1NC
1NC K
The plan is part of an ongoing attempt to neoliberalize gambling – offload
responsibility but get all the benefits of taxation
Reith 2008 – professor at University of Glasgow (Gerda, “Reflections on Responsibility”
Journal of Gambling Issues: Issue 22, December 2008
http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue22/pdfs/01.1intro.pdf)
The emphasis on the responsibility of the individual player and/or the gambling provider,
rather than on, say, the responsibility of state regulation, dovetails with wider political and
fiscal policies of neo-liberalism, with its emphasis on individual freedom and choice. Its
underlying ideology is exemplified in Milton Friedman’s (1980) famous maxim "free to
choose," and it is characterized by the state’s reduced intervention in social and economic
life, its decreasing responsibility for the provision of public services, and its promotion of
competitive enterprise. In particular, this minimal state is characterized by increasing
unwillingness to levy unpopular taxation on voting populations. In the revenue vacuum
created by such policies, the economic utility of gambling as a source of revenue is
clear (Abt et al. 1985). And so, as the presence of the state in the regulation of public life
recedes, its involvement in the business of gambling increases, creating a relationship that
has seen a proliferation and liberalization of commercial gambling throughout Western
economies over the past three decades. The reduction of external governance that is central
in neo-liberalism is accompanied by an increasing emphasis on individual self-control. Here,
the requirement is for individuals to control their consumption through behaviour that is
rational, selflimiting, and based on informed and prudent decision-making. Such features
are the foundation of the neo-liberal ideal: the sovereign consumer (O’Malley, 1996;
Rose, 1999). So, crucially, the corollary of all this emphasis on freedom and choice is the
exercise of self-control on the part of the rational—or responsible—consumer. As one writer
has put it, in order to be free at all, individuals must first demonstrate that they are
"capable of responsibly exercising that freedom through systems of domination" (Dean,
1999, p. 165; [italics added). In this way, responsible or "appropriate" consumption has
come to be regarded as behaviour that contributes to both individual and social health, as
well as demonstrating moral well-being. The emphasis within neo-liberal policies typically
represents a shift away from a focus on what can be termed production side issues,
concerned with, for example, supply, availability, accessibility, and the formats of products,
and a shifting towards what can be termed consumption side issues, concerned with, for
example, the choices, freedoms, preferences, and habits of individual consumers. As a
feature of these broad socio-economic trends, the increasing liberalization and deregulation
of commercial gambling is accompanied by rising demands for selfcontrol and responsible
gambling by players themselves. Rather than resting on restrictive legislation, the onus now
rests on both individual and corporate responsibility. Gamblers are considered rational,
sovereign consumers; the gambling industry is considered a legitimate, mainstream leisure
provider; the interests of both are assumed to come together in responsible self-regulation.
The responsible gambling tropes that are found in these kinds of discourses reflect a
continued focus on the individual as both the site of gambling problems and their resolution.
Despite the apparent diffusion of responsibility among a wide range of stakeholders, the real
focus here is on individual players themselves whose actions, beliefs, and intentions are the
repository of ideas about ”appropriate” behaviour. Milton Friedman, the architect of neoliberalism, was famously scornful of the very notion of corporate or government
responsibility, arguing instead for a narrowly individualistic definition of responsible
behaviour: "What does it mean to say that government might have a responsibility?
Government can’t have a responsibility any more than business can. The only entities which
can have responsibilities are people" (Friedman, 1970, p. 32). It is not only free choice, but
also informed choice, that is crucial here, and the informed consumer is the cornerstone of
ideas about responsible gambling. The hope here is that informed choice will result in
rational, and therefore responsible, behaviour, and this hope is based on the assumption
that decisions about whether and how much to gamble should be largely left to the
individual. The individual player is also the focus of public health strategies, which aim to
provide information and education in order to facilitate informed choice and responsible
play. Indeed, such approaches have come to be almost synonymous with ideas about
responsibility themselves. However, the relationship between the two is not a necessary
one. In fact, the links are largely political, and they reflect the ideological dominance of
notions of responsibility as much as the supposed efficacy of individual responsibility as the
best strategy for improving public health. The blueprint for responsible gambling initiatives,
the Reno Model, proposed by Alex Blaszczynski, Robert Ladouceur, and Howard Shaffer
outlines such sentiments, stating that a responsible gambling program"rests upon two
fundamental principles: (1) the ultimate decision resides with the individual and represents
a choice, and (2) to properly make this decision individuals must have the opportunity to be
informed" (Blaszczynski et al., 2004, p. 311). In outlining the parameters of responsible
gambling, Blaszczynski et al. (2004) also articulate the principles of neo-liberal policies
more generally: the emphasis on individual freedom and choice, and, particularly, the
emphasis on the centrality of information for the facilitation of autonomous and rational
action. They go further down this path when they invoke the idea of civil liberties to argue
that "external organizations cannot remove an individual’s right to make decisions"
(Blaszczynski et al., 2004, p. 311), and they go further still along this path when they claim
that "responsible gambling ... rests on the principle of informed choice [which] is a
fundamental principle of human rights policies" (Blaszczynski et al., 2004, p. 312). It should
be pointed out here that this is not the case: Informed choice may be a fundamental
principle of neo-liberal ideology, but it has not yet been incorporated into the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. However, the point to be made from all this is simply that
these ideas about responsibility, freedom of choice, and information extend beyond debates
on gambling, and they are actually embedded in wider socio-economic contexts, where they
reflect current political ideologies and policies. It is no longer the prerogative of the
industry, the state, or the courts to restrict the consumption of gambling—this is now up to
the individual, who becomes responsible for his or her own fate at the tables. It is the task
of rational consumers to temper their enjoyment of the thrills of gambling with a prudent
awareness of the risks involved, to exercise self-control, to manage their losses, and even
to exclude themselves from gambling venues altogether.
Biopower and neoliberalism combine to create a unique form of
necropolitics that drives endless extermination in the name of maintaining
the strength of the market
Banerjee 2006 - University of South Australia (Subhabrata Bobby, “Live and Let Die:
Colonial Sovereignties and the Death Worlds of Necrocapitalism,” Borderlands, Volume 5
No. 1, http://www.borderlands.net.au/vol5no1_2006/banerjee_live.htm)
10. Agamben shows how sovereign power operates in the production of bare life in a variety
of contexts: concentration camps, 'human guinea pigs' used by Nazi doctors, current
debates on euthanasia, debates on human rights and refugee rights. A sovereign decision to
apply a state of exception invokes a power to decide the value of life, which would allow a
life to be killed without the charge of homicide. The killings of mentally and physically
handicapped people during the Nazi regime was justified as ending a 'life devoid of value', a
life 'unworthy to be lived'. Sovereignty thus becomes a decision on the value of life, 'a
power to decide the point at which life ceases to be politically relevant' (Agamben, 1998:
142). Life is no more sovereign as enshrined in the declaration of 'human' rights but
becomes instead a political decision, an exercise of biopower (Foucault, 1980). In the
context of the 'war on terror' operating in a neoliberal economy, the exercise of biopower
results in the creation of a type of sovereignty that has profound implications for those
whose livelihoods depend on the war on terror as well as those whose lives become
constituted as 'bare life' in the economy of the war on terror. 11. However, it is not enough
to situate sovereignty and biopower in the context of a neoliberal economy especially in the
case of the war on terror. In a neoliberal economy, the colony represents a greater potential
for profit especially as it is this space that, as Mbembe (2003: 14) suggests, represents a
permanent state of exception where sovereignty is the exercise of power outside the
law, where 'peace was more likely to take on the face of a war without end' and
where violence could operate in the name of civilization. But these forms of
necropolitical power, as Mbembe reads it in the context of the occupation of Palestine,
literally create 'death worlds, new and unique forms of social existence in which
vast populations are subjected to conditions of life conferring upon them the
status of theliving dead ' (Mbembe, 2003: 40). The state of endless war is precisely the
space where profits accrue whether it is through the extraction of resources or the use of
privatized militias or through contracts for reconstruction. Sovereignty over death worlds
results in the application of necropower either literally as the right to kill or the right to
'civilize', a supposedly 'benevolent' form of power that requires the destruction of a
culture in order to 'save the people from themselves' (Mbembe, 2003:22). This attempt to
save the people from themselves has, of course, been the rhetoric used by the U.S.
government in the war on terror and the war in Iraq. 12. Situating necropolitics in the
context of economy, Montag (2005: 11) argues that if necropolitics is interested in the
production of death or subjugating life to the power of death then it is possible to speak of a
necroeconomics - a space of 'letting die or exposing to death'. Montag explores the relation
of the market to life and death in his reading of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and Theory
of Moral Sentiments. In Montag's reading of Smith, it is 'the dread of death, the great
poison to the happiness...which while it afflicts and mortifies the individual, guards and
protects the society' (cited in Montag, 2005: 12). If social life was driven solely by
unrestrained self-interest then the fear of punishment or death through juridical systems
kept the pursuit of excessive self-interest in check, otherwise people would simply rob,
injure and kill for material wealth. Thus, for Smith the universality of life is contingent on
the particularity of death, the production of life on the production of death where the
intersection of the political and the economic makes it necessary to exercise the right to kill.
The market then, as a 'concrete form of the universal' becomes the 'very form of
universality as life' and requires at certain moments to 'let die'. Or as Montag theorizes it,
Death establishes the conditions of life; death as by an invisible hand restores the market to
what it must be to support life. The allowing of death of the particular is necessary to the
production of life of the universal. The market reduces and rations life; it not only allows
death, it demands death be allowed by the sovereign power, as well as by those who
suffer it. In other words, it demands and required the latter allow themselves to die. Thus
alongside the figure of homo sacer, the one who may be killed with impunity, is another
figure, one whose death is no doubt less spectacular than the first and is the object of no
memorial or commemoration: he who with impunity may be allowed to die, slowly or
quickly, in the name of the rationality and equilibrium of the market (Montag, 2005: 15).
Montag, therefore, theorizes a necroeconomics where the state becomes the legitimate
purveyor of violence: in this scenario, the state can compel by force by 'those who
refuse to allow themselves to die' (Montag, 2005: 15). However, Montag's concept of
necroeconomics appears to universalize conditions of poverty through the logic of the
market. My concern however, is the creation of death worlds in colonial contexts through
the collusion between states and corporations. 13. If states and corporations work in
tandem with each other in colonial contexts, creating states of exception and exercising
necropower to profit from the death worlds that they establish, then necroeconomics fails to
consider the specificities of colonial capitalist practices. In this sense, I would argue that
necrocapitalism emerges from the intersection of necropolitics and necroeconomics, as
practices of accumulation in colonial contexts by specific economic actors - multinational
corporations for example - that involve dispossession, death, torture, suicide, slavery,
destruction of livelihoods and the general management of violence. It is a new form of
imperialism, an imperialism that has learned to 'manage things better'. Colonial
sovereignty can be established even in metropolitan sites where necrocapitalism may
operate in states of exception: refugee detention centres in Australia are examples of these
states of exception (Perera, 2002). However, in the colonies (either 'post' or 'neo'), entire
regions in the Middle East or Africa may be designated as states of exception.
The alternative is to refuse to imagine legality – only the formation of
autonomous geographies can challenge biopolitical neoliberalism
Pickerill and Chatterton 2006 - Leicester University AND Leeds University (Jenny and
Paul, “Notes towards autonomous geographies: creation, resistance and self-management
as survival tactics” Progress in Human Geography30, 6 (2006) pp. 730–746)
In essence, autonomy is a coming together of theory and practice, or praxis. Hence, it is not
solely an intellectual tool nor a guide for living; it is a means and an end. Autonomous
geographies represent the deed and the word, based around ongoing examples and
experiments. Autonomous spaces are not spaces of deference to higher organizational
levels such as non-governmental organizations, political representatives or trade union
officials. They are based around a belief that the process is as important as the
outcome of resistance, that the journey is an end in itself. As the Zapatistas say: ‘we
don’t know how long we have to walk this path or if we will ever arrive, but at least it is the
path we have chosen to take’. Autonomous geographies are based around a belief in
prefigurative politics (summed up by the phrase ‘be the change you want to see’), that
change is possible through an accumulation of small changes, providing much-needed
hope against a feeling of powerlessness. Part of this is the belief in ‘doing it yourself ’ (see
McKay, 1998) or creating workable alternatives outside the state. Many examples
have flourished embracing ecological direct action, free parties and the rave scene,
squatting and social centres, and opensource software and independent media (Wall, 1999;
Seel et al., 2000; Plows, 2002; Chatterton and Hollands, 2003; Pickerill, 2003a; 2006).
Resources are creatively reused, skills shared, and popular or participatory education
techniques deployed, aiming to develop a critical consciousness, political and media literacy
and clear ethical judgements (Freire, 1979). In the terrain opened up by the failure of statebased and ‘actually existing socialism’, autonomy allows a rethinking of the idea of
revolution – not about seizing the state’s power but, as Holloway (2002) argues, ‘changing
the world without taking power’ (Vaneigem, 1979). Autonomy does not mean an
absence of structure or order, but the rejection of a government that demands
obedience (Castoriadis, 1991). Examples of postcapitalist ways of living are already part of
the present (Gibson-Graham, 1996). The documentation of the ‘future in the present’ has
been a hallmark of work by anarchist, libertarian and radical scholars from Peter Kropotkin
(1972) to Colin Ward (1989) and Murray Bookchin (1996). Their work looks for tendencies
that counter competition and conflict, providing alternative paths. Some of these disappear,
others survive, but the challenge remains to find them, encourage people to articulate,
expand and connect them. Autonomous projects face the accusation that, even if they do
improve participants’ quality of living, they fail to have a transformative impact on the
broader locality and even less on the global capitalist system (DeFilippis, 2004).
Consequently, in talking of local resistance, Peck and Tickell (2002) suggest that ‘the defeat
(or failure) of local neoliberalisms – even strategically important ones – will not be enough
to topple what we are still perhaps justified in calling “the system”’ (p. 401). However,
commentators make the mistake of looking for signs of emerging organizational
coherence, political leaders and a common programme that bids for state power, when
the rules of engagement have changed. A plurality of voices is reframing the debate,
changing the nature and boundaries of what is taken as common sense and creating
workable solutions to erode the workings of market-based economies in a host of, as yet,
unknown ways. Rebecca Solnit’s writings on hope remind us that, while our actions’ effects
are difficult to calculate, ‘causes and effects assume history marches forward, but history
is not an army. It is a crab scuttling sideways, a drip of soft water wearing away stone’
(Solnit, 2004: 4).
1NC DA
Obama’s using capital to persuade Congress to avoid sanctions but
opponents are nearing a veto-proof majority
Riechmann, 12-29—Deb, AP writer, “Obama doesn't rule out opening US embassy in
Iran; Congress planning January vote on sanctions,” MN Star Tribune,
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/286993011.html --BR
While President Barack Obama hasn't ruled out the possibility of reopening a U.S. Embassy
in Iran, Republicans say the Senate will vote within weeks on a bill to impose more
sanctions on Tehran over its nuclear program. Obama was asked in an NPR interview
broadcast on Monday whether he could envision opening an embassy there during his final
two years in office. "I never say never," Obama said, adding that U.S. ties with Tehran must
be restored in steps. Washington and its partners are hoping to clinch a deal with Iran by
July that would set long-term limits on Iran's enrichment of uranium and other activity that
could produce material for use in nuclear weapons. Iran says its program is solely for
energy production and medical research purposes. It has agreed to some restrictions in
exchange for billions of dollars in relief from U.S. economic sanctions. On a visit to Israel on
Saturday, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said the new Republican-controlled Senate will vote
on an Iran sanctions bill in January. He said the bipartisan sanction legislation says: "If Iran
walks away from the table, sanctions will be re-imposed. If Iran cheats regarding any deal
that we enter to the Iranians, sanctions will be re-imposed." Graham also is sponsoring
legislation that would require any deal with Iran to be approved by Congress before
sanctions could be lifted. Standing alongside Graham, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu called Iran a "dangerous regime" that should be prevented from having nuclear
weapons. "I believe that what is required are more sanctions, and stronger sanctions,"
Netanyahu said. The Obama administration has been telling members of Congress that it
has won significant concessions from Iran for recently extending nuclear talks, including
promises by the Islamic republic to allow snap inspections of its facilities and to neutralize
much of its remaining uranium stockpile. Administration officials have been presenting the
Iranian concessions to lawmakers in the hopes of convincing them to support the
extension and hold off on new economic sanctions that could derail the diplomatic effort.
Obama has threatened to veto any new sanctions legislation while American diplomats
continue their push for an accord that would set multiyear limits on Iran's nuclear progress
in exchange for an easing of the international sanctions that have crippled the Iranian
economy. Senate hawks are still trying to build a veto-proof majority of 67 votes with
Republicans set to assume the majority next month. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., told Fox News
Sunday that Senate Republicans might have enough backing from Democrats to pass vetoproof legislation that would impose more sanctions on Iran. "The good thing about those
votes, they will be really bipartisan votes," he said. "I have 17 Democrats with me. . We
have a shot at even getting to a veto-proof majority in the Senate."
Plan causes mad controversy
Demirjian, 10—Karoun, Washington Correspondent for the Las Vegas Sun, AP,
Congressional Quarterly, and Chicago Tribune, M.A. in Law and Diplomacy, International
Law (Tufts) and B.A. History (Harvard), "Harry Reid Rushes Effort to Legalize Internet
Poker," Las Vegas Sun, Dec 7, http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/dec/07/reidpushes-online-poker-bill/
But Internet gambling is as controversial in Washington as it has historically been in the
gaming industry, meaning that while the lame-duck session is likely Reid’s best chance to push something
it’s still going to be a hard road. The bill is a work in progress, but opposition is in full
swing on the Hill, where critics are lobbying against it on both moral and fiscal
grounds. Ranking Republicans of the House’s three committees with jurisdiction on Internet
through,
gambling — Spencer Bachus of Financial Services, Dave Camp of Ways and Means, and Lamar Smith of Judiciary —
are lobbying the Senate against taking up any measure that “might be partially motivated by one of
the gravest sins that afflicts this Congress: desperation for more tax dollars to pay for ever-increasing federal
spending.” “Creating a federal right to gamble that has never existed in our country’s history and imposing an
unprecedented new tax regime on such activity require careful deliberation, not backroom deals or earmarks or
special interests,” they wrote in a letter sent to Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — who has
historically opposed Internet gambling. The letter amounts to little more than emphatic opposition from the
minority. But in a few weeks, those same Republicans enter the majority in the House, from where they could
easily stop similar legislation, adding to the urgency for Reid to work fast. Lobbyists guess that the bill could hit the
Senate floor as early as next week. Reid won re-election with the backing of Nevada’s biggest gaming operators.
For example, Caesars Entertainment facilitated union efforts to drive up voter turnout among members. And MGM
Mainstream Republican opposition to
legalization of online gambling hasalways been fierce. In 2006, one of the last acts of the
Resorts CEO Jim Murren endorsed Reid in campaign ads.
Republican Congress was passing the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act, which outlawed all forms of
gambling online — and, advocates say, helped to drive this offshore business further underground.
Obama’s capital is do or die—failure triggers war
Winsor, 14 (Ben, “A Coalition Is Working Furiously Behind The Scenes To Support
Obama's Iran Talks,” Oct 2, http://www.businessinsider.com/rag-tag-iran-coalition-backingdiplomacy-2014-10)
Since November 2013, the Obama administration has engaged with Iran in tense, drawnout nuclear negotiations which optimists hope could bring an end to decades of hostility and
mistrust. Throughout it all, Congress has threatened to play the spoiler, with a tough
sanctions bill passing the House and looming in the Senate which would almost certainly
scuttle the fragile talks over the Iranian nuclear program. Now, as the deadline for the end
of the talks approaches, a coalition of legislators, advocacy groups, and White House
officials are working to hold Congress back from the brink of thwarting what they see
as a historic window of opportunity. They're fighting against legislators and
conservative groups like The Heritage Foundation and The Free Enterprise Institute who
are pushing for the US to take a hawkish stance. Legislators, led by Minnesota
Congressman Keith Ellison, have been maneuvering quietly behind the scenes in Congress
to keep the talks alive. At the same time, officials from the White House have been
leaning heavily on Senate Democrats to refrain from bringing a sanctions bill to
the floor. On the outside, a diverse range of pro-diplomacy groups, led by organisations
like the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) and the liberal Jewish organization J
Street, have found a common cause and rallied together to lobby for restraint. Even the
Quakers are energized. “This is a do-or-die moment, either we succeed, or we go in a much
more negative direction,” said NIAC co-founder Trita Parsi at the group’s annual conference
last weekend. Parsi sees the negotiations as a historic moment during a narrow window
of opportunity. Presidents on both sides have sunk significant time and energy
into the talks and Parsi believes the current leadership in both countries is more likely to
make a deal than those who came before — or might come after. “The next president,
whatever political party they’re in, is not going to spend precious political capital
battling Congress… [Obama] is the guy,” Parsi said. Supporters fear that failure of the
talks could trigger increased sanctions, the rise of hardliners in Iran, and relations
spiraling toward military confrontation.
Veto threats are only credible if Obama has capital
Lee, 5—Andrew Lee (Professor of Political Science at Claremont McKenna College) 05
“Invest or Spend? Political Capital and Statements of Administration Policy in the First Term
of the George W. Bush Presidency”, Georgia Political Science Association, Conference
Proceedings
With these words, the Framers created veto power, a central feature of our legislative
process. The veto, traditionally an executive prerogative designed as a defensive check on
Congress, has become an offensive tool for the president’s legislative agenda. In addition to
blocking disfavored legislation, the president may threaten to veto favored legislation to
compel Congress to change provisions within legislation. Congressional leaders take a veto
threat very seriously. How does Congress gauge the credibility of a veto threat? Legislators
would gauge the “political capital” of the president to determine the credibility of
the threat. According to political journalist Tod Lindberg (2004), political capital is a “form
of persuasive authority stemming from a position of political strength” (A21). Political
capital can be measured by favorability and job approval polling numbers because they
signify support for the president’s actions and agenda. For example, President Bush’s
leadership after the September 11th terrorist attacks increased his favorability and job
approval polling, and thus his political capital. He subsequently was able to launch a war
with Afghanistan and Iraq. In such cases, the president’s high political capital would
make a veto more credible. Congress must also reckon whether the president will think
an issue is worth spending political capital on. As Richard S. Conley and Amie Kreppel
(1999) write, “Whenever the President . . . act[s] to change the voting behavior of a
Member, political capital is expended. It would not be logical to expend that capital in what
was known ahead of time to be a losing battle” (2).
Goes nuclear—tons of different actors and scenarios for extinction
Avery, 13 -- Associate Professor, University of Copenhagen (11/6/2013, John Scales
Avery, “An Attack On Iran Could Escalate Into Global Nuclear War,”
http://www.countercurrents.org/avery061113.htm)
Despite the willingness of Iran's new President, Hassan Rouhani to make all reasonable
concessions to US demands, Israeli pressure groups in Washington continue to demand an
attack on Iran. But such an attack might escalate into a global nuclear war, with
catastrophic consequences. As we approach the 100th anniversary World War I, we should
remember that this colossal disaster escalated uncontrollably from what was intended to be
a minor conflict. There is a danger that an attack on Iran would escalate into a largescale war in the Middle East, entirely destabilizing a region that is already deep in
problems. The unstable government of Pakistan might be overthrown, and the revolutionary
Pakistani government might enter the war on the side of Iran, thus introducing nuclear
weapons into the conflict. Russia and China, firm allies of Iran, might also be drawn into
a general war in the Middle East. Since much of the world's oil comes from the region, such
a war would certainly cause the price of oil to reach unheard-of heights, with catastrophic
effects on the global economy. In the dangerous situation that could potentially result
from an attack on Iran, there is a risk that nuclear weapons would be used, either
intentionally, or by accident or miscalculation. Recent research has shown that besides
making large areas of the world uninhabitable through long-lasting radioactive
contamination, a nuclear war would damage global agriculture to such a extent that a
global famine of previously unknown proportions would result. Thus, nuclear war is the
ultimate ecological catastrophe. It could destroy human civilization and much of the
biosphere. To risk such a war would be an unforgivable offense against the lives and future
of all the peoples of the world, US citizens included.
1NC CP
The United States federal government should
■
amend the Interstate Horseracing Act to prohibit all internet
gambling on horseracing
■
clarify that this ban is meant eliminate the public moral harms of
online gambling
■
remove all regulations and restrictions on banks and credit agencies
in the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2008.
The WTO says that a uniform ban creates full compliance
Dan Silver 8, U Arizona, Internet Offshore Gambling in the United States and Abroad
https://next.eller.arizona.edu/courses/outsourcing/Fall2007/student_papers/final_papers/D
Silver_DanSilver_ENTR4-589_FinalDraft.pdf
The WTO agreed with Antigua’s contention in their initial confidential ruling on March 24, 2004. The U.S. filed two subsequent
The most recent WTO report on the case was issued on
February 15, 2007, and provided a stronger-than-ever support of Antigua’s position. The report demonstrated
many findings that made clear that the U.S. does allow many forms of
gambling, both interstate, and intrastate. Concerning horseracing, the report made
the conclusion that there is “significant domestic remote gambling [on
horse racing] in the U.S.”27 and that, “the evidence of these suppliers demonstrates the existence of a flourishing
interstate remote account wagering industry on horseracing in the United States operating in ostensible
legality.”28 The WTO determined that in order for the U.S. to become
compliant with GATS, they would need to secure legislation that would
appeals, each one rejected by the WTO.
render all forms of online betting illegal . And while the Bush administration did, in fact, vow to do
just that, all of their attempts to do so have been blocked by the horse racing industry. The reality is that between the Wire Act and
the Interstate Horseracing Act, Internet gambling on horseracing is firmly entrenched as a legal activity.
1nc DA
Gambling growth’s stable and key to tribal economies and selfdetermination – the plan crushes it
Washburn 12 – Kevin K. Washburn, Dean of the University of New Mexico School of
Law, “WHAT’S AT STAKE FOR TRIBES? – THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OFFICE OF
LEGAL COUNSEL OPINION ON INTERNET GAMING”, Congressional Testimony Before the
Senate Committee of Indian Affairs, 2-9,
http://www.indian.senate.gov/sites/default/files/upload/files/Kevin-Washburntestimony020912.pdf
Indian casinos constitute 40% of the American gaming market. For a large
number of American Indian nations, Indian gaming has been a key
resource in facilitating tribal self-governance and self-determination .
Approximately 237 tribes operate 442 Indian gaming facilities in the United States.1 Given
the importance of Indian gaming to tribal governments, Congress must
consider how online gaming will affect Indian tribes and insure that any federal
laws enacted to regulate Internet gaming give Indian tribes a fair opportunity to share in
the Internet gaming boom. The Supreme Court recognized that tribes had inherent powers
to regulate gaming on their own lands in California v. Cabazon Band of Missions Indians2 in
1987. That decision produced a nationwide debate on Indian gaming that was largely
resolved the next year when President Ronald Reagan signed the Indian Gaming Regulatory
Act into law. The Reagan administration was strongly supportive of Indian gaming even
before the Cabazon decision. The Reagan Administration believed that revenues from
Indian gaming could increase tribal self-sufficiency and reduce tribal
dependence on federal appropriations. When it enacted IGRA, Congress
recognized the exclusive right of tribes to regulate gaming on their lands and sought to
promote tribal economic development, self-sufficiency and strong self government.3
Moreover, Congress refused to privatize the benefits of Indian gaming. It mandated in IGRA
that gaming revenues must be used primarily for public purposes, naming five authorized
uses: “(i) to fund tribal government operations or programs; (ii) to provide for the general
welfare of the Indian tribe and its members; (iii) to promote tribal economic development;
(iv) to donate to charitable organizations; or (v) to help fund operations of local government
agencies.”4 The legal regime set forth in IGRA has allowed many tribes to
prosper . The Reagan Administration’s hopes for Indian gaming have been
realized , probably beyond their wildest expectations . Indian gaming has
been the greatest economic engine on Indian reservations that the U nited
S tates has ever seen. From 1998 to 2010, Indian Gaming grossed more than
$246.2 billion nationwide.5 Consistent with the purposes specified by Congress,
most of these have been used to fund tribal operations and promote the
economic development and welfare of tribes and Indian people. For instance,
according to the National Indian Gaming Association’s (NIGA) Economic Impact Report for
2009, 237 Indian tribes in 28 states had used Indian gaming to create new
jobs , fund essential government services and rebuild communities . In
2009 tribal governments generated $26.2 billion gross revenue from gaming alone - 20% of
that net revenue was dedicated to education, children and elders, culture
and charity, 19% to economic development, 17% to health care, 17% to police
and fire protection, 16% towards infrastructure and 11% towards housing.6
While tribal revenues allocation plans that provide for per capita payments to individual
tribal members have been approved by the Secretary of the Interior and have earned a
great deal of press attention, most of these payments have done little more than to increase
household income and lift some Indian citizens out of poverty. In addition to gaming
revenues, tribes generated $3.2 billion in gross revenue from related hospitality and
entertainment services such as resorts and entertainment complexes.7 As of 2009, tribal
governments had directly or indirectly generated 628,000 jobs nationwide for American
Indians and others.8 As a result of gaming, tribes have experienced extensive
economic development and built strong governmental infrastructures. In
sum, gaming has assisted in producing strong tribal governmental infrastructures.
Tribal gaming revenues have been a boon to the federal government as well. In light of the
federal government’s trust responsibility to the tribes, it would likely have had to spend
more on federal Indian programs in the absence of Indian gaming. In addition, Indian
gaming revenues have produced tax revenues for the federal government, both directly and
indirectly, and revenue shares for state governments. Although predictions are difficult,
especially about the future, Internet gaming poses some magnitude of threat to
the brick and mortar casino industry, including tribal casinos. Federal
policy toward Internet gaming going forward should recognize the
significant risk to the stable revenue stream upon which many tribes
have been able to depend . Under the worst case scenario, a shift in the market
for gaming away from land-based casinos and toward Internet gaming could vastly
increase revenues to private and even off-shore Internet gaming
companies and decrease tribal governmental revenues, plunging some
tribal nations back into poverty . Federal policy must recognize and seek to mitigate
this risk, so as to preserve gaming as a viable means of raising governmental resources for
tribal governments.
The plan’s an economic tsunami that devastates tribal growth
Porter 13, Robert Odawi Porter is the former President of the Seneca Nation of Indians
and currently Senior Counsel at SNR Denton in Washington, D.C., Why Tribes Should
Oppose Internet Gaming, http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/04/05/whytribes-should-oppose-internet-gaming
Congress is now considering the legalization of gambling over the Internet. Indian country,
which has invested billions of dollars in traditional “bricks and mortar” businesses, should be
extremely worried about this effort. If successful, many of the over 300 tribally-owned
gaming facilities risk losing significant patrons and profits. Research on the impact of
Internet gaming legalization is thin, but the primary study to date (Geiger-Johns 2010)
concludes that tribal casinos could lose up to 25 percent of annual gross gaming
revenues if legalization were to occur. Controlling $28 billion in gaming revenues is a
major economic accomplishment for Indians. Given our history of economic deprivation,
who would have guessed that this revitalization was possible? But we should not sit idly
by while $7 billion in revenues and associated jobs is given away to the
competition. Indian country response to the Internet legalization threat has been mixed. A
few tribes are actively pursuing efforts to get involved in on-line gambling. They see it as
simply a logical expansion of the market given technological advances. Other tribes see it as
a clear threat, seeing the great potential for unknown numbers of patrons to gamble in the
comfort of their own homes rather than visit the tribal casino. Our industry trade
association, the National Indian Gaming Association, has strongly defended the need to
protect existing tribal-state compacts. Both NIGA and I in Congressional testimony have
argued that tribes should have the same rights as non-Indian casinos were legalization to
occur. The problem with legalizing Internet gambling, as the research suggests, is that it
drains away customers who would otherwise be limited to visiting tribal casinos. The
Poker Players Alliance argues that legalizing on-line poker would actually support “bricks
and mortar” casinos since poker players eventually want to play against other humans as
they get better. But powerful forces in the gaming industry, led by name-brand Nevada and
New Jersey interests, are strongly promoting the legalization effort. States, too, are eager
to get in on the action and start taxing on-line bettors. It doesn’t seem reasonable that this
effort will end with only legalizing on-line poker. Our competitors and their allies in
government are going “all in” for full legalization of all Internet gambling. Losing 25 percent
or more of gross revenues could cause widespread economic injury to tribal casinos,
many of which have significant debt. Which is why Indian country needs to stop
watching this economic tsunami in the making and start fighting against it. If the
on-line gambling market opens wide, only a handful of providers will control the market. Do
we really think tribal gaming brands can beat out the marquee gaming brands in a global
on-line market? A few larger tribes might, but I seriously doubt – as the research suggests
– that tribal casinos will gain new customers in an Internet gaming era. There are actions
that can be taken now to fight against this effort. We should be preparing our litigation
strategy to protect existing compacts and investments. We should be educating and
lobbying Congress to protect Indian country gaming—which employs tens of thousands of
non-Indians as well as Indians—to protect the bird in the hand rather than chase the bird in
the bush. The Internet might not be stopped, but it can be slowed down. If we don’t act
now and Internet gambling legalization occurs, the ensuing economic disaster in Indian
country would be our own version of the “fiscal cliff.”
Tribal sovereignty’s modelled – solves ethnic conflicts
Morris 5
– Tenured professor @ UC-Denver, American academic and Native American
activist
(Glenn, “Native American Sovereignty,” e-copy from Taylor and Francis, p. 276)
While such assertions may seem novel and untenable at present, it should be
recalled that just forty years ago, tens of millions of people languished under the
rule of colonial domination; today, they are politically independent. Central to their
independence was the development and acceptance of the right to selfdetermination under international law. Despite such developments, many colonized
peoples were forced by desperate conditions to engage in armed struggle to advance
their legitimate aspirations. Similarly, for many indigenous peoples few viable options
remain in their quest for control of their destinies. Consequently, a majority of the
current armed conflicts in the world are not between established states, but
between indigenous peoples and states that seek their subordination. Armed
struggle for most indigenous peoples represents a desperate and untenable strategy
for their survival. Nonetheless, it may remain an unavoidable option for many of
them, because if their petitions seeking recognition of their rights in international forums
are ignored, many indigenous peoples, quite literally, face extermination. Although this
chapter has implications for the status of all indigenous peoples, its concentration is
primarily within the United States. This is because, in several ways, the status of
indigenous nations within the U.S. is unique, and the policy of the U nited S tates
toward indigenous nations has frequently been emulated by other states . The fact
that a treaty relationship exists between the U nited S tates and indigenous nations,
and the fact that indigenous nations within the U.S. retain defined and separate
land bases and continue to exercise some degree of effective self-government ,
may contribute to the successful application of international standards in their
cases. Also, given the size and relative power of the U nited S tates in i nternational
r elations, and absent the unlikely independence of a majority- indigenous nation-state such
as Guatemala or Greenland, the successful application of decolonization principles to
indigenous nations within the U.S. could allow the extension of such applications
to indigenous peoples in other parts of the planet .
Self-determination solves global war
Handlery 10-10, Contributor to Brussels Journal, PhD, former associate professor of
history, George, Secession, Autonomy And The State System,
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/5164
Even aloof Americans and West- Europeans are affected by “foreign affairs”. The lacking
concern’s cause is supported the impression that all troubles happen “abroad”. It is the
good fortune of the American continent, and largely of Europe’s west, that it
avoided numerous destructive territorial-ethnic disputes.
Borders played a role among the violent forces that
had shaped the 20th century. Several components have contributed. One is the case of peoples that, devoid of historic independence, lack/ed their own state. Furthermore, boundaries
ignore ethnicity: such borders separate what is apt to want to belong together. The world wars had led to the redrawing of boundaries and to the creation and to the abolition of states.
The problems of unfair and inappropriate borders remain. We are mired in the morass of arbitrary borders and the states they define that created populations that perceive of them as
“prisons”. Here an example. The reorganization of the USSR and Yugoslavia into successor states tells of the problem caused by boundaries designed to settle disputes but that feed
new tensions. In Europe alone, much continues to hide under covers. A sample: Laplanders, Germans in several countries, Austrians in Italy, Sorbs in Germany, Frisians, Catalans,
Basques, Bretons, Ocsitanians, Scots, Kasubs, Albanians, Serbs, Flemiss, Corsicans, Moldovans, Macedonians, Russians, Ukranians, Romanians, Gypsies, Magyars and Jews. New maps
make teachers despair; they need to upgrade displays and to learn something new. Cartographers benefit. The discrepancy between existing borders and their possible adjustment to
connect what belongs together and to separate what is different, fuels disputes. Our instincts are territorial. We share this trait with dogs that raise a leg. The difference is that we have
missiles. We claim to be cleverer than our canines, yet a few square miles can cause bitter conflicts. Therefore, rules to guide the processes of adjustment are crucial. Even if
understood, this does not make solutions, easy. The Kosovo question, being far from the Western reader and unconnected to the writer’s background, is suited to illustrate some
generalizations. To its misfortune, Kosovo represents much that defines territorial quarrels. Typically, allegations backing good claims are pit against each other. However, the invoked
facts lack a common denominator and sometimes prove only the fantasy of their inventors. Who should own contested territory that had several past owners? Actual demographics,
facts and myths collide. Regarding Kosovo, a battle lost by the Christians against the Turks creates a “clearly unclear” case. In fact, there were two clashes. The Serbs prefer to
remember the second one. No wonder. In the first encounter, a neighbor did the heavy lifting. It is a role that Serbs now resent because of claims to a district newly administered by
Serbia. Actually, the second battle on Kosovo Meadow was fought by an alliance in 1389. The defeat brought the ruin of the Serbs that represented Europe’s resistance to armed Islam.
The glorious defeat, became an icon by which the Serbs define themselves. Subsequently, this identification grew into a complication. The essentials tend to be repeated in areas that
were under the rule of alien empires. Today’s contested Kosovo’s original Serb population moved north – into Hungary’s south where they became a majority. WW1’s generous victors
gave the land to Serbia. Earlier, through migration, Kosovo became Albanian and Muslim. While alleging that demography prevails over Hungary’s historical claim, in Kosovo the claim is
reversed to assert that history overrides demography.
A conclusion is suggested by world wars ; common
borders can make for bad neighbors. Territorialized disputes tend to make the
involved communities lose their sound judgment. Reason, fairness, common
interests, as well as the facts, are abandoned in favor of claims presented as
temper tantrums that demand land.
Examine the case of contested borders: only rarely can “good lines” be drawn –ones that respect the
identity of all locals. Borders that reduce tensions, rather than to nurture them, are not the rule. The great peace treaties (Vienna 1814, Paris 1919 and Yalta/Potsdam 1945 share an
element. The victors claimed to lay down the basis of a lasting peace. Just borders creating states that rely on a supportive people were to be the solution. Sound borders were to
facilitate internal harmony. Stability was to be served by eliminating territorial disputes between ethnic states. To support the edifice, the integrity of the entities was to be inviolable.
Such commitments lasted until the “next war” and the repetition of the charades at peace treaties. Much is wrong with the alleged stabilizing result of inviolable borders that ignore the
artificial divisions they impose. Equally wobbly is a related assumption. It is that borders, drawn without the consent of the affected, secure the state behind them. Also, the fiction is
believed, that states with reluctant subjects can become national states and as such will function as homogenous democratic and stable communities. Therefore, in principle, the entities
created are declared untouchable. The conditional inserted into an absolute is not the result of logical inconsistency. Obviously, great powers are, such as Russia in the Crimea,
exempted. The equation that sacrosanct borders guarantee peace is wrong. The theory attempts to overlook a component of reality which is the lot of ethnics assigned to the “wrong”
Forcing local ethnic majorities to submit to a “national state” of another people
has consequences. The contradiction between claimed homogeneity and ethnic
diversity brings internal strife first and then interstate conflicts. It is hard to be loyal
to a state that claims not to be yours. This outcome arises because the denial of rights must
occur when arbitrary borders incorporate resented and suspected populations into
structures that are alien to them and which they will resent. Suppressed ethnic groups tend
to overlap interstate boundaries. Thus, the distance between internal and international strife
is small. “What is to be done?” Let us begin with an admission. It is senseless to support
centrally governed multi-ethnic states that want to eliminate minorities whose existence
provokes the “people of state”. Suppression in the pursuit of stability is a bad policy.
state.
In the case of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, this effort led to the Great War .
Those who wish to preserve multi-ethnic states governed by the pretention that
they are mono-ethnic, need to be nudged to grant local self-government. Failing
that, separatism will emerge . The international community must abandon the view that
all autonomists are separatists and that the former are therefore a threat to peace. For
some time now, the contrary approach was thought to provide stability. As in Iraq, major
powers support allies that suppress minorities. This has consequences. By ignoring federal
solutions, countries whose minorities might have a state across the border, limit democracy
alone for the majority. With a built-in enemy, much will be sacrificed to combat the feared
collusion of domestic and foreign foes. Such a project will also hinder the development of
peoples that discover “brothers” in need of liberation. The derived duty to irredentism or to
conformity will be exploited by ultras that demand the kind of unity on which dictatorship
feeds. The problem is soluble even if the ailment seems to be a chronic. The
international community must use its influence not to re-draw borders but to
change their consequence. Not borders need to be moved: their outcome must be
revised. To save the country, ultras claim that power be used to create a uniform people.
Yet the openly multi-ethnic state must not be a threat. Nor is forced unity a precondition of greatness. These are the errors of the past – successful societies have avoided
the disease. Minority status must not be a punishment. The land of the minorities is not
conquered territory kept down to secure imperial survival. Disputes recede once rights
are respected because they apply to “man” and do not express ethnic privilege. The rule
of law instead of the rule of a lording majority, defuses ticking bombs.
This outweighs – ethnic conflicts are uniquely escalatory and
destabilize key hotspots
Mead 13, James Clarke Chace Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard
College and Editor-at-Large of The American Interest magazine, Walter Russell, Peace In
The Congo? Why The World Should Care, http://www.the-americaninterest.com/wrm/2013/12/15/peace-in-the-congo-why-the-world-should-care/
These wars continue today; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the war in Syria, the Kurdish
struggle for independence, the tensions in the Caucasus. So far, the only way of settling
them for good has been to exterminate minorities or to kick hundreds of thousands or even
millions of people (Germans from Poland and the Sudentenland after World War II) out to
create homogeneity. One of the biggest questions of the 21st century is whether
this destructive dynamic can be contained, or whether the demand for ethnic,
cultural and/or religious homogeneity will continue to convulse world politics,
drive new generations of conflict, and create millions more victims . The Congo
conflict is a disturbing piece of evidence suggesting that, in Africa at least, there is
potential for this kind of conflict. The Congo war (and the long Hutu-Tutsi conflict in
neighboring countries) is not, unfortunately alone. The secession of South Sudan from
Sudan proper, the wars in what remains of that unhappy country, the secession of Eritrea
from Ethiopia and the rise of Christian-Muslim tension right across Africa (where
religious conflict often is fed by and intensifies “tribal”—in Europe we would say “ethnic” or
“national”—conflicts) are strong indications that the potential for huge and
destructive conflict across Africa is very real. But one must look beyond Africa. The
Middle East of course is aflame in religious and ethnic conflict . The old British Raj
including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka offers countless
examples of ethnic and religious conflict that sometimes is contained, and
sometimes boils to the surface in horrendous acts of violence. Beyond that, rival
nationalisms in East and Southeast Asia are keeping the world awake at night. The
Congo war should be a reminder to us all that the foundations of our world are
dynamite , and that the potential for new conflicts on the scale of the horrific wars
of the 20th century is very much with us
today. The second lesson from this conflict stems from the realization of how much
patience and commitment from the international community (which in this case included the Atlantic democracies and a coalition of African states working as individual countries and
through various international institutions) it has taken to get this far towards peace. Particularly at a time when many Americans want the US to turn inwards, there are people who
make the argument that it is really none of America’s business to invest time and energy in the often thankless task of solving these conflicts. That might be an ugly but defensible
position if we didn’t live in such a tinderbox world. Someone could rationally say, yes, it’s terrible that a million plus people are being killed overseas in a horrific conflict, but the war is
really very far away and America has urgent needs at home and we should husband the resources we have available for foreign policy on things that have more power to affect us
directly. The problem is that these wars spread. They may start in places that we don’t care much about (most Americans didn’t give a rat’s patootie about whether Germany controlled
the Sudetenland in 1938 or Danzig in 1939) but they tend to spread to places that we do care very much about. This can be because a revisionist great power like Germany in 1938-39
needs to overturn the balance of power in Europe to achieve its goals, or it can be because instability in a very remote place triggers problems in places that we care about very much.
Out of Afghanistan in 2001 came both 9/11 and the waves of insurgency and
instability that threaten to rip nuclear-armed Pakistan apart or trigger wider
conflict with India . Out of the mess in Syria a witches’ brew of terrorism and
religious conflict looks set to complicate the security of our allies in Europe and
the Middle East and even the security of the oil supply on which the world economy
so profoundly depends. Africa, and the potential for upheaval there, is of more
importance to American security than many people may understand. The line
between Africa and the Middle East is a soft one. The weak states that straddle the
southern approaches of the Sahara are ideal petri dishes for Al Qaeda type groups
to form and attract local support. There are networks of funding and religious contact that
give groups in these countries potential access to funds, fighters, training and weapons from
the Middle East. A war in the eastern Congo might not directly trigger these other conflicts,
but it helps to create the swirling underworld of arms trading, money transfers,
illegal commerce and the rise of a generation of young men who become
experienced fighters—and know no other way to make a living. It destabilizes the
environment for neighboring states (like Uganda and Kenya) that play much more
direct role in potential crises of greater concern to us.
1NC Banking
The regs are watered down- small banks avoided the impact
Rose 09 I. Nelson Rose is a Distinguished Senior Professor at Whittier Law School in
Costa Mesa, Calif, Gambling Law Review, Volume 13, Number 1, 2009, “New UIGEA Regs
Put Benefits and Burdens on States”, pg. 1
The new final regulations only apply to the UIGEA and they would not protect an online operator against
prosecution by the Department of Justice under a different federal statute. But these regulations are not only the
formal position of the federal government; they were written in consultations with Justice. It took 66 pages of fine
in the end the federal regulators charged with making regulations to enforce the
UIGEA simply gave up. They were supposed to make rules forcing financial institutions to
identify and block money transfers for unlawful Internet gambling transactions. But they were
defeated by the difficulty of defining what was unlawful and the impossibility of tracking
individual transactions. So they told credit card companies to come up with some additional
code numbers for gambling transactions and everyone else can basically continue to do
what they are now doing—oh, and financial institutions have to send a notice to all their
clients telling them not to be involved in illegal gambling . As is well-known by now, the new
print. But
regulations are the result of a bill rammed through Congress in 2006 by then Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist
(RTenn.), without being read. It called for the impossible: The United States Treasury and Federal Reserve Board,
in consultation with the Department of Justice, were told to make regulations requiring payment processors to
the
UIGEA does not define what is unlawful . Whether a particular transaction is illegal depends upon the
particular facts and whether it violates some other federal, state and possibly even tribal law. As t he agencies
themselves admit, they do not have the resources or ability to make that determination. So,
in their proposed regulations, the agencies put the burden on the banks. The proposal was
met with ridicule. If the federal government could not determine whether a particular
transaction involved illegal gambling, how was a bank employee supposed to make that
determination? This was particularly ridiculous since banks do not know what is being bought with a credit card
or money wire transfer. The agencies, in their final rule, gave in. Except for calling for additional code
numbers for credit card transactions, the regulations expressly tell financial institutions to
not spend any time looking at individual transactions. And they make it clear that any
money sent to an individual, even by a gambling site, cannot be a “restricted transaction”
under the statute or regulations. The statute does create a new crime, being a gambling business that
accepts money for an illegal transaction. But by its own terms it does not apply to individual bettors or
banks or other payment processors. And the final regulations, which only apply to financial
institutions, now make it clear that payment processors should not waste their time checking
on where money is sent by individuals. The agencies thought about requiring banks to ask
their patrons whether they were wiring money to illegal overseas gaming operators. But
someone at Treasury or the Federal Reserve had the brains to realize that the answer the
banks were going to get would always be “No.” Banks and credit card companies are required to put
some new procedures into place. They have until Dec. 1, 2009. The original proposed regs would have
impacted 253,368 small businesses and an unknown number of large companies. The final rule has
been so cut back that only 12,267 small businesses, or less than five percent of the original
estimated number, are subject to the regulations. Although very few companies will spend much time
identify and block restricted unlawful Internet gambling transactions. Unfortunately for these federal agencies,
with these new regulations, it’s still an enormous waste of time. The agencies estimated that the recordkeeping
burden on financial institutions “to develop and establish the policies and procedures required by the Act and this
final rule” will add up to “approximately one million hours.”4 The federal agencies still put the burden on the
banks have to do the same amount of
“know your customer” work with new commercial accounts that they now do to prevent
money laundering: basically ask the company owners what their business is and do a little
financial institutions to do due diligence. But what this means is
checking to confirm they are telling the truth. If the new commercial customer proves it is not in the
gambling business, there’s nothing more to do. If it is in the gambling business, the bank then has to ask questions
to see if it falls into one of the safe harbor categories. There aren’t a whole lot of illegal gambling Web sites
operating out of the United States,
so the new rule will have almost no impact, other than opening
unlicensed overseas
opportunities for states, tribes and gaming operators. What about licensed and
gambling operators? If there are any left with direct business relationships with U.S. banks—and I doubt that
there are—they will have to start using foreign banks, like every other foreign operator. American
banks are not expected to ask their foreign correspondent banks about their commercial
customers. The one change that will affect online operators, and therefore players, is the addition
of new transaction codes for credit card companies. For illegal and gray market operators, there is
probably going to be little change. Credit card companies already have a merchant code for
gambling, 7995, and American banks already refuse to let their credit cards be used for 7995 purchases.
Overseas banks are not subject to the UIGEA. The agencies admit companies issuing cards in other
countries are not about to ask their merchants if they are illegally taking bets from Americans. But the bright spot
for this new rule is that it calls for new credit card codes for legal online gaming. The federal agencies repeatedly
and emphatically refused to create a list of Web sites that were to be avoided because they conducted illegal
Internet gambling. The agencies also would not provide a list of sites that were deemed to be legal. But the new
safe harbors and the call for new credit card codes will have the effect of letting everyone know that a gaming
operation is being conducted by a state, or licensed by a state or tribe, or has a reasoned legal opinion declaring
that it is not involved in restricted transactions.
Alt cause to banking decline – Dodd Frank and regulatory fragmentation
deck competitiveness.
Bennetts 14 (Louise Bennetts, Associate Director of Financial Regulation Studies at the
Cato Institute, Testimony to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Committee
on Financial Services, United States House of Representatives, “Regulatory Fragmentation,
the Balkanization of Financial Markets and the Competitiveness of the American Financial
Services Sector”, 3/4/14, http://www.cato.org/publications/testimony/regulatoryfragmentation-balkanization-financial-markets-competitiveness)
In the United States since 2010 we have seen the rollout of one of the most comprehensive
“reform” agendas targeting the financial services industry both in the United States and abroad. The
centerpiece of the reform agenda — the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act —
has 394 associated rulemaking requirements and already has spurred thousands of pages of
related rules. But this is just the tip of the iceberg. As of February 2014, only 52% of the rules required by the
Act have been finalized.ii Around 20% have yet to be proposed. And Dodd-Frank is but one component of a far
greater regulatory reform agenda that includes a complete overhaul of the capital and liquidity rules imposed on
the U.S. banking sector (the “Basel III” regime); a radical revision of the regulation of nonbank financial companies
such as insurance firms and asset managers; changes in the regulation of the U.S. operations of foreign banks;
changes in the regulation of consumer credit; imposing new monitoring and enforcement obligations on banks on
All of these new obligations are only magnified for banks and
financial service companies that operate cross-border. In addition, barely a month passes without a
behalf of the Federal government.
new initiative aimed at the financial services sector being proposed either in Congress or through the regulatory
they nonetheless impose a
significant cost on the private sector in terms of the uncertainty they generate and
the time and resources private firms must spend on evaluating the potential impact of
such proposals. The question before the Committee today is: how is this regulatory overhaul impacting the
agencies.iii While most of these proposals will never see the light of day,
global competitiveness of the American financial services sector and, indeed, American consumers of financial
services? To date, no assessment has been made and no studies have been undertaken to assess the cumulative
impact or cost of all this regulation. To answer this question, in my view, we need to address two related issues:
What are the costs associated with the individual impact and, more importantly, cumulative effect of all these
regulations? And secondly, given the sheer volume, complexity and the unintended consequences of this massive
undertaking, are we likely to achieve the desired outcome — that is: creating a financial system that is safer and
more transparent without damaging credit provision and profitability? Before I discuss these two key points with an
analysis of some specific cases, I would like to make a few observations about the United States’ position in the
global economy. The United States is a net importer of capital and a net exporter of financial services and
products. Despite, or possibly even because of, its inauspicious and crisis-prone banking history, the United States
has the world’s most vibrant capital markets and, currently, has the only well-developed debt market and shortterm or overnight dollar funding market. Many foreign companies and banks raise a significant portion of their nondepositary short-term funding in the United States. However, while the United States may have had a head start,
one cannot assume a permanent state of dominance. Steps are being taken to develop high yield and other shortterm funding markets in South East Asia, particularly in Hong Kong and Singapore as well as in Europe (although
the European funding markets remain weak).iv In addition to the large European banks, several emerging markets,
most notably China, are taking noteworthy steps towards the creation of worldwide banking conglomerates, by
acquiring significant stakes in banks and financial companies in the developing, and to a lesser extent, the
The United States’
financial services sector has long been subject to a fragmented regulatory regime, in part
due to the structural spilt that historically characterized the market (between activities such as
developed world. The Costs of Regulatory Fragmentation within the United States
loan-making and underwriting) and the deep-seated American aversion to the “universal” banking model.v In most
countries, banks and financial services companies report to a single regulatory authority. In the United States,
even monoline financial firms such as commercial or investment banks must report to more
than one regulatory agency and these agencies frequently have overlapping jurisdiction.
This creates a competitive disadvantage for U.S. financial institutions as it
increases the costs associated with regulatory compliance, decreases the
efficiency of both the regulators and the regulated, opens the door for regulatory
arbitrage and creates a lack of transparency as to who bears ultimate
responsibility for regulatory oversight. It could also result in the release of rules and
regulations that are contradictory in nature, making it impossible for a regulated entity to
be compliant with all rules at all times. The Dodd-Frank Act made this problem worse not
better. Instead of streamlining the regulatory agencies responsible for the oversight of the financial system, the
Dodd-Frank Act adds several new regulatory bodies — the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the
Office of Financial Research and the Financial Stability Oversight Counsel. It also gives overlapping jurisdiction to
multiple regulators and carves up the regulatory “turf” in arbitrary ways.vi This has led to the situation where, for
multiple versions of rules on the same topic have been released by more than one
agency (such as was the case with the first release of the Volcker Rule proposal). The Dangers of Financial Sector
“Balkanization” Several commentators and industry experts have drawn a parallel between the
current climate in global financial regulation and the relations that characterized trade
politics among the world’s largest economies in the early 1930s following the passage of the
“Smoot-Hawley” Tariff Act, a situation known as “balkanization.”vii In this regard, particular attention has
example,
been paid to current measures that have protectionist implications or serve to encourage the further balkanization
of financial services or the isolation of American banks, companies and individuals, (such as the Federal Reserve’s
recent Foreign Banking Organization proposal or the FATCA legislation). I believe the comparison is well made.viii
In the two years following the passage of Smoot-Hawley, the volume of U.S. imports fell 40 percent. This was due,
in part, to a decline in domestic demand, but scholars estimate that at least a quarter of this decline can be directly
attributable to the act itself.ix In addition, retaliatory actions against the United States resulted in a decline of 60
percent in U.S. exports in the 1930s, and this discrimination against U.S. products persisted for decades. In
addition, Smoot-Hawley encouraged other countries—most notably Germany—to institute retaliatory measures,
leading to a worldwide trade freeze that exacerbated hardships for local consumers and almost certainly
contributed to the increasingly Balkanized international environment in the period leading up to World War II.
Following a crisis, the natural inclination for any regional authority is to attempt to erect walls around local
industries and operations to make it easier—at least, theoretically—to address problems at a local level. Usually
for U.S. regulators,
the lesson from the Smoot-Hawley experience should be clear: this approach may yield
positive results in the immediate term only, if at all, and any positive outcomes are far
outweighed by the negative effects of retaliation. As the world’s leading financial services economy,
this also serves to meet the demands of local interest groups harmed by the crisis. But
the actions of U.S. policymakers have a disproportionate effect on the global financial sector and are likely to spur
retaliatory actions elsewhere in the world. When it comes to the regulatory “marketplace,” the United States is a
“price-setter” and ought to lead by example. Indeed, my great fear is that the response to the 2007–08 Financial
Crisis in the United States may be a classic example of policymakers throwing the baby out with the bathwater. In
this case it is
global capital flows—as with global trade flows in the 1930s—that could potentially suffer a
steep decline in the wake of the measures adopted to address the perceived problems in the
financial services industry. Although the increased size, depth, liquidity, and complexity of financial markets
has received widespread criticism, including being labeled as a “cause” of the crisis, in my view this criticism is
misplaced. It overlooks the significant global benefits that fluid and highly developed capital markets have
accrued—benefits that have not come close to being wiped out even in the wake of the financial crisis.x In the only
detailed study released to date on the effect of post-crisis reforms on global capital flows, the McKinsey Global
since 2008, cross-border
capital flows have fallen dramatically as banks and borrowers deleverage. xiThe firm estimates
that cross-border capital flows have declined 60 percent since 2007 .xii Financial assets had been
Institute (the research arm of the consulting firm McKinsey and Co.) found that
increasing by close to 8 percent per annum since the early 1990s, but they are now growing at under 2 percent.xiii
At the same time, government debt securities have increased by more than $15.4 trillion worldwide. The authors
note that “for three decades, capital markets and banking systems rapidly expanded and diversified, but now that
process—called financial deepening— has largely ground to a halt…. Today, global financial markets are at an
inflection point. One path leads to a more balkanized structure that relies primarily on domestic capital formation
and concentrates risks within local banking systems.”xiv The study also notes: “facing
new regulations
on capital and liquidity as well as pressures from shareholders and regulators to
reduce risk, many banks in advanced economies are winnowing down the
geographies and business lines in which they operate. Since early 2007, commercial banks
have sold off more than $722 billion in assets and operations, with foreign operations accounting for almost half of
this total. Regulators in many countries are moving to exert more control over the foreign banks that remain active
in their jurisdictions, in some cases requesting that banks operate as subsidiaries rather than branches.”xv
Although the “Foreign Banking Organization” rule release last month by the Federal Reserve (discussed below) may
stop short of requiring the full subsidiarization of foreign banks’ U.S. operations, the likely chilling effect on global
capital is the same. The McKinsey Global Institute study concludes with the warning that regional differences in the
availability of capital could emerge and that regions with high savings rates could find themselves with surplus
capital and a shortage of good investment opportunities, while other countries could find themselves short of
there are many factors contributing to the collapse
of global capital flows post-2008, not least the European public debt crisis, the weaknesses
in the Chinese financial sector, and a general lack of investor confidence worldwide.
Nonetheless, any measures on the part of U.S. regulators that have the effect—whether intentional
or incidental—of hastening the decline of such flows should be approached with extreme
caution. This is especially true when it is unclear whether the measures will deliver their promised benefits.
capital and facing lower growth.xvi Undoubtedly,
Unregulated shadow banks cause industry instability – any shock will
cause a crisis irrelevant to 1AC reforms.
AFP 10/1 (Associated Foreign Press, Channel News Asia, “IMF warns about growth of
shadow banking”, 10/1/14, http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/imf-warnsabout-growth-of/1392410.html)
Lightly regulated "shadow banking" has grown to huge proportions in the global financial
system and increasingly poses a risk to stability, especially in the United States, the
IMF said on Wednesday (Oct 1). As much as US$60 trillion in assets are handled by
shadow banks around the world, according to a statement by the International Monetary Fund. The sector
includes legal but lightly policed institutions like mutual funds, money market funds, wealth
management funds in China, and finance companies in emerging economies, that take money from investors
and lend it like banks. They have grown larger in the extremely low interest-rate environment of
the past six years, as investors seek higher yields on their money and banks tighten up under tougher post-crisis
the risks are high because
shadow banking largely depends on short-term funding. In a scare, it said, the impact
of panic withdrawals can snowball into the broader financial system and global
economy with outsized impact. That was seen in the financial crisis in 2008, when US
regulation. But the International Monetary Fund said in a new report that
money market funds which were important lenders in Europe faced large redemptions, and with the near-collapse
Since the crisis the power of shadow banks has only grown,
the IMF report noted. In the United States, shadow banks have nearly twice as much assets
of companies like insurer AIG.
as banks, and in the eurozone their assets have reached 60 per cent of the banks. In developing countries, the
figure is also close to 60 per cent. The sector has rocketed in China, where banks face interest rate controls,
pushing savers to seek better returns on their money outside the banks. The IMF estimates shadow banking
amounts to 35-50 per cent of China's gross domestic product. "Shadow banking in China stands out and warrants
close monitoring," the report said. "Shadow
banking tends to take off when strict banking
regulations are in place, which leads to circumvention of regulations," said Gaston Gelos, chief of
the Global Financial Analysis Division at the IMF. "It also grows when real interest rates and yield
spreads are low and investors are searching for higher returns."
No trade finance gap
Samuel Rubenfeld, WSJ, Bob McKay Discusses Trade-Finance Risks, July 10, ‘14,
http://blogs.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/2014/07/10/bob-mckay-discusses-trade-financerisks/
What’s your reaction to the recent report from the International Chamber of Commerce,
which said excess anti-money laundering enforcement could affect the trade-finance
business? Accuity has not seen a wholesale exiting from correspondent banking.
Rather, some Western banks are scrutinizing the numbers of correspondents required to
sustain their business practices and support their customer base. Certainly, though, some
banks have reexamined their correspondent relationships with banks that have lax AML
practices, or with non-bank remittance firms in countries that are susceptible to illicit
activities. Arguably, the corporate customers for these Western banks will require a
sustainable network of financial institutions, either through the branches or via
correspondents. There is also the likelihood of larger non-Western banks sweeping in to
pick up these under-served smaller financial institutions, recognizing the market
opportunities surrounding trade finance.
FATCA tubes trade finance
Neil Hodge, Writer for legal week, quoting a bunch of industry experts, “The long reach of
FATCA,” | 9/24/’14 http://www.legalweek.com/legal-week/analysis/2370775/the-longreach-of-fatca
FATCA is this summer's top acronym thanks to the wide-sweeping new US rules that came
into force on 1 July. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act compels any organisation
outside the US that handles client money to, in effect, report the financial details of all US
account holders to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The legislation affects financial
institutions such as banks and fund managers, but also trust companies and even law firms.
However, it seems that law firms (and their clients) are finding that what was supposed to
be largely a 'tick box' exercise of updating and sharing client details is more complicated –
and costly – than they thought. For legal advisers around the world, the challenge is
threefold: to advise clients correctly given the complexity of the law and the speed with
which key deadlines are approaching; to determine whether their own law firm is subject to
FATCA; and to know how to approach the flow of annual compliance business from clients.
FATCA's extra-territorial provisions target US taxpayers so that they cannot use foreign
accounts to evade tax. The law's main elements require financial institutions based outside
the US to analyse new and existing client accounts, identify US account holders and,
indirectly, report client information to the IRS. However, because of data protection laws,
institutions in fact need to provide this information to their own national tax authorities,
which have agreements to share that data with the IRS. More than 30 jurisdictions
(including the UK, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, Guernsey, Jersey, Isle of Man and the Virgin
Islands) have established bilateral intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) to apply and
enforce FATCA and almost 40 more (such as Bahamas and Panama) have formed
'agreements in substance' with the US Treasury. These intergovernmental agreements
make compliance with the US legislation mandatory under local laws. In return, registered
institutions in those countries will not suffer a 30% withholding tax on payments received
from US sources such as dividends, interest and even sales proceeds from shares or other
property. Organisations that are subject to FATCA must register with the US authorities. At
the time of writing, around 77,000 financial institutions worldwide are registered under the
Act with the US authorities, and more are expected to register in the coming months.
Institutions are required to register for a global intermediary identification number by
1 January 2015, which they need to provide to any US payers (US citizens or companies)
to demonstrate that they do not need to withhold tax on payments they make to the fund.
In the UK FATCA-registered institutions are also required to submit their first returns to HM
Revenue & Customs (HMRC) by 31 May 2015. Yet despite the timeframe and potentially
onerous nature of the US legislation, industry awareness seems to be low. "We are seeing
firms struggling with the IRS registration stage, namely when determining whether they
need to register and in what capacity," says Nick Matthews, global head of forensic services
at regulatory consultancy Kinetic Partners. Although this is superficially a tick-box exercise,
firms are said to be grappling with hundreds of pages of rules and exemptions.
Moreover, Matthews notes: "Consideration must be given to the question of how the full US
regulations, US intergovernmental agreements, guidance notes, the UK's version of FATCA
and forthcoming OECD common reporting standard might interact with one another for
client due diligence and reporting." Mihiri Gajraj, a solicitor within the private client team at
Pitmans, says: "I would be highly surprised if clients of most professional firms have much
awareness of FATCA itself or the requirements at this stage." She adds that HMRC's final
FATCA guidance – running to 181 pages – was only published on 28 August, so it has been
difficult to know how to advise clients. John McArthur, head of tax at Gillespie Macandrew, is
not afraid to spell out bluntly how he sees the general state of readiness. "From my
experience, FATCA awareness is almost non-existent among UK trustees. Worse still,
the scale of the compliance effort and the various deadlines are only just being
recognised by law firms." FATCA requires institutions to review existing customer details,
as well as obtain a self-certification from the account holder to establish their status and
residency details for accounts opened from 1 July. This will mean that institutions need to
assess and modify their existing databases and data-mining tools, as well as their 'know
your customer' and anti-money laundering procedures. But in a white paper released last
year, An Approach to Ensuring Compliance with FATCA, Tata Consultancy Services found
that "most of the foreign financial institutions (FFIs) fall behind in terms of quality of
customer data required to establish FATCA status. Also, most of them do not have a
centralised customer data source that could mitigate the effort required for due diligence
tasks, such as the aggregation of account balances. FFIs would have to employ efficient
client communication strategies and technology services to overcome these challenges." Will
Smith, tax partner at Sidley Austin, says that clients have found FATCA a "cost and
administrative burden". While US Congress expects to raise an additional $800m
(£492m) a year in tax revenue through the legislation, compliance costs are estimated to
cost the financial services sector tens of billions of dollars. "Investment funds, for
example, will need to have a rigorous system in place to check that historic client
information has the necessary level of detail to comply with the new rules, which means
asking the right questions," explains Smith. "It will be easier to collect all of the necessary
details for new clients taken after 30 June 2014 as these can be answered on induction
through self-certification, but finding the holes in existing information and filling them
accurately can take time, and it will cost." McArthur believes that "some trusts are going
to have to ask themselves if it is economically viable to actually operate because of
the cost of the compliance burden that FATCA imposes upon them".
This advantage is lobbyist hysteria
Kelly 9 (Joseph, Ph.D., J.D., co-editor-in-chief of Gaming Law Review and Economics, is a professor of business
law at SUNY College Buffalo in New York and an associate of Catania Con- sulting in Halcedon, N.J, Financial
Transaction Providers Needn’t Worry Too Much about Complying with UIGEA Rules, GAMING LAW REVIEW AND
ECONOMICS Volume 13, Number 3)
the burden on the financial transaction provider is
very light—“a simple notice” sent to the customer that “restricted transactions are
prohibited from being processed through the account or relationship.” Should the financial
transaction provider have actual knowledge that the existing customer is engaged in an
Internet gambling business, it should conduct due diligence procedures similar to that of a new
customer.54 If the transaction is cross-border, the agencies considered but rejected a
“requirement that the foreign counterparty have reasonably designed policies and
procedures in place to ensure that the commercial relationship would not be used to process
restricted transactions.”55 There is also no requirement “to conduct due diligence on its
foreign respondent’s commercial customers.”56 Should the U.S. participant be informed by
the U.S. government that the foreign customer has processed illegal gambling transactions,
then it should send a notice to the foreign customer pursuant to Appendix A to the
regulations.57
Concerning an established commercial customer,
Financial transaction providers must also establish a compliance program to monitor commercial transactions.
Remedial action is required only if the financial transaction provider has “actual knowledge”
of a restricted transaction “that is known or brought to the attention of compliance personnel of the
participant responsible for that transaction or customer (which may be below officer level) or any officer of the
This actual knowledge requirement is less of a burden than the “should have
known” or “reason to know” requirements to establish mere negligence.
The regulations do not mandate specific remedial action, and defer to the “business
judgment” of the financial transaction provider.59 One alternative might be to “block” a
prohibited transaction. The rules define blocking as rejecting but not “freezing or
otherwise prohibiting subsequent transfers ... ”60 Another alternative might be to utilize
participant.”58
business judgment either to deny a commercial customer access to a payment system or close the account for
processing a restricted transaction.61 The rules provide the financial transaction provider protection
from liability, as long as the termination or response is based on a reasonable belief that the transaction is
restricted.62 There is no liability if the financial transaction provider chooses for business reasons to refuse all
online gambling transactions.63
The regulations also exempt many of the designated payment systems, such as automated
clearing houses, check collection systems, and wire transfer systems, unless they have a
“customer relationship with the Internet gambling business,”64 which is extremely
unlikely, or in certain other limited circumstances. Money transmitting businesses are exempt unless they
permit transmission of funds “remotely other than a physical office of the money transmitting business.”65 Thus,
money transmitting businesses, such as check cashiers and currency ex- changes, could be
included only if they transmit funds by remote means.66 Credit card companies probably block all
gambling pursuant to utilization of the Merchant Code 7995. They might now create a new code for legal online
gambling.67
restricted transactions are with respect to commercial
customers only.68 The American Bankers Association summarized the responsibility to the
individual customer: “In other words, if your customer is the gambler, you do not have to
block gambling transactions except for debit and credit card transactions. In those cases,
you may rely on the network policies and procedures and merchant codes.”69
The regulations stress that policies to prevent
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR LAWYERS AND FINANCIAL TRANSACTION PROVIDERS?
The impact of UIGEA and the final rule, except for recordkeeping, should be minimal . The
agencies note “that most Internet gambling businesses that use card systems for funding do so
through non-U.S. merchant acquirers that are not subject to the Act or the Final Rule . . . .”70
Gaming lawyers, however, may rejoice at the prospect of drafting numerous “reasoned legal opinions” on what
Internet gam- bling is either lawful or unlawful. The agencies also estimate that the recordkeeping burden for
regulated entities should be approximately one million hours.71 Should the DOJ initiate prosecution of a financial
transaction provider, it may utilize UIGEA as the last count in a laundry list in a criminal proceeding.
No econ impact
Jervis 11, Robert Professor in the Department of Political Science and School of
International and Public Affairs at Columbia University, December 2011, “Force in Our
Times,” Survival, Vol. 25, No. 4, p. 403-425
Even if war is still seen as evil, the security community could be dissolved if severe conflicts of interest were to arise. Could the
more peaceful world generate new interests that would bring the members of the community into sharp disputes? 45 A zerosum sense of status would be one example, perhaps linked to a steep rise in nationalism. More likely would be a worsening
of the current economic difficulties, which could itself produce greater nationalism, undermine
democracy and bring back old-fashioned beggar-my-neighbor economic policies. While these
dangers are real, it is hard to believe that the conflicts could be great enough to lead
the members of the community to contemplate fighting each other. It is not so much that
economic interdependence has proceeded to the point where it could not be reversed – states that were more
internally interdependent than anything seen internationally have fought bloody civil wars. Rather it is that even if the
more extreme versions of free trade and economic liberalism become
discredited, it is hard to see how without building on a preexisting high level of political conflict leaders and
mass opinion would come to believe that their countries could prosper by impoverishing or
even attacking others. Is it possible that problems will not only become severe, but that people will entertain the thought
that they have to be solved by war? While a pessimist could note that this argument does not appear as
outlandish as it did before the financial crisis, an optimist could reply (correctly, in my view) that
the very fact that we have seen such a sharp economic down-turn without anyone
suggesting that force of arms is the solution shows that even if bad times bring about
greater economic conflict, it will not make war thinkable.
1NC Trade
Trade conflict inevitable but won’t kill relations
Feigenbaum, Asia CFR, ’10 (Evan, October 19, “Reluctant Warriors” Foreign Policy,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/10/19/reluctant_warriors?page=full)
In the United States, campaign ads this election season routinely blame trade with China for U.S. job losses. And in China, rising stars like Wang Yang,
the Communist Party boss who governs China's booming southern province of Guangdong, fret that China's "traditional model is excessively dependent
on international demand." In just the latest sign of this growing tension, the U.S. House of Representatives last month passed legislation seeking to raise
All signs at the moment point toward increased trade and financial
tension between the world's two economic giants. A full-fledged trade war between the
United States and China would be disastrous; thankfully, it's far from likely. Decision makers on both
sides appear to have concluded that their trade disputes can be managed without undermining
the entire U.S.-China relationship. Trade conflict is here to stay, but it is fast becoming a
"new normal" in relations between Washington and Beijing. What is fueling this growing tension on trade issues?
Unemployment and flat growth in the United States are one part of the story. But four underlying factors are dramatically
changing the U.S.-China economic relationship and will ensure that conflicts persist into the
future.
the cost to China for its currency policies.
Peaceful management of China’s rise is inevitable – assuming the WTO is
key relies on an infantilized notion of Chinese foreign policy
Herscovitch 14, Beijing-based Research Fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies
(Benjamin, Preserving Peace as China Rises I, March, cis.org.au/images/stories/foreignpolicy-analysis/fpa9.pdf)
Beijing and Washington are certainly locked in a subtle and high-stakes strategic dance.
Nevertheless, there are good reasons to expect each party to successfully pull off the
necessary steps. Beijing and Washington have each committed to ‘a new model of major
country relations’ in a bid to emphasise mutually beneficial cooperation and manage
inevitable tensions. Of course, good intentions alone do not guarantee that Beijing and Washington will be able to overcome strategic
distrust and mitigate irritants straining the relationship. However, both capitals stand to benefit if they can muster what Yang
Jiechi, Chinese state councillor and former foreign minister, calls the necessary ‘wisdom to manage their differences and
frictions.’ Two-way trade between China and the United States in goods alone has grown from US$33
billion in 1992 to more than US$536 billion in 2012.102 China exported US$426 billion worth of goods to the United States in 2012 (22% of total Chinese
goods exports), and imported US$110 billion worth of US goods.103 In 2013, Chinese investment in the United States totalled US$64 billion, while
Beijing holds approximately US$1.3 trillion in Treasury securities. The evolving balance of power in the Indo-Pacific and fraught regional relations will
extensive and mutually beneficial economic interests will help
minimise the fallout from these difficulties. Economic interdependence is certainly not a foolproof
safeguard against conflict and war, but it offers a strong incentive for relatively stable and peaceful Sino-US
relations. The notion that China and the United States lack the requisite wisdom to
carefully manoeuvre around each other also inadvertently infantilises Beijing. Underlying the
logic of a ‘China choice’ is the assumption that China must get what it wants because
otherwise it will bloody-mindedly risk war with the United States and its Indo-Pacific allies and
partners. Notwithstanding China’s gunboat diplomacy and sabre-rattling, Beijing understands that wise foreign policy
often means accepting an imperfect but mutually profitable compromise, and forgoing the
perfect realisation of strategic and territorial aims. With a leadership avowedly opposed to
the ‘Cold War mentality’ of ‘zero-sum games,’ and committed to peaceful development and
co-existence, Beijing can reliably be expected to choose economic growth and trade over
achieving all of its strategic goals and gaining control of every tract of territory it claims. In
periodically strain Sino-US ties, but
cases of unresolvable disagreement, Beijing does not expect acquiescence to its demands; it instead wants other capitals to sidestep problems and focus
on mutually beneficial arenas. As former Premier Li Peng argued: Disputes defying immediate solutions can be temporarily shelved in the spirit of seeking
common ground while putting aside differences. They should never be allowed to stand in the way of the development of normal state-to-state relations.
Even if China’s rise isn’t peaceful regional deterrence checks – also what
kind of shmuck tags a card “no defense?” How can that possibly work?
Waldron 14, IR Prof at Penn (Arthur, 2/17, China’s ‘Peaceful Rise’ Enters Turbulence,
ac.els-cdn.com/S0030438714000118/1-s2.0-S0030438714000118main.pdf?_tid=30c7d5ca-47e9-11e4-8cc800000aab0f01&acdnat=1412002939_352a02e441d6e2070e3535ce1a936f5e)
What causes China to hesitate, I suspect, is the failure of Japan, Korea, or the United States to
act in the way Beijing had expected, as what strategists call “cooperative adversaries,” who will play their roles in the script on which
the Chinese have pinned their hopes of victory. As seen above, according to the script, China’s actions should intimidate both Washington and Tokyo.
Then the United States ought to pressure Japan to make some “symbolic” concession to calm the situation—and this, it must be admitted, is quite
conceivable. The concession most often discussed is an acknowledgement by Tokyo that a genuine dispute exists over the sovereignty of the Senakakus,
which the Japanese maintain belong to them, period. Such a statement by Japan would be welcomed by many, but would open the way for potentially
interminable negotiations that could (although this seems unlikely) end with the islands somehow winkled away from Japan, or Japan’s claims diluted and
Japan has responded, unexpectedly for the Chinese, by strengthening
military preparations, raising the long steady defense budget by $12 billion to $246 billion.46 According to Stars and Stripes, “[T]he
her military edge dulled. Instead,
her
Japanese Self Defense Forces are looking at buying 17 Ospreys, according to reports in major Japanese newspapers, which detail a five-year defense
build-up. The program, valued at 24.67 trillion yen ($238 million), includes new tanks, unmanned aircraft, aerial refuelers, submarines, destroyers and
amphibious vehicles that could ferry ground troops ashore on remote islands, according to media reports. It will also include three Global Hawk
surveillance drones, whose ability to hover at high altitudes for more than 30 hours will serve to strengthen Japan’s surveillance capabilities in the
region.”47 Japan and Korea are also both buying advanced American F-35 fighters: Tokyo reportedly 43, Seoul reportedly 40 with a possible 20 more.
Because the F-35 can be given STOVL capabilities, it is quite conceivable that they might be carried by the latest Japanese “helicopter destroyers” of the
Izumo class, of which the first has just entered service.48 Japan has also spoken of the need for missiles to counter strikes against her. These actions
peace in the Pacific is not to be undermined by what can only be called
Chinese strategic irrationality. Why would she set a military course that undermines her necessary economic development? To answer
is extremely difficult. But she has undeniably done so. Furthermore, in typical Japanese style, this very wisely
conceived improvement of military capabilities is coming “just in time.” Japan will soon have
the ability to enforce “Anti Access and Area Denial” tactics against China should she threaten her
territories. This translates also into the ability, if necessary, to contribute, in case of conflict, to
bottling the Chinese fleet into the South China Sea by closing choke points. It is important
to understand the larger implications of this defensive capacity, not difficult to acquire, in
the hands of other claimants as well as Japan, with whom China has territorial disputes. The ability to
frustrate any small step China may take—to block the acquisition of an island, for example, or to prevail in a small scale naval
or air conflict—means that the path of psychological suasion powered by small bites at the larger strategic pie , is untenable for
Beijing. Politically, China simply cannot risk the internal outrage and humiliation— not to mention the
disastrous loss of prestige abroad—that would follow if, for example, some of her planes were downed, or her ships
sunk, in engagements with Japan, China, Vietnam, or even the Philippines. Nor could she tolerate the ignominy of having a landing force repelled from
are, in this author’s opinion, long overdue if
an island, or forced to give it up. In other words, the tactics that come naturally to the Chinese and are extolled in their writings, ancient and modern, of
rapid victories at low cost, are simply not available for the pursuit of her current policy—territorial recovery or aggrandizement, call it what you will.
Achieving those goals will demand a lot more fighting. The only option that remains for China is to escalate: to abandon her traditions of limited and highpay-off operations in favor of large engagements, protraction, attrition, and all the other horrors of full-fledged war. Were China to attempt such a
conflict, the pivotal question would be American extended nuclear deterrence. Would Washington, in fact, launch nuclear strikes against China to defend
Japan, South Korea, or any other ally? Attempts have been made to reassure the Japanese on this count, with official visits to secret American nuclear
facilities.49 This author believes that faced with an actual nuclear exchange, the United States would carry out an “agonizing reappraisal” and back down.
The British and French, who know us well, after all, believe this too. This is why they maintain, at all times, one nuclear missile submarine carrying a
terrifying thermonuclear force as a deterrent against which no defense is possible. The Japanese, Koreans, and other American friends know this as well.
So do the Chinese. If China attempted nuclear blackmail in connection with any of her claims, the almost certain result, in addition to a vast international
Mutual
Assured Destruction would then freeze the map of Asia and forestall any Chinese acquisitions.
Indirectly the Chinese admit this. As we have seen, former Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations, Sha Zukang spoke of the Senkakus
political and economic crisis, would be a rapid appearance of similar submarine forces, under the flags of the threatened countries.
as tiny islands over which it was not worth fighting. From that, however, he moved to threatening World War III.50 But whether intended or not, the first
they are not worth a Chinese fight
part of his statement suggests that if they are not worth Japan or the United States fighting for,
either. In the future, perhaps, tensions in Asia will rise to the point where only the possession of independent nuclear deterrents by our allies can keep
the strengthening of conventional forces by our allies and other
states, looks set to counter sufficiently the Chinese threat. Let us hope that with the path of gradual
steps and “victory without fighting” closed off, China will have the sense not to choose the road of escalation.
the peace. For now, though,
China will never comply with DSB
Webster 2014 (Timothy; Director of East Asian Legal Studies & Assistant Professor of
Law, Case Western Reserve University]; PAPER COMPLIANCE: HOW CHINA IMPLEMENTS
WTO DECISIONS; 35 Mich. J. Int'l L. 525; kdf)
Since the number of WTO cases involving China is small, certitude about China's future conduct in the DSB would
patterns are clear. First, in the majority of cases, China has revised its legal and
regulatory systems to comply with the DSB rulings. It has done so typically within the
reasonable period of time in which it agreed to do so and has accumulated a strong record in terms of the
quality of its implementation. Moreover, as of July 2013, no Chi-nese case has gone into compliance
proceedings, wherein an arbitration panel determines the costs of one country's non-compliance to other WTO
members. This is a significant difference from other major trading partners, such as the United
States, E.U., and Japan, all of which have been respondents in compliance proceedings. n256 Some of these cases
be inapt. But certain
have dragged on for more than a decade, indicating a resistance to WTO rulings far and above anything that China
has exhibited. Second, China has found ways to resist WTO rulings and norms. Inconsistent
regulations remain in effect. In the three cases discussed above - DS 362 (intellectual property enforcement), DS
363 (trading rights for publications) DS 373 (financial information services) - inconsistent regulations either
continue in effect or were revised so as not to ef-fectuate [*573] the purpose of the ruling. This lacuna could be a
function of institutional capacity.
China's capa-cious bureaucratic institutions produce reams of
regulations; it is unclear whether many of them keep close tabs on the various regulations they produce, and
quite definite that some of them have not repealed regulations found to be in-consistent. Or there may be a more
China wants to keep the inconsistent regulations in place, and understands
that its regulatory maze may be too labyrinthine for other WTO members to navigate.
Whether by design or neglect, a number of inconsistent regulations continue to plague China's
compliance record. Moreover, local and provincial-level regulations often amplify the effects of inconsistent
sinister explanation:
national regulations. In cases such as DS 363 and DS 373, lower-level government agencies have promulgated
policies that reference regulations that were either revoked or found inconsistent. This means that WTOinconsistent regulations will cast a regulatory afterglow at various levels of the Chinese legal system. The most
striking case of non-compliance, so far, has been the trading rights case (DS 363). The revisions suggest-ed by the
Not only did China
not comply within a reasonable period of time, but it also left in place several regulations
that the DSB deemed inconsistent with WTO disciplines. This suggests that, in particularly sensitive
areas, China will not fulfill its implemen-tation obligations. As China continues to gain experience with
WTO litigation, instances of non-implementation are likely to increase. China has, in essence,
learned that it can "get away" without fully complying with DSB rulings and
recommendations. Indeed, as noted above, two recent rulings show just how far China is willing to push the
implemen-tation envelope. Third, reforming laws in China means less than it would in Western
liberal democracies with robust legal institu-tions. One-party rule, coupled with a unitary
governance structure, allow the party-state to control the passage of laws and regulations, dictate
DSB challenged China's censorship regime and long-held monopoly on cultural information.
revisions to the domestic legal environment, and coordinate changes with a maximum of speed and minimum of
China has tinkered with the literal letter of its law, but it continues to produce a whole
range of programs that violate WTO principles. It is perhaps unrealistic to think the DSB
can induce compliance more broadly, that is, outside of the regulation challenged. But it is
doubtful that China's domestication of DSB rulings has meaningfully influenced the
development of its political economy. Many basic norms - market capitalism, dereg-ulation, strong
protection of intellectual property, limits on subsidies - remain alien to China. Fourth, many WTO violations
take place in the interstices of law, areas where government officials exercise discre-tion:
institutional friction.
whether or not to register a foreign company, to issue it a business license, or to prosecute someone for IP theft.
China distributes trade regulations to governmental agencies as "internal guidance"
that should be published under China's WTO transparency obligations, but in fact
[*574] never are. n257 The dispute set-tlement system provides a very rough tool by which to
Likewise,
(neibu cankao)
reshape a member's domestic legal system and to monitor its implementation of WTO
commitments. A range of violations takes place, either below the radar or without meaningful recourse for
investors or manufacturers outside of China. Finally, China deploys the tactical features of the dispute
settlement system to buffer the ruling's impact. China settles "easy" cases early and
prolongs decisions that seriously disrupt its political system, harm core economic interests,
or require significant internal reform to implement . Like any other national actor, China seeks to
maximize its interests and minimize disruptions that international law and institutions may inflict upon its domestic
legal and regulatory sys-tems.
Ev says
GATT/WTO decline key to development of regionalism which is a better
check on protectionism and war. They’ll use their Cho evidence to say that
creates a dangerous spaghetti bowl but that assumes old forms of
regionalism not new regionalism which is a never ending supply of
delicious Olive Garden hospitaliano
Brkic 13, Economics Prof at U of Sarajevo (Snježana, 3/25, Regional Trading
Arrangements – Stumbling Blocks or Building Blocks in the Process of Global Trade
Liberalization?, papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2239275)
Besides those advocating the optimistic or pessimistic view on regionalism effect on global trade liberalization,
some economists, such as Frankel and Wei, hold a neutral position, in a way. Frankel and Wei believe that forms
regionalism can be
– depending on circumstances – linked to greater or smaller global trade liberalization. In the
and achievements of international economic integrations can vary and that, for this reason,
years-long period of regional integration development, four periods have been identified during which the
integration processes were becoming particularly intensive and which have therefore been named "waves of
regionalism". The first wave was taking place during the capitalism development in the second half of the 19th
century, in the course of British sovereign domination over the world market. Economic integrations of the time
primarily had the form of bilateral customs unions; however, owing to the comparative openness of international
trading system based on the golden standard automatism, this period is called the "era of progressive
bilateralism". The next two waves of regionalism occurred in the years following the world wars. Since the
disintegration processes caused by the wars usually spawned economic nationalisms and autarchic tendencies, it is
were marked by discriminatory international economic
integrations, primarily at the level of so-called negative integration, with expressedly “beggarthy-neighbor” policies that resulted in considerable trade deviations . This particularly refers to the
not surprising that post-war regionalisms
regionalism momentum after the First World War, which was additionally burdened by the consequences of Big
The current wave of regionalism started in late 1980s and spread around the
world to a far greater extent than any previous one did: it has covered almost all the continents and
Economic Crisis.
almost all the countries, even those which have mis to join all earlier regional initiatives, such as the USA, Canada,
Integration processes, however, do not show any signs of flagging. Up till now,
over 200 RTAs have been registered with GATT/WTO, more than 150 of them being still in force, and
most of these valid arrangement have been made in the past ten years. Specific in many ways, this wave
was dubbed "new regionalism". The most specific characteristics of new regionalism include:
geographic spread of RTAs in terms of encompassing entire continents; greater speed; integration
forms success; deepening of integration processes; and, the most important for this theoretical
discussion, generally non-negative impact on outsiders, world economy as a whole, and the
Japan and China.
multilateral liberalization process. Some theorists (Gilpin) actually distinguish between the "benign" and "malign"
regionalism. On the one hand, regionalism can advance the international economic stability, multilateral
liberalization and world peace. On the other, it can have mercantilist features leading to economic well-being
degradation and increasing international tensions and conflicts.
Analyses of trends within the
contemporary integration processes show that they mainly have features of
"benign" regionalism. Reasons for this are numerous. Forces driving the contemporary
regionalism development differ from those that used to drive earlier regionalism periods in the
20th century. The present regionalism emerged in the period characterized by the increasing
economic inter-dependence between different world economy subjects, countries attempts to
resolve trade disputes and multilateral framework of trade relations. As opposed to the 1930s episode,
contemporary regional initiatives represent attempts to make the members'
participation in the world economy easier, rather than make them more distant
from it. As opposed to 1950s and 1960s episode, new initiatives are less frequently motivated
exclusively by political interests, and are less frequently being used for mercantilist
purposes. After the Second World War, more powerful countries kept using the economic
integration as a means to strengthen their political influence on their weaker partners and
outsiders. The examples include CMEA and European Community arrangements with its members' former
colonies. As opposed to this practice, the new regionalism, mostly driven by common
economic interests, yielded less trade diversion than previous one, and has also
contributed to the prevention of military conflicts of greater proportions. Various
analyses have shown that many regional integrations in earlier periods resulted in trade deviations,
particularly those formed between less developed countries and between socialist countries. In recent years,
newly formed or revised regional integrations primarily seem to lead to trade
creation. Contrary to the “beggar thy- neighbor” model of former international economic
integrations, the integrations now offer certain advantages to outsiders as well, by stimulating
growth and spurring the role of market forces. The analyses of contemporary trends in
world economy also speak in favor of the "optimistic" proposition. The structural analysis shows that
the world trade is growing and that this growth results both from the increase in intra-regional and
from the increase in extra-regional trade value (Anderson i Snape 1994.)28. Actually, the intraregional
trade has been growing faster, both by total value and by its share in world GDP . The extrahowever, the
regional trade share in GDP was increasing in some regions – in North America, Asia-Pacific and Asian developing
countries. However, the question arises as to whether the extra-regional trade would be greater without regional
integrations or not? The answer would primarily depend both on the estimate of degree of some countries' trade
policy restrictedness in such circumstances, and on factors such as geographic distance, transport communications,
One should also take into account certain contemporary integration
features – the primarily economic, rather than strategic motivation, and continuous
expansion, which mostly includes countries that are significant economic partners. With
respect to NAFTA, many believe that the negative effects on outsiders will be negligible, since
the USA and Canada have actually been highly integrated economies for a long time
already, while the Mexican economy is relatively small. The same view was pointed out by the EU,
with respect to its expansion. It particularly refers to the inclusion of the remaining EFTA
countries, because this will actually only complete, in institutional terms, the EU strong
economic ties with these countries. Most EFTA countries have been part of the European
economic area (EEA), i.e. the original EC-EFTA agreement, for a few years already, and conduct some
70% of their total international exchange with the Union countries. EU countries are also the most
significant foreign-trade partners of Central and East Europe countries, and the recent
joining the Union of several of them is not expected to cause a significant trade diversion .
Besides, according to some earlier studies, during the previous wave of regionalism, in the 1967-70 period, the
creation of trade in EEC was far greater than trade diversion: trade creation ranged from 13
to 23% of total imports, while trade diversion ranged from 1 to 6%. In Latin America, the
new regionalism resulted in the faster growth of intra-regional trade, while the extraregional exports and imports also continued to grow. Since early 1990s, the value of intra-regional
political relations among states.
imports registered the average annual growth of 18%. In the same time, the extra-regional exports were also
growing, although at a lower rate of 9% average a year; its share in the total Latin America exports at the end of
decade amounted to 18% as compared to 12% in 1990. In the 1990-1996 period, the intraregional imports grew
by some 18% a year. The extra-regional imports were also growing very fast, reaching the 14% rate. These data
reflect a great unbalance in the trade with extra-regional markets, since the imports from countries outside the
Since the described trends point to the continued growth of
extra-regional imports and exports, they also show that regional integration in Latin
region grew much faster the exports.30
America has had the open regionalism character. Besides, the pending establishment of FTAA
– Free Trade Area of Americas will gather, in the same group, the so-called "natural" trade partners –
countries that have had an extremely extensive mutual exchange for years already, and the outsiders are
therefore unlikely to be affected by strengthening of regionalism in this part of the world.
Contemporary research shows that intra-regional trade is growing, however, same as
interdependence between North America and East Asia and between the EU and East Asia . It
can also be seen that the biggest and the most powerful countries, i.e. blocs, are extremely
dependent on the rest of the world in terms of trade. For the EU, besides the intra-European
trade, which is ranked first, foreign trade has the vital importance since it accounts for 10% of
European GDP. In early 1990s, EU exchanged 40% of its foreign trade with non-members, 16% out of which
with North America and East Asia together. EU therefore must keep in mind the rest of the world as
well. The growing EU interest in outsiders is confirmed by establishing "The Euro-Med Partnership", which
proclaimed a new form of cooperation between the EU and the countries at its South periphery32. Besides, the
past few years witnessed a series of inter-regional agreements between the EU on the one
hand, and certain groups from other regions on the other (MERCOSUR, CARICOM, ASEAN and GCC). In
case of North America the ratio between intra-regional and inter-regional trade is 40:60, and in East Asia, it is
Any attempt to move towards significantly closed blocs ("fortresses") would
require overcoming the significant inter-dependence between major trading blocs.
Besides the analysis of contemporary trends in extra- and intra-regional trade, other research was
conducted that was supposed to point to the reasons why the new regionalism has mainly a nonnegative impact on outsiders and global liberalization. The distinctive features of new
regionalism were also affected to characteristics of international economic and political
environment it sprouted in. In the 1980s, economic nationalisms were not so expressed as
in the interventionism years following the Second World War; however, the neo-liberalism
represented by GATT activities did not find the "fertile ground” in all parts of the world. Regionalism growth in
the circumstances of multilateral system existence is, among other things, the consequence of
distrust in multilateralism. „The revival of the forces of regionalism stemmed from
frustration with the slow pace of multilateral trade liberalization... If the world trade regime
could not be moved ahead, then perhaps it was time for deeper liberalization within more
limited groups of like-minded nations... Such efforts would at least liberalize some trade... and might
45:55.
even prod the other nations to go along with multilateral liberalization.“33 Kennedy's round and Tokyo round of
the
1980s witnessed significant changes in the world economy that the GATT trade system was
not up to. Besides. GATT had not yet managed to cover the entire trade in goods, since there were still
trade negotiations under GATT auspices brought a certain progress in the global trade liberalization. However,
exceptions in the trade in agricultural and textile products that particularly affected the USA and developing
countries. GATT system of conflict resolutions, and its organizational and administrative mechanism in general also
In this vacuum that was created in promoting trade and investment multilateralism from
the point when GATT inadequacy became obvious until the start of the Uruguay round and the
establishment of World Trade Organization, the wave of regionalism started spreading across the world
again. Prodded by the Single European Act and the success of European integration, many countries turned
to an alternative solution – establishment of new or expansion and deepening of the
existing economic integrations. Even the USA, the multilateralism bastion until then, made a radical turn in
required revision.
their foreign-trade policy and started working on designing a North American integration.
That outweighs—multilateral trade causes wars with a larger impact
Thoma- Economics Prof, U of Oregon- ‘7 Mark, Trade Liberalization and War, July,
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/07/trade-liberaliz.html
Globalisation is by construction an increase in both bilateral and multilateral trade flows.
What then was the net effect of increased trade since 1970? We find that it generated an
increase in the probability of a bilateral conflict by around 20% for those countries
separated by less than 1000kms, the group of countries for which the risk of
disputes that can escalate militarily is the highest. The effects are much smaller for countries which
are more distant. Contrary to what these results (aggravated by our nationality) may suggest, we are not anti-globalisation
The result that
bilateral trade is pacifying brings several more optimistic implications on globalisation . First, if
activists even though we are aware that some implications of our work could be (mis)used in such a way.
we think of a world war as a war between two large groups or coalitions of countries, then globalisation makes such a war less
likely because it increases the opportunity cost of such a conflict. Obviously, this conclusion cannot be tested but is a logical
implication of our results. From this point of view, our work suggests that globalisation may be at the origin of a change in the
our results do confirm that increased trade
flows created by regional trade agreements (such as the EU) are indeed pacifying as
intended. Given that most military conflicts are local, because they find their origins in
border or ethnic disputes, this is not a small achievement . These beneficial political
aspects of regional trade agreements are not usually considered by economists who often
focus on the economic distortions brought by their discriminatory nature. Given the huge
human and economic costs of wars, this political effect of regional trade
agreements should not be discounted. This opens interesting questions on how far these regional trade
agreements should extend – a topical issue in the case of the EU. The entry of Turkey in the EU would indeed
pacify its relations with EU countries (especially Greece and Cyprus), but also increase the probability of a conflict
between Turkey and its non-EU neighbours. However, our simulations suggest that in this case, the first effect dominates
the second by a large margin. More generally, our results should be interpreted as a word of
caution on some political aspects of globalisation. As it proceeds and weakens the economic
ties of proximate countries, those with the highest risk of disputes that can escalate into
military conflicts, local conflicts may become more prevalent . Even if they may not appear optimal on
purely economic grounds, regional and bilateral trade agreements, by strengthening local
economic ties, may therefore be a necessary political counterbalance to economic
globalisation.
nature of conflicts, less global and more local. Second,
WTO credibility waters down Multilateral Environmental Agreements
eliminating their effectiveness – particularly CITES
Millimet 14, Professor of Economics at SMU (Daniel, May 12, Multilateral Environmental
Agreements and the WTO,
www.freit.org/WorkingPapers/Papers/TradePolicyMultilateral/FREIT745.pdf)
In light of the positive time trends in WTO membership and the number of MEAs in force, the time series evidence
does not suggest a `chilling' effect of WTO membership on the creation of new MEAs. Nonetheless, there are
theoretical models of MEAs emphasize the need for full
participation to achieve success, and full participation requires punishments (or rewards)
which typically are enacted through trade policies such as trade sanctions, import tariffs, or export
reasons to be concerned. First,
subsidies. Absent such punishments (or rewards), full participation is difficult to sustain in theory. Moreover, trade
leakage due to nonparticipants may undermine the effectiveness of MEAs (Barrett 2005). In practice, Eckersley
vulnerability to a WTO challenge has
given rise to a conservative or ‘cool’ implementation of trade restrictive obligations
under existing MEAs to avoid the threat of legal challenge." Second, some MEAs must
impede free trade by definition to achieve their objectives. For example, the Convention
on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) aims “to ensure that
international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival."
Thus, the underlying premise of the MEA is to impede trade in certain goods for the sake of
environmental preservation. Given that many MEAs are incompatible with the
objectives of the WTO to further the “principles of liberalization" through “commitments to lower custom
tariffs and other trade barriers" and agreements to “require governments to make their trade
policies transparent by notifying the WTO about laws in force and measures adopted," countries
may be wary of joining MEAs that distort free trade due to fear of violating WTO
(2004, p. 26) states that “increasing international awareness of
rules (Rauscher 2005). Thus, even though an increasing number of MEAs have entered into
force, less than full participation may, in part, be attributable to the WTO and may undermine
the effectiveness of these agreements. Alternatively, attempts by relatively recent MEAs to ensure
compatibility with multilateral trade rules through the avoidance of trade issues do so at the
expense of effectiveness, making them less appealing to potential participants. For example, Eckersley
(2004, p. 26) concludes that “the expanding reach of the WTO's trade agreements does
serve to cramp the scope and operation of MEAs ..."
CITES is key to ocean biodiversity and global food security
Vincent 13, Canada Research Chair in Marine Conservation at the Fisheries Centre at the
University of British Columbia (Amanda, June, The role of CITES in the conservation of
marine fishes subject to international trade,
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12035/full)
Ensuring sustainable extraction of marine fishes is crucial to the conservation of
biodiversity in the oceans, well-being of local communities and food security globally. The Food
and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) indicates that 57% of all fisheries it tracks are fully
exploited and require effective management to avoid decline and that a further 30% are
overexploited, depleted or recovering from depletion; the latter is a notable increase from 10% in 1974 to 26% in
1989 (FAO 2012a). Over 80% of global catches, however, are derived from fisheries lacking formal assessment,
and small unassessed fisheries are in substantially worse condition than assessed fisheries (Costello et al. 2012).
populations of marine fishes can indeed be extirpated or become
globally threatened, notwithstanding their typically high fecundity and capacity for wide dispersal (Hutchings
There is, today, no doubt that
2001; Sadovy 2001; Reynolds et al. 2005). It is also evident that a tremendous number of people depend on
fishing for livelihoods (up to 820 million people) and food security (some 3 billion people) (FAO 2012a). The
economic value of many species draws greatly from their international trade. Approximately 38% of all fish
products (from both wild and cultured sources) were exported in 2010 (FAO 2012a). Increased trade is facilitated
by improvements in storage and transport capabilities and stimulated by the increasing use of fish in expanding
cash economies and for foreign exchange earnings (e.g. Béné et al. 2007; Asche and Smith 2009). It is also
enabled by the spiralling prices attained by some species, such as bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) (Collette et al.
2011). Seafood has become one of the most widely traded of all commodities, with a total export value of the
seven principal fishery commodity groups (94.66% of world total) reaching 109 billion US dollars in 2010 (FAO
2012a). A study by TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, in the early 1990s found that fisheries
constituted about 25% of international trade in wild species, which has a total worth of about $160 billion (TRAFFIC
as cited in Dickson 2002). In addition, many millions of tonnes of low trophic level fishes are used as fishmeal for
agriculture and aquaculture or for other non-food purposes. Conservation and sustainable use of fish stocks,
populations and species has largely been vested in fisheries management agencies and organizations at national,
regional and global levels. At the national level, fisheries and/or marine affairs agencies tend to be production
oriented and distant from the forestry and environment agencies that are typically charged with conservation policy
and activity. The approximately 17 Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs: FAO 2012b) have a
mandate for managing high seas, straddling and highly migratory fish stocks, either by taxon or by geographical
region. Increasingly, however, there have been calls for RFMOs to improve their conservation and management of
fishery resources (see refs in Gilman et al. 2013). Most RFMOs, for example, have large governance deficits in
areas such as by-catch, with binding measures addressing about one-third of by-catch problems (Gilman et al.
2013), and many fisheries are not covered by any RFMO. FAO, often argued to be the arbiter of fisheries issues
and concerns, has no fisheries management mandate or capacity per se, nor can it insist on agreed action (FAO
1995). Rather, FAO works primarily through its voluntary Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF) across
a wide range of fisheries issues, provides important capacity building assistance to many countries and collates and
analyses fisheries data. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES)
is ideally placed to complement national and regional management of fish species
subject to international trade. First, CITES was crafted specifically to prevent international
trade from contributing to the extinction of commercially exploited species. To that end, it
has a precautionary mandate to regulate international trade of species that are or may
become threatened by such commerce. Second, it has a long history of engagement with
difficult issues and has achieved notable successes by catalysing improvements in the
conservation status of taxa ranging from crocodiles to orchids (Kievit 2000; Dickson 2002). Third, CITES is
the only multilateral environmental agreement that has legal mechanisms in place to
promote compliance with agreed restrictions on exports. Fourth, CITES has a global reach
with 177 member States (Parties), representing over 90% of the world's countries. CITES can be seen as
both a trade Convention serving to address conservation concerns, and a conservation Convention that addresses
threats by regulating trade.
Ocean biodiversity key to all life
Craig 03,
Law Prof at Indiana (Robin, Taking Steps Toward Marine Wilderness
Protection? Fishing and Coral Reef Marine Reserves in Florida and Hawaii, 34 McGeorge L.
Rev. 155)
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
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 provide. n857 More generally, "
ecosystems are particularly dependent on their biodiversity. 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 functi oning 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
maintaining and restoring the biodiversity of marine ecosystems is
critical to maintaining and restoring the ecosystem services that they provide. Non-use
system. n860 Thus,
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
: if we kill the ocean we kill
ourselves, and we will take most of the biosphere with us. The Black Sea is almost dead, n863 its oncethat may be unique in the world. We may not know much about the sea, but we do know this much
complex and productive ecosystem almost entirely replaced by a monoculture of comb jellies, "starving out fish and dolphins, emptying fishermen's nets,
and converting the web of life into brainless, wraith-like blobs of jelly." n864 More importantly, the Black Sea is not necessarily unique.
Food security collapse causes failed states - extinction
Brown 09, Founder of both the WorldWatch Institute and the Earth Policy Institute (May,
Lester R., Scientific American, “Could Food Shortages Bring Down Civilization?” Ebsco)
The biggest threat to global stability is the potential for food crises in poor countries to
cause government collapse. Those crises are brought on by ever worsening environmental degradation One
of the toughest things for people to do is to anticipate sudden change. Typically we project the future by
extrapolating from trends in the past. Much of the time this approach works well. But sometimes it fails
spectacularly, and people are simply blindsided by events such as today's economic crisis. For most of us, the idea
that civilization itself could disintegrate probably seems preposterous. Who would not find it hard to think seriously
about such a complete departure from what we expect of ordinary life? What evidence could make us heed a
warning so dire--and how would we go about responding to it? We are so inured to a long list of highly unlikely
catastrophes that we are virtually programmed to dismiss them all with a wave of the hand: Sure, our civilization
For many years I have studied
global agricultural, population, environmental and economic trends and their interactions.
The combined effects of those trends and the political tensions they generate point to the
breakdown of governments and societies. Yet I, too, have resisted the idea that food shortages
could bring down not only individual governments but also our global civilization. I can no longer ignore
might devolve into chaos--and Earth might collide with an asteroid, too!
that risk. Our continuing failure to deal with the environmental declines that are undermining the world food
economy--most important, falling water tables, eroding soils and rising temperatures--forces me to conclude that
Even a cursory look at the vital signs of our
current world order lends unwelcome support to my conclusion. And those of us in the
such a collapse is possible. The Problem of Failed States
environmental field are well into our third decade of charting trends of environmental decline without seeing any
significant effort to reverse a single one. In six of the past nine years
world grain production has fallen
short of consumption, forcing a steady drawdown in stocks. When the 2008 harvest began, world carryover
stocks of grain (the amount in the bin when the new harvest begins) were at 62 days of consumption, a near
record low. In response, world grain prices in the spring and summer of last year climbed to the highest level ever.
As demand for food rises faster than supplies are growing, the resulting food-price inflation
puts severe stress on the governments of countries already teetering on the edge of chaos.
Unable to buy grain or grow their own, hungry people take to the streets. Indeed, even before
the steep climb in grain prices in 2008, the number of failing states was expanding [see sidebar at left]. Many of
if the food situation
continues to deteriorate, entire nations will break down at an ever increasing rate. We
have entered a new era in geopolitics. In the 20th century the main threat to international
security was superpower conflict; today it is failing states. It is not the concentration of
power but its absence that puts us at risk. States fail when national governments can no longer
provide personal security, food security and basic social services such as education and health care. They
their problem's stem from a failure to slow the growth of their populations. But
often lose control of part or all of their territory. When governments lose their monopoly on power, law and order
begin to disintegrate. After a point, countries can become so dangerous that food relief workers are no longer safe
and their programs are halted; in Somalia and Afghanistan, deteriorating conditions have already put such
Failing states are of international concern because they are a source of
terrorists, drugs, weapons and refugees, threatening political stability everywhere. Somalia,
programs in jeopardy.
number one on the 2008 list of failing states, has become a base for piracy. Iraq, number five, is a hotbed for
terrorist training. Afghanistan, number seven, is the world's leading supplier of heroin. Following the massive
genocide of 1994 in Rwanda, refugees from that troubled state, thousands of armed soldiers among them, helped
Our global civilization depends
on a functioning network of politically healthy nation-states to control the spread of
infectious disease, to manage the international monetary system, to control international
terrorism and to reach scores of other common goals. If the system for controlling infectious
diseases--such as polio, SARS or avian flu--breaks down, humanity will be in trouble. Once
states fail, no one assumes responsibility for their debt to outside lenders. If enough states
disintegrate, their fall will threaten the stability of global civilization itself.
to destabilize neighboring Democratic Republic of the Congo (number six).
Regulating the wildlife trade is key to prevent global pandemics
Karesh 05, Wildlife Conservation Society (William, Emerging Infectious Diseases: vol 11,
no. 7, July, p. 1001-2)
Rather than attempting to eradicate pathogens or the wild species that may harbor them, a
practical approach to decrease the risk for the spread of infectious diseases would include
decreasing contact among species. Closing down retail poultry markets in Hong Kong for 1
day per month reduced the rate of H9N2 avian influenza virus in market birds. Little
equivalent research has been conducted in market systems that sell wildlife, but an
analogous approach to the precautionary principle would be an appropriate action to take
before the next outbreak or pandemic. Since wildlife markets are a system of networks
with major hubs, these trading points provide practical control opportunities to maximize
the effects of regulatory efforts. Focusing efforts at markets to regulate, reduce, or in some
cases, eliminate the trade in wildlife could provide a cost-effective approach to decrease the
risks for humans, domestic animals, wildlife, and ecosystems.
Global pandemics are coming and outweigh nuke war
Zakaria 05, Editor of Time Magazine (Fareed, “A Threat Worse than Terror,” 10-31,
Newsweek, http://www.fareedzakaria.com/ARTICLES/newsweek/103105.html)
A flu pandemic is the most dangerous threat the United States faces today," says Richard
Falkenrath, who until recently served in the Bush administration as deputy
Homeland Security adviser. "It's a bigger threat than terrorism. In fact it's bigger
than anything I dealt with when I was in government." One makes a threat
assessment on the basis of two factors: the probability of the event, and the loss of life if
it happened. On both counts, a pandemic ranks higher than a major terror attack, even one
involving weapons of mass destruction. A crude nuclear device would probably kill hundreds of
thousands. A flu pandemic could easily kill millions. Whether this particular virus
makes the final, fatal mutation that allows it to move from human to human, one
day some virus will. The basic factor that is fueling this surge of viruses is China's growth.
(China is the natural habitat of the influenza virus.) As China develops, it urbanizes, and its
forests and wetlands shrink. That forces migratory birds to gather closer together-and closer
to human habitation--which increases the chances of a virus spreading from one species to
the next. Also, growth means a huge rise in chicken consumption. Across thousands of
homes in China every day, chickens are slaughtered in highly unhygienic ways. "Every day
the chances that this virus or another such virus will move from one species to another
grow," says Laurie Garrett, author of "The Coming Plague," who has been writing brilliantly
on this topic for years. Nobody really disputes that we are badly unprepared for this
threat. "If something like this pandemic were to happen today," says Falkenrath, "the
government would be mostly an observer, not a manager." The government can't even give
intelligent advice to its citizens because it doesn't actually know what to say. We don't know
whether people should stay put, leave cities, stay home or go to the nearest hospital.
During the cold war, hundreds of people in government participated in dozens of
crisis simulations of nuclear wars, accidents and incidents. These "tabletop exercises"
were conducted so that if and when a real crisis hit, policymakers would not be
confronting critical decisions for the first time. No such expertise exists for today's
deadliest threat.
2NC
Conditionality Good 2NC
First our offense1- Critical thinking- Reacting to multiple attacks increases aff ability to
evaluate their best arguments and collapsing down teaches the neg to
make strategic, reactive decisions- that’s key to decisionmaking skills
2- Negative flexibility- The aff gets to parametricize the rez by picking one
example- its an inherent advantage because they know way more about
their one aff than the neg who has to be prepared for every aff- the only
check is to advance multiple cps
Now our defense1- Not “infinitely” regressive- time limits and quality of argument create a
limit. Our interp is: _______________________________________
2- Ground- Aff can always make “aff key” args and addons- it’s offense
against any and all CPs
3- Strat and time skew are inev- The alternative to multiple advocacies is
more T and Das- those require just as many answers and create strategic
double binds too
4- CPs aren’t uniquely complex and perms check the advantages of neg
fiat- a SKFTA CP is way less threatening than a SKFTA DA because you can
perm it
5- To vote aff you have to believe the debate is irreparably damaged by
conditionality- it might make debate hard but not impossible
6- Don’t be fooled by “reciprocity”- the aff’s job is to pick the question of
debate and the neg’s is to find a way to disprove it- that’s why stability is
important for the aff and flexibility is key for the neg
2nc cp
Legality is irrelevant for WTO compliance---the only issue is equal
application
Murawski 8 – Mattia V. Corsiglia Murawski, J.D. Candidate at Santa Clara University
School of Law, “THE ONLINE GAMBLING WAGER: DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL
IMPLICATIONS OF THE UNLAWFUL INTERNET GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT ACT OF 2006”,
Santa Clara Law Review, 48 Santa Clara L. Rev. 441, Lexis
Furthermore, new pragmatic legislation would correct [*470] U.S. violations of GATS because
domestic and foreign operators would be treated equally. Such legislation would obviate the current legal
battle taking place in the WTO. First, the legislation would repeal or amend the Horseracing Act. It would allow foreign operators to
enter into the same U.S. markets that U.S. operators enter. Otherwise, the WTO will take action. n308 In addition, the new
legislation should jettison the UIGEA's discriminatory carve outs for the states. Though the WTO's final decision will avoid the
question of whether a U.S. state law banning unlicensed online gambling is discriminatory, the WTO's initial ruling implies that it is
Congress can avoid this by crafting
nondiscriminatory legislation, which would only require passing a gambling law that treats
state and international operators equally. Congress should construct the law so as to allow individual states to
determine the legality of online gambling within their borders, as long as the state gives foreign operators equal access. As a
result, a state can either make online gambling completely illegal and bar all foreign
operators or make all unlicensed online gambling illegal and allow licensed foreign
operators. Either way, states will have decisional autonomy over online gambling and international principles will be protected.
likely to consider the issue with greater scrutiny. n309
Thus, the United States, through thoughtful regulation of Internet gambling, can avoid unnecessary revenue loss, legitimatize the
gambling industry, increase government control and oversight, curtail negative social implications, prevent interstate jurisdiction
issues, and put the county into compliance with its international legal obligations.
2nc bank
No banking collapse coming – they’re resilient
Klein, ’12 (Ezra, March 14, “Wonkbook: ‘The U.S. banking system is safe’” Washington
Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/wonkbook-the-us-bankingsystem-is-safe/2012/03/14/gIQAbKfcBS_blog.html)
It's not clear that Rick Santorum's wins in Mississippi and Alabama will mean much when we look back on 2012. Mitt Romney still looks to be marching
towards the nomination. His delegate count is almost twice that of Santorum's, and if you look at last night's results closely, endorsements from the
the
Federal Reserve released the results of its latest round of financial "stress tests." In these
simulations, the Fed looked at the condition of 19 major financial institutions if the global
economy entered another recession that sent unemployment up to 13 percent and housing prices down another 20 percent.
Eighteen of the 19 tested institutions passed the tests. The results mean most of the
institutions will be permitted to increase dividends and stock buybacks. The FT summarized the Fed's
message succinctly: "The US banking system is safe." That's important for businesses who want to make
state's two superdelegates mean Romney actually picked up more delegates in Mississippi than Santorum did. So what will matter? On Tuesday,
sure that if they begin borrowing and investing again, they're not suddenly going to get cut off in things go south in Europe. It matters for the banks, as
most of them are getting the go-ahead to wriggle out of the Fed's tight, post-crisis rules and take more risks. That could mean more lending. It matters
it's a little bit more fuel for the recovery
for the markets, which closed at pre-crisis highs yesterday. And it matters because
.
After years of false starts and illusory dawns, it's wise to be very cautious about predicting sustained growth for this economy. Just ask Ben Bernanke,
recoveries are partly driven
by expectations about whether they will continue or not. If a business thinks consumer demand will be higher next
whose interview invoking "green shoots" aired three years ago this week. But it's nevertheless true that
year than it is today, they need to make investments to meet that demand. And every time we get another piece of news like this, it gives them that
much more reason to make those investments. Top stories 1) SANTORUMENTUM! DENEWTIFICATION! OMITTED! "Rick Santorum has won Republican
primaries in Mississippi and Alabama, a surprising Deep South sweep that signals Santorum is consolidating support among the party’s conservatives.
Both of the wins were narrow: just a few points separated Santorum from rivals Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich in both states. The larger lesson of the
night was that this long-running primary--far from leading the party to unite behind a favorite--has left Republicans divided stubbornly into
thirds...Santorum has only a slim chance of actually becoming the GOP nominee. But the results in Alabama will help Santorum with the only hope he has
left--that Gingrich can be convinced to drop out of the race, and that conservatives will unify behind a single challenger to Romney, making the rest of
the primaries a two-man race." David Fahrenthold in The Washington Post. @davidaxelrod: @MittRomney You know what they say: as America Samoa
goes, so goes the nation! UP NEXT: Illinois. "The Republican presidential candidates spent the past week honing their Southern accents and talking
awkwardly about their love of grits. With their Southern swing behind them, they will return to the industrial heartland for a potentially pivotal primary
Tuesday in Illinois. Illinois is the biggest of the three contests that will be held over the next week, after Saturday’s Missouri’s caucuses and Sunday’s
Puerto Rico primary. Given Rick Santorum’s strong performance in the South, Illinois becomes the latest state where pressure will be on Mitt Romney to
regain momentum. It also offers the former Massachusetts governor the opportunity to extend his winning streak in Midwestern primaries. Romney
struggled mightily to beat Santorum in primaries in the two other big Midwestern states, Michigan and Ohio. A Romney victory in Illinois would puncture
Santorum’s hopes of winning and give the former governor a decisive hold on the GOP nomination." Dan Balz in The Washington Post. @pourmecoffee:
Most banks
pretty good at dealing with stress. "Most of the biggest U.S. banks passed the latest round of 'stress tests' administered by federal
Very, extremely dramatic night tonight in politics as more stuff happens along the way to Mitt Romney being the nominee. 2) FED:
regulators--a milestone in the recovery from the financial crisis that clears the way for investors to receive tens of billions of dollars in increased bank
dividends and share buybacks. But in a major setback to Citigroup Inc.'s efforts to restore investor confidence, the Federal Reserve rejected the bank's
request to raise its dividend and expand its buyback. Citigroup, the third-largest U.S. bank by assets, passed the stress test, but the Fed indicated it
The Fed's stress tests were designed to see
whether banks would have enough capital on hand to keep lending even if another deep
economic slump or financial crisis were to strike. It's the third round of stress tests: The first took place in 2009, in the
would fall short of some capital requirements if it boosted the payouts...
immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. At that time, banks fared much more poorly." Dan Fitzpatrick and Victoria McGrane in The Wall Street Journal.
2nc link
1ac says it’s the linchpin!!
DSB is whats key to mess up the MEAs
Its gonna be like the end of the WTO
Codd 07 (Kathryn Codd is a Litigation Attorney in Arlington, VA with 6 years of
experience, William and Mary Law Review, 2007, vol. 27, iss. 9, “Betting on the Wrong
Horse: The Detrimental Effect of Noncompliance in the Internet Gambling Dispute on the
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)”,
http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1133&context=wmlr&seiredir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dantigua%2Bwto
%2Bgambling%2Bdispute%26hl%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%252C9%26as_ylo%3D2006%26a
s_yhi%3D#search=%22antigua%20wto%20gambling%20dispute%22)
IV. THE EFFECT OF U.S. NONCOMPLIANCE IN THE GAMBLING DISPUTE ON THE LEGITIMACY
OF GATS "The best international agreement is not worth very much if its obligations cannot be
enforced when one of the signatories fails to comply with such obligations."1'29 The United
States is just such a signatory whose noncompliance could bring down the entire trade in
services agreement. A failure by the United States to conform to the DSB's
recommendations in the gambling dispute will be detrimental to GATS for a variety of
reasons. First, GATS suffers from skepticism among member nations regarding the
strength of its provisions-a skepticism that cannot be overcome by any precedent for
service trade regulation. Next, the United States was highly influential in the push for an
agreement on trade in services, 3 ' and, along with playing a role in the development of
GATS, the United States also helped shape the dispute settlement framework that
governs the agreement. 3' U.S. failure to abide by its commitments to the agreement would
appear disingenuous and set a poor example for other GATS members. In addition, the
United States's attitude toward the Panel's initial decision undermines the DSB's credibility
in deciding disputes under GATS. The United States lacks the typical reasons for
noncompliance that have been proffered to explain previous instances of noncompliance. The
inexplicable nature of U.S. non compliance in the Antigua gambling dispute further
emphasizes that perhaps GATS members are unwilling to take this agreement seriously. Finally,
noncompliance in the Antigua dispute leaves the United States open to further challenges to its
gambling laws, which could lead to repeated instances of noncompliance under GATS. A.
Fragility of GATS as a Mechanism for Regulating Trade in Services A negative response to
a WTO decision under GATS by a powerful WTO member nation, such as the United
States, will be far more detrimental than a similar response under other WTO agreements.
One of the greatest reasons that U.S. noncompliance in the gambling dispute will
have such a strong impact is that GATS is a much younger agreement than GATT and
is far less battle tested internationally. 132 The WTO Ministerial Conferences have devoted
relatively little time and attention to the issue of trade in services.'33 GATS is already
struggling to gain respect in the face of a problem with overly flexible provisions that allow
for fairly facile escape from its relevant obligations.3 Additionally, very few cases thus far
have complained exclusively of violations under GATS.'35 The often cited examples of
U.S. noncompliance involved other agreements.'36 U.S. unresponsiveness to Panel
recommendations involving GATS may be more damaging, therefore, than similar responses
under GATT or other WTO agreements. For example, TRIPS, promulgated at the same time
as GATS, has suffered from similar dilemmas. Some scholars have worried that the U.S.
response in the Section 110(5) Copyright dispute, which appears to advocate substituting
compensation of victims for compliance with obligations, may likewise undercut that
agreement. 3 7 The precedent for international protection of intellectual property, however,
was already well established prior to promulgation of TRIPS. TRIPS incorporated a prior
convention governing authors and composers of music and was accompanied by a number
of other older conventions as well.13 Thus, the fact that U.S. noncompliance with a
WTO decision under TRIPS, a comparable but slightly more conventional agreement than
GATS, may have such a potentially negative impact on that agreement suggests
that a similar U.S. response under GATS will carry even more destructive weight. B. U.S.
Influence on the Creation of GATS and the Current DSU A further reason that U.S.
noncompliance under GATS is detrimental is that the United States played a key role in the
development of a multilateral agreement regarding the services industry, and,
because of this early leadership, failure to honor its service sector commitments could
undermine the agreement. The United States was among the first countries to advocate for
the incorporation of a services agreement into the GATT. The argument originated in the
1970s, and in 1982, the United States made a formal proposal to include services at a GATT
ministerial meeting.139 GATS eventually took effect in January of 1995.140 U.S. influence
also shaped the current framework for dispute settlement in the WTO. This influence
can be traced to a number of factors. First, the United States played a large role in the
writing of the WTO treaty itself, which includes the current DSU.14 1 Further, as
discussed above, the United States has been the primary player in a majority of WTO
disputes.'42 During the first ten years of its existence, the United States participated in 62
percent of all panel proceedings and 66 percent of all appellate proceedings. 143 Finally,
many of the lawyers participating in WTO dispute settlement proceedings-as both
representatives of member nations and as part of the WTO bodies-received education or
training through the U.S. legal system.144 Thus, U.S. influence permeates into many aspects
of dispute settlement under GATS. The influence the United States exerted over the passage
of GATS and its dispute settlement mechanism is another of the primary reasons that an
unfavorable U.S. response to decisions handed down under the agreement could have such
a damaging result. Because the United States initially fought so vehemently for the
adoption of GATS and the DSU, other member nations could perceive these actions as
indicating that liberalized trade in services is important enough for the United States to get
involved and push through an agreement, complete with a dispute settlement framework.
At the same time, the United States appears to have helped construct an agreement that is
binding on all members, except when the United States decides otherwise.145 Member nations
may identify such actions as both contradictory and hypocritical. [Footnote 145 begins
here] 145. See Rose, supra note 6, at 227 ("The Clinton and Bush administrations spent
years convincing other countries to join and abide by [WTO] decisions. How would we feel
if China announced that it would not permit American carmakers to compete
against its local manufacturers, and then blew off a ruling against it by the WTO?”).
[Footnote 145 ends here] C. U.S. Expression of Discontent with the Panel's Ruling Another
factor contributing to the fragility of GATS as a guarantor of service sector commitments is
the fact that the gambling dispute is the first instance in which the United States has
ever declared publicly its intent to ignore the recommendations of a WTO body. 4'
Even in the most notorious instances of noncompliance, such as the Hot-Rolled Steel and
Section 211 cases, the United States at least expressed that its objective was to adhere to the
WTO's recommendations.147 Although the United States was not forced to make good on its
threat in the gambling dispute, as the recommendations of the Panel were largely
overturned by the Appellate Body, such blatant disregard for the authority of the Panel sets a
terrible example for other member nations. Further, other member nations may
perceive the reversal of the Appellate Body as an example of U.S. attempts to strongarm
the DSB into ruling in its favor, further undermining the WTO as a guarantor of service
sector commitments. Although the United States may appear to be justified in its threat
given that the Panel report was overturned, the lack of deference to a legally binding judicial
body is concerning. The United States has never expressed an intent to disregard a
questionable DSB ruling pertaining to any other WTO agreement, suggesting that the
United States takes perceived violations of GATS less seriously than it does violations
of its other multilateral obligations. If other members decide that they too will not
only fail to comply with WTO recommendations, but also decline to make an appearance
of attempting compliance, the legitimacy of GATS will be in jeopardy. D. Lack of Recourse to
the Usual Excuses for Noncompliance The United States has compiled a regular grab
bag of excuses for its noncompliance with some of the more controversial WTO
decisions noted above. 4 ' Most of these excuses, however, fail to apply to the gambling dispute
as justification for the United States's lack of responsiveness. The United States partially
excused its noncompliance in some of the earlier instances by pointing to the fact that some
of the disputes dealt with fundamental principles of U.S. law and by indicating that making
major changes to U.S. legislation is a lengthy process.'49 Congress that even include a
provision to address compliance. 5 ' Unlike in the Byrd Amendment and Hot-Rolled Steel
cases, the United States cannot appeal to the difficulty of a legislative fix as a reason for
noncompliance in this case. In fact, "with just a little tweaking of the Interstate Horseracing
Act, the United States would be in complete compliance with its WTO treaty obligations.''
The United States also cannot rely on the excuse that it currently lacks enough information
to do an effective cost-benefit analysis of the trade effects of reforming the offending
measure, as it did in the US-Section 211 Appropriation Act dispute. 5 2 Critics concerned
with the possible increase in gambling and its resulting ill effects on public morals need not
fear because, in this case, bringing the IHA into compliance with WTO recommendations
would have little effect on gambling in the United States. As one scholar notes, even if
foreign operators were allowed to take U.S. horse racing bets, bettors would be unlikely to
risk their money with less-established operators.' 53 Furthermore, the United States could
either ban offtrack betting altogether, or it could allow foreign operators to take bets subject
to the strict regulations already in place. Because many foreign operators fail to meet those
regulations, they would be shut out of the market, likely making the effects on gambling
minimal."" E. Vulnerability of the United States to Further Challenges Under GATS Finally,
the United States may have placed itself in a position to face further challenges from other
nations intent on fostering the growth of their respective gambling industries; such challenges
represent further opportunities to weaken the legitimacy of GATS. One such country is the
United Kingdom, which recently passed its Gambling Act,'55 providing for licenses to
operate remote gambling sites that a Gambling Commission would regulate and evaluate. 5
' The Act also provides extensive regulation to protect against crime, addiction, and
exploitation of minors, as well as to promote open and fair gambling. 5 7 In its response to
the initial proposal for industry reforms in Great Britain, the government found that Britain's
gambling laws had "failed to keep pace with technology," and that gambling had "become
part of the main stream of leisure activity."'58 Although retaliatory trade sanctions
from a small country such as Antigua are not daunting to the United States, 59 the
prospect of a similar trade dispute with Britain, a major trading partner, is a far greater threat.
The European Union and other countries are also considering the possibility of liberalizing
their gambling regulations to permit Internet gambling.160 Additionally, because of a
procedural error made by Antigua in the Panel stage of the dispute, the Appellate
Body declined to scrutinize U.S. state laws for consistency with GATS obligations. 1
Should another member, such as Britain or the European Union, later bring a similar case, U.S.
domestic gambling laws will be on the chopping block. If these larger, more
powerful GATS members decide to pursue complaints against the United States
with regard to its gambling laws, this relatively minor act of noncompliance with regard to
Antigua's complaint could spiral into a glaring example of U.S. noncooperation under
GATS. This would force the United States into an international dilemma: comply with the
DSB and amend its gambling laws, thereby admitting its error in the current dispute, or fail to
comply and seal the fate of GATS as an agreement devoid of material significance.
CONCLUSION GATS has the potential to be one of the most important agreements
under the administration of the WTO. The international trade in services has been
growing at a rate much faster than that of trade in goods over the past two decades.'62 A
strong, multilateral agreement in the services sector will increase security and predictability in
trading, strengthen the ability of weaker nations to compete in the international
services market, and also aid in the growth of member nations' economies along the lines of
comparative advantage.'63 Yet, GATS is in danger, with the threat coming from one of its
major proponents and signatories: the United States. The U.S. response to the DSB
recommendations jeopardizes the legitimacy of GATS as a mechanism for regulating services
disputes. The United States has not lived up to its end of the bargain with regard to its GATS
obligations, with this failure made weightier by the fact that the country was responsible in
large part for the creation of the agreement in the first place. Although concerns about
national sovereignty admittedly must accompany a multilateral agreement such as GATS,
the agreement is structured in such a way that the United States could have protected
its gambling laws if it so chose. Yet, it did not, and once a commitment is made to liberalize
a particular sector, that commitment ought to be honored. The United States could have fixed
this problem early by simply amending or repealing the Interstate Horseracing Act. This Act
was neither as difficult to change nor as fundamental as much of the other legislation that
has been the subject of a WTO dispute. By failing to comply, the United States has made
both itself and the agreement vulnerable as a legitimate mechanism for regulation of trade. An
early precedent has been set for noncompliance under GATS, and, if the United States hopes to
benefit from liberalization of the service trade in the future, this is indeed a dangerous
precedent. To avoid detrimental effects on such an important multilateral trade agreement,
the United States should take the steps necessary to comply with the WTO recommendations
in the gambling dispute. Compliance would not require major adjustments to any current
federal gambling regulations, and, in reality, would likely have little effect on domestic
gambling."' Yet, though the costs of compliance would be very little to the United
States, the benefits are clearly great. To realize these benefits, the United States should do
its part to protect the agreement that protects trade in services.
China
No risk of extinction- the us would overwhelm chinese forces
Rosemount 2/7/08 (Henry Jr., distinguished professor emeritus @ St.
Mary’s College of Maryland, pg. http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4945)
Finally, China has 100-400 nuclear weapons. But only the 18 in the silos mentioned
above are capable of striking the western continental United States and these
cannot be launched quickly. Unless fired as a first-strike weapon, they could easily
be destroyed. The United States, on the other hand, has almost 10,000 nuclear
warheads and sufficient delivery capabilities to obliterate every Chinese city with
a population of a half-million or more, and still have more than enough of a
stockpile to hold the rest of the world at bay.11
US-China conflict won’t go nuclear – political checks
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania) September 9/29, 2004
U.S. military capacity is now so overstretched by the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts
that a Chinese move to realize its own top strategic objective, the scooping up of
Taiwan to complete the hat trick with Hong Kong and Macao, would find the United
States hard-pressed to be able to respond at all. A U.S. threat of a nuclear attack on
China -- with China's inevitable nuclear counterstrike -- would be so wildly
unacceptable in political terms in the United States itself as to be out of the question
for any U.S. administration. The idea of causing Los Angeles to disappear because
China had seized Taiwan would be a trade-off that no American leader would even
dare contemplate. America is lucky so far that China has not yet sought to match its
economic reach in Asia with a corresponding assertion of political influence. That doesn't
mean that Asia will inevitably become a sphere of Chinese dominance. What will happen
instead -- what is already happening, in fact -- is that other Asian powers such as Japan,
Korea and India will increasingly take steps to check Chinese power by increasing their own
military capacity. In other words, what was a situation in which the United States stood
between Japan and Korea and the imposition of Chinese influence will now become one in
which those countries will become more dependent on their own resources to defend
themselves. The response of the Koreans could be said to be a move toward resolving the
problems between South and North Korea to enable them to present a united front to the
Chinese. The response of Japan that can be expected will be limited remilitarization. The
health and peace of the region will depend on the degree to which the competition among
these countries will be economic, rather than political and military. What will this
modification of the balance of power in Asia mean for the United States? First of all, none of
this will happen tomorrow. The extension of China's reach and the Japanese and Korean
response will be gradual and spread out across the years, although there may well be some
pinpricks at the extremities sooner rather than later. The Chinese themselves will avoid
direct confrontation with the United States at all costs. It is not their way. Conflict
between the two countries would be asymmetrical in the extreme in any case.
Basically, the two can't attack each other. Nuclear warfare is out. The million-man
People's Liberation Army isn't portable. The Chinese are definitely not into
terrorism.
Their evidence cherry picks examples
Johnston, Professor Government at Harvard, ’13 (Alastair Iain, Spring, “How New and
Assertive is China’s New Assertiveness?” International Security, Vol 37 No 4, p 7-48,
ProjectMuse)
Analytical Problems with the New Assertiveness Meme¶ The argument that China’s diplomacy in
2010 was newly assertive contains at¶ least three analytical flaws that have
characterized much of the commentary¶ on Chinese foreign policy in the United
States and elsewhere—selection on the¶ dependent variable; ahistoricism; and
poor causal specification. The first two¶ are general methodological problems that often plague media
and pundit¶ analysis on a range of public policy questions; though serious, I do not go ¶ into them in detail here.
The last deals with problematic empirical claims¶ associated with causal
arguments, the evaluation of which requires critical¶ examination of the available
evidence.¶ selecting on the dependent variable¶ A common problem in the new assertiveness
analyses is that they consider¶ only confirming evidence while ignoring
disconfirming examples. The risk¶ here is exaggerating change and discounting
continuity. The pundit and media¶ world thus tended to miss a great deal of
ongoing cooperative interaction between¶ the United States and China throughout
2010. Examples include the¶ continued growth of U.S. exports to China during the year;
the continued high¶ congruence in U.S. and Chinese voting in the UN Security
Council;70 Chinese¶ support for UN Security Council Resolution 1929, which imposed tougher¶ sanctions on the
Iranian regime—a move appreciated by the Obama administration;¶ 71 Beijing’s abiding by its 2009
agreement with the United States to¶ hold talks with representatives of the Dalai Lama;72 a
Chinese decision to con-¶ tinue the appreciation of the renminbi prior to the Group
of Twenty meeting in¶ Toronto in June 2010; Hu Jintao’s decision to attend the U.S.-hosted
nuclear¶ summit in April 2010 (in the wake of the January 2010 Taiwan arms sales decision,¶ the Chinese
had hinted that Hu would not attend the summit); a Chinese¶ decision to pressure the Sudan
government to exercise restraint should South¶ Sudan declare independence; and
China’s more constructive cross-strait policies,¶ in the wake of Ma Ying-jeou’s 2008
election as president of the Republic of¶ China, which have contributed to a decline in
tensions between China and¶ Taiwan, thus reducing the probability, for the moment, of a
U.S. military¶ conflict with the PRC.¶ In addition to these U.S.-specific cooperative actions, throughout 2010
China¶ continued to participate in all of the major multilateral global and regional
institutions¶ in which it had been involved for the past couple of decades, including¶ the World Trade
Organization, the International Monetary Fund, the¶ United Nations Security Council, the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations¶ (ASEAN) Plus 3, the China-ASEAN Free Trade Agreement, UN peacekeeping¶
operations, and antipiracy activities in the Gulf of Aden. There is no evidence¶ that, beginning in 2010, it
began to withdraw from global institutional life or to¶ dramatically challenge the
purposes, ideology, or main organizational features¶ of these institutions to a degree that it
had not in the past. Diplomacy in these¶ institutions continued to show the
expected mix of focused pursuit of status¶ and material interest, defense of sovereignty, and
functional cooperation that¶ has characterized China’s approach to these institutions
over the past couple¶ of decades.¶ This list of examples is not exhaustive, of course. I present these only
as examples¶ of a more general point: that determining whether, on balance, Chinese
diplomacy¶ became much more assertive in 2010 requires considering the full¶
range of Chinese conflictual and cooperative behavior, not just China’s
noncooperative¶ actions. Methodologically, therefore, selecting on the dependent variable¶ makes it
difªcult to arrive at any conclusion about a new assertiveness.
China wouldn’t be a threat for decades
Etzioni, Professor International Affairs George Washington, 8-21-’12 (Amitai, “The United
States’ Premature Pivot to “Asia”” Soc Vol 49, p 395-399,
http://icps.gwu.edu/files/2012/09/A446_the_United_states_premature_pivot_to_asia.pdf)
Few, if any, question the observation that U.S. power is declining and that of China is rising. However, one should not overlook the fact that the
U.S. decline starts from a very high level and China’s rise from a very low one. Hence,
even if China’s economy continues to grow at a rapid pace, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
projects that, in 2050, the U.S. GDP per capita will still be nearly three times larger
than that of China, despite the fact that China’s total GDP will be 20 % larger. Moreover, given that China has a population
four times larger than that of the U.S., a population that is demanding and gaining a share of the affluence
so far limited to a small fraction, and that the legitimacy of the regime is based on such economic wellbeing, the income per
capita is the more relevant figure. According to the World Bank, in 2010, China’s income per capita was a mere $4,260 to America’s $47,240, placing it
behind Ecuador and Algeria. While exact estimates and calculations vary, the wide per capita gap is expected to persist in the coming decades. And this
assumes no political and environmental upheavals and disregards the demographic deterioration of China and the relative youthfulness of the U.S.
Impact
Fish depletion causes ocean collapse - extinction
VOA, 10 (Voice of America News, “Bluefin Tuna Endangered by Overfishing,” 12/1,
http://www.voanews.com/english/news/asia/Bluefin-Tuna-Endangered-by-Overfishing-111159869.html)
Predatory fish are at the top of the ocean food chain. They help keep the balance
of marine life in check. Without their eating habits, an overabundance of smaller
organisms might affect the entire underwater ecosystem. Some scientists say such a shift
could lead to a total collapse of the oceans. Yet so far, those in charge of regulating international fisheries have done
little to protect at least one endangered species. Scientists say this species is on the brink of extinction… and it is all our fault. "Nobody's free of blame
in this game," said Kate Wilson. Kate Willson is an investigative journalist who recently exposed what she says is a $4-billion, black market trade in the
"Scientists tell us that when a top predator like bluefin or another big fish is depleted, that
will affect the entire ecosystem," she said. "Scientists say you better get used to eating jellyfish sashimi and algae burgers if
you let these large fish become depleted - because they anchor the ecosystem." Ecosystems are how living things interact
sale of bluefin tuna.
with their environments and each other. Scientists agree they can change dramatically if a link disappears from the food chain.
and members of environmental groups met in Paris in mid-November to discuss
Government officials
fishing regulations that may affect all life
on Earth. Sue Lieberman is Director of International Policy with the Pew Environment Group: a Washington-based, non-profit agency. She says
the bluefin is in jeopardy. "The fish is in worse shape than we thought, and that's why we're calling for the meeting of this
commission to suspend this fishery ... to put on the brakes and say, 'let's stop," said Sue Lieberman. "Let's stop mismanaging and start managing the
right way to ensure a future for this species.'" Both Lieberman and Willson say that greed, corruption and poor management of fishing quotas brought us
The quotas are designed to let fish recover, but quotas are more than scientists recommend, but
even within quotas, there's consistent lack of enforcement, fraud, fish being traded without documents to the point
to this point. "
where it's a multibillion dollar business that will cause the depletion of an incredible species," said Lieberman. Willson says that fishing the bluefin to
near-extinction followed increased Japanese demand for fresh sushi - starting in the 1970s and 80s. And - fishing practices that target the two primary
regions in which blue fin spawn: the Gulf of Mexico and the Mediterranean Sea. "You don't need a PhD in fisheries to know that's really not very smart,"
said Sue Lieberman. "If you want the species to continue into the future, you don't take them when they come to breed." And that practice shines light
on a bigger problem. "Ninety per cent of all large fish - it's estimated - have been depleted," said Kate Wilson. "Bluefin is just a bellwether for what's
happening to what's left of the world's large fish." "We're not saying there should be no fishing, but we are saying there should be no fishing like that,"
said Lieberman. "This isn't single individuals with a pole and a line; this isn't recreational fishermen; this is massive, industrial scale fishing.
"If countries
really want to protect the remaining stocks of bluefin, they have to get serious
about enforcing the rules and listening to their scientists when they set catch limits," said Wilson. "Management of
fish species on the high seas isn't just about making sure people have nice seafood when they go to a restaurant; it's
about the very future of our planet," continued Lieberman. "And we have to get management of the oceans correct and
Governments can change this; this isn't an environmental threat that we throw up our hands and there's nothing to do about it."
we can't keep … and governments can't keep acting like we'll take care of that next year. We'll worry about making money in the short term, we'll listen
to the fishing industry; we'll worry about the ocean & the environment later. We don't have that luxury."
Overfishing causes a shift to tuna farms
Longo, 11 (Anthropology Professor-East Tennessee State University, “Global Sushi: The
Political Economy of the Mediterranean Bluefin Tuna Fishery in the Modern Era,”
http://jwsr.ucr.edu/archive/vol17/Longo-vol17n2.pdf)
In the late twentieth century, global fish consumption expanded with the help of aquaculture production. As global marine captures
could not keep pace with the expanding markets, typically in core nations, industrial
aquaculture emerged as the strategic method to augment production (Bailey, Jentoft, and
Sinclair 1996; UN FAO 2007). Inspired by the growing market in aquaculture products and its industrialized production methods, bluefin tuna
“farming” was adopted as a way to further expand and control production, and increase surplus
value. Tuna farming or ranching, sometimes referred to as “capture-based aquaculture” (Ottolenghi et al. 2004), is a form of intensive tuna production
that in many ways parallels feedlots used for livestock production on land. Bluefin are captured and placed in feeding cages to rapidly increase weight,
and specifically their fat content, until they are ready for slaughter. Unlike conventional industrial aquaculture systems, such as those used in salmon,
sea bass, tilapia, and others, there has been little success rearing bluefin tuna in controlled environments Given that closing the bluefin tuna life cycle in
captivity for commercial production has been difficult to achieve, purse-seines capture wild “seed” stocks that are transported to fattening facilities, many
of which are in the Mediterranean. In 2008, there were almost seventy registered bluefin tuna ranching facilities throughout the Mediterranean in eleven
countries, with a potential capacity of over 63,000 tons (ICCAT 2008). The “domestication” of bluefin tuna for commercial mass production has been a
process that has thus far eluded scientists and industry (Sawada et al. 2005). Captured bluefin are transferred from purse-seine nets to sea cages, and
transported by tugboat to the ranching facility. Moving at the careful pace of about one to one-and-a-half knots to avoid harming the valuable cargo,
transport can take many days, weeks or, even more than a month. Some firms are vertically integrated, which allows for easier coordination of this
mammoth undertaking (Bregazzi 2005). In the wild, bluefin tuna are opportunistic feeders, preying on an array of small and large species. However, in
captivity, they are fed a diet of frozen fish selected for the high oil or fat content to produce bluefin that meet the quali ty demands of the relatively new
sushi and sashimi markets. The feed is usually made up of some combination of herring, sardines, mackerels, anchovies, and squid. Feed fish are
occasionally procured locally, but the majority has been imported from outside the region, including from the Americas (Ottolenghi 2008). Throughout
the process, ranches attempt to increase the quantity of feed to levels that approach seven to ten percent of the bluefin tuna’s weight, with an average
consumption of five to six percent of body weight per day. Therefore, a bluefin tuna ranch with a capacity of 1,000 tons can consume an average of fifty
to sixty tons of feed fish per day. ABFT are kept in ranches anywhere from four months and, in some locations, up to two years. The global supply of
ranched bluefin tuna reached over 20,000 tons by the year 2000, about half of which came from the Mediterranean (Miyake et al. 2003). In the following
five years tuna ranching production in the Mediterranean tripled. This growth continued and capacity in the Mediterranean doubled again after 2005
(ICCAT 2008). Consequently, up to eighty percent of Mediterranean exports of bluefin tuna to Japan originated from tuna ranches (Ottolenghi et al. 2004;
Tuna ranches have become the main supplier of ABFT for the global
market. As Mediterranean bluefin became a major supplier for Japan, the markets
were linked. Ranching methods were adopted primarily to maintain the “quality” and
supply for the sushi and sashimi market. Thus, over a few decades, the Mediterranean bluefin tuna
fishery has been transformed from a long-standing sustainable trap fishery that supplied
mostly regional populations, into a globalized industrial fishery , guided by the dictates of transnational capital, supplying
Tudela and García 2004).
fattened bluefin for global elites.
Causes spread of toxic algae blooms
Staniford, 3 (President- The Global Alliance Against Industrial Aquaculture, “Closing
the Net on Sea Cage Fish Farming,” Paper presented to Queensland Conservation Council
and the Australian Marine Conservation Society for Charting the Best Course Conference,
http://freedownload.is/doc/closing-the-net-on-sea-cage-fish-farming-377266.html)
An increasing body of international research points to strong causal links between
untreated finfish farm effluent and toxic harmful algal blooms [36]. Whilst there is a growing body
of evidence detailing waste impacts from salmon farms, the threat posed by tuna, kingfish and red snapper farm wastes has been less well publicised.
Privately though the Australian Government have long known about tuna farming’s capacity to produce wastes. According a 1996 Fisheries Research and
Development Corporation project: “Environmental monitoring was undertaken from the first stages of southern bluefin tuna farming development, with
the early surveys suggesting localised effects on the seafloor sediments and benthic communities, as well as surrounding water column. The causes
appeared to be primarily from the shading effect of the nets, accumulation of waste feed and increased sedimentation of parti culate matter, as well as the
release of dissolved nutrients” [37] A ‘pollute and move on’ mentality has characterised the Australian Government’s approach to tuna farming: “Frid and
Mercer (1989) recommended the siting of sea cages in areas of high tidal flow as this would disperse the sediment rain over a broader area and reduce
the more localised environmental impact. They note, however, that nutrient enrichment of the water body for a longer period could stimulate the growth
of phytoplankton. An alternative approach advocated by some resource managers and used for the farming of tuna in South Australia, is to accept that
the accumulation of wastes will exceed the natural assimilative capacity of the seafloor community. In response farmers are issued with a larger lease
area so as to allow the practice of cage rotation and seafloor fallowing (Bond 1993)” [38] Such a state-sponsored policy of shifting cultivation has not
been without its problems. In 1996, ca. 75% of all the farmed tuna stock in South Australia were mysteriously wiped out by a toxic algal bloom with any
surviving fish towed to deep water [39]. The 1996 Boston Bay incident is still highly controversial and whilst there is some documentary evidence many
facts are still to emerge from unpublished insurance and Government documents [40]. Tuna farmers claim they were the innocent victims of a natural
The link between tuna farming wastes and the
algal blooms is all too obvious. One year after the 1996 tuna kill a researcher attached to Flinders University conducted
tests at tuna feedlot sites near Port Lincoln and found 47 species of algal bloom.
event. However, it has all the hallmarks of man-made disaster.
One potentially toxic bloom affected all monitored sites near Port Lincoln in May and June 1997 [41]. A subsequent TV investigation in 2000 suggested
“In the last 30 years there have been
increasing numbers of fish kills around the world. The tuna in this South Australian fish-farm died in just two
that the 1996 incident was hushed up. According to the ABC documentary ‘Cells from Hells’:
days in 1996. As with so many other cases a natural cause is still the official explanation. However more and more, evidence is shifting the blame away
from mother nature…. in Australia and around the world, there's a reluctance to acknowledge that it's human activity that is triggering the transformation
If we continue to mismanage the way
nutrients and pollutants are released into the environment we'll have to confront
new incarnations of the cells from hells” [42] It quoted Professor Gustaaf Hallegraeff from the University of Tasmania:
of normally benign organisms into increasingly dangerous forms.
“The local South Australian government prefers to stick with this explanation because it somehow claims that this is a completely natural event. There is
no human involvement whatsoever. The alternative claim that there is an algal bloom that caused this problem is of much more concern. But in Japan
Chattonella is a prime example of an algal bloom phenomenon which is actually induced by the waste products of the aquaculture industry itself and of
course that’s not something that the tuna aquaculture industry want to hear” Professor Hallegraeff told ABC that when he examined a water sample he
found that it was teeming with a toxic alga never before seen in Australia called ‘chattonella’. The same organism killed half a billion dollars worth of fish
in Japan in 1972. Professor Hallegraeff said that in Japan chattonella is “an example of an algal bloom phenomenon which is actually induced by the
What is important, there’s
a very good data set from Japan more than fifty years of data that have shown a very good
relationship between increase of Chattonella marina blooms (particularly the Seto Inland Sea) and the
fertilisation of water by both domestic and industrial and in particular aquaculture
wastes. And this is important to take into account, that if finfish aquaculture operations develop in very sheltered areas like Boston Bay, they have
waste products of the aquaculture industry”. Speaking later on radio, Professor Hallegraeff stressed: “
to be prepared for an increasing frequency of these algal blooms” [43] The furore prompted a parliamentary question: do toxic algal blooms represent
threats to or from aquaculture? [44]. That is a question neither the industry nor the government want to answer. Others though are more public in
organic wastes and nutrients from
the faecal wastes from the 66 caged tuna farms contributed to a phytoplankton bloom
declaring a direct link between tuna farm wastes and toxic algal blooms:“In April 1996,
Dr Anthony Cheshire (University of Adelaide) and researchers from SARDI, have
clearly identified the tuna farms as a major contributor to nutrient and organic
loads within the bay. Poor flushing of waters within the bay, and a history of pollution within the bay, resulted in SARDI researchers actually
in Boston Bay….respected researchers, such as
predicting the eventual disaster as early as January 1993. The State government, eager to please the demands of the tuna industry, ignored all scientific
warnings, and are now trying to convince the public of South Australia, that the disaster was natural, and not the result of poor environmental
“Tuna farming in feedlots
can generate a significant amount of pollution. Recent research suggests that
pollution is causing the sudden appearance of strange micro-organisms capable of poisoning fish. It has been
suggested that a toxic algae was the cause of death of the tuna in Boston Bay, Port Lincoln in 1996” [46]
management and monitoring” [45] According to the ‘Australia State of the Environment Report 2001’:
That leads to an oxygen crisis
Science Daily, 8 (4/7, “Harmful Algae Takes Advantage Of Global Warming: More
Algae Blooms Expected”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080403140928.htm)
Fish and other aquatic animals and plants stand little chance against cyanobacteria . The
algae crowds the surface water, shading out plants -- fish food -- below. The fish generally avoid cyanobacteria, so they're left
when the algae die they sink to the bottom where their decomposition
can lead to extensive depletion of oxygen. These cyanobacteria -- blue-green algae -- were the first plants
without food. And
on earth to produce oxygen. "It's ironic," Paerl said. "Without cyanobacteria, we wouldn't be here. Animal life needed the oxygen
algae produced." Now, however, it threatens the health and livelihood of people who
depend on infested waters for drinking water or income from fishing and recreational use. These algae
the
that were first on the scene, Paerl predicts, will be the last to go ... right after the cockroaches.
Extinction
Tatchell, 8 human rights activist who campaigns with OutRage! He is a regular
contributor to PinkNews.co.uk and The Guardian,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/13/carbonemissions.climatechange
Compared to prehistoric times, the level of oxygen in the earth's atmosphere has declined by
over a third and in polluted cities the decline may be more than 50%. This change in the makeup of the air
we breathe has potentially serious implications for our health. Indeed, it could
ultimately threaten the survival of human life on earth, according to Roddy Newman, who is drafting a new
book, The Oxygen Crisis. I am not a scientist, but this seems a reasonable concern. It is a possibility that we should examine and assess. So, what's the
evidence? Around 10,000 years ago, the planet's forest cover was at least twice what it is today, which means that forests are now emitting only half the
amount of oxygen. Desertification and deforestation are rapidly accelerating this long-term loss of oxygen sources. The story at sea is much the same.
Nasa reports that in the north Pacific ocean oxygen-producing phytoplankton concentrations are 30% lower today, compared to the 1980s. This is a huge
drop in just three decades. Moreover, the UN environment programme confirmed in 2004 that there were nearly 150 "dead zones" in the world's oceans
pollutants have reduced oxygen levels
to such an extent that most or all sea creatures can no longer live there. This
oxygen starvation is reducing regional fish stocks and diminishing the food
supplies of populations that are dependent on fishing. It also causes genetic
mutations and hormonal changes that can affect the reproductive capacity of sea
life, which could further diminish global fish supplies.
where discharged sewage and industrial waste, farm fertiliser run-off and other
Regulating the wildlife trade is key to prevent global pandemics
Karesh 05, Wildlife Conservation Society (William, Emerging Infectious Diseases: vol 11,
no. 7, July, p. 1001-2)
Rather than attempting to eradicate pathogens or the wild species that may harbor
them, a practical approach to decrease the risk for the spread of infectious
diseases would include decreasing contact among species. Closing down retail
poultry markets in Hong Kong for 1 day per month reduced the rate of H9N2 avian influenza
virus in market birds. Little equivalent research has been conducted in market systems that
sell wildlife, but an analogous approach to the precautionary principle would be an
appropriate action to take before the next outbreak or pandemic. Since wildlife markets
are a system of networks with major hubs, these trading points provide practical
control opportunities to maximize the effects of regulatory efforts. Focusing
efforts at markets to regulate, reduce, or in some cases, eliminate the trade in wildlife
could provide a cost-effective approach to decrease the risks for humans, domestic
animals, wildlife, and ecosystems.
Global pandemics are coming and outweigh nuke war
Zakaria 05, Editor of Time Magazine (Fareed, “A Threat Worse than Terror,” 10-31,
Newsweek, http://www.fareedzakaria.com/ARTICLES/newsweek/103105.html)
A flu pandemic is the most dangerous threat the United States faces today," says Richard
Falkenrath, who until recently served in the Bush administration as deputy
Homeland Security adviser. "It's a bigger threat than terrorism. In fact it's bigger
than anything I dealt with when I was in government." One makes a threat
assessment on the basis of two factors: the probability of the event, and the loss of
life if it happened. On both counts, a pandemic ranks higher than a major terror attack,
even one involving weapons of mass destruction. A crude nuclear device would probably kill hundreds
of thousands. A flu pandemic could easily kill millions. Whether this particular virus
makes the final, fatal mutation that allows it to move from human to human, one
day some virus will. The basic factor that is fueling this surge of viruses is China's growth.
(China is the natural habitat of the influenza virus.) As China develops, it urbanizes, and its
forests and wetlands shrink. That forces migratory birds to gather closer together-and closer
to human habitation--which increases the chances of a virus spreading from one species to
the next. Also, growth means a huge rise in chicken consumption. Across thousands of
homes in China every day, chickens are slaughtered in highly unhygienic ways. "Every day
the chances that this virus or another such virus will move from one species to
another grow," says Laurie Garrett, author of "The Coming Plague," who has been
writing brilliantly on this topic for years. Nobody really disputes that we are badly
unprepared for this threat. "If something like this pandemic were to happen
today," says Falkenrath, "the government would be mostly an observer, not a
manager." The government can't even give intelligent advice to its citizens because it
doesn't actually know what to say. We don't know whether people should stay put, leave
cities, stay home or go to the nearest hospital. During the cold war, hundreds of people
in government participated in dozens of crisis simulations of nuclear wars,
accidents and incidents. These "tabletop exercises" were conducted so that if and
when a real crisis hit, policymakers would not be confronting critical decisions for
the first time. No such expertise exists for today's deadliest threat.
1NR
1NR O/V
Ethnic conflicts are the greatest impact:
a) Scope -- they’re the majority of armed conflicts globally
b) Greatest Propensity to Escalate --- dialogue and deterrence prove
intervening actors can always back us down from the brink of their
impacts but ethnic conflicts fester under the surface making them
unmanageable “ticking time bombs” on global stability --desperation makes escalation unavoidable
c) Turns the case --- wrecks strategic stability through state collapse in
every region --- makes all their impacts more likely
Conjunctive fallacy—prefer broad trends over their specific scenarios—c-x
1NC is a reason to prefer the impact
This outweighs – ethnic conflicts are uniquely escalatory and
destabilize key hotspots
Mead 13, James Clarke Chace Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard
College and Editor-at-Large of The American Interest magazine, Walter Russell, Peace In
The Congo? Why The World Should Care, http://www.the-americaninterest.com/wrm/2013/12/15/peace-in-the-congo-why-the-world-should-care/
These wars continue today; the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the war in Syria, the Kurdish
struggle for independence, the tensions in the Caucasus. So far, the only way of settling
them for good has been to exterminate minorities or to kick hundreds of thousands or even
millions of people (Germans from Poland and the Sudentenland after World War II) out to
create homogeneity. One of the biggest questions of the 21st century is whether
this destructive dynamic can be contained, or whether the demand for ethnic,
cultural and/or religious homogeneity will continue to convulse world politics,
drive new generations of conflict, and create millions more victims . The Congo
conflict is a disturbing piece of evidence suggesting that, in Africa at least, there is
potential for this kind of conflict. The Congo war (and the long Hutu-Tutsi conflict in
neighboring countries) is not, unfortunately alone. The secession of South Sudan from
Sudan proper, the wars in what remains of that unhappy country, the secession of Eritrea
from Ethiopia and the rise of Christian-Muslim tension right across Africa (where
religious conflict often is fed by and intensifies “tribal”—in Europe we would say “ethnic” or
“national”—conflicts) are strong indications that the potential for huge and
destructive conflict across Africa is very real. But one must look beyond Africa. The
Middle East of course is aflame in religious and ethnic conflict . The old British Raj
including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Burma and Sri Lanka offers countless
examples of ethnic and religious conflict that sometimes is contained, and
sometimes boils to the surface in horrendous acts of violence. Beyond that, rival
nationalisms in East and Southeast Asia are keeping the world awake at night. The
Congo war should be a reminder to us all that the foundations of our world are
dynamite , and that the potential for new conflicts on the scale of the horrific wars
of the 20th century is very much with us
today. The second lesson from this conflict stems from the realization of how much
patience and commitment from the international community (which in this case included the Atlantic democracies and a coalition of African states working as individual countries and
through various international institutions) it has taken to get this far towards peace. Particularly at a time when many Americans want the US to turn inwards, there are people who
make the argument that it is really none of America’s business to invest time and energy in the often thankless task of solving these conflicts. That might be an ugly but defensible
position if we didn’t live in such a tinderbox world. Someone could rationally say, yes, it’s terrible that a million plus people are being killed overseas in a horrific conflict, but the war is
really very far away and America has urgent needs at home and we should husband the resources we have available for foreign policy on things that have more power to affect us
directly. The problem is that these wars spread. They may start in places that we don’t care much about (most Americans didn’t give a rat’s patootie about whether Germany controlled
the Sudetenland in 1938 or Danzig in 1939) but they tend to spread to places that we do care very much about. This can be because a revisionist great power like Germany in 1938-39
needs to overturn the balance of power in Europe to achieve its goals, or it can be because instability in a very remote place triggers problems in places that we care about very much.
Out of Afghanistan in 2001 came both 9/11 and the waves of insurgency and
instability that threaten to rip nuclear-armed Pakistan apart or trigger wider
conflict with India . Out of the mess in Syria a witches’ brew of terrorism and
religious conflict looks set to complicate the security of our allies in Europe and
the Middle East and even the security of the oil supply on which the world economy
so profoundly depends. Africa, and the potential for upheaval there, is of more
importance to American security than many people may understand. The line
between Africa and the Middle East is a soft one. The weak states that straddle the
southern approaches of the Sahara are ideal petri dishes for Al Qaeda type groups
to form and attract local support. There are networks of funding and religious contact that
give groups in these countries potential access to funds, fighters, training and weapons from
the Middle East. A war in the eastern Congo might not directly trigger these other conflicts,
but it helps to create the swirling underworld of arms trading, money transfers,
illegal commerce and the rise of a generation of young men who become
experienced fighters—and know no other way to make a living. It destabilizes the
environment for neighboring states (like Uganda and Kenya) that play much more
direct role in potential crises of gre
2NC AT #1
Gambling’s key to all aspects of Indian self-determination
Kunesh 9 – Patrice H. Kunesh, MPA from Harvard Kennedy School of Government,
Associate Professor of Law, University of South Dakota (USD) School of Law and Director of
the Institute of American Indian Studies at USD, “CONSTANT GOVERNMENTS: TRIBAL
RESILIENCE AND REGENERATION IN CHANGING TIMES”, Kansas Journal of Law and Public
Policy, Fall, 19 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol'y 8, Lexis
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA) n127 heralded in the new era of
tribal self-determination. Gaming provided many tribes a viable means of
sustainable reservation economic development for the first time. IGRA
transformed Indian country, perhaps unsurpassed in the breadth of its impact on Indian
country except for the General Allotment Act of 1887. The immediate and
extraordinary success of gaming n128 undoubtedly has increased the
capacity of tribal governments to operate and deliver services and
programs to their communities and has encouraged active and engaged
governance and innovative economic development . Much like the Indian SelfDetermination Act, the proliferation of tribal gaming has animated the
exercise of tribal powers . Tribes now control their own funds and decide
their own program priorities. They invest their own funds into their own
communities, into building houses, health clinics, schools, and cultural centers and
employing tribal members. Tribal courts and traditional forums of dispute
resolution decide all manner of cases and extend their jurisdictional reach
beyond the reservation borders. Dean Washburn has observed that the initiatives
stemming from the War on Poverty have made "more positive effects for Indian tribes than
any federal "Indian policy' initiative has ever had. Indeed ... modern tribal governments
were born from the War on Poverty programs." n129 Yet, it would appear that IGRA and the
phenomenon of tribal gaming have completely transformed the platform
upon which tribes operate politically and economically .
It provides revenue that reinforces overall sovereignty and selfdetermination
Rand 6 – Kathryn R.L. Rand, Floyd B. Sperry Professor of Law and Associate Dean for
Academic Affairs at University of North Dakota School of Law, “HOW CONGRESS CAN AND
SHOULD "FIX" THE INDIAN GAMING REGULATORY ACT: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LAW AND
POLICY REFORM”, Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, Spring, 13 Va. J. Soc. Pol'y &
L. 396, Lexis
Bingo
revenues have enabled tribes, like lotteries and other games have done for State and local
governments,
to provide a wider range of government services to tribal citizens
and reservation residents than would otherwise have been possible. For
various reasons, not all tribes can engage in profitable gaming operations. However, for those tribes that have
entered into the business of business,
the income often means the difference between an
adequate governmental program and a skeletal program that is totally
dependent on Federal funding . n93 [*423] The Senate Committee report's emphasis
on Indian gaming as a tool for tribal governments, more akin to state lotteries than commercial gaming, implicitly
recognized gaming's role in building tribal institutions . As the report stated, "The
Committee views tribal gaming as governmental gaming, the purpose of which is to raise tribal revenues for
member services." n94 Thus, Congress envisioned IGRA as providing a foundation for what might be termed
"public gaming" n95 on reservations. By fostering economic development and strengthening tribal governments,
IGRA's regulatory scheme promotes healthy reservation communities and culturally appropriate institutional
capacity building, hallmarks of tribal sovereignty and tribal self-determination. The success of tribal gaming
operations typically is measured by profits, and the unevenness of tribal casinos' revenues is raised as a [*424]
criticism of IGRA. n96 Certainly location - meaning access to potential patrons - largely drives the profitability of
any bricks-and-mortar business. This most assuredly is the case for tribal casinos. n97 Typically, tribal casinos in
rural areas, such as those scattered throughout the Midwest, see only modest profits when compared to tribal
casinos near major metropolitan areas, such as those in New York, Connecticut, and California. n98 As public
a tribal casino's success should not be measured by profits
alone. Standard economic measures of a casino's direct and indirect effects on a tribal, state, or local economy
gaming, though,
may not capture the entire story. Such
unquantifiable impacts as strengthening tribal
governments and increasing tribal self-sufficiency and selfdetermination are fundamental, but often overlooked, indicators of
gaming's success. n99 Moreover, these measures track IGRA's policy goals. We have argued elsewhere
that studies failing to measure tribal gaming's socioeconomic effects on
tribes themselves inappropriately minimize the impacts of Indian gaming
on its intended beneficiaries - tribal governments and tribal members - and overlook IGRA's specific
policy goals. n100 Job creation and economic development are the bedrock
economic rationales for tribal gaming. Further, tribes have been able to
provide public services , such as law enforcement, fire, and emergency
services , dramatically improve public infrastructure , build public housing
and retirement or assisted living facilities, provide various social
programs to children, the elderly, or those in poverty, and preserve or
reinvigorate tribal cultural heritage through the construction of [*425]
museums, social activities centers, and language retention programs. n101
As exercises of self-governance and manifestations of tribal selfdetermination, such benefits reinforce tribal sovereignty . The exercise of tribal
sovereignty may not be quantifiable, but it should not be overlooked when weighing Indian gaming's impacts on
tribes themselves - or as a realization of the stated goals of IGRA and federal Indian policy. n102 Such benefits
need not be seen as exclusive to a tribe; a healthy reservation community ultimately benefits both surrounding
non-tribal communities and the state. Here, too, it is not surprising that tribes with gaming enterprises fall along
the spectrum of success.
This is the primary threat to tribal economies – eviscerates the foundation
of growth
Williams 12, Staff writer at NYT, Timothy, $1 Million Each Year for All, as Long as Tribe’s
Luck Holds, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/us/more-casinos-and-internet-gamblingthreaten-shakopee-tribe.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
While the Shakopee tribe continues to prosper, casino gambling in much of Indian Country — which tribes say
is the only economic development tool that has ever worked on reservations — has
come increasingly under threat, stirring worries that the long lucky streak is over. The
more
menacing, tribes say, is a sophisticated and growing movement to legalize Internet gambling under
in recent months
primary anxiety is competing casinos being hurriedly opened by states in pursuit of new revenue. But
state laws that would give those states the potential power to regulate and tax online gambling even on
expansion of legalized gambling in the United States, and the prospect of
more to come, could not have arrived at a worse moment for tribes, because after 25 years
of booming profits, the tribal casino business has suddenly gone flat. The vast majority of
tribes have not become rich. Instead, casinos have become a baseline economic necessity,
lifting thousands out of poverty by serving as a primary source of income and
employment. “My worry is this may be the beginning of the end, that in the push to increase
state and federal revenue we are putting at risk the groups who continue to need Indian gaming,”
reservations. Further, the current
said Kathryn Rand, co-director of the Institute for the Study of Tribal Gaming at the University of North Dakota.
During the past year or so, Maine, Ohio, Kansas and Pennsylvania have all opened large casinos, and in Maryland,
pent-up demand caused a traffic snarl miles long— during the middle of the night — at the opening of a new casino
in June.
2NC Link Wall
The plan’s an economic tsunami that devastates tribal growth
Porter 13, Robert Odawi Porter is the former President of the Seneca Nation of Indians
and currently Senior Counsel at SNR Denton in Washington, D.C., Why Tribes Should
Oppose Internet Gaming, http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/04/05/whytribes-should-oppose-internet-gaming
Congress is now considering the legalization of gambling over the Internet. Indian country,
which has invested billions of dollars in traditional “bricks and mortar” businesses, should be extremely worried
If successful, many of the over 300 tribally-owned gaming facilities risk
losing significant patrons and profits. Research on the impact of Internet gaming legalization is thin,
but the primary study to date (Geiger-Johns 2010) concludes that tribal casinos could lose up
to 25 percent of annual gross gaming revenues if legalization were to occur.
Controlling $28 billion in gaming revenues is a major economic accomplishment for
Indians. Given our history of economic deprivation, who would have guessed that this
revitalization was possible? But we should not sit idly by while $7 billion in revenues
and associated jobs is given away to the competition. Indian country response to the Internet
about this effort.
legalization threat has been mixed. A few tribes are actively pursuing efforts to get involved in on-line gambling.
They see it as simply a logical expansion of the market given technological advances. Other tribes see it as a clear
threat, seeing the great potential for unknown numbers of patrons to gamble in the comfort of their own homes
rather than visit the tribal casino. Our industry trade association, the National Indian Gaming Association, has
strongly defended the need to protect existing tribal-state compacts. Both NIGA and I in Congressional testimony
The
problem with legalizing Internet gambling, as the research suggests, is that it drains away
customers who would otherwise be limited to visiting tribal casinos. The Poker Players Alliance
have argued that tribes should have the same rights as non-Indian casinos were legalization to occur.
argues that legalizing on-line poker would actually support “bricks and mortar” casinos since poker players
eventually want to play against other humans as they get better. But powerful forces in the gaming industry, led
by name-brand Nevada and New Jersey interests, are strongly promoting the legalization effort. States, too, are
eager to get in on the action and start taxing on-line bettors. It doesn’t seem reasonable that this effort will end
with only legalizing on-line poker. Our competitors and their allies in government are going “all in” for full
Losing 25 percent or more of gross revenues could cause
widespread economic injury to tribal casinos, many of which have significant debt.
Which is why Indian country needs to stop watching this economic tsunami in the
making and start fighting against it. If the on-line gambling market opens wide, only a
handful of providers will control the market. Do we really think tribal gaming brands can
beat out the marquee gaming brands in a global on-line market? A few larger tribes might,
but I seriously doubt – as the research suggests – that tribal casinos will gain new customers in
an Internet gaming era. There are actions that can be taken now to fight against this effort. We should be
legalization of all Internet gambling.
preparing our litigation strategy to protect existing compacts and investments. We should be educating and
lobbying Congress to protect Indian country gaming—which employs tens of thousands of non-Indians as well as
Indians—to protect the bird in the hand rather than chase the bird in the bush. The Internet might not be stopped,
If we don’t act now and Internet gambling legalization occurs, the
ensuing economic disaster in Indian country would be our own version of the “fiscal cliff.”
but it can be slowed down.
a) Spillover losses --- industries dependent on Casinos like hotels,
restaurants, etc. get cut out --- dooms revenue
ABC 13 (“Poker Players, Outraged, Target CEO Adelson Over Internet Gaming Stand”
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/online-poker-boycott-threatened-adelsonremarks/story?id=19473807)
In the U.S., he predicts, the spread of online gaming will cost "400,000 lost jobs in casinohosting cities across America"—200,000 jobs directly related to the gaming industry plus
another 200,000 indirectly related. His own business, he says, would not suffer, since the
Sands gets "almost all" its casino profits from Asia. Rather, the blow would fall on
domestic casinos, including those run by Native Americans.
Low threshold for the link --- even small fluctuations have devastating
consequences
Weston 13 – Richard Weston, Reporter for EGR North America, “Conquering
Cannabalization”, EGR North America, April, http://gspc.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/Conquering-cannibalization.pdf
“A concern is the revenues will be cannibalized as people won’t come back
to the casino,” he says. “According to companies in Europe, that didn’t happen to them,
although many of their customers may have not frequented casinos before. We, and other
casinos, are concerned about cannibalization so we will maximize our cross-promotion. We’ll
have points redeemable back at the casino for example.” An unfavorable taxation rate for
online gambling in Delaware could also make it less attractive. Sutor argues the tax rate
works out at approximately 55% of online gross gaming revenues, although he is hopeful
this will be lowered before the end of the legislative session in June. “If it doesn’t change,
it’s going to be a harsh winter,” he says. “Would I encourage players to go to a different
form of gambling so I receive less revenues? No. We’ve got too much invested in our
landbased business. We have to protect our largest source of revenue, and we will protect
it.” High stakes Small fluctuations in a casino’s visitors can have dramatic
consequences for its balance sheet. They often have large fixed costs ,
such as loans to pay off resort building costs, as well as the running costs
to maintain the property. However, if a casino breaks even for the year on
these costs, it can achieve high profits from its customers, who cost relatively
little to provide for. It is when the visitors do not come when problems arise. When Atlantic
City’s resorts closed for between five to eight days in November last year due to damage
caused by Hurricane Sandy, the 12 casinos saw their total gaming revenue for the month
drop a record 28% year-on-year, from $244.9m down to $176.6m.
Low threshold for the link --- even small fluctuations have devastating
consequences
Weston 13 – Richard Weston, Reporter for EGR North America, “Conquering
Cannabalization”, EGR North America, April, http://gspc.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/Conquering-cannibalization.pdf
“A concern is the revenues will be cannibalized as people won’t come back
to the casino,” he says. “According to companies in Europe, that didn’t happen to them,
although many of their customers may have not frequented casinos before. We, and other
casinos, are concerned about cannibalization so we will maximize our cross-promotion. We’ll
have points redeemable back at the casino for example.” An unfavorable taxation rate for
online gambling in Delaware could also make it less attractive. Sutor argues the tax rate
works out at approximately 55% of online gross gaming revenues, although he is hopeful
this will be lowered before the end of the legislative session in June. “If it doesn’t change,
it’s going to be a harsh winter,” he says. “Would I encourage players to go to a different
form of gambling so I receive less revenues? No. We’ve got too much invested in our
landbased business. We have to protect our largest source of revenue, and we will protect
it.” High stakes Small fluctuations in a casino’s visitors can have dramatic
consequences for its balance sheet. They often have large fixed costs ,
such as loans to pay off resort building costs, as well as the running costs
to maintain the property. However, if a casino breaks even for the year on
these costs, it can achieve high profits from its customers, who cost relatively
little to provide for. It is when the visitors do not come when problems arise. When Atlantic
City’s resorts closed for between five to eight days in November last year due to damage
caused by Hurricane Sandy, the 12 casinos saw their total gaming revenue for the month
drop a record 28% year-on-year, from $244.9m down to $176.6m.
Empirics --- Delaware proves they force casino closure
Williams 12, staff writer at NYT, $1 Million Each Year for All, as Long as Tribe’s Luck
Holds, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/us/more-casinos-and-internet-gamblingthreaten-shakopee-tribe.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Delaware, in June, became the first state to legalize casino-style gambling on the Internet, a move
that followed a Justice Department interpretation last December that opened the door to online gambling. All this
has come as unwelcome news in the $26 billion tribal gambling industry. In recent years, a
number of casinos have closed, the days of building elaborate new complexes appears to have ended, and
efforts to build new casinos off reservation — and nearer metropolitan areas — has proved largely unsuccessful.
Even some of the most successful gambling tribes have had to reduce or eliminate gambling revenue payments to
members. The Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation in Ledyard, Conn., for instance, has stopped making individual
awards that had once been as high as $120,000 a year after it amassed $2 billion in debt. And members of the
Mohegan tribe in Uncasville, Conn., who operate Mohegan Sun, had been receiving about $360,000 annually before
Gambling analysts say the coming wave of casualties
will most likely be Indian casinos in remote areas that make little money but employ dozens of tribal
seeing significant reductions in recent years.
members and use gambling proceeds to pay for social services. The Shakopees are under no such pressure. While
it is impossible to say for certain whether individual tribal members are indeed the nation’s richest based on their
monthly income — derived from the tribe’s two casinos, championship golf course, big-name concert acts, 600room hotel and other business ventures — each adult earns enough each year to be a millionaire.
1NR Cyber Terror Add-ON
Risk of laundering is low
Lange 13 – citing one of the world’s leading experts on issues relating to the shadow
economy, Professor Friedrich Georg Schneider of Johannes-Kepler-Universität Linz
Ansgar, Workshop Online Poker at the EU Parliament: Does Europe need uniform safety
standards? – Experts attest providers effective control mechanisms against fraud attempts,
3/13/13, http://www.gaminglaw.eu/news/workshop-online-poker-at-the-eu-parliamentdoes-europe-need-uniform-safety-standards-experts-attest-providers-effective-controlmechanisms-against-fraud-attempts/
One of the world’s leading experts on issues relating to the shadow economy,
Professor Friedrich Georg Schneider of Johannes-Kepler-Universität Linz
http://www.econ.jku.at/schneider, had a closer look at the argument of the
money laundering risks frequently put forward by the opponents of online
poker. His conclusion: Money laundering via online poker is not worthwhile.
According to his analyses, illegal gambling plays a minor role in global money
laundering activities, running at only approximately 0.5 per cent. In view of a
study of the consultancy firm Goldmedia on the German gaming market, he explained
that, even if all online poker activities were used exclusively for money
laundering purposes, the total volume of “laundered money” would be
comparably small in comparison to other fields of the economy and therefore
relatively unattractive for criminals. He added that money laundering via
online poker is associated with large outlay and high transaction costs. Detlev
Henze, CEO of TÜV Trust IT GmbH (TÜV Austria Group) http://www.it-tuv.com, also
criticised the unsupported arguments in relation to money laundering risks in online
poker as a “perceived threat scenario”. This is why the TÜV has commissioned a study
which is to examine the actual relevance of money laundering activities in the area of
online poker. Furthermore, the TÜV, on the basis of initial examination results, has
started to compile a checklist for the assessment of the risk matrix of online gaming
offers. The providers’ in-house safety measures can be monitored and assessed on the
basis of this method. “Regulators and customers will then be able to judge the quality
of the poker provider’s in-house safety measures”, Mr Henze said.¶ In-house safety
measures work¶ Sven Stiel, Director Northern Europe for the market leader
Rational Group (brand: PokerStars) which is monitored at the moment by eight
licensing authorities in the EU alone, reported that the providers themselves have
a vital interest in safe and fraud-free offers, as the customers’ trust in the
integrity of the gaming offers is an indispensable requirement for customer loyalty. In
view of gaming practice, he also explained that the money laundering risks are
hardly relevant in online poker. “Online poker is usually played with
relatively small sums which have no relevance with regard to money
laundering. High stakes are only placed by so-called “high rollers”, professional
players with large stakes who usually are personally known.” As the business model
furthermore works with non-cash payment transactions, funds paid in have in most
cases already been part of the banking circuit, and have been made subject to the
financial institutions’ money-laundering examinations before they are paid in to
PokerStars. Upon a critical question by Mr Creutzmann, Mr Stiel also commented on
“anonymous means of payment”. He said that such means of payment, for instance
prepaid cards, irrespective of their limited possibilities of use – the new German
money laundering act completely prohibits deposits for online gaming via anonymous
means of payment -, are only of minor relevance, as players can only charge such
products with relatively small sums (usually a maximum of 100 to 150 Euro).
Furthermore, players always have to log in via their customer account in order to play,
so that they can be identified. All transactions and the gaming behaviour, including
the stakes, are furthermore recorded on back-up servers, so that they are verifiable
and are associated with high detection risks for potential fraudsters.
No cyberterror – discount evidence from the new Pentagon report**
Rid, Reader War Studies at King’s College, 3-13-’13 (Thomas, “The Great Cyberscare”
Foreign Policy, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/13/the_great_cyberscare)
The Pentagon, no doubt, is the master of razzmatazz. Leon Panetta set the tone by warning again and again of an
impending "cyber Pearl Harbor." Just before he left the Pentagon, the Defense Science Board delivered a remarkable report, Resilient
Military Systems and the Advanced Cyber Threat. The paper seemed obsessed with making yet more drastic historical comparisons: "The cyber threat is
serious," the task force wrote, "with potential consequences similar to the nuclear threat of the Cold War." The manifestations of an all-out nuclear war
would be different from cyberattack, the Pentagon scientists helpfully acknowledged. But then they added, gravely, that "in the end, the existential
The world has yet to witness a single casualty, let
alone fatality, as a result of a computer attack. Such statements are a plain insult to
survivors of Hiroshima. Some sections of the Pentagon document offer such eyewateringly shoddy analysis that they would not have passed as an MA dissertation in a
self-respecting political science department. But in the current debate it seemed to make sense. After all a bit of fear helps
impact on the United States is the same." A reminder is in order:
to claim -- or keep -- scarce resources when austerity and cutting seems out-of-control. The report recommended allocating the stout sum of $2.5 billion
for its top two priorities alone, protecting nuclear weapons against cyberattacks and determining the mix of weapons necessary to punish all-out cyberaggressors. Then there are private computer security companies. Such firms, naturally, are keen to pocket some of the government's money earmarked
for cybersecurity. And hype is the means to that end. Mandiant's much-noted report linking a coordinated and coherent campaign of espionage attacks
dubbed Advanced Persistent Threat 1, or "APT1," to a unit of the Chinese military is a case in point: The firm offered far more details on attributing
attacks to the Chinese than the intelligence community has ever done, and the company should be commended for making the report public. But instead
of using cocky and over-confident language, Mandiant's analysts should have used Words of Estimative Probability, as professional intelligence analysts
would have done. An example is the report's conclusion, which describes APT1's work: "Although they control systems in dozens of countries, their
attacks originate from four large networks in Shanghai -- two of which are allocated directly to the Pudong New Area," the report found. Unit 61398 of the
People's Liberation Army is also in Pudong. Therefore, Mandiant's computer security specialists concluded, the two were identical: "Given the mission,
resourcing, and location of PLA Unit 61398, we conclude that PLA Unit 61398 is APT1." But the report conspicuously does not mention that Pudong is not
a small neighborhood ("right outside of Unit 61398's gates") but in fact a vast city landscape twice the size of Chicago. Mandiant's report was useful and
the company should have been more careful in its overall
assessment of the available evidence, as the computer security expert Jeffrey Carr and others have pointed out. The firm made it
many attacks indeed originate in China. But
too easy for Beijing to dismiss the report. My class in cybersecurity at King's College London started poking holes into the report after 15 minutes of red-
The media want to sell copy through threat
inflation. "In Cyberspace, New Cold War," the headline writers at the Times intoned in late February. "The U.S. is not ready for a cyberwar,"
teaming it -- the New York Times didn't. Which leads to the next point:
shrieked the Washington Post earlier this week. Instead of calling out the above-mentioned Pentagon report, the paper actually published two supportive
articles on it and pointed out that a major offensive cyber capability now seemed essential "in a world awash in cyber-espionage, theft and disruption."
the only military-style cyberattack that has actually created
physical damage -- Stuxnet -- was actually executed by the United States government. The Times, likewise, should have asked
The Post should have reminded its readers that
tough questions and pointed to some of the evidential problems in the Mandiant report; instead, it published what appeared like an elegant press release
On issues of cybersecurity, the nation's fiercest watchdogs too often look like hand-tame
puppies eager to lap up stories from private firms as well as anonymous sources in the
security establishment. Finally, the intelligence community tags along with the hype because
the NSA and CIA are still traumatized by missing 9/11. Missing a "cyber 9/11" would be truly catastrophic for
for the firm.
America's spies, so erring on the side of caution seems the rational choice. Yes, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's recent testimony was
more nuanced than reported and toned down the threat of a very serious cyberattack. But at the same time America's top spies are not as forthcoming
the intelligence community, especially in the United States, has far
better information, better sources, better expertise, and better analysts than private companies like Symantec, McAfee, and
Kaspersky Lab. But for a number of reasons they keep their findings and their analysis classified . This means that
the quality of the public debate suffers, as experts as well as journalists have no choice but
to rely on industry reports of sometimes questionable quality or anonymous informants
whose veracity is hard to assess.
with more detailed information as they could be. We know that
No incentive or technical capability – much more likely attackers steal info
than destroy infrastructure
Larry Clinton – president of the Internet Security Alliance – 10/18/12, Exaggeration
Unfairly Shifts Responsibility, http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/10/17/shouldindustry-face-more-cybersecurity-mandates
We need to start by clearly defining which problem we are trying to solve. Our government
has not yet done that. Theoretically, nation states, like China, have the ability to
disable our nation’s critical infrastructure through cyber attacks — just as they do
through conventional weapons. However, why would the Chinese want to
destabilize the U.S. economy by taking down our electric grid? China owns about
half our debt, and destabilizing our economy would also destabilize China’s
economy. Yes, terrorists or rogue states may have this desire, but they do not have
the technical ability to launch the ultra- sophisticated cyber attacks that would
have this effect, and probably won’t for some time. Moreover, it’s wrong to say that
the recently failed Senate bill, which would have established government standards for
private-sector cyber security, is an answer to catastrophic cvber threats. The ultrasophisticated cyber attacks — known as Advanced Persistent Threat — could disable critical
infrastructure. However, these ultra-sophisticated attacks are not going to he stopped by
the adoption of best practices and standards. These are nonstandard attacks that overcome
defenses like intrusion detection, firewalls and passwords. This is a much more sophisticated
problem than would be solved by the Senate bill. And who should be responsible for
protecting us from these nation-state attacks? Let’s say the damage Panetta refers to was
caused by conventional means, rather than digital. Would we expect the owners of power
plants to erect their own anti-aircraft weapons and radar? A recent Blooinberg study reports
that if Lhis maximum defense were paid for by the private sector, it would require a tenfold
increase in spending by private companies. A mandate of this sort would drive companies
off-shore, crippling employment and innovation — and not solving the problem. While the
unrealistic threats of crumbling critical infrastructure may be useful rhetoric to
scare senators into voting on issues they have not studied adequately, the real cyber
problem lies elsewhere. Nation states and criminals are not trying to take down
the Internet; they want to use it to steal intellectual property. This is an entirely
different sort of attack requiring a completely different solution that promotes collaboration
between industry and government. Cyber security is not simply a technical or standards
issue. It has strategic and economic dimensions as well, and none of the current proposals
deal with it in a truly comprehensive way that goes beyond standards to deal with
economics and incentives at both a domestic and international level.
Plan doesn’t solve laundering
Fiedler 13 – Post Doc Researcher at the Division on Gambling at the Institute of Law &
Economics, University of Hamburg
Ingo, Online Gambling as a Game Changer to Money Laundering?, 4/30/13,
http://www.wiso.unihamburg.de/fileadmin/bwl/rechtderwirtschaft/institut/Ingo_Fiedler/Online_Gambling_as_a_
Game_Changer_to_Money_Laundering_01.pdf
All forms of money laundering in online gambling involve unregulated or
illegal operators as they do not have to oblige to anti-money laundering
directives but can hide in regulatory havens. Legal operators, in contrast, are not
prone to money laundering (Brooks 2012), especially because of the much lower
payout ratios. However, the online gambling market is still dominated by illegal
operators; legal ones play only a minor role. This leaves penty of opportunities of
money laundering.¶ The obvious way to tackle money laundering in
unregulated/illegal online gambling is to introduce legal markets. But this is
far from sufficient. Legal operators are far less attractive to customers due to
lower payout ratios which result from taxes and fees the operators have to
pay. Even in regulated markets like France the illegal operators still play an
important role. The reason is a lack of law enforcement against
unregulated/illegal operators. For example, Germany is the largest online poker
market worldwide although it is illegal (Fiedler and Wilcke 2012). Thus, the first and
most important step in tackling money laundering in online gaming and
preventing it from increasing the prevalence of organized crime in our society is to
enforce the law against illegal/unregulated operators.
Legalized online gambling causes proliferation of terrorist money laundering,
causing catastrophic terrorism – only prohibition solves
Thackston 14, James Thackston, is a Florida-based independent software engineer
with a background in the aerospace, manufacturing and energy industries. Earl L. Grinols is
distinguished professor of economics at Baylor University, former senior economist for the
President's Council of Economic Advisers, and author of "Gambling In America: Costs and
Benefits.", http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/column-online-gambling-is-astrategic-national-threat/2151317
Remote gambling is fundamentally different from brick-and-mortar casino
gambling because the website operator never has complete control. Using technology
undetectable to website operators and their regulators, it is possible for gamblers
to play games from physical locations that are not what they seem. We know, because we
have done it. Recently, House Energy and Commerce Committee staff and others in
the Capitol Hill office of U.S. Rep. Gregg Harper, R-Miss., witnessed a demonstration
in which a single remote computer took control of two computers and used
them as alias machines to play poker online. The Harper demonstration
showed the technology and techniques that terror and crime organizations could
use to operate untraceable money laundering built on a highly liquid legalized
online poker industry — just the environment that will result from the spread
of poker online. One of us set up a website — undetectablelaundering.com — to help
communicate the problem to a broader audience. No one should doubt the ability of
criminals to exploit the inherent weakness in online gambling. A drug cartel could
arrange for buyers' machines to be remotely linked and lose to the aliased
cartel machines. Drug buyers would not even need to play from their own
machines. Illegal drug money would appear to be legal online winnings. A
single poker game takes just a few hours to transfer $5 million as was
recently demonstrated — legally — by American player Brian Hastings with his Swedish
competitor half a world away. An established al-Qaida poker network could
extract from the United States enough untraceable money in six days to fund an
operation like the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. The threat is real. Last
month a Texas lawyer was found guilty of trying to launder $600 million in drug money for a
Mexican cartel. Caesar's Entertainment is currently under investigation by the Justice
Department and IRS, accused of money laundering and Bank Secrecy Act violations. In
December 2012, the FBI's Tampa field office asked us to take down the website explaining
the threat. We complied. This May, special agents at FBI headquarters in Washington
responsible for enforcing the Wire Act and all other federal gambling laws were briefed on
the vulnerability. In July, a Senate Commerce Committee hearing seemed to reinforce
concerns. Rep. C.W. Bill Young wrote a letter of concern to FBI director Robert Mueller on
Aug. 7. But since then action seems to have stalled. And the threat moves on. With the
passing of Young, we have put the website back up and joined together in hopes of spurring
action. Since it remains true that gambling regulations in Nevada, Delaware and New
Jersey are no match for determined terrorists and criminals, we feel duty-bound
as responsible citizens to ensure knowledge of the threat reaches as many policymakers as
possible. We have proved it is possible to make money laundering undetectable.
Gambling should be firmly restricted to stay offline.
This gives terrorists a safe haven and expanded revenue source
Kindt & Joy 7 - Professor of business and legal policy at U of Illinois and Ph.D. candidate
in Legal Psychology at Florida International University
(September 2007, “Internet Gambling and the Destabilization of National and International
Economies Time for a Comprehensive Ban on Gambling Over the World Wide Web”, John
Warren Kindt & Stephen W. Joy,
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/1901/KindtOP_07Sept.pdf?sequence
=2, ACDIS Occasional Paper)
Gambling used to involve secretive dealings with unscrupulous bookmakers, or concerted
trips to the dog or horse track, or to Atlantic City or Las Vegas. 100 By 1995, however, the
Internet broadened access to gambling, making it almost ubiquitous. Speculators used
modern computers to extend the reach of gambling— often frustrating regulators. 101
Technology’s biggest impact on the gambling industry could be inviting gambling into the
home—which International Gaming and Wagering Business, a gambling industry trade
publication, referred to as “gaming’s new frontier.” 102 Libertarians sometimes argued that
if Internet users chose to risk their money on unregulated Internet gambling with strangers
in a foreign land, they got what they deserved when cheated. 103 Internet gambling,
however, had another insidious aspect. “Unchecked, it ha[d] the [very real] potential to turn
every family room[, office, and school] in America with a . . . computer into an unregulated
casino,”104 according to former Minnesota Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey, III.
Thereby, Internet gambling could send billions of U.S. dollars to dubious foreign
jurisdictions (including terrorist organizations), potentially making Internet gambling a
national security issue.
They’ll get around regs
McMullan and Rege 10 – John, Department of Sociology and Criminology, Saint Mary's
University, Halifax and Aunshul, School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University (“Online
crime and internet gambling,” Journal of Gambling Issues, Is 24, July 2010,
http://jgi.camh.net/doi/full/10.4309/jgi.2010.24.5 //Red)
Money-laundering enterprises Criminal assemblages also operated or worked in tandem with
Internet gambling sites to further other criminal pursuits. From 1997 to 2008, for example, US state
and federal courts have charged and convicted gambling companies such as World Sports Exchange,
World Interactive Gaming Corporation, Golden Chips Casino, Paradise Casino, Gold Medal Casino, Betcris,
for crimes
including conspiring to violate the Wire Wager Act, tax fraud, illegal gambling, money
laundering, racketeering, and enterprise corruption. While many of these prosecutions were
Dukesports, Betcorp, Betwwwts, BetonSports, Bettheduck, Sportingbet, and Safedepositsports
for engaging in or enabling illegal sports betting using phone lines and computers on the Internet,
several had complex structures involving formal organized-crime elements. The Giordano
money-laundering enterprise is a good case in point. Members of this network were adept at
moving unlawfully earned proceeds through online casinos, shell corporations, and bank
accounts to Central America, the Caribbean, Switzerland, and Hong Kong . The executors involved
front companies that developed the gambling Web site www.playwithal.com, which enabled approximately 40,000
customers to set up accounts and place bets on football, baseball, golf, and other sports events. Giordano, the
organizer, ran the strategic operation of the network; his son-in-law, the controller, oversaw the everyday operations,
managed bettor information, and handled Internet accounting matters and discrepancies; and his wife and daughter,
the financial officers, laundered crime proceeds to several offshore banks. Five other individuals acted as street-level
clerks, runners, and enforcers, collecting bets; distributing, delivering, and transferring illegal gambling proceeds
between members; and maintaining network and bettor discipline when necessary (CERT-LEXSI, 2006; North
The Uvari Bookmaking network also
combined an illegal gambling business with money laundering and tax evasion . They had network
Country Gazette, 2006; Venezia, Martinez, & Livingston, 2006).
members and clients in New York, New Jersey, Florida, Nevada, North Dakota, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma, as
well as in offshore locations, such as the Euro Off-Track in the Isle of Man and the Elite Turf Club in Curacao. The
Uvari Group operated as an intermediary between gamblers and sport-betting companies. They determined their
“take” based on the volume of accounts they opened at offshore sites and always returned a portion of their
commissions to bettors as an incentive for them to continue using their bookmaking facilities. They created customer
accounts for individual bettors, took their customers’ personal information, and attached it to the social security
numbers of group members, creating hundreds of dummy accounts in their own names. This permitted customers
to remain anonymous and avoid paying taxes on winnings and, simultaneously, allowed the Uvari Group to launder
money and claim income tax deductions by associating their customers’ losses with their own accounts (CERT-LEXSI,
the Corozzo network engaged in an illegal
gambling and loan-sharking enterprise that was based in the United States and Costa Rica. The
2006; USASDNY, 2005, pp. 1–6; DOJ, 2007b, pp. 1–6). Finally,
network of at least 26 members relied on toll-free telephone numbers and four online betting Web sites to handle
thousands of sport wagers each month from November 2005 to January 2008, amounting to an estimated take of
$10 million. A controller ran the operations, resolved bettor and accounting disputes, and managed account
information, and three agents oversaw the offshore accounts, calibrated wins and losses, counted the weekly take,
and advised the controller regarding economic matters. In addition, an onshore clerk accepted wagers over the
telephone and recorded them on audiotape and on paper, six money collectors transferred gambling proceeds
between members of the organization and financial institutions, and 13 runners managed bettors by accepting wagers
and setting up login codes and passwords. Finally, two enforcers lent money at exorbitant interest rates to troubled
bettors and instilled fear in all bettors not to miss their payments (District Attorney Queens County, 2008, pp. 1–5;
These case studies suggest that Internet
gambling sites are ideal for money laundering and other complex fraudulent and extortionist
activities that, in turn, can finance yet other crimes. Despite the strict codes for reporting
financial transactions, money launderers seem able to function by manipulating accounts,
making smaller cash exchanges, putting players “on the take” on their payrolls, hiding
transactions in a bewildering array of gambling and bank accounts, and mobilizing fear when
necessary. Characteristics of criminal assemblages Criminal assemblages were structured as ongoing
projects or businesses rather than as crafts or solo operations. Unlike the “short cons” of the dot.con
teams, which were often intermittent events, the “big cons” of the criminal assemblages relied upon the
time-honoured methods of long firm fraud: the willingness of a large number of victims to
supply credit and information and to invest or agree to acquiesce to schemes that promised
to pay well over the odds. This culminated in the establishment of clever illegal business
premises on the net where victims were relieved of both identity and capital before bankruptcies were declared or
North Country Gazette, 2008, pp. 1–3; Ginsberg, 2009).
corporations disappeared. This was especially apparent with the modus operandi of cyberextortion groups whose
organizations were remotely controlled rather than directly and locally managed. Nodal subnetworks in extortion
virtual rings that brought down
gambling sites were dynamic, international pods of loosely connected groups. The networks
supplied contact points to assemble criminal endeavours and to develop counteractions
against reluctant or resistant victims, competitors, or law enforcement agencies, after which they usually
dispersed, only to resurface later (Brenner, 2002; McMullan & Rege, 2007). However, because larger amounts
rings coexisted in a dispersed lateral field of global information flow. The
of money were being appropriated in an increasingly visible way, gambling providers,
regulators, police, and private security companies necessarily stepped up their efforts to prevent
it. Criminal networks and public and private law enforcement agencies were more and more
engaged in techno-wars, which had a tendency to escalate as each side improved their
techniques to outwit and outflank the other. One consequence was that assemblages had to be prepared to take
greater chances, including raising the risks involved in marketing their products and using direct confrontations with
their victims while simultaneously upgrading their techniques and planning to minimize these higher risks. The danger
of recognition in victim confrontations at virtual venues was reduced by upgrading the speed of operations and by
deploying ingenious aliases, clones, and simulations. The danger that information might be leaked before or after
the commission of crimes was reduced by remote planning, careful recruiting of members, secret meetings, and
prudent online behaviour that aroused as little suspicion as possible. The danger of exposure was reduced by
communicating via screen identities that were difficult to trace and by engineering trust in the act of crime. In short,
speed, anonymity, synchronization, and coordination were arranged as much as possible in
advance so that criminal acts appeared as “natural” as possible and aroused few suspicions.
New XO solves
RICHARD LARDNER – NYT – 10/21/12, Draft order would give companies cyberthreat
info, http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2019484431_cybersecurity21.html
A new White House executive order would direct U.S. spy agencies to share the
latest intelligence about cyberthreats with companies operating electric grids,
water plants, railroads and other vital industries to help protect them from
electronic attacks, according to a copy obtained by The Associated Press. The seven-page
draft order, which is being finalized, takes shape as the Obama administration expresses
growing concern Iran could be the first country to use cyberterrorism against the United
States. The military is ready to retaliate if the U.S. is hit by cyberweapons, Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta said. But the U.S. also is poorly prepared to prevent such an attack,
which could damage or knock out critical services. The White House declined to say when
the president would sign the order. The draft order would put the Department of Homeland
Security in charge of organizing an information-sharing network that rapidly distributes
sanitized summaries of top-secret intelligence reports about known cyberthreats that
identify a specific target. With these warnings, known as tear lines, the owners and
operators of essential U.S. businesses would be better able to block potential
attackers from gaining access to their computer systems. An organized, broadbased approach for sharing cyberthreat information gathered by the government
is widely viewed as essential for any plan to protect U.S. computer networks from
foreign nations, terrorist groups and hackers. Existing efforts to exchange information are
narrowly focused on specific industries, such as the finance sector, and have had varying
degrees of success. Yet the order has generated stiff opposition from Republicans on Capitol
Hill who view it as a unilateral move that bypasses the legislative authority held by
Congress. Administration officials said the order became necessary after Congress failed this
summer to pass cybersecurity legislation, leaving critical infrastructure companies
vulnerable to a serious and growing threat. Conflicting bills passed separately by the House
and Senate included information-sharing provisions. But efforts to get a final measure
through both chambers collapsed over the GOP's concerns the Senate bill would expand the
federal government's regulatory power and increase costs for businesses. The White House
has acknowledged that an order from the president, while legally binding, is not enough.
Legislation is needed to make other changes to improve the country's digital defenses. An
executive order, for example, cannot offer a company protection from liabilities that might
result from a cyberattack on its systems. The addition of the information-sharing provisions
is the most significant change to an earlier draft of the order completed in late August. The
new draft, which is not dated, retains a section that requires Homeland Security to identify
the vital systems that, if hit by cyberattack, could "reasonably result in a debilitating
impact" on national and economic security. Other sections establish a program to encourage
companies to adopt voluntary security standards and direct federal agencies to determine
whether existing cybersecurity regulations are adequate. The draft order directs the
department to work with the Pentagon, the National Security Agency, the director of
national intelligence and the Justice Department to quickly establish the information-sharing
mechanism. Selected employees at critical infrastructure companies would receive
security clearances allowing them to receive the information, according to the
document. Federal agencies would be required to assess whether the order raises any
privacy or civil-liberties risks.