a moat. Meanwhile, high above the forest canopy, he has erected gantries linked by catwalks, so that he can study the trees in detail as the artificial drought progresses. The work was all done by
hand to avoid damaging the dense forest, and the scientists soon found they were not alone. The canals became "congregating places for every kind of snake you can imagine," says Nepstad. Caimans and jaguars cruised
by, just, it seemed, to find out what was going on. The results were worth the effort. The forest, it turns out, can handle two years of drought without great trouble. The trees extend their roots deeper to find water and
slow their metabolism to conserve water. But after that, the trees start dying. Beginning with the tallest, they come crashing down, releasing carbon to the air as' they rot, and exposing the forest floor to the drying sun.
By the third year, the plot was storing only about 2 tons of carbon, whereas a neighboring control plot, on which rain continued to fall, held close to 8 tons. The "lock was broken" on a corner of one of the planet's great
carbon stores. The study shows that the Amazon is "headed in a terrible direction," wrote the ecologist Deborah Clark, of the University of Missouri, discussing the findings in Science. "Given that droughts in the
Amazon are projected to increase in several climate models, the implications for these rich ecosystems are grim." Everywhere in the jungle, drought is followed by fire. So, in early 2005, Nepstad started an even more
audacious experiment. He set fire to another stretch of forest with kerosene torches. "We want to know if recurring fire may threaten the very existence of the forest." he says. The initial findings were not good: the fires
crept low along the forest floor, and no huge flames burst through the canopy. The fire may even have been invisible to the satellites that keep a constant watch overhead. But many trees died nonetheless, as their bark
scorched and the flow of sap from their roots was stanched. Nepstad's experiments are part of a huge international effort to monitor the health of the Amazon, called the Large-scale Biosphere-Atmosphere Experiment in
Amazonia. From planes and satellites and gantries above the jungle, researchers from a dozen countries have been sniffing the forest's breath and assessing its survival strategies. The current estimate is that fires in the
forest are releasing some 200 million tons of carbon a year—far more than is absorbed by the growing forest. The Amazon has become a significant source of carbon dioxide, adding to global warming. More worrying
still, the experiment is discovering a drying trend across the Amazon that leaves it ever more vulnerable to fires. Nepstad's work suggests that beyond a certain point, the forest will be unable to recover from the fires,
The rains failed across the
Amazon through 2005, killing trees, triggering fires, and reducing the ability of the forest to recycle moisture in future—thus
and will begin a process of rapid drying that he calls the "savannization" of the Amazon. And even as he concluded his drought experiment, nature seemed to replicate it.
increasing the risk of future drought. Nepstad's experiments suggest that the rainforest is close to the edge—to permanent drought, rampant burning, savannization,
or worse. In the final weeks of 2005, the rains returned. The forest may recover this time. But if future climate change causes
significant drying that lasts from one year to the next, feedbacks in the forest could realize Nepstad’s worst fears . The 2005 drought was caused
by extremely warm temperatures in the tropical Atlantic-the same high temperatures that are believed to have caused the record-breaking hurricane season that year. The rising air that triggered the hurricanes eventually
came back to earth, suppressing the formation of storm clouds over the Amazon. And, as I discovered at Britain's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction, that is precisely what climate modelers are forecasting for future
business-as-usual increases in industrial carbon dioxide
emissions worldwide in the coming decades will generate warmer sea temperatures, subjecting the Amazon to repeated droughts,
and thus creating "threshold conditions" beyond which fires will take hold. The Amazon rainforest will be dead before the end of
the century. Not partly dead, or sick, but dead and gone. "The region will be able to support only shrubs or grass at most," said a study published by the Hadley Centre in 2005. Not all models agree about that.
decades. The Hadley Centre's global climate model is generally regarded as one of the world's top three. And it predicts that
But the Hadley model is the best at reproducing the current relationship between ocean temperatures and Amazon rainfall, so it has a good chance of being right about the future too. Nepstad himself predicts that a
"megafire event" will spread across the region. As areas in the more vulnerable eastern rainforest die, they will cease to recycle moisture back into the atmosphere to provide rainfall downwind. A wave of aridity will
With the trees gone, the thin soils will bake in the sun. Rainforest could literally
turn to desert. The Hadley forecast includes a graph of the Amazon's forest's future carbon. It predicts that the store of a steady 77 billion tons over the past half century will shrink to 44 billion tons by 2050
and 16.5 billion tons by the end of the century. That, it calculates, would be enough to increase the expected rate of warming worldwide by at least 50
percent.
travel west, creating the conditions for fire to rip through the heart of the jungle.
Extinction
Takacs 96 (David, Professor of environmental humanities at the Institute for Earth Systems Science and Policy at Cal state,) “The idea of biodiversity: Philosophies
of Paradise,” p. 200-201
So biodiversity keeps
the world running. It has value and of itself, as well as for us. Raven, Erwin, and Wilson oblige us to think about the value of biodiversity for our own lives. The Ehrlichs’
It is likely that destruction of the rich complex of
species in the Amazon basin could trigger rapid changes in global climate patterns. Agriculture remains heavily dependent on
stable climate, and human beings remain heavily dependent on food. By the end of the century the extinction of perhaps a million species in
the Amazon basin could have entrained famines in which a billion human beings perished . And if our species is very unlucky, the famines
could lead to a thermonuclear war, which could extinguish civilization.” 13 Elsewhere Ehrlich uses different particulars with no less drama: What then will happen if the
rivet-popper trope makes this same point; by eliminating rivets, we play Russian roulette with global ecology and human futures: “
current decimation of organic diversity continues? Crop yields will be more difficult to maintain in the face of climatic change, soil erosion, loss of dependable water supplies, decline of pollinators, and ever more
serious assaults by pests. Conversion of productive land to wasteland will accelerate; deserts will continue their seemingly inexorable expansion. Air pollution will increase, and local climates will become harsher.
Humanity will have to forgo many of the direct economic benefits it might have withdrawn from Earth's wellstocked genetic library. It might, for example, miss out on a cure for cancer; but that will make little
difference. As ecosystem services falter, mortality from respiratory and epidemic disease, natural disasters, and especially famine will lower life expectancies to the point where cancer (largely a disease of the elderly)
will be unimportant.
Humanity will bring upon itself consequences depressingly similar to those expected from a nuclear winter. Barring a
will disappear some time before the end of the next century - not with a bang but a whimper.14
nuclear conflict, it appears that civilization
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
5/18
1AC 5/
And warming destroys the oceans by turning them into acid
Stern 2007 (Nicholas, Head of the British Government Economic Service, Former Head Economist for the World Bank, I.G. Patel
Chair at the London School of Economics and Political Science) “The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review”, The report
of a team commissioned by the British Government to study the economics of climate change led by Siobhan Peters, Head of G8 and
International Climate Change Policy Unit, Cambridge University Press, p. 72
Ocean acidification, a direct result of rising carbon dioxide levels, will have major effects on marine ecosystems, with possible
adverse consequences on fish stocks. For fisheries, information on the likely impacts of climate change is very limited – a major
gap in knowledge considering that about one billion people worldwide (one-sixth of the world’s population) rely on fish as their
primary source of animal protein. While higher ocean temperatures may increase growth rates of some fish, reduced nutrient
supplies due to warming may limit growth. Ocean acidification is likely to be particularly damaging. The oceans have become
more acidic in the past 200 years, because of chemical changes caused by increasing amounts of carbon dioxide dissolving in
seawater.44 If global emissions continue to rise on current trends, ocean acidity is likely to increase further, with pH declining by
an additional 0.15 units if carbon dioxide levels double (to 560 ppm) relative to pre-industrial and an additional 0.3 units if carbon
dioxide levels treble (to 840 ppm).45 Changes on this scale have not been experienced for hundreds of thousands of years and are
occurring at an extremely rapid rate. Increasing ocean acidity makes it harder for many ocean creatures to form shells and
skeletons from calcium carbonate. These chemical changes have the potential to disrupt marine ecosystems irreversibly - at the
very least halting the growth of corals, which provide important nursery grounds for commercial fish, and damaging molluscs and
certain types of plankton at the base of the food chain. Plankton and marine snails are critical to sustaining species such as salmon,
mackerel and baleen whales, and such changes are expected to have serious but as-yet-unquantified wider impacts.
Extinction
Craig 2003 (McGeorge, Associate Prof Law, Indiana U School Law) Law Review, 34 McGeorge L. Rev. 155 Lexis)
Biodiversity and ecosystem function arguments for conserving marine ecosystems also exist, just as they do for terrestrial ecosystems,
but these arguments have thus far rarely been raised in political debates. For example, besides significant tourism values - the most
economically valuable ecosystem service coral reefs provide, worldwide - coral reefs protect against storms and dampen other
environmental fluctuations, services worth more than ten times the reefs' value for food production. n856 Waste treatment is another
significant, non-extractive ecosystem function that intact coral reef ecosystems provide. n857 More generally, "ocean ecosystems
play a major role in the global geochemical cycling of all the elements that represent the basic building blocks of living organisms,
carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, and sulfur, as well as other less abundant but necessary elements." n858 In a very real and
direct sense, therefore, human degradation of marine ecosystems impairs the planet's ability to support life. Maintaining biodiversity is
often critical to maintaining the functions of marine ecosystems. Current evidence shows that, in general, an ecosystem's ability to
keep functioning in the face of disturbance is strongly dependent on its biodiversity, "indicating that more diverse ecosystems are
more stable." n859 Coral reef ecosystems are particularly dependent on their biodiversity. [*265] Most ecologists agree that the
complexity of interactions and degree of interrelatedness among component species is higher on coral reefs than in any other marine
environment. This implies that the ecosystem functioning that produces the most highly valued components is also complex and that
many otherwise insignificant species have strong effects on sustaining the rest of the reef system. n860 Thus, maintaining and
restoring the biodiversity of marine ecosystems is critical to maintaining and restoring the ecosystem services that they provide. Nonuse biodiversity values for marine ecosystems have been calculated in the wake of marine disasters, like the Exxon Valdez oil spill in
Alaska. n861 Similar calculations could derive preservation values for marine wilderness. However, economic value, or economic
value equivalents, should not be "the sole or even primary justification for conservation of ocean ecosystems. Ethical arguments also
have considerable force and merit." n862 At the forefront of such arguments should be a recognition of how little we know about the
sea - and about the actual effect of human activities on marine ecosystems. The United States has traditionally failed to protect marine
ecosystems because it was difficult to detect anthropogenic harm to the oceans, but we now know that such harm is occurring - even
though we are not completely sure about causation or about how to fix every problem. Ecosystems like the NWHI coral reef
ecosystem should inspire lawmakers and policymakers to admit that most of the time we really do not know what we are doing to the
sea and hence should be preserving marine wilderness whenever we can - especially when the United States has within its territory
relatively pristine marine ecosystems that may be unique in the world. We may not know much about the sea, but we do know this
much: if we kill the ocean we kill ourselves, and we will take most of the biosphere with us.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
6/18
1AC 6/
And the clock is ticking – models prove carbon emissions must peak by 2015 to halt warming
Tiffany Kaiser (Daily Tech Writer) 8/3/2010: Model Predicts How Much CO2 Humans Can Safely Emit Without Warming.
http://www.dailytech.com/Model+Predicts+How+Much+CO2+Humans+Can+Safely+Emit+Without+Warming/article19241.htm
Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg have calculated the amount of carbon dioxide humans can safely
emit before effecting the heating of the Earth. Scientist Erich Roeckner and his team have created a model that determines the highest
volumes of carbon dioxide that humans are allowed to emit in order to ensure that Earth does not heat up by more than two degrees
Celsius, which is the gate to climate warming. They've used the methodology proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC) in order to reconstruct historical emission pathways "on the basis of already-calculated carbon dioxide
concentrations." In order for this to occur, carbon cycle data, such as the volume of carbon dioxide absorbed by forests and oceans, is
added to the model. The model then simulates the evolution of carbon dioxide emissions in order to understand what the future holds
and how it should be changed to prevent warming. The model is based on a low-resolution spatial grid with 400 kilometer grid
spacing. With this kind of model, the land surface, ocean, sea ice, atmosphere and terrestrial and marine carbon cycle are all included
in the study. According to the model, carbon dioxide caused by fossil fuels must be reduced to almost zero by the end of the century to
achieve long-term goals of carbon concentration stabilization in the atmosphere. The model calculated that, since the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution, fossil carbon dioxide has increased by 35 percent. Other figures the model has calculated is that carbon
emissions will increase from seven billion tonnes in 2000 to 10 billion tonnes in 2015. Then, emissions will have to be decreased by
56 percent by 2050, and reach zero by the end of the century for long-term stabilization to be achieved. But even if these goals are
met, global warming would only stay below two degrees Celsius until 2100, and further measures will need to be taken to control
warming.
Because climate change could be irreversible we must err on the side of preventing it even if the scientific evidence is
debatable.
Cass R. Sunstein—Professor in the Department of Political Science and at the Law School of the University of Chicago—2007
(“Worst-Case Scenarios”, Harvard University Press)
Most worst-case scenarios appear to have an element of irreversibility. Once a species is lost, it is lost forever. The special concern for endangered species stems from
the permanence of their loss (outside of Jurassic Park). One of the most serious fears associated with genetically modified organisms is that they might lead to
irreversible ecological harm. Because some greenhouse gases stay in the atmosphere for centuries, the problem of climate change may
be irreversible, at least for all practical purposes. Transgenic crops can impose irreversible losses too, because they can make pests more resistant to
pesticides. If we invest significant wealth in one source of energy and neglect others, we may be effectively stuck forever, or at least for a long time. One objection to
capital punishment is that errors cannot be reversed. In ordinary life, our judgments about worst-case scenarios have everything to do with
irreversibility. Of course an action may be hard but not impossible to undo, and so there may be a continuum of cases, with different degrees of difficulty in
reversing. A marriage can be reversed, but divorce is rarely easy; having a child is very close to irreversible; moving from New York to Paris is reversible, but moving
back may be difficult. People often take steps to avoid courses of action that are burdensome rather than literally impossible to reverse. In this light, we might
identify an Irreversible Harm Precautionary Principle, applicable to a subset of risks.' As a rough first approximation, the principle says this:
Special steps should be taken to avoid irreversible harms, through precautions that go well beyond those that would be taken if irreversibility were
not a problem. The general attitude here is "act, then learn," as opposed to the tempting alternative of "wait and learn." In the case of climate change, some people
believe that research should be our first line of defense. In their view, we should refuse to commit substantial resources to the problem until evidence of serious harm is
unmistakably clear.' But even assuming that the evidence is not so clear, research without action allows greenhouse gas emissions to continue, which might produce
risks that are irreversible, or at best difficult and expensive to reverse. For this reason, the best course of action might well be to take precautions
now as a way of preserving flexibility for future generations. In the environmental context in general, this principle suggests that
regulators should proceed with far more aggressive measures than would otherwise seem justified.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
7/18
1AC 7/
The plan attracts immigrant entrepreneurs which are key for clean energy development
Richard T. Herman (the founder of Richard T. Herman & Associates, an immigration and business law firm) 6/29/2010,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/richard-herman/why-immigrants-can-drive_b_629451.html
Raymond Spencer, an Australian‐born entrepreneur based in Chicago, has a window on the future--and a gusto for investing after founding a high‐technology consulting company that sold for more than $1 billion in 2006. "I
start‐ups, all of which fall within a broad umbrella of a 'green' theme," he said. "And it's interesting, the vast majority are either led by
immigrants or have key technical people who are immigrants."It should come as no surprise that immigrants will help drive the green
revolution. America's young scientists and engineers, especially the ones drawn to emerging industries like alternative energy, tend to speak with an accent. The 2000 Census found that immigrants, while accounting
for 12 percent of the population, made up nearly half of the all scientists and engineers with doctorate degrees. Their importance will only grow. Nearly 70 percent of the men and
women who entered the fields of science and engineering from 1995 to 2006 were immigrants. Yet, the connection between
immigration and the development and commercialization of alternative energy technology is rarely discussed. Policymakers envision
millions of new jobs as the nation pursues renewable energy sources, like wind and solar power, and builds a smart grid to tap it. But
Dan Arvizu, the leading expert on solar power and the director of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy in Golden, Colorado, warns that much of the
clean‐technology talent lies overseas, in nations that began pursuing alternative energy sources decades ago. The 2000 Census found that immigrants,
while accounting for 12 percent of the population, made up nearly half of the all scientists and engineers with doctorate degrees. Their importance will only grow. Expanding our own clean‐tech
industry will require working closely with foreign nations and foreign‐born scientists, he said. Immigration restrictions are making
collaboration difficult. His lab's efforts to work with a Chinese energy lab, for example, were stalled due to U.S. immigration barriers. "We can't get researchers over here," Arvizu, the son of a
once‐undocumented immigrant from Mexico, said in an interview in March 2009, his voice tinged with dismay. "It makes no sense to me. We need a much more enlightened approach." Dr. Zhao Gang, the
Vice Director of the Renewable Energy and New Energy International Cooperation Planning Office of the Ministry of Science and
Technology in China, says that America needs that enlightenment fast. "The Chinese government continues to impress upon the
Obama administration that immigration restrictions are creating major impediments to U.S.‐China collaboration on clean energy
development," he said during a recent speech in Cleveland. So what's the problem? Some of it can be attributed to national security restrictions that impede international collaboration on clean energy. But Arvizu
places greater weight on immigration barriers, suggesting that national secrecy is less important in the fast‐paced world of green‐tech development. "We are innovating so
fast here, what we do today is often outdated tomorrow. Finding solutions to alternative energy is a complex, global problem that
requires global teamwork," he said. We need an immigration system that prioritizes the attraction and retention of scarce, high‐end talent
needed to invent and commercialize alternative energy technology and other emerging technologies.
have investments in maybe 10
And U.S. China collaboration on warming is the only way to effectively solve – that’s key to overall U.S. China relations
Joshua Kucera (staff writer) 5/4/2010: China and U.S. Try Cooperation on Climate, Energy Policy.
http://politics.usnews.com/news/energy/articles/2010/05/04/china-and-us-try-cooperation-on-climate-energy-policy.html
U.S.-Chinese cooperation on climate change is manifold. The two countries are the world's largest energy producers, energy
consumers, and carbon emitters, combining to account for 40 percent of the greenhouse gases emitted globally each year. By working
together, the United States and China could accomplish more than if they proceeded independently. For example, the costs of
developing and implementing alternative energy and emissions-reduction technologies are high. But if the two nations pursue them jointly,
the collaboration could create economies of scale that would drive prices down. In addition, business and political interests in both
countries are reluctant to assume the costs of reducing emissions while their competitors across the Pacific continue unimpeded.
Cooperation could help both sides take politically difficult steps. [Read America's New Energy Dependency: China's Metals.] A collaboration on
clean energy also could be a steppingstone to building a better overall relationship between the two nations. "In solving the world's
energy problems, having China and the U.S. work together can make a big difference ," says David Sandalow, assistant secretary of energy for
policy and international affairs, who heads the government's energy outreach efforts with China. "Cooperation on clean energy can be a foundation for a
broader bilateral relationship and can contribute positively to the relationship overall."
And extinction.
Ratliff, 95 (William, Senior research fellow at The Hoover Institution, 7/31, “Long-term U.S.-China interests”, The Washington Times, p. A21, Lexis-Nexis)
Much of the growth and prosperity of the Pacific Rim countries in general – ranging from Japan and China through Southeast Asia to the United States and the
Pacific Coast of South America – depends on peace and stability in East Asia. The United States and China must lead other nations in
fostering this peace and stability. Today, this means cooperating on such varied issues as the potential nuclear threat of North Korea, the resolution of the China-Taiwan
controversy and the exploration of – and safety of sea lanes through – the South China Sea, the superhighway of the Southeast Asian economic miracle. These matters will recur, and other
cooperation often will not be easy, for fear as to Chinese intentions
pervades Washington and suspicions of U.S. motives remain widespread here in China . Americans, for example, are particularly concerned at the size
of the Chinese military budget and what Beijing intends to do with its modernized and expanded military capacity. Thus as Mr. Perry noted, increasing contacts between the
militaries of the two countries, and each nation's clearer understanding of the defense policies and strategic intentions of the other,
are essential. This was the particular importance of Mr. Perry's visit to the PLA gathering, a type of exchange both sides must foster in the future for everyone's good. Short-term
problems unforeseen today will turn up, in the years ahead. So the world spins. To be sure,
issues are not necessarily unimportant because they are short-term, but they must be worked out by each side having consistent policies the other can understand that look beyond short-
United States and China will be the two superpowers of the early 21st century
and our living together in peace will be essential to the prosperity if not the survival of the world.
term problems to longer-term interests. The high probability is that the
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
8/18
1AC 8/
And U.S. China cooperation on clean technologies results in clean coal as well as carbon capture technologies – it’s most
convenient for both countries
Joshua Kucera (staff writer) 5/4/2010: China and U.S. Try Cooperation on Climate, Energy Policy.
http://politics.usnews.com/news/energy/articles/2010/05/04/china-and-us-try-cooperation-on-climate-energy-policy.html
Clean coal. Also conspicuously absent was an initiative regarding so-called clean coal. The economies of both countries rely heavily
on coal. China uses it for 80 percent of its primary energy supply, and the United States uses coal for 50 percent of its electricity
supply. Because those percentages are not likely to change in the short term, finding ways to limit pollution from coal plants would be
essential for the nations to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. In particular, there are high hopes for carbon capture and storage
technologies. CCS traps carbon dioxide from coal plants before it enters the atmosphere and deposits it somewhere harmless, like
underground or even in carbonated soft drinks. Clean coal technology is in its infancy, however, and needs large-scale government
investments to jump-start development, experts say. And unlike other climate-saving efforts, such as conservation and improvements
in energy efficiency, which provide significant cost savings, CCS adds to the cost of producing coal power. That makes it a hard sell.
"It's a huge sink of money and has long-term benefits but no short-term benefits," Lewis says. "But it's also one of the most crucial
[technologies] to dealing with climate change." And because of the cost, "if we're going to do it, we want China to do it as well."
And clean coal solves warming best
MIT, 7 ( Massachusetts Institute of Technology, “MIT PANEL PROVIDES POLICY BLUEPRINT FOR FUTURE OF USE OF
COAL AS POLICYMAKERS WORK TO REVERSE GLOBAL WARMING,” March 14, 2007, http://web.mit.edu/coa l/) // CCH
Washington, DC – Leading academics from an interdisciplinary Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) panel issued a report
today that examines how the world can continue to use coal, an abundant and inexpensive fuel, in a way that mitigates, instead of
worsens, the global warming crisis. The study, "The Future of Coal – Options for a Carbon Constrained World," advocates the U.S. assume global leadership
on this issue through adoption of significant policy actions. Led by co-chairs Professor John Deutch, Institute Professor, Department of Chemistry, and Ernest J. Moniz,
Cecil and Ida Green Professor of Physics and Engineering Systems, the report states that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is the critical enabling technology to
help reduce CO2 emissions significantly while also allowing coal to meet the world's pressing energy needs.According to Dr. Deutch, "As the world's
leading energy user and greenhouse gas emitter, the U.S. must take the lead in showing the world CCS can work. Demonstration of
technical, economic, and institutional features of CCS at commercial scale coal combustion and conversion plants will give
policymakers and the public confidence that a practical carbon mitigation control option exists, will reduce cost of CCS should carbon
emission controls be adopted, and will maintain the low-cost coal option in an environmentally acceptable manner ." Dr. Moniz added,
"There are many opportunities for enhancing the performance of coal plants in a carbon-constrained world – higher efficiency generation, perhaps through new
materials; novel approaches to gasification, CO2 capture, and oxygen separation; and advanced system concepts, perhaps guided by a new generation of simulation
tools. An aggressive R&D effort in the near term will yield significant dividends down the road, and should be undertaken immediately to help meet this urgent
scientific challenge." Key findings in this study: Coal is a low-cost, per BTU, mainstay of both the developed and developing world, and its use is projected to increase.
Because of coal's high carbon content, increasing use will exacerbate the problem of climate change unless coal plants are deployed with very high efficiency and large
scale CCS is implemented. CCS is the critical enabling technology because it allows significant reduction in CO2 emissions while allowing
coal to meet future energy needs. A significant charge on carbon emissions is needed in the relatively near term to increase the economic attractiveness of new
technologies that avoid carbon emissions and specifically to lead to large-scale CCS in the coming decades. We need large-scale demonstration projects of
the technical, economic and environmental performance of an integrated CCS system. We should proceed with carbon sequestration
projects as soon as possible. Several integrated large-scale demonstrations with appropriate measurement, monitoring and verification are needed in the United
States over the next decade with government support. This is important for establishing public confidence for the very large-scale sequestration program anticipated in
the future. The regulatory regime for large-scale commercial sequestration should be developed with a greater sense of urgency, with the Executive Office of the
President leading an interagency process. The U.S. government should provide assistance only to coal projects with CO2 capture in order to demonstrate technical,
economic and environmental performance. Today, IGCC appears to be the economic choice for new coal plants with CCS. However, this could change with further
RD&D, so it is not appropriate to pick a single technology winner at this time, especially in light of the variability in coal type, access to sequestration sites, and other
factors. The government should provide assistance to several "first of a kind" coal utilization demonstration plants, but only with carbon capture. Congress should
remove any expectation that construction of new coal plants without CO2 capture will be "grandfathered" and granted emission allowances in the event of future
regulation. This is a perverse incentive to build coal plants without CO2 capture today. Emissions will be stabilized only through global adherence to CO2 emission
constraints. China and India are unlikely to adopt carbon constraints unless the U.S. does so and leads the way in the development of CCS technology. Key changes
must be made to the current Department of Energy RD&D program to successfully promote CCS technologies. The program must provide for demonstration
of CCS at scale; a wider range of technologies should be explored; and modeling and simulation of the comparative performance of
integrated technology systems should be greatly enhanced.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
9/18
1AC 9/
Clean coal is key to solve air pollution
USA Today, 12/27/07, “Tech could reduce coal facilities' emissions,” p. Lexis
From the top of a hill here in coal country, you can see distant swells of smoke curling up from coal-fired power plants along the flat
horizon. Even here, in a town of only 348 residents, a small coal plant has operated off and on since World War II. But that plant
might soon be replaced by a new kind of coal plant, one that could signal a critical turning point in the future of coal and how the
United States reconciles its conflicting energy and environmental needs. Duke Energy, the Charlotte, N.C.-based utility, is now
awaiting an air permit from Indiana for a $2 billion, 630-megawatt coal plant, large enough to power about 200,000 homes a year.
Considered only average-size as traditional plants go, it would become the world's largest coal-fired power plant to use a new, cleaner
technology called integrated gasification combined cycle, or IGCC. "It's a technology that has the ability to take air pollution out of
the debate over coal," says John Thompson, director of the Coal Transition Program at the Clean Air Task Force, a Boston-based
environmental group that supports the plant. "The day that plant opens, the 500 or so coal plants in the U.S. are obsolete." Unlike
conventional coal-fired power plants, often called "pulverized" coal plants because they crush coal to a powder before burning it to
make electricity, the Edwardsport plant would turn coal into a gas before burning it. "Gasification" makes removing pollutants easier.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, such gasification plants emit about 65% less mercury and 75% less sulfur dioxide
than conventional plants, while nearly eliminating particulate matter, the fine particles linked to heart and lung disease. But perhaps
more important, coal-power experts say, the Edwardsport plant's gasification design would enable Duke to capture the plant's carbondioxide emissions, then inject them underground where they cannot affect the atmosphere, a process known as carbon capture and
sequestration. Coal-fired power plants account for a third of U.S. CO{-2} emissions, the primary gas blamed for global warming,
about as much as every plane, train and automobile in the country combined. Yet, most energy experts say the nation can't meet its
energy demand for decades, at least, without a lot of coal. Deploying coal gasification technology at power plants such as
Edwardsport could be a crucial first step toward solving that conflict, supporters say, because capturing CO{-2} from conventional
coal plants is likely to be prohibitively expensive. "If those (pulverized coal) plants go ahead, it is extremely unlikely carbon will ever
be captured from them," says Doug Cortez, who heads a clean energy consulting firm in California. But with gasification plants, it's
more likely, he says.
Air pollution causes terminal extinction
Salvador, 2007. (Lourdes Salvador, Writer and Social Advocate for American Chronicle. "Human Extinction,")
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/24238
The most common pattern of macroevolutionary trends is extinction. In short “when a species is no longer adapted to a changed
environment, it may die. Extinction seems, in fact, to be the ultimate fate of all species” (Relethford, 2005). One has to wonder the
fate of the human race as the world becomes more and more toxic and people become more ill. Are 60% (Ray & Oakley, 2003) of
Americans taking psychiatric medications because they are really mentally ill or is it our society that is sick and we the victims of
trying to adapt to a bad environment? How can we justify that 60% is a MAJORITY of the population that is labeled as mentally ill?
How long can we deny the damage of modern pollution to the human body before we take action? How long can we sustain
reproductive damage before we can no longer reproduce and have children to share our tales of an earlier generation with?
Occasionally I have heard statements such as “we will evolve to tolerate air pollution.” Such statements are absurdities. Natural
selection only operates on variations that are present. If no genetic variation occurs to aid in breathing polluted air, natural selection
will not help us. Even in cases where genetic variation is present, the environment may change too quickly for us to respond to natural
selection. All we have to do is examine the fossil record to see how inaccurate this misconception is—that 99% of all past species are
extinct shows us that natural selection obviously doesn't always work” (Relethford, 2005).
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
10/18
1AC 10/
Air Pollution Decimates Honeybee Population – Causes Colony Collapse Disorder
Eilperin, 2008 (Juliet Eilperin, Washington Post Staff Writer, “Air Pollution Impedes Bees' Ability to Find Flowers” Washington Post
Scientists already knew that scent-bearing hydrocarbon molecules released by flowers can be destroyed when they come into contact
with ozone and other pollutants. Environmental sciences professor Jose D. Fuentes at the University of Virginia -- working with
graduate students Quinn S. McFrederick and James C. Kathilankal -- used a mathematical model to determine how flowers' scents
travel with the wind and how quickly they come into contact with pollutants that can destroy them. They described their results in the
March issue of the journal Atmospheric Environment. In the prevailing conditions before the 1800s, the researchers calculated that a
flower's scent could travel between 3,280 feet and 4,000 feet, Fuentes said in an interview, but today, that scent might travel 650 feet
to 1,000 feet in highly polluted areas such as the District of Columbia, Los Angeles or Houston. "That's where we basically have all
the problems," Fuentes said, adding that ozone levels are particularly high during summer. "The impacts of pollution on pollinator
activity are pronounced during the summer months." This phenomenon triggers a cycle, the authors noted, in which the pollinators
have trouble finding sufficient food, and as a result their populations decline. That, in turn, translates into decreased pollination and
keeps flowering plants, including many fruits and vegetables, from proliferating. Fuentes said scientists now have a more sophisticated
understanding of the signals for which insects are searching, and that air pollution rapidly eliminates as much as 90 percent of flowers'
aroma. "We now know what the pollinators are looking for when they're actually looking for the flowers," he said. Most bees have
poor eyesight, which makes scent particularly important, the researchers wrote. Since 2006, honeybee colonies in the United States
have been suffering from a widespread phenomenon known as colony collapse disorder (CCD), in which adult worker bees abandon
an otherwise-healthy hive. John P. Burand, an associate professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst who is studying bee
colony collapses, said the effects of air pollution described in the new study are probably not directly related to that phenomenon. But,
he added in an e-mail: "There is no doubt that air pollution and air quality is having an effect on bees and other pollinators. It appears
there is more than one factor that is contributing to the CCD phenomenon we are seeing with bees, and certainly air pollution in some
fashion may be playing a role."
The Impact is Extinction – Bees are Key to Our Survival – and Colony Collapse Disorder is the Root Cause
Watson, 2007. (Joseph Watson, Prison Planet News. “Ecological Apocalypse: Why Are All the Bees Dying” April/10/2007
The alarming decline in bee populations across the United States and Europe represents a potential ecological apocalypse, an
environmental catastrophe that could collapse the food chain and wipe out humanity. Who and what is behind this flagrant abuse of
the eco-system? Many people don't realize the vital role bees play in maintaining a balanced eco-system. According to experts, if bees
were to become extinct then humanity would perish after just four years. "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then
man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man," said
Albert Einstein. Others would say four years is alarmist and that man would find other food sources, but the fact remains that the
disappearance of bees is potentially devastating to agriculture and most plant life. Reports that bee populations are declining at rates of
up to 80% in areas of the U.S. and Europe should set alarm bells ringing and demand immediate action on behalf of environmental
organizations. Experts are calling the worrying trend "colony collapse disorder" or CCD. "Bee numbers on parts of the east coast and
in Texas have fallen by more than 70 percent, while California has seen colonies drop by 30 to 60 percent," reports AFP .
"Approximately 40 percent of my 2,000 colonies are currently dead and this is the greatest winter colony mortality I have ever
experienced in my 30 years of beekeeping," apiarist Gene Brandi, from the California State Beekeepers Association, told Congress
recently. The article states that U.S. bee colonies have been dropping since 1980 and the number of beekeepers have halved.
Scientists are thus far stumped as to what is causing the decline, ruling out parasites but leaning towards some kind of new toxin or
chemical used in agriculture as being responsible. "Experts believe that the large-scale use of genetically modified plants in the US
could be a factor," reports Germany's Spiegal Online . Bee populations throughout Germany have simultaneously dropped 25% and up
to 80% in some areas. Poland, Switzerland and Spain are reporting similar declines. Studies have shown that bees are not dying in the
hive, something is causing them to lose their sense of orientation so that they cannot return to the hive. Depleted hives are not being
raided for their honey by other insects, which normally happens when bees naturally die in the winter, clearly suggesting some kind of
poisonous toxin is driving them away.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
11/18
1AC 11/
And continued research and development of clean coal are fundamental to the future of the coal industry
The European Commission 2001 (12/20, http://europa.eu.int/comm/energy/coal/fostering_en.pdf)
We should keep the coal option open because of the abundance and diversity of resources, and because it is easily available and costcompetitive. In addition, coal has a stabilising effect on energy markets:it played a leading role in solving previous oil crises and
remains available as a substitution fuel. Coal can contribute to security of supply while also considering climate change, provided
advanced clean coal technology is sufficiently developed and implemented. European industry, with the support of several
Community programmes, has made crucial advances in reducing pollutant emissions;all efforts are now focused on CO2 abatement.
Accordingly, research,development and deployment of clean coal technology are fundamental for the future contribution of coal to
security in energy supply.
And a decrease in access to coal would hurt railroads
AP, 07 (Associated Press, December 7, 2007)
(AP) The nation's two largest railroads have hauled record amounts of coal from the mines in northeast Wyoming and southeast
Montana this year, but Union Pacific Corp. and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. still struggle to keep up with utility demand and
existing contracts. If utilities run low on coal during the high demand of winter, they might be forced to buy fuel on the open market at
higher prices that could be passed on to customers, said Jim Owen, with the utility trade group Edison Electric Institute. "It's been a
fairly contentious issue in the last 18 months," said Owen, whose group represents nearly three-quarters of all U.S. utilities. The
problems began in May 2005 when two derailments on the main line leading out of the Powder River Basin revealed that accumulated
coal dust in the rail bed made the line unstable. Repairs disrupted traffic and slowed deliveries for months. Then last winter, some
utilities worried about depleting their onsite stockpiles, and one, Entergy Corp., in April sued UP over the delivery problems. Entergy
says it lost "tens of millions of dollars," and its lawsuit is pending in Pulaski County Circuit Court in Arkansas. "Utilities have made
no secret of the fact that deliveries have been a problem," Owen said. Some utilities last winter even imported coal from overseas to
help make up for the Wyoming delivery problems. The U.S. Energy Information Administration said 30.5 million tons of coal was
imported in 2005, and that was up 11.7 percent over the previous year. The delivery problems, spot market purchases and imports cost
the utilities _ "and ultimately their customers" _ more money, Owen said. The problems have eased somewhat this year, but Owen
said utilities were still not getting all the coal they want and contracted for. A mild winter this year could ease concerns, he said.
And railroads are key to lower food prices
Laur, 98 (Ed, vice president of Attebury Grain, Inc, Federal News Service, 3/31, lexis)
U.S. agriculture is undergoing a major transition, from being heavily influenced by government to one of less government and more
market freedom. The 1996 farm law that opened the door to greater planting flexibility for producers also phases out the government's
financial support of farmers, challenging agriculture to expand farm income from the marketplace and to aggressively pursue export
markets. To achieve that outcome, reliable transportation services of all kinds are an absolute must. Predictable access to markets -whether to ports to load oceangoing vessels or to poultry and hog farms or flour mills to keep products growing and moving into
consumer channels -- is highly necessary if this new farm policy is to be successful. If grain and its derivative products cannot be
delivered in a predictable manner, domestic and global customers will go elsewhere as we watch our markets shrink. U.S. farmers
expect and deserve the support of Congress and the federal government in assuring reasonable market access and predictability of
transportation service. How important is predictable rail service to U.S. agriculture? Upwards of 50 percent of all commercial grain
movements to markets are carried by rail. In some western growing areas, it is not unusual to have 75 percent or more of shipments
moving by rail. Railroads link the major production regions of the Midwest with processing, livestock and poultry operations on both
east and west coasts, as well as all the ports. In the long-haul movements required to keep grain flowing reliably from production
regions to points of consumption, rail is often the only viable economic alternative. Many grain shippers are located beyond effective
trucking distances from markets and far from navigable waterway transportation.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
12/18
1AC 12
Increased food prices cause Chinese econ collapse
Lester Brown, 1995, founded the Earth Policy Institute. 23 honorary degrees, a MacArthur Fellowship, the 1987 United Nations' Environment Prize, the 1989
World Wide Fund for Nature Gold Medal, and the 1994 Blue Planet. , “Who Will Feed China?” p. 133-4, Worldwatch Institute, KAPUSTINA
In the new era, political leaders will be called on to govern under unfamiliar conditions. Their understanding of the world, their
values, and their priorities were shaped in a far different age. With the new era comes the need for different priorities in the use of
public resources- priorities that recognize food scarcity rather than military aggression as the principal threat to security.
In an integrated economy where expanding human demand for food is colliding with the earth’s natural limits, population growth
anywhere limits the ability of popular opinion, it will not be in the devastation of poverty-stricken Somalia or Haiti but in the
booming economy of China that we will see the inevitable collision between the expanding demand for food and the limits of
some of the earth’s most basic natural systems. In addition to raising food prices, the failure to arrest the deterioration of our basic
life-support systems could bring economic growth to a halt, dropping incomes and food purchasing power throughout the world. It
could lead to political unrest and a swelling of hungry migrants across national borders. Rising food prices and the associated
economic and political disruptions within China could bring that nation’s economic miracle to a premature end.
Chinese economic collapse leads to World War Three – multiple scenarios
Tom Plate, professor at UCLA, 6-28-03, ““Neo-Cons A Bigger Risk to Bush Than China,” Straits Times [Tandet]
But imagine a China disintegrating - on its own, without neo-conservative or Central Intelligence Agency prompting, much less
outright military invasion - because the economy (against all predictions) suddenly collapses. That would knock Asia into chaos. A
massive flood of refugees would head for Indonesia and other places with poor border controls, which don't want them and can't
handle them; some in Japan might lick their lips at the prospect of World War II Revisited and look to annex a slice of China. That
would send Singapore and Malaysia - once occupied by Japan - into nervous breakdowns. Meanwhile, India might make a grab for
Tibet, and Pakistan for Kashmir. Then you can say hello to World War III, Asia-style. That's why wise policy encourages Chinese
stability, security and economic growth - the very direction the White House now seems to prefer.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
13/18
1AC 13/
Contention 2 is Science Diplomacy
High skilled workers are key to science diplomacy – solves disease, environmental decline, and global conflict
Pickering 10 (Thomas R., Advisory Council – Civilian Research and Development Foundation, and Dr. Peter Agre, Director – Johns
Hopkins Malaria Research Institute and President – American Association for the Advancement of Science, “More opportunities
needed for U.S. researchers to work with their foreign counterparts”, Partnership for a Secure America, 2-9,
http://www.psaonline.org/article.php?id=634)
Science, an international enterprise that relies on a lively exchange of ideas and data, can help build trust and expand understanding when
government-to-government contacts may be strained. The North Korea visit, plus the first-ever U.S. science envoys, represent a fine beginning to a new
era of international research cooperation. But the White House, the State Department and Congress must do far more to bolster science
diplomacy. In particular, the U.S. government should quickly and significantly increase the number of H1-B visas being approved for
specialized foreign workers such as doctors, scientists and engineers. Their contributions are critical to improving human welfare as well as our
economy. Foreign scientists working or studying in U.S. universities also become informal goodwill ambassadors for America globally an important benefit in the developing world, where senior scientists and engineers often enter national politics. More broadly, we
urgently need to expand and deepen links between the U.S. and foreign scientific communities to advance solutions to common
challenges. Climate change, sustainable development, pandemic disease, malnutrition, protection for oceans and wildlife, national
security and innovative energy technologies all demand solutions that draw on science and technology. Fortunately, U.S. technological
leadership is admired worldwide, suggesting a way to promote dialogue with countries where we otherwise lack access and leverage. A
June 2004 Zogby International poll commissioned by the Arab American Institute found that only 11 percent of Moroccans surveyed had a favorable overall view of the
United States - but 90 percent had a positive view of U.S. science and technology. Only 15 percent of Jordanians had a positive overall view, but 83 percent registered
admiration for U.S. science and technology. Similarly, Pew polling data from 43 countries show that favorable views of U.S. science and technology exceed overall
views of the United States by an average of 23 points. The recent mission to North Korea exemplified the vast potential of science for U.S. diplomacy. Within the
scientific community, after all, journals routinely publish articles co-written by scientists from different nations, and scholars convene frequent conferences to extend
those ties. Science demands an intellectually honest atmosphere, peer review and a common language for professional discourse. Basic values of transparency, vigorous
inquiry and respectful debate are all inherent to science. Nations that cooperate on science strengthen the same values that support peaceful
conflict resolution and improved public safety. U.S. and Soviet nongovernmental organizations contributed to a thaw in the Cold War
through scientific exchanges, with little government support other than travel visas. The U.S. government is off to a good start in leveraging
science diplomacy, with 43 bilateral umbrella science and technology agreements now in force. The Obama administration further
elevated science engagement, beginning with the president's June speech in Cairo. Then, in November, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appointed three science
envoys to foster new partnerships and address common challenges, especially within Muslim-majority countries. She also announced the Global Technology and
Innovation Fund, through which the Overseas Private Investment Corporation will spur private-sector investments in science and technology industries abroad.
Eco collapse causes extinction
Jayawardena 9 (Asitha, London South Bank University, “We Are a Threat to All Life on Earth”, Indicator, 7-17, http://www.indicator.org.uk/?p=55)
Sloep and Van Dam-Mieras (1995) reveal why the natural environment is so important for all life on Earth. For all organisms, it is the
source of energy and raw materials for growth, reproduction and development. And it is the transfer of energy and (re)cycling of
matter that keeps the biosphere machinery running. However, they warn that the present day human-induced infringements are large enough to
upset the ecosystems, threatening all life on Earth. Finally, they recommend that we humans should examine our infringements, investigate their destructive effects and determine how best to
repair them or avoid them in the future. In this post Asitha Jayawardena has bases his discussion around this Sloep and Van Dam-Mieras (1995) article. (For enhanced readability, the main reference (i.e. Sloep and Van DamMieras, 1995) is usually mentioned at the beginning of a section only. My position is clearly differentiated, usually by way of using ‘I’ or ‘my’.) Sustain what? Sustainability, or more precisely human sustainability, is a buzz
word today. But sustain what? Reitan’s (2005: 77) answer to this question is, ‘to sustain successful societies.’ However, he emphasises that, even such an anthropocentric focus leads to a requirement of ecocentric sensitivity
at all levels, local to global. The need for an eco-focus is emphasised by a number of other scholars, too. For example, Glasbergen and Blowers (1995), in Maiteny and Parker (2002: 27), view sustainability as ‘a scientific
sustainability is ‘ultimately about bio-ecological processes remaining
functional and viable and keeping human activities to a level where they continue to be capable of supporting our lives and wellbeing,
both locally and globally.’ They further remind us that, for existence, nature does not depend on humans but humans depend on
nature, which is their environment. The key word here is the ‘environment.’‘The system that destroys its environment destroys itself,’
principle indicating the notion of natural systems enduring over time.’ For Maiteny and Parker (2002: 27),
declares the Inevitable Rule (Wilden, 1987: 86, in Maiteny and Parker, 2002). Therefore, Maiteny and Parker (2002) propose that ‘human sustainability is… increasingly dependent on developing cultural worldviews that
keep natural/ecological systems in a condition that can continue to support human life….’ These scholars’ point of convergence is that an essential requirement for human sustainability is the existence of a healthy planet. But
why is the environment so important for life on Earth? The natural environment’s importance to life on Earth Sloep and Van Dam-Mieras (1995) explain in detail why the natural environment is so important for life on Earth.
It is from the environment that the living organisms of all species import the energy and raw material required for growth, development and reproduction. In almost all ecosystems plants, the most important primary
producers, carry out photosynethesis, capturing sunlight and storing it as chemical energy. They absorb nutrients from their environment. When herbivores (i.e. plant-eating animals or organisms) eat these plants possessing
chemical energy, matter and energy are transferred ‘one-level up.’ The same happens when predators (i.e. animals of a higher level) eat these herbivores or when predators of even higher levels eat these predators. Therefore,
in ecosystems, food webs transfer energy and matter and various organisms play different roles in sustaining these transfers. Such transfers are possible due to the remarkable similarity in all organisms’ composition and
major metabolic pathways. In fact all organisms except plants can potentially use each other as energy and nutrient sources; plants, however, depend on sunlight for energy. Sloep and Van Dam-Mieras (1995) further reveal
two key principles governing the biosphere with respect to the transfer of energy and matter in ecosystems. Firstly, the energy flow in ecosystems from photosynthetic plants (generally speaking, autotrophs) to nonphotosynthetic organisms (generally speaking, heterotrophs) is essentially linear. In each step part of energy is lost to the ecosystem as non-usable heat, limiting the number of transformation steps and thereby the number of
levels in a food web. Secondly, unlike the energy flow, the matter flow in ecosystems is cyclic. For photosynthesis plants need carbon dioxide as well as minerals and sunlight. For the regeneration of carbon dioxide plants,
the primary producers, depend on heterotrophs, who exhale carbon dioxide when breathing. Like carbon, many other elements such as nitrogen and sulphur flow in cyclic manner in ecosystems. However, it is photosynthesis,
and in the final analysis, solar energy that powers the mineral cycles.
Ecosystems are under threat and so are we
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
14/18
1AC 14/
Diseases cause extinction
South China Morning Post, 1996 (1/4, l/n)
Despite the importance of the discovery of the "facilitating" cell, it is not what Dr Ben-Abraham wants to talk about. There is a much
more pressing medical crisis at hand - one he believes the world must be alerted to: the possibility of a virus deadlier than HIV. If this
makes Dr Ben-Abraham sound like a prophet of doom, then he makes no apology for it. AIDS, the Ebola outbreak which killed more
than 100 people in Africa last year, the flu epidemic that has now affected 200,000 in the former Soviet Union - they are all, according
to Dr Ben-Abraham, the "tip of the iceberg". Two decades of intensive study and research in the field of virology have convinced him
of one thing: in place of natural and man-made disasters or nuclear warfare, humanity could face extinction because of a single virus,
deadlier than HIV. "An airborne virus is a lively, complex and dangerous organism," he said. "It can come from a rare animal or
from anywhere and can mutate constantly. If there is no cure, it affects one person and then there is a chain reaction and it is
unstoppable. It is a tragedy waiting to happen."That may sound like a far-fetched plot for a Hollywood film, but Dr Ben -Abraham
said history has already proven his theory. Fifteen years ago, few could have predicted the impact of AIDS on the world . Ebola has
had sporadic outbreaks over the past 20 years and the only way the deadly virus - which turns internal organs into liquid - could be
contained was because it was killed before it had a chance to spread. Imagine, he says, if it was closer to home: an outbreak of that
scale in London, New York or Hong Kong. It could happen anytime in the next 20 years - theoretically, it could happen tomorrow.
The shock of the AIDS epidemic has prompted virus experts to admit "that something new is indeed happening and that the threat of a
deadly viral outbreak is imminent", said Joshua Lederberg of the Rockefeller University in New York, at a recent conference. He
added that the problem was "very serious and is getting worse". Dr Ben- Abraham said: "Nature isn't benign. The survival of the
human species is not a preordained evolutionary programme. Abundant sources of genetic variation exist for viruses to learn how
to mutate and evade the immune system." He cites the 1968 Hong Kong flu outbreak as an example of how viruses have outsmarted
human intelligence. And as new "mega-cities" are being developed in the Third World and rainforests are destroyed, disease-carrying
animals and insects are forced into areas of human habitation. "This raises the very real possibility that lethal, mysterious viruses
would, for the first time, infect humanity at a large scale and imperil the survival of the human race," he said.
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
15/18
2AC CARDS
Species moral ob
Bhavani Prakash 9/7/2010: Witness to Execution: How We Failed to Save the Yangtze River Dolphin.
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2010/09/07/witness-to-execution-how-we-failed-to-save-the-yangtze-river-dolphin/
In 2008, Turvey returned to interview the fishing communities along the Yangtze. To his surprise and consternation, “younger
fishermen from the same communities had not only never seen baiji or paddlefish, but had never even heard of them.” His study
called, “Rapidly Shifting Baselines in Yangtze Fishing Communities and Local Memory of Extinct Species” in Conservation Biology
showed that extinct animals are surprisingly forgotten quickly.
It would seem that this loss of local cultural memory has spilled over to mainstream media as well, where the baiji is hardly ever
mentioned anymore. We can’t let this collective memory loss happen, if we have to keep our hopes of saving the thousands of species
at the brink of never coming back.
The fate of the river dolphins is symptomatic of the freshwater crisis facing the Asian river systems – which are collapsing due to
climate change, population pressures and industrial development. The larger issue of how we protect and restore the river waters of
Asia will hold the key to the fate of many endangered species.
If you’re looking for a message of hope in the book – there isn’t one. ”Someday it will all be over,” are Turvey’s final words. And
they come as a shock.
Protecting a unique, endangered species is the moral responsibility of the world. If at all there is something that Turvey teaches us, it is
this: the effort and energy shown by a few individuals like him can make a difference, if done in good time. It was too late for the
baiji, but maybe, just maybe, there is a tiny window of opportunity for the other river dolphins of the world.
Fitz 9 (Marshall, Director of Immigration Policy – Center for American Progress and JD – University of Virginia Law, “Prosperous
Immigrants, Prosperous America”, Center for American Progress, December,
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/12/pdf/highskilled_immigrants.pdf)
Immigrants who come to the United States to study at our best universities and then go to work at our nation’s leading companies
contribute directly and immediately to our nation’s global economic competitiveness. High-skilled immigrants who have started their
own high-tech companies have created hundreds of thousands of new jobs and achieved company sales in the hundreds of billions of
dollars. Yet despite the critical importance of such immigrants to the nation’s economic success in a global economy, our current highskilled immigration system is a two-fold failure: arbitrary restrictions prevent companies from effectively tapping the full potential of
this talent pool, while inadequate safeguards fail to prevent against wage depression and worker mistreatment. The reforms outlined in
this paper will help establish a 21st century immigration system that serves the nation’s economic interests and upholds our
responsibilities in a global economy. Of course, our current immigration policies have failed the country on many fronts beyond the
high-skilled policy arena. And the urgent need for comprehensive, systemic reforms is beyond question. The national debate has
understandably focused up to this point on the most visible and most highly charged issue—ending illegal immigration. Solving that
riddle and ending illegal immigration is indisputably a national imperative and must be at the heart of a comprehensive overhaul of
our system. But reforms to our high-skilled immigration system are an important component of that broader reform and integral to a
progressive growth strategy.1 Science, technology, and innovation have been—and will continue to be—keys to U.S. economic
growth. The United States must remain on the cutting edge of technological innovation if we are to continue driving the most dynamic
economic engine in the world,2 and U.S. companies must be able to recruit international talent to effectively compete in the
international innovation arena. To be certain, educating and training a 21st century U.S. workforce is a paramount national priority
and the cornerstone of progressive growth. Improving access to topflight education for everyone in this country will be the foundation
for our continued global leadership and prosperity. 3 But it is shortsighted in a globalized economy to expect that we can fill all of our
labor needs with a homegrown workforce. In fact, our current educational demographics point to growing shortfalls in some of the
skills needed in today’s economy.4 And as global economic integration deepens, the source points for skill sets will spread—such as
green engineering in Holland or nanotechnology in Israel—the breadth of skills needed to drive innovation will expand, and global
labor pools must become more mobile. Reforming our high-skilled immigration system will stimulate innovation, enhance
competitiveness, and help cultivate a flexible, highly-skilled U.S. workforce while protecting U.S. workers from globalization’s
destabilizing effects. Our economy has benefitted enormously from being able to tap the international pool of human capital. 5
Arbitrary limitations on our ability to continue doing so are ultimately self-defeating: Companies will lose out to their competitors
making them less profitable, less productive, and less able to grow; or they will move their operations abroad with all the attendant
negative economic consequences. And the federal treasury loses tens of billions of dollars in tax revenues by restricting the
opportunities for high-skilled foreign workers to remain in the United States. 6
Ajay Malshe (Cornell Law School J.D. 2009; Goodwin Procter Fellow at the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition in
Washington D.C.) 2010 “FROM OBSOLETE TO ESSENTIAL: HOW REFORMING OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS CAN
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Boomsticks Aff
Gonzo
16/18
STIMULATE AND STRENGTHEN THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY”. Albany Government Law Review. 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Malshe.pdf
The immigration process in the United States is broken. Poorly designed and ineffectively implemented, the current scheme has
created a quagmire of backlogs and oversubscription. Those seeking admission to the United States face a daunting and sometimes
impossible journey. Employers cannot hire the foreign labor they need to complement the native workforce, boost overall production,
and compete in the global marketplace. Over the years, many companies have resorted to outsourcing portions of their business to
countries with more amicable immigration schemes, just to meet their labor needs.1
Against the backdrop of a broken immigration system, the United States has suffered through one of the worst economic crises in
nearly a century. 2The credit markets are frozen and the fundamentals of the economy are weak. Comprehensive immigration reform
can provide the United States with a tremendous catalyst for recovery. Congress must revise immigration laws to admit highly
qualified foreign workers to the country and keep them here. These immigrants will stimulate innovation and create jobs for
Americans, providing a pathway to economic restoration.
It is in the national interest to have a properly regulated system of legal immigration. A good immigration scheme “enhances the
benefits of immigration while protecting against potential harms.” 3By removing the backlogs, quotas, and oversubscriptions that
plague our current scheme, Congress can strengthen the economy. This article demonstrates that immigration is beneficial and
explains how reform of the current scheme can revitalize the U.S. economy.
Ajay Malshe (Cornell Law School J.D. 2009; Goodwin Procter Fellow at the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition in
Washington D.C.) 2010 “FROM OBSOLETE TO ESSENTIAL: HOW REFORMING OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS CAN
STIMULATE AND STRENGTHEN THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY”. Albany Government Law Review. 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Malshe.pdf
To revitalize and strengthen the U.S. economy, it is necessary to recruit the best and brightest foreign workers. These are the
immigrants who will complement the native labor force, stimulate innovation and production, and create jobs for Americans. While
these workers typically arrive in the United States through the H-1B visa program, the majority of them will attempt to obtain
permanent residency while they are here. To end the current recession and strengthen the U.S. economy, Congress must begin by
simplifying the process for immigrant workers. This is why Congress should exempt certain high-priority workers in fields of great
importance from the employment-visa quota and preference category system.
The employment-visa exemption would apply primarily to immigrants with advanced degrees in STEM fields that are crucial to this
country’s attempt at economic recovery. The CIR Bill of 2006 also suggested this mechanism, exempting from the immigrant visa
scheme aliens with certain advanced degrees in the STEM fields that had been working the previous three years in the United States as
nonimmigrants.179 When necessary, the Department of Labor can also exempt immigrants that work in fields of critical shortage.180
The Department of Labor should have little difficulty identifying fields of critical shortage through employment surveys and
monitoring fields that traditionally suffer from shortages of native labor. However, critical shortages vary from time to time and
should not be part of the permanent cap-exempt structure.181
Other bills have suggested creating a new category of immigrant visas for STEM professionals rather than an exemption.182An
exemption, however, is preferable. A new visa category would not go far enough to revitalize the economy—it would still be subject
to the quota system, resulting in oversubscription. Highly skilled workers who are already working in the United States should be
encouraged to make a commitment to the United States by becoming permanent residents and eventually citizens. Immigration policy
must prioritize long-term interests, which means attracting and retaining highly skilled workers so that they can continue to contribute
to the economy.
Ajay Malshe (Cornell Law School J.D. 2009; Goodwin Procter Fellow at the Capital Area Immigrants’ Rights Coalition in
Washington D.C.) 2010 “FROM OBSOLETE TO ESSENTIAL: HOW REFORMING OUR IMMIGRATION LAWS CAN
STIMULATE AND STRENGTHEN THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY”. Albany Government Law Review. 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Malshe.pdf
Other bills have suggested creating a new category of immigrant visas for STEM professionals rather than an exemption.182An
exemption, however, is preferable. A new visa category would not go far enough to revitalize the economy—it would still be subject
to the quota system, resulting in oversubscription. Highly skilled workers who are already working in the United States should be
encouraged to make a commitment to the United States by becoming permanent residents and eventually citizens. Immigration policy
must prioritize long-term interests, which means attracting and retaining highly skilled workers so that they can continue to contribute
to the economy.
Seth R. Leech & Emma Greenwood 10 Leech-Partner with Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP and is a member of the Firm?s
Immigration and International Trade and Business Practice Groups and adjunct professor of immigration law at Albany Law School.
Greenwood-Graduate of the law program at Oxford University in the United Kingdom. Keeping America Competitive: A Proposal to
Eliminate the Employment-Based Immigrant Visa Quota. Albany Law Review Vol. 3 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Spring_Book_Leech.pdf
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Boomsticks Aff
Gonzo
17/18
Bill Gates pointed to immigration as one of the key areas for reform and commented on the enormous value of immigrants to U.S.
economic development. 8 He said, “Now we face a critical shortage of scientific talent, and there’s only one way to solve that crisis
today. Open our doors to highly talented scientists and engineers who want to live, work, and pay taxes here.”
9 Many American employers believe that having a global talent pool to choose from is critical to their ability to compete in a global
economy.10 “Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international
patent applications filed from the United States in 2006.”11 It is apparent that in research and development, these foreign workers are
important drivers of innovation and resulting economic growth, even when the economy begins to slow. “The departure of top talent
in technology and science may . . . undercut the prospects for [economic] recovery . . . .”12 United States companies rely heavily on
foreign nationals living in and outside the United States, and for example, the contribution of inventors with Chinese-heritage names
on international patent applications filed from within the United States was 16.8% in 2006.13
Seth R. Leech & Emma Greenwood 10 Leech-Partner with Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP and is a member of the Firm?s
Immigration and International Trade and Business Practice Groups and adjunct professor of immigration law at Albany Law School.
Greenwood-Graduate of the law program at Oxford University in the United Kingdom. Keeping America Competitive: A Proposal to
Eliminate the Employment-Based Immigrant Visa Quota. Albany Law Review Vol. 3 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Spring_Book_Leech.pdf
This section examines the hardships suffered by EB immigrants resulting from long delays caused by the annual quota. These
hardships to the intending immigrant’s personal and professional life are the chief reason that the United States is not the attractive
destination it once was for talented foreign workers. This is the reason that these immigrants are choosing to immigrate to other
countries and benefit their economies.71
The anxiety felt by an intending immigrant, in what may be a ten-year wait from the time that the permanent immigration process
begins before entering the safe harbor of having the final Adjustment of Status pending, is well-justified. Small errors can derail the
entire process and cause the ultimate denial of his or her green card. This is devastating for immigrants who have spent the majority of
their professional lives in the United States, have children who are U.S. citizens that know only the U.S. way of life, and otherwise
have become strong members of their local communities.
There are many reasons for denial, abandonment, revocation, or withdrawal of a green card application, which are entirely beyond the
intending immigrant’s control. Some of these reasons include intervening changes of U.S. immigration policy or the U.S.
government’s error, or minor errors in the employer or employer’s representatives’ paperwork, not discovered until many years into
the process. For these reasons, many immigrants put some aspects of their lives on hold including starting families, pursuing further
education, or purchasing homes, until they have acquired a green card and know for certain they will be able to stay for the long term.
In addition to these personal challenges, the intending immigrant often faces legal obstacles which prevent him or her from realizing
his or her full professional potential. Professional development may be difficult because of nonimmigrant visa restrictions or
restrictions in the permanent immigration process itself—the immigrant must stay in the position that was the subject of the labor
certification, or one that is very similar, until final issuance of the green card.
72 The basis for this problem is that labor certifications are both geographically- and position-specific.73
Seth R. Leech & Emma Greenwood 10 Leech-Partner with Whiteman Osterman & Hanna LLP and is a member of the Firm?s
Immigration and International Trade and Business Practice Groups and adjunct professor of immigration law at Albany Law School.
Greenwood-Graduate of the law program at Oxford University in the United Kingdom. Keeping America Competitive: A Proposal to
Eliminate the Employment-Based Immigrant Visa Quota. Albany Law Review Vol. 3 2010.
http://www.albanygovernmentlawreview.org/files/Spring_Book_Leech.pdf
Floodgate arguments are irrelevant in the EB immigrant visa context because both the law and the economy put numerous
checks, beyond the immigrant visa quotas, on EB immigrants. The PERM labor certification system, the primary means of
EB immigration, provides substantial protections to the American workforce. The PERM system requires that employers
demonstrate that there are no minimally qualified American workers available before certifying a foreign worker for
immigration. In this way, PERM acts as a filter to ensure that only those that meet a specific labor need are allowed to
immigrate. The labor certification system exempts immigrant visa categories for aliens of Extraordinary Ability,
Multinational Managers, Outstanding Researchers, and those whose presence is in America’s national interest. The
certification system allows only those who meet very strictly enforced standards and those who are presumed to be of
benefit to the country, to immigrate permanently. The current category-based system filters in only those who will
contribute to the U.S. economy. Because of the strict standards embedded in the EB immigrant categories, the caps are
redundant.
PERM ensures that employers do not undercut or diminish American wages by requiring that employers pay immigrant
employees the prevailing wage. If immigrants were undercutting wages, one would expect that the numbers of EB
immigration applications would increase in this recessionary economy as employers seek to save money through a
cheaper labor pool, or to at least remain constant regardless of the economy. However, it is apparent that the reverse is
true. Though the statistical information for levels of labor certification and EB immigrant visa submissions is not readily
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells
USF Debate 2010-2011
Gonzo
Boomsticks Aff
18/18
available for the fiscal year as of writing, it is instructive to consider the effect of the economy on the recent level of H-1B
applications. As the economy grew in the years up until late 2008, there were not enough H-1B nonimmigrant visas to fill
companies’ needs. Consequently, American companies had to delay expansion, expand on a smaller level, or even move
their operations overseas in order to ensure that they had the labor needed. As a result of the recent recession, this is the
first year that the H-1B cap has not been met. In fact, almost four months into the H-1B filing season for fiscal year 2010,
only about half of the H-1B numbers have been used.
183 In the previous two years all available H-1B visas were applied for on the first day of the filing season.184 The available
statistics clearly show that PERM green card applications are down.185 With adequate laws that regulate the quality of EB
immigrants into the United States and the recent demonstration that the economy performs a similar regulatory function,
there is no need for a cap.
Skilled immigration key to the economy and broadband
Marguerite Reardon (a CNET News reporter since 2004, covering cell phone services, broadband, citywide Wi-Fi, the Net neutrality
debate, as well as the ongoing consolidation of the phone companies) 6/30/2010: Immigration and tech: What do you think?
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20009335-266.html
President Obama has acknowledged that growth in the tech sector will be a crucial contributor and enabler for growth in the U.S.
economy. That's why he has put his support behind the National Broadband Plan, a road map for communications policy over the next
decade, drafted by the Federal Communications Commission.
This 10-year plan, which calls for getting broadband Internet service to all Americans, is seen as a major policy step toward creating
more jobs and stimulating more investment in the U.S. in the future. Compete America says access to skilled foreign workers will be
important to achieve many of the goals laid out in the National Broadband Plan.
"The American economy has always benefited from the contributions of the highly educated, regardless of where they were born,"
said Frances Cox, a spokeswoman for Compete America. "We're talking about the innovators and job creators our country should be
welcoming with open arms--especially during tough economic times."
For every action there is an equal and opposite government program – Bob Wells