Page | 1
Oceanic Dredging 1ac
Oceanic Dredging 1ac ...................................................................................................................................................1
Affirmative ....................................................................................................................................................................4
1AC............................................................................................................................................................................5
Inherency ...............................................................................................................................................................6
Trade Competitiveness Adv ..................................................................................................................................7
Coastal Erosion Adv ............................................................................................................................................ 15
Solvency .............................................................................................................................................................. 23
Trade Competitiveness Adv .................................................................................................................................... 24
Trade Comp Uq -- Low ....................................................................................................................................... 25
Ports k to Trade.................................................................................................................................................... 26
AT Competitiveness Theory Wrong .................................................................................................................... 28
AT Competitiveness Not k to Hege ..................................................................................................................... 31
AT Heg Doesn’t Solve Wars ............................................................................................................................... 32
Food Price Spikes  War ................................................................................................................................... 34
AT Heg Decline Inevitable .................................................................................................................................. 35
Trade Good Generic ............................................................................................................................................ 37
Coastal Erosion Adv ................................................................................................................................................ 39
Yes Resource Wars .............................................................................................................................................. 40
Oceanic Region k to US Economy ...................................................................................................................... 41
Solvency .................................................................................................................................................................. 42
Dredging Key ...................................................................................................................................................... 43
Inherency ................................................................................................................................................................. 44
AT WRRDA ........................................................................................................................................................ 45
Offcase Answers ...................................................................................................................................................... 46
AT States CP - Jurisdiction.................................................................................................................................. 47
AT States CP - Federal Funding Key .................................................................................................................. 50
AT States CP - Race to the Bottom ..................................................................................................................... 52
AT 24/7 Ports CP -- Union Strikes Turn ............................................................................................................. 53
AT Politics - Bipartisanship ................................................................................................................................. 55
AT Biodiversity DA -- Impact Defense ............................................................................................................... 57
AT Biodiversity DA -- Link Turn........................................................................................................................ 61
AT Biodiversity DA -- No Link/Internal Link .................................................................................................... 64
AT Biodiversity DA -- UQ Overwhelms Link .................................................................................................... 65
AT Biodiversity DA -- Mudflats Turn ................................................................................................................. 66
Page | 2
AT Biodiversity DA -- Mudflats Turn Ext .......................................................................................................... 68
AT Competitiveness K ........................................................................................................................................ 69
Negative ....................................................................................................................................................................... 70
Biodiversity DA ....................................................................................................................................................... 71
Biodiversity DA -- 1nc ........................................................................................................................................ 72
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Link ................................................................................................................................ 75
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Marine Ecosystems Key................................................................................................. 77
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Turns Coastal Erosion .................................................................................................... 78
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Generic Biodiversity Loss  Exn ................................................................................. 79
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Oxygen Impact ............................................................................................................... 82
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Antibiotics Impact .......................................................................................................... 84
Politics DA .............................................................................................................................................................. 86
Partisanship Link ................................................................................................................................................. 87
Public Popularity Link ......................................................................................................................................... 89
States CP .................................................................................................................................................................. 90
States CP 1nc Solvency ....................................................................................................................................... 91
States CP 2nc Solvency ....................................................................................................................................... 92
24/7 Ports CP ........................................................................................................................................................... 93
24/7 Ports CP 1nc Solvency ................................................................................................................................ 94
24/7 Ports CP 2nc Solvency ................................................................................................................................ 95
AT Trade Competitiveness Adv .............................................................................................................................. 96
Ag Comp Uq -- High Now .................................................................................................................................. 97
AT Ports k to Trade ............................................................................................................................................. 98
AT Dredging k to Trade ...................................................................................................................................... 99
AT Competitiveness Theory .............................................................................................................................. 100
AT Competitiveness k to Heg ............................................................................................................................ 102
AT Heg Solves War ........................................................................................................................................... 103
AT Heg - Decline Inevitable .............................................................................................................................. 104
AT Heg - Peaceful Transition ............................................................................................................................ 105
Alt Causalities to Ag Competitiveness .............................................................................................................. 107
AT Food Scarcity/Food Price Shocks ................................................................................................................ 108
Generic Trade Bad ............................................................................................................................................. 111
AT No wars post WW2 ..................................................................................................................................... 113
AT Trade  Economic Growth ........................................................................................................................ 114
AT Coastal Erosion Adv ........................................................................................................................................ 115
Alt Causalities to Coastal Erosion ..................................................................................................................... 116
AT Climate Change Inevitable .......................................................................................................................... 118
AT Oil Supply Shocks ....................................................................................................................................... 119
AT China-Japan War ......................................................................................................................................... 120
Page | 3
Solvency ................................................................................................................................................................ 123
No Solvency - Funding Mismanagement .......................................................................................................... 124
Inherency ............................................................................................................................................................... 128
No Inherency ..................................................................................................................................................... 129
Page | 4
Affirmative
Page | 5
1AC
[Tentative] Plan: The United States federal government should substantially
increase dredging along the United States’ ocean coastline.
Page | 6
Inherency
Proposed legislation won’t solve - empirically funding in similar bills isn’t
appropriated to the ports
Szakonyi 5/30/14 (Mark, Senior Editor, “WRRDA’s Promised Funding for US Ports Isn’t Guranteed”, The
Journal of Commerce, JOC.com, http://www.joc.com/regulation-policy/transportation-policy/us-transportationpolicy/wrrda%E2%80%99s-promised-funding-us-ports-isn%E2%80%99t-guaranteed_20140530.html)
WASHINGTON — Congressional appropriators , or those with the purse strings, aren’t bound to follow
the guidance set forth by the Water Resources Reform Development Act , which President Barack
Obama is expected to soon sign into law. Just because Congress promises to send hundreds of millions of dollars
more annually to U.S. ports and more fairly distribute the funding doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. The bill sets
targets for reforming the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund so that all the money will go back to ports by fiscal 2025,
but there is no mandate or trigger to force Congress to back up its goals with dollars , said Paul Bea,
principal of maritime consultant PHB Public Affairs. Currently, only half of the $1.8 billion collected in
harbor maintenance taxes — a 0.125 percent levy of the value of imported cargo — goes back to
ports, with the rest being used to plug federal budget holes. “ The bill doesn’t solve the problem (of
the misuse of the HMTF), but it does point to the way it could be,” Bea said. There is a shadow hanging over the
soon-to-be-enacted water resources development bill amid the port industry’s jubilation over potential HMTF
reform. There was a similar level of adulation when the HMTF was created through passage of the
first WRDA bill in 1986, said J. Stanley “Stan” Payne, a principal at Summit Strategic Partners, a management
and transportation consulting firm. The port industry thought Congress was finally getting serious about
funding ports — only to see appropriators siphon money away from the trust fund. There isn’t any
guarantee that appropriators will follow the mechanism created through the bill aimed at giving donor ports
a fairer share of funding either. The bill calls for donor ports to get at least 10 percent of any surplus of the first $800
million allocated annually. Donor ports are defined as those that have collected at least $15 million in HMT dollars
annually, received less than 25 percent of their collected HMT back in the last five fiscal years and handled more
than 2 million TEUs in fiscal 2012.
Page | 7
Trade Competitiveness Adv
US ports shallow now - causes shipping delays and hurts trade competitiveness dredging is key
Tirschwell 14
(Peter, Staffwriter for Journal of Commerce, “Underfunding Keeps US Ports Shallow”, Feb 05, 2014,
http://www.joc.com/port-news/us-ports/port-brunswick/underfunding-keeps-us-ports-shallow_20140205.html)
Although its channel depth is supposed to be 38 feet at the harbor entrance, Brunswick, Ga., currently has only
31 feet at low tide due to shoaling and inadequate funding for dredging , said Colonel Thomas J. Tickner,
commander and district engineer for the Savannah District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Authorized and
actual depths of U.S. ports Authorized and actual depths of U.S. harbors and channels Full-size chart Brunswick is
not alone. In recent years as Congress has appropriated only about half of the fees on importers generated for the
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, several ports have become several feet shallower than their authorized
depth , that is, the depth they are supposed to be maintained at. Among them is Mobile, Ala., authorized at 55 feet
but currently only at 45 feet mean low water, New Orleans and Baton Rouge, also authorized at 55 feet but only
currently at 45 feet, and the channel to the port of Stockton, Calif., authorized at 45 feet but only at 35 feet currently.
Mean low water is the low tide average. Thus if mean low water is 40 feet any ships that draw less than that can
enter or leave the port at any time. If a ship’s draught is deeper than mean low water then it must wait
for a higher tide. The constraints on shipping at Brunswick, the 3rd busiest roll-on, roll-off port in the U.S., are so
severe that the GPA decided to spend its own money, allocating $3 million to get the depth down to 35 feet, a
project that will be completed this spring. The effect of the shoaling in the channel is such that ships carrying cars
made by Hyundai, Volkswagen, Kia, BMW, Mercedes, Audi, Porsche, Nissan and Toyota must wait sometimes
for hours for a favorable tide to enter or leave the port. Brunswick also has a bulk handling facility that
moves 1 million tons of agribulk annually, and a general cargo forest products export facility, whose ships must
sometimes load less cargo because of the tide. “ It’s been woefully underfunded every year to maintain
the depth ,” GPA Executive Director Curtis Foltz told the JOC. “Some of the large ro-ro ships not only
carrying autos but high and heavy cargo like agriculture equipment are being delayed awaiting
tidal movements,” he said. “It’s the classic infrastructure challenge,” he said, referring to Brunswick and similar
scenarios around the country. “ It lessens our competitiveness and increases the cost of shipping goods
as a nation .” Tickner said, “we are striving to keep (Brunswick) at the authorized depth,” but the funding hasn’t
been there. There could be relief for Brunswick and other ports if the Water Resources Development Act is
approved by Congress. Current language would incrementally increase the amount of the Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund that gets spent rather than withheld as an offset to the deficit. Under the wording, allocations from the fund
would grow to 65 percent of FY 13 HMT receipts up to 80 percent by FY 2020, according to the American
Association of Port Authorities. “Both the House and Senate (versions of WRDA) have language that would
improve the funding for O&M (Army Corps’ operations and maintenance) activities like Brunswick,” Foltz said.
Preventative dredging is key - loss of business is on the brink now and its
irreversible - once companies leave, they’re gone forever
Weakley 8
(James President of Lake Carriers´ Association, an organization of U.S.-Flag vessel operators on the Great Lakes,
and an officer of the Great Lakes Maritime Task Force, a coalition of ship operators, labor, shipyards, ports and
others on the Great Lakes. “Realize America’s Maritime Promise”, 4-30,
http://www.ramphmtf.org/speeches_043008.html, 7-12-12)
Page | 8
America´s deep-draft navigation system is at a crossroads , with a future that can be bright or
bleak. Our waterways´ ability to support the Nation’s continuing growth in trade and in the defense of our Nation,
hinges on much-needed Federal attention to unresolved funding needs that are derailing critical channel maintenance
and deep-draft construction projects of the water highways to our ports. Because most ports do not have
naturally deep harbors, they must be regularly dredged to allow ships to move safely through Federal
navigation channels. Also, as modern vessels increase in size, navigation channel depths must increase
accordingly, if we are to continue to be a player on the international marketplace. A recent U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Study reports that almost 30 percent of the 95, 550 vessel calls at U.S. ports are
constrained due to inadequate channel depths . Ladies and gentlemen, these are the things that cause port
directors nightmares. Without a channel dredged to its authorized depth, nothing else comes into play.
Attracting new customers, dealing with labor issues, environmental concerns, and the public - all go away - because
without a properly-dredged channel, business goes away. Public ports are at a critical state in keeping their
channels open for business. We are losing existing business and potential new business to ports outside
of the U nited S tates and once lost, it is rarely regained .
Delays crush US competitiveness - transportation costs are the key internal link to
trade volume - makes US ports less desirable for import and export and kills
investment
USAID 4
“THE BROAD ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PORT INEFFICIENCY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO
PORTS”
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADC612.pdf
Recent research, for example, has shown how transport inefficiencies affect development, trade
success, and foreign investment . Hummels (1999) provides evidence of the impact of high transportation
costs (determined by distance to source and export markets), on development. Henderson, Shalizi, and Venables
(2001) explore how transport costs influence trade and welfare . Hoffmann and Kumar (2002) show a
symbiotic relationship between trade and maritime transport and their interplay with globalization. Other studies
show the precise impact of high transport costs. Limao and Venables (2000), for example, show that
increasing transport costs by 10 percent can reduce trade volumes by 20 percent; Radelet and Sachs
(1998) show that a doubling of shipping costs can slow annual economic growth by about a half
percentage point.
Ocean-vessel port infrastructure is particularly key to US trade - alternatives aren’t
cost effective - failure crushes US trade competitiveness
TFB 12 “Port Infrastructure Policy Development” Tennessee Farm Bureau, group advocating on behalf of
farmers and farming communities. http://www.tnfarmbureau.org/sites/default/files/Port%20Infrastructure.pdf
As the American economy has grown, the United States has become more and more dependent on
its waterborne trade. Today, international trade through U.S. ports , directly and indirectly, supports
25-30 percent of U.S. GDP and 13 million jobs. For U.S. agriculture the impact is even larger, 3035 percent of agricultural income is derived from exports , the vast majority of which is transported
via water . Overall, deep draft ports accommodate ocean-going vessels which carry more than 99
percent of U.S. overseas trade by weight and 64 percent by value. Our country’s inland navigation
system plays a critical role in our nation’s economy, moving hundreds of millions of tons of domestic commerce.
Incredibly important to the agriculture industry, approximately 60 percent of the nation’s grain exports move by
barge on the inland waterway, primarily on the Mississippi River. Across all trade, the transportation cost
savings alone are estimated to exceed $7 billion annually compared to the cost of shipping this type
Page | 9
of tonnage by alternative means. Without adequately maintained shipping channels and port
infrastructure, U.S. participation and benefits will not be maximized. Despite this, the IWTF is
woefully low of funding and the HMT may only be used to fund maintenance, not new construction. To increase a
channel’s authorized depth or width requires an act of Congress, which is referred to as construction or “new work”
by USACE and is funded from the General Treasury, not the HMT. Multiple other proposals for collecting
additional revenues have surfaced. Some have proposed raising the current waterways fuel tax, taxing recreational
users, initiating additional user fees, privatization and combinations thereof.
Scenario 1 is Growth Differential
Low trade costs are key to US firm productivity - exports are key to boost US
growth and generate US innovation
Council of Economic Advisors 13
(Economic Policy Report 2013, “CHAPTER 7 INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND COMPETITIVENESS”,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic-report-of-the-President/2013)
Greater openness of world markets enhances the productivity of U.S. industries and firms. Research
finds that the U.S. industries experiencing the largest declines in tariffs have exhibited some of the strongest
productivity gains. Bernard, Jensen, and Schott (2006) find that falling trade costs led individual U.S.
manufacturing plants that already export to increase their shipments abroad, high-productivity
nonexporters to become more likely to export, and low-productivity plants to become more likely to
exit the domestic market. Together, these effects result in a reallocation of economic activity toward
high-productivity firms, thereby raising overall industry productivity . Studies of numerous other
countries show similar gains in industry productivity through trade-induced reallocation across firms. Evidence also
shows that decreases in industry-level trade costs lead to within-firm productivity growth. Lileeva
and Trefler (2010), for example, found that the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement caused increases in labor
productivity, product innovation, and adoption rates for advanced manufacturing technologies among Canadian
exporters. Pierce (2011) showed that U.S. tariffs lower the productivity of U.S. firms, in part by slowing the rate at
which older, less-productive production lines are phased out in favor of new product lines. Several other studies
have found that trade liberalization increases research and development (R&D) and technology upgrading. Firm
productivity and exports also can be enhanced when trade liberalization lowers the cost, and expands the variety, of
imported intermediate inputs.1 Although much of the evidence for this channel comes from studies of middle- and
low-income countries, Amiti and Wei (2009) found that imports of service inputs, such as telecommunications,
insurance, finance, computing, and other business services, have a significant positive effect on manufacturing
productivity in the United States. In a similar vein, Francois and Woerz (2008) showed that, across advanced
economies, increased import penetration in producer services results in better export performance,
particularly by skill- and technology-intensive industries.
Attempts to maintain hegemony are inevitable - US trade competitiveness and
growth differential are key to maintain alliances and prevent rival challengers
Tellis 9
Senior Associate @ Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, specializing in international security, defense and
Asian strategic issues. [Ashley J. Tellis (Research Director of the Strategic Asia program @ National Bureau of
Asian Research, “Preserving Hegemony: The Strategic Tasks Facing the United States”, Global Asia, Vol.4, No. 1,
Spring 2009]
Precisely because the desire for dominance is likely to remain a permanent feature of US
geopolitical ambitions — even though how it is exercised will certainly change in comparison to the Bush years
— the central task facing the next administration will still pertain fundamentally to the issue of US power. This
concern manifests itself through the triune challenges of: redefining the United States’ role in the world, renewing
the foundations of US strength, and recovering the legitimacy of US actions. In other words, the next
Page | 10
administration faces the central task of clarifying the character of US hegemony, reinvigorating the
material foundations of its power, and securing international support for its policies. The challenge of
comprehensively strengthening US power at this juncture, when the United States is still in the early phase
of its unipolar role in global politics, arises importantly from the fact that the hegemony it has enjoyed since
1991 represents a “prize” deriving from victory in intense geopolitical competition with another
great power. The historical record suggests that international politics can be unkind to such victors over
the long term . A careful scrutiny of the hegemonic cycles since 1494 confirms quite clearly that power
transitions at the core of the global system often occur because successes in systemic struggles — of which
the Cold War is but one example — can irreparably weaken otherwise victorious hegemonies. The annals of
the past actually corroborate the surprising proposition that no rising challenger, however capable, has ever
succeeded, at least thus far, in supplanting any prevailing hegemony through cold or hot war. Over the centuries,
Spain, France, Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union all tried in different ways but failed. This reassuring fact
notwithstanding, hegemonic transitions still occurred regularly in international politics, a reality that points to two
critical insights about succession struggles in the international system — which is a subject that ought to be of great
significance to the United States and its allies as well as to its adversaries. First, struggles for hegemony in
global politics are rarely limited to dyadic encounters between states. These struggles involve not only
the existing hegemon and the rising challenger as the preeminent antagonists — roles that many expect
will be played respectively by the United States and China over the long term — but also the entire cast of
international characters, including non-state actors involved in economic processes, and the nature of their
involvement in the competition become relevant to the succession process. Thus, the nature of the alliances
orchestrated and managed by the United States (and possibly China as well) in the future, the relationship
between state entities and the global economic system , and the relative burdens borne by every
actor involved in this contest become relevant to the outcome. Second, and equally importantly, who wins
in the ensuing struggle — whether that struggle is short or long, peaceful or violent — is as important as by
how much. This is particularly relevant because the past record unerringly confirms that the strongest surviving
state in the winning coalition usually turns out to be the new primate after the conclusion of every systemic struggle.
Both Great Britain and the United States secured their respective ascendancies in this way. Great Britain rose
through the wreckage of the wars with Louis XIV and with Napoleon. The United States did so through the carnage
of the hot wars with Hitler and Hirohito, finally achieving true hegemony through the detritus of the Cold War with
Stalin and his successors. If the United States is to sustain this hard-earned hegemony over the long term,
while countering as necessary a future Chinese challenge should it emerge, Washington will need to amass
the largest differential in power relative not only to its rivals but also to its friends and allies .
Particularly in an era of globalization, this objective cannot be achieved without a conscious
determination to follow sensible policies that sustain economic growth , minimize unproductive
expenditures, strengthen the national innovation system , maintain military capabilities second to none, and
enjoin political behaviors that evoke the approbation of allies and neutral states alike. The successful
pursuit of such policies will enable the United States to cope more effectively with near-term
challenges as well, including the war on terrorism and managing threatening regional powers, and
will ineluctably require — to return full circle — engaging the central tasks identified earlier as facing the new US
administration. These tasks involve the need to satisfactorily define the character of desirable US hegemony, the
need for sound policies that will renew the foundations of US strength, and the need to recover the legitimacy of US
purposes and actions. What is clearly implied is that the principal burdens facing the next US president transcend
Asia writ large. The success of these pursuits, however, will inevitably impact Asia in desirable ways, even as the
resolution of several specifically Asian problems would invariably contribute to the conclusive attainment of these
larger encompassing goals. Policy Implications US efforts in three areas will reaffirm its role as global leader:
supporting a durable framework for international trade, maintaining unqualified military supremacy, and ensuring
the delivery of certain public goods, such as peace and security, freedom of navigation, and a clean environment.
The renewal of traditional US economic might requires policies that favor growth and innovation ,
Page | 11
increased capital and labor pools, and sustained pursuit of total factor productivity . Legitimacy is an
important facet of US power that has eroded over the last eight years. The US can secure legitimacy for future
political acts by shaping world opinion through a combination of decisiveness, cultivation of key allied support, and
attentiveness to the views of others.
US primacy key to solve extinction - even if hegemony is bad, managing decline is
key to prevent great power wars
Barnett 11
(Thomas P.M., Former Senior Strategic Researcher and Professor in the Warfare Analysis & Research Department,
Center for Naval Warfare Studies, U.S. Naval War College American military geostrategist and Chief Analyst at
Wikistrat., worked as the Assistant for Strategic Futures in the Office of Force Transformation in the Department of
Defense, “The New Rules: Leadership Fatigue Puts U.S., and Globalization, at Crossroads,” March 7
http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/8099/the-new-rules-leadership-fatigue-puts-u-s-and-globalization-atcrossroads)
Events in Libya are a further reminder for Americans that we stand at a crossroads in our
continuing evolution as the world's sole full-service superpower . Unfortunately, we are
increasingly seeking change without cost, and shirking from risk because we are tired of the
responsibility. We don't know who we are anymore, and our president is a big part of that problem. Instead of
leading us, he explains to us. Barack Obama would have us believe that he is practicing strategic patience. But
many experts and ordinary citizens alike have concluded that he is actually beset by strategic incoherence -- in
effect, a man overmatched by the job. It is worth first examining the larger picture: We live in a time of
arguably the greatest structural change in the global order yet endured, with this historical
moment's most amazing feature being its relative and absolute lack of mass violence . That is
something to consider when Americans contemplate military intervention in Libya, because if we do take the
step to prevent larger-scale killing by engaging in some killing of our own, we will not be adding to some
fantastically imagined global death count stemming from the ongoing "megalomania" and "evil" of American
"empire." We'll be engaging in the same sort of system-administering activity that has marked our stunningly
successful stewardship of global order since World War II. Let me be more blunt: As the guardian of
globalization, the U.S. military has been the greatest force for peace the world has ever known .
Had America been removed from the global dynamics that governed the 20th century, the mass
murder never would have ended. Indeed, it's entirely conceivable there would now be no identifiable
human civilization left , once nuclear weapons entered the killing equation. But the world did
not keep sliding down that path of perpetual war. Instead, America stepped up and changed
everything by ushering in our now- perpetual great-power peace . We introduced the
international liberal trade order known as globalization and played loyal Leviathan over its spread.
What resulted was the collapse of empires, an explosion of democracy , the persistent spread of
human rights , the liberation of women, the doubling of life expectancy , a roughly 10-fold increase
in adjusted global GDP and a profound and persistent reduction in battle deaths from statebased conflicts. That is what American "hubris" actually delivered. Please remember that the next time some
TV pundit sells you the image of "unbridled" American military power as the cause of global disorder instead of
its cure. With self-deprecation bordering on self-loathing, we now imagine a post-American world that is
anything but. Just watch who scatters and who steps up as the Facebook revolutions erupt across the Arab world.
While we might imagine ourselves the status quo power, we remain the world's most vigorously revisionist
force. As for the sheer "evil" that is our military-industrial complex, again, let's examine what the world looked
like before that establishment reared its ugly head. The last great period of global structural change was the first
half of the 20th century, a period that saw a death toll of about 100 million across two world wars. That comes to
an average of 2 million deaths a year in a world of approximately 2 billion souls. Today, with far more
Page | 12
comprehensive worldwide reporting, researchers report an average of less than 100,000 battle deaths annually in
a world fast approaching 7 billion people. Though admittedly crude, these calculations suggest a 90 percent
absolute drop and a 99 percent relative drop in deaths due to war. We are clearly headed for a
world order characterized by multipolarity, something the American-birthed system was
designed to both encourage and accommodate. But given how things turned out the last time we
collectively faced such a fluid structure, we would do well to keep U.S. power, in all of its forms,
deeply embedded in the geometry to come. To continue the historical survey, after salvaging Western Europe
from its half-century of civil war, the U.S. emerged as the progenitor of a new, far more just form of
globalization -- one based on actual free trade rather than colonialism. America then successfully replicated
globalization further in East Asia over the second half of the 20th century, setting the stage for the Pacific
Century now unfolding.
Scenario 2 is Agricultural Competitiveness
Agricultural competitiveness is on the brink - erosion of crucial trade
infrastructure threatens US loss of agricultural leadership
KYFB 12
(“Failure to Act- Impacts on Agriculture” Kentucky Farm Bureau, represents the interests of agricultural producers
and rural communities. https://www.kyfb.com/media/files/fed/legislativeaffairs/resources/WRDA%20Infrastructure-white-paper.pdf)
Waterborne transportation facilities are critical to the health of the agricultural economy ,
enabling the importing and exporting of goods. Today and increasingly into the future, growing
economies in developing countries demand U.S. agricultural exports . U.S. agriculture is up to the
challenge, but chronic underinvestment in our waterborne infrastructure causes us to question
whether our aging system will cause us to become uncompetitive. The challenge to the marine
transportation system lies in the projected growth of the nation’s international trade, and the ability of the marine,
highway, and rail systems to accommodate the increased volumes of freight shipments so vital to our nation’s
continued economic growth. The U.S. Department of Transportation projects that trade volume for marine ports will
double by 2021, and double again shortly after 2030. Increasing agricultural trade is expected to be a large part of
that increase. As trade volumes increase, the capacity of America’s waterborne infrastructure
system must increase in order to maintain and expand the nation’s economy.
Failure of ocean ports ensures massive farm collapse - exports are critical to
the success of US farming and agriculture
KYFB 12
(“Failure to Act- Impacts on Agriculture” Kentucky Farm Bureau, represents the interests of agricultural producers
and rural communities. https://www.kyfb.com/media/files/fed/legislativeaffairs/resources/WRDA%20Infrastructure-white-paper.pdf)
U.S. ports and the maritime industry offer agricultural shippers and exporters access to a vast global
marketplace. A major catalyst behind stronger farm income over time has been the strength of U.S.
agricultural exports. As a share of total gross farm receipts, U.S. agricultural exports accounted for
more than 30 percent of earnings in 2012. Forty years ago, that share was less than 15 percent.
Increased global interdependence among trade nations has been one of the keys to rising farm
incomes, but it has also placed additional demands on our ports and the end- to-end delivery system of
imports and exports. U.S. ocean ports provide the gateway for an estimated 70 percent of U.S.
agricultural exports and 60 percent of agricultural imports . Through those ports U.S. farmers and
Page | 13
ranchers export a wide variety of products. Through bulk shipments, America’s farmers send international
customers familiar products like corn and soybeans, or grain products such as flour and oil, soybean products such
as oil, animal feed, rice, and poultry. But they also send products that do not come to mind as quickly, such as:
tallow, canned food, fruits and vegetables, as well as fish and molasses among others. In terms of volume, more than
80 percent of waterborne agricultural exports in 2007 were moved in bulk. But there has been a rising shift in the
form of those agricultural exports. Through containerized shipments, America’s farmers and ranchers
send international customers an even wider variety of products ranging from high-value specialty
items such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, meats, dairy products, and beverages to items formerly exclusively
shipped in bulk, like soybeans and grains. The improvement and use of containers has allowed U.S.
agriculture to export products in new and unique ways. Containers allow small and medium sized
enterprises (SMEs) to participate in trade in ways that were previously only available to large grain trading
companies. Containers allow SMEs to supply relatively small amounts of product to buyers and service small niche
markets. In fact, some agricultural products, such as food preparations, food grade soybeans, cotton, and frozen
poultry, use containers extensively to reach export markets. In terms of volume, nearly 20 percent of waterborne
agricultural exports in 2007 were moved in containers.
The impact is extinction - failure of US agricultural competitiveness ensures
shift to alternative sources that cause environmental destruction and resource
wars
Lugar 4
U.S. Senator – Indiana, (Richard, “Plant Power” Our Planet v. 14 n. 3,
http://www.unep.org/OurPlanet/imgversn/143/lugar.html
In a world confronted by global terrorism, turmoil in the Middle East, burgeoning nuclear threats and other crises, it
is easy to lose sight of the long-range challenges. But we do so at our peril. One of the most daunting
of them is meeting the world’s need for food and energy in this century. At stake is not only
preventing starvation and saving the environment, but also world peace and security . History tells
us that states may go to war over access to resources , and that poverty and famine have often bred
fanaticism and terrorism. Working to feed the world will minimize factors that contribute to
global instability and the proliferation of w eapons of m ass d estruction. With the world population
expected to grow from 6 billion people today to 9 billion by mid-century, the demand for affordable food will
increase well beyond current international production levels. People in rapidly developing nations will have the
means greatly to improve their standard of living and caloric intake. Inevitably, that means eating more meat. This
will raise demand for feed grain at the same time that the growing world population will need vastly more basic food
to eat. Complicating a solution to this problem is a dynamic that must be better understood in the West: developing
countries often use limited arable land to expand cities to house their growing populations. As good land
disappears, people destroy timber resources and even rainforests as they try to create more arable
land to feed themselves. The long-term environmental consequences could be disastrous for the
entire globe . Productivity revolution To meet the expected demand for food over the next 50 years, we in the
United States will have to grow roughly three times more food on the land we have. That’s a tall order. My farm in
Marion County, Indiana, for example, yields on average 8.3 to 8.6 tonnes of corn per hectare – typical for a farm in
central Indiana. To triple our production by 2050, we will have to produce an annual average of 25 tonnes per
hectare. Can we possibly boost output that much? Well, it’s been done before. Advances in the use of fertilizer and
water, improved machinery and better tilling techniques combined to generate a threefold increase in yields since
1935 – on our farm back then, my dad produced 2.8 to 3 tonnes per hectare. Much US agriculture has seen similar
increases. But of course there is no guarantee that we can achieve those results again. Given the urgency of
expanding food production to meet world demand, we must invest much more in scientific research and target that
money toward projects that promise to have significant national and global impact. For the United States, that will
mean a major shift in the way we conduct and fund agricultural science. Fundamental research will generate the
Page | 14
innovations that will be necessary to feed the world. The U nited S tates can take a leading position in a
productivity revolution . And our success at increasing food production may play a decisive
humanitarian role in the survival of billions of people and the health of our planet .
Page | 15
Coastal Erosion Adv
Climate change is inevitable - energy consumption and emissions are growing, not
declining
Falk 14
(William, editor-in-chief of The Week, and has held that role since the magazine's first issue in 2001, “Why climate
change is inevitable”, January 24, 2014, http://theweek.com/article/index/255504/why-climate-change-is-inevitable)
Have you cut your energy consumption — and greenhouse gas emissions — by 40 percent in recent years? Didn't
think so. Neither have I, or many of the other seven billion people on the planet. In a draft of their final report that
was leaked last week to The New York Times, scientists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
have concluded that the world is not heeding their repeated warnings, and that mankind's heavy use of
fossil fuels — and emissions of carbon dioxide — are increasing, not declining by 25 to 40 percent, as
they recommended. The boom in energy consumption in India, China, and the developing world has
overwhelmed some emissions reductions in Europe and the U.S. In coming years, the IPCC glumly predicted, " the
fundamental drivers of emissions growth are expected to persist ." We'll probably blow past the CO2
targets that the IPCC says will bring disastrous consequences, and see total warming exceed 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit
— more than twice the warming seen so far. The climate will get way weirder. No one should be surprised.
Human beings, psychologists have found, are really terrible at assessing and responding to risks. We overreact to
threats when we have already experienced painful consequences of something similar (such as
terrorism), and there's a scary perpetrator to blame (such as Osama bin Laden). But people aren't wired to make
drastic, painful changes now in response to hedged predictions by scientists about a hotter, more extreme climate in
the year 2030 or 2050. Drive a lot less? Cut back on the use of electrical devices? Pay a lot more for energy?
Resistance remains strong. If plan A is prevent climate change through massive, collective sacrifice,
let's face it: It's time to start working on plan B.
Adaptation is key - port dredging is necessary to respond to massive changes in sea
level
CEDA 12
(Central Dredging Assocation, “Climate Change Adaptation As It Affects The Dredging Community”, CEDA
Position Paper May 2012, http://www.dredging.org/documents/ceda/html_page/2012-05-ceda_positionpaperclimatechangeadaptation.pdf)
Climate change is now a fact. It is also now widely accepted that human activities are playing a role
in the increase of greenhouse gas emissions that have accelerated global warming during the last century,
although the significance of the human contribution is still a matter of debate. The related effects include: • Sea
level rise • An increase in seawater surface temperature • Changes in (seasonal) precipitation and
hence river flow. Climate change research moves rapidly and there is still a great deal of uncertainty: some new
estimates project faster rates of sea level rise than those reported by IPCC in 2007 (Rahmstorf, 2010) whilst
other (satellite) data suggest that rates of sea level rise may be slowing (CU Sea Level Research Group, 2012). In
addition to trends for an ongoing rise in global temperature and associated sea level rise, it is anticipated there will
be an increase in the frequency of such extreme events as storms, surges, floods and droughts. Climate
change effects are also expected to increase in the coming decades , in part because of the relative
lack of success to date in implementing mitigation measures (ie measures designed to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions), and in part due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, the ‘climate engine’. Low-lying coastal areas
worldwide face a large-scale increase in population density, urbanisation, industrialisation and
agriculture with associated implications for land subsidence. These increasing pressures make
coastal zones and deltas especially vulnerable to climate change impacts – not only flooding and erosion,
Page | 16
but also implications for ecosystems (Nicholls et al, 2010) such as through intrusion of saline waters. Adaptation
strategies are therefore absolutely necessary to reduce the consequences of climate change by
improving resilience and reducing vulnerability. And dredging will often be an important element
in the adaptation ‘toolkit’ .
Specifically climate change makes coastal erosion inevitable - oceanic port dredging
is key to re-sedimentation
CEDA 12
(Central Dredging Assocation, “Climate Change Adaptation As It Affects The Dredging Community”, CEDA
Position Paper May 2012, http://www.dredging.org/documents/ceda/html_page/2012-05-ceda_positionpaperclimatechangeadaptation.pdf)
Open Coasts Coastal areas are influenced by natural forces such as tides, surges, waves, winds and currents
that may lead to coastal erosion, sediment accumulation and coastal flooding. Climate change is
already manifesting itself in the form of sea level rise and altered wind patterns . The consequences
of climate changes are likely to include increased coastal erosion and an increasing risk of breaching of
dikes and dunes and of flooding from the sea. Changes in sediment transport may lead to increased
sedimentation in harbours, inlets and channels. There are many associated challenges: the quantity of sand
required for future strengthening or raising of dikes and dunes, for example, or for nourishing foreshores in low
lying areas and along eroding stretches of coast. These are likely to increase in many situations and if this
is the case, such materials may need to be sourced further offshore – in deeper waters and therefore in a
harsher environment. The uncertainties associated with climate change projections for extreme events
can in turn result in significant uncertainties for basic design criteria for marine projects – such as
extreme water levels and extreme waves – within the lifetime of a project. This need to take into account a wider
range of projected future conditions may provide some additional design challenges. Coastal zone management
has evolved considerably over recent decades, facilitated largely by an ever-improving
understanding of the littoral sediment transport processes that govern coastal change. Positive use
of such natural processes by dredging contractors can help towards adaptive measures for climate
change . Managing sediment balances through cyclic nourishment is a potentially relevant
adaptation measure in which the dredging industry could play an important role. Case Studies –
Coastal Defence An example of an adaptive management solution is the experimental mega-nourishment in the
Netherlands called The Sand Engine (Figure 1), which combines safety requirements with space for nature
development and recreation, and uses natural processes for distribution of sand (Aarninkhof et al., 2010). This type
of solution may become more commonplace under the scenario of climate change – building on innovative modern
schemes and management plans implemented along our coasts and estuaries. Such schemes already have to be
multi-functional, while at the same time satisfying the requirements of society, conserving the environment or even
rehabilitating past environmental damage. Other examples include the beach parks Køge Bay (Figure 2) and Amager
in Denmark which combine flood protection with ‘engineered nature’ in the form of lagoons, and high quality
artificial beaches (Brøker and Mangor 2011): such solutions, however, require specific conditions which may not be
available in all locations. Another example of an innovative approach combining profile nourishments with
submerged feeder berm nourishments is illustrated in Figure 3. Restoration was necessary after a storm that caused
erosion of dunes, tidal and subtidal beaches along the coastal stretch between Vlissegem, De Haan, Bredene
(Belgium). By integrating the natural morpho-dynamics into the design a significant improvement in
stability of the reclamation could be achieved. A negative sediment balance in the coastal area is
typically associated with erosion and an increased threat from flooding – a situation which is likely
to be exacerbated as a result of climate change . EUROSION, a European initiative for sustainable coastal
management, recommends that a source of future sediment be identified to help improve the long term resilience of
Page | 17
affected areas. These ‘Strategic Sediment Reservoirs’ could be derived from offshore, coastal or hinterland areas,
and in the case of the former, dredging may have an important role to play .
Coastal erosion guarantees energy insecurity - destroys pipelines and extraction
infrastructure - makes disruption of oil and natural gas service delivery inevitable
Dismukes et al 9
(David E, Professor & Associate Director of LSU Center for Energy Studies, Additional Authors: Michelle L.
Barnett, Research Associate Kristi A. R. Darby, Geologist, “Chapter 5 – Determining the Economic Value of
Coastal Preservation and Restoration on Critical Energy Infrastructure”, pg. 84, in The Economic and Market Value
of Coasts and Estuaries: What’s At Stake?, Edited by Linwood H. Pendleton,
http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/pdf/economic_and_market_valueofcoasts_and_estuaries.pdf)
While considerable attention has been paid to the negative impacts of energy development on coastal areas, little
analyses or thought has been given to the potential synergies between restoration activities and this important
infrastructure. Industry, for instance, has invested billions in infrastru cture assets along the GOM. Coastal
erosion threatens these assets and potentially threatens the delivery of important energy resources to
consuming areas throughout the country . Thus, coastal erosion, in the extreme case, can have two
negative impacts on energy industries operating in coastal areas. The first and most obvious is the
economic damage (or loss) of the exposed infrastructure in the area. This damage or loss could have
considerable economic value . Consider, for instance, that the replacement value for a major pipeline segment
today ranges from $500,000 to $1 million per mile. Thus, the destruction of several miles of pipeline can be
a considerable loss. The second impact would be the lost income that results from delivery
interruptions from either a temporary outage or complete loss. Pipeline companies, for instance, make
money by moving crude oil or natural gas from one location to another. If they are not moving volumes,
they are not making money. The same is true for producers: if their ability to move production from their
wells and platforms is interrupted, they are not making any profit on the significant assets in which they have
invested for the duration of the outage. Thus, industry is tied to the coastal restoration challenge. There
could be considerable economic benefits to energy supply security and deliverability from a natural form
of hardening (or protection) for energy infrastructure assets in the region. Shell Oil Company’s participation through
the America’s Wetlands Campaign is a prime example of how energy companies can have both a significant impact
on coastal restoration and support energy security and deliverability.
Coastal production is the lynchpin of all of US oil and natural gas production -- the
Gulf of Mexico contains almost all of the countries refinery capacity -- supply
shocks to the coastal region ensure massive US energy insecurity
Hibbard 6
(Paul J, Analysis Group: Economic, Financial, and Strategy Consultants, “US Energy Infrastructure Vulnerability
Lessons From the Gulf Coast Hurricanes”, March 2006,
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/Infrastructure%20Vulnerability%20Hibbard_44873b7081ec6.pdf)
Why did the hurricanes produce such an impact, and what does it tell us about our energy infrastructure needs?
The Gulf Coast is the undisputed heart of the U.S. energy industry . In the Gulf, we produce or
import three-fifths of the country’s supply of crude oil and a third of U.S. natural gas supplies; we
generate half of the countries refined product, supplying nearly all of the requirements for the Gulf region,
the East Coast, and most of the Midwest. The vast majority of the petroleum and natural gas products consumed in
the eastern half of the country find their origin in markets, storage, processing, and pipeline capacity concentrated in
Gulf states. The sheer magnitude of fossil fuel operations in the Gulf make them the centerpiece of
U.S. natural gas and refined petroleum product supply and pricing. The combined effect of the two
Page | 18
hurricanes took out virtually all of this capacity for a short period of time, and an unprecedented level of capacity for
a more extended period of time. It did so, as mentioned, against a backdrop of historically thin supply and high
prices, and the results were predictably severe. What are our options to address the weaknesses that the hurricanes
revealed: to try to prevent such a disproportionate impact in the future, whether it is the result of hurricanes or other
natural forces, or the result of an intentional terrorist act? If there is a silver lining, it is in the potential that the
aftermath of the hurricanes on energy markets will serve as a wakeup call – that they will remind us of some
basic facts related to energy security and infrastructure vulnerability. In particular, they have demonstrated the
magnitude of the influence of energy costs and availability on personal wealth and national and local economies.
And they have revealed both how sensitive energy supply and pricing is to relatively small disruptions,
and how concentrations and weaknesses in our energy infrastructure leave us vulnerable to such
supply disruptions . This paper reviews the vulnerabilities in our nation’s energy infrastructure, as revealed in
part by the havoc wreaked by the Gulf hurricanes. The focus is primarily on petroleum and natural gas. First, it
describes the sources of supply for each fuel, along with the capacity to process raw fuels and distribute the resulting
products to U.S. markets. Next it describes industry conditions following the hurricanes, and the actual and expected
supply and price impacts of these disruptions. Finally, it examines in particular the supply and price impacts on
energy markets in the Northeast, which is excessively dependent on Gulf supplies of oil for heating, and on natural
gas for heating, commercial activity, and electricity generation. This review underscores the consequences of
existing vulnerabilities in our energy infrastructure, and in our national and regional pattern of
dependencies on tightening global and national markets for petroleum and natural gas. Concern over energy supply
and price vulnerability is not new – indeed, understanding the role of energy supply and cost in national security and
economic health has been the primary focus of numerous government and privately-funded studies spanning
decades. The impacts of the Gulf hurricanes have reinforced certain fundamental concerns prevalent in these
studies – namely our dependence on fossil fuels and the concentration of our energy infrastructure . But
they also have revealed important near-term vulnerabilities associated with recent growth in demand and current
infrastructure conditions.
Perceptions of US energy supply adequacy are crucial to East-Asian stability failure of the US to guarantee Japanese energy security ensures miscalculation and
Sino-Japanese war
Phillips 13
(Andrew, Senior Lecturer in International Relations and Strategy
@ University of Queensland, “A dangerous synergy: energy securitization, great power rivalry and strategic
stability in the Asian century”, The Pacific Review, 2013Vol. 26, No. 1, 17–38)
Energy security perceptions inevitably focus firstly on questions of supply adequacy
relative to current and
projected demand. In addressing supply adequacy questions, governments must first establish whether or not they can meet current and projected
energy consumption demands through exclusive reliance on indigenous resources, before then determining if sufficient energy resources are
likely to be available internationally to meet their needs if this proves not to be the case. Given the dominance of fossil fuels in the global energy
mix, fears
of looming energy shortages have long preoccupied states when addressing these questions of
supply adequacy. Contrarily, more optimistic commentators have downplayed such dangers, maintaining
that pricing signals will encourage technological innovation and greater investments in both traditional and
renewable sources of energy to ensure sufficient supply of energy services in the long run (Yergin 2006: 74). Such
optimism is grounded in sanguine assumptions regarding the efficiency, flexibility, resilience and
responsiveness of global energy markets to price signals, adverting to the second set of considerations
informing states’ energy security perceptions. Questions of supply adequacy are inevitably conditioned by
governments’ assessments concerning the efficiency, flexibility, resilience and responsiveness of the
domestic and international institutions charged with allocating energy services. Whether these institutions are
governed mainly by the logic of bureaucratic command or by market signals varies crossnationally, depending on states’ domestic energy
resource endowments, level of development and choice of developmental model. This caveat aside, over the last three decades, the tendency in
Asia has been for states to adopt developmental models predicated on their increased integration into global markets, including global energy
markets (Solingen 2007: 765). Whether or not these markets will prove sufficiently efficient to assure the uninterrupted supply of energy services
at an affordable price, sufficiently resilient in the face of short-term disruptions of supply in particular energy sectors, and sufficiently adaptive to
ensure adequate investment in the full range of energy services necessary to ensure long-term global energy security are consequently all
Page | 19
Perceptions of supply adequacy are
therefore intrinsically linked with assessments concerning the allocative efficiency, flexibility, responsiveness
considerations that now profoundly shape Asian states’ energy security assessments.
and resilience of the institutions – increasingly, regional and global energy markets – responsible for the provision
of these services. These assessments are, in turn, conditioned by states’ perceptions regarding the stability
and benignity of the strategic environment within which these institutions operate. The example of the
global oil market is instructive on this point, with the United States’ role as the Persian Gulf’s chief security
guarantor having historically played a vital role in assuring its Western European and East Asian security clients that
the global oil market would continue to function in amanner consistent with the fulfilment of their energy needs
(Klare 2004: 45–7). Regional and global markets remain inescapably embedded within a broader
geopolitical context, with a stable and benign strategic order being a vital prerequisite for these
markets’ continued ability to assure consumer states reliable access to energy tradeables. That states’
energy security perceptions are a composite of multiple considerations – encompassing perceptions regarding supply
adequacy, institutional efficiency, and strategic stability and benignity – is significant in that it provides an insight
into the ease with which governments can come to regard energy as a national security challenge , rather
than an exclusively or even primarily economic issue. Despite the apparently intimate connection between energy policy and national security
implied by the phrase, ‘energy security’, it is critical to note that the decision to securitize energy policy is a political choice and that states can,
under limited circumstances, conceive of energy policy as being purely economic in character. States that are self-sufficient in energy resources,
such as China prior to 1993, are particularly well positioned to conceptualize energy policy in this way, their energy self-sufficiency effectively
shielding domestic energy consumers from external supply shocks. Conversely, however, states that rely on energy imports are likely to be
acutely sensitive to the larger strategic context within which the international energy transactions on which they depend take place and, thus,
more likely to conceive of energy as a security challenge. As John Ravenhill notes elsewhere in this volume, East Asian governments have long
The tendency to
securitize trade in key commodities has historically been the norm, rather than the exception, in the AsiaPacific, so it is unsurprising that this trend is now extending to energy resources as China and India
join Japan as major energy importers. What I aim to establish below is that it is not the fact that energy
security is increasingly being securitized by itself that should concern analysts, but rather the
identified vulnerability to the disruption of essential imports as a vital national security concern (Ravenhill 2013:89) .
adversarial manner in which it is currently being securitized and the way in which this process is
interacting negatively with existing alignment patterns to reinforce existing regional rivalries . The case of
Japanese energy policy in the years following the Shanghai communiqu ´e and the oil shocks will now be considered to corroborate the claim that
energy securitization can interact positively with existing patterns of alignment to reinforce strategic stability. This will be followed by an
analysis of the more adversarial dynamics of energy securitization that are now aggravating and amplifying security rivalries within a more
contested Asia. 2. Energy security and Asian regional security, 1972–91 For the two decades following the Shanghai communiqu´ e, Asia was
vastly more stable than it had been during the immediate post-war period. This stability was attributable predominantly to favourable diplomatic
alignments and a corresponding military balance, but also to regional patterns of energy consumption and production that further underwrote the
post- 1972 order. Turning firstly to alignment patterns, East Asia’s strategic outlook was fundamentally transformed by the post-1972
rapprochement between the United States, the People’s Republic of China and Japan. The suspension of the Sino-US contest for influence in East
Asia after 1972 removed a critical contributor to regional instability, while the US alliance with Japan worked to stabilize relations between all
three countries. American paramountcy provided a ‘double reassurance’ to China and Japan, simultaneously muting their suspicions towards one
another, while enhancing the three countries’ anti-Soviet solidarity (White 2008: 97). The emerging trilateral entente stabilized East Asia at a
time when perceptions of American decline might otherwise have undermined regional order. Additionally, the regional military balance
continued to favour the US and its security partners. On land, Washington’s alignment with Beijing enabled the latter to concentrate its energies
on containing the Soviet Union. At sea, meanwhile, US maritime supremacy secured regional Sea Lines Of Communication (SLOCs) and thus
provided East Asian states with the security necessary to pursue self-strengthening strategies predicated on their integration within a liberal global
economic order (Olsen 2000: 187). This reversed a trend towards self-strengthening via policies of autarky and confrontation with the West,
which had formerly guided key powers such as China and Indonesia, presaging an era of growing prosperity that further fortified regional
stability (Phillips 2011: 97). Finally, regional patterns of energy consumption and production further underwrote a more stable order, as did the
manner in which Japan specifically responded to the energy challenges of the post-oil shock era. Given its paucity of natural resources, energy
concerns had always been central to Japan’s national security outlook and these became even more so following the oil shocks. The oil shocks
and the macro-economic dislocations they precipitated initially threatened to derail the Japanese economic miracle, potentially destabilizing an
Asia that had already become reliant on Japanese prosperity as both a stimulant of regional development and a safeguard against revived Japanese
militarism. As it eventuated, however, Japan’s post-oil shock energy anxieties spurred policies that bound it more tightly into the regional order,
thereby enhancing strategic stability. One of the most significant impacts of the 1973–74 oil crisis was the long-term fillip it provided for a
For the Japanese, who had foresworn the right to wage war as a condition
of their post-war rehabilitation, the first oil shock dramatized their dual dependence on both Middle Eastern
oil to fuel their economic development and on the US as the ultimate guarantor of continued access to
strengthening of Japan’s alliance with America.
that oil . In responding to this dual dependence, Tokyo pursued a range of domestic initiatives to mitigate Japan’s vulnerability to supply
interruptions from the Middle East (Ikenberry 1986: 115). These initiatives notwithstanding, the reality that dependence on Middle Eastern oil
could be reduced, but not eliminated, compelled Tokyo towards greater cooperation with the US, even if immediate energy security concerns saw
Page | 20
Tokyo adopt an ostensibly more pro-Palestinian stance than the US at the height of the 1973–74 oil embargo (Licklider 1988: 217). This longterm trend towards enhanced US-Japanese security cooperation manifested itself regionally in Japan’s commitment to make a greater contribution
to the defence of its own SLOCs, as specified in the 1978 Guidelines for Japan-US Cooperation (Berger 1993: 144). More fundamentally,
however, Japan’s status as an American energy protectorate saw it provide critical diplomatic and financial backing for American foreign policy
in the Middle East, a convergence of interests most powerfully illustrated in Japan’s assistance in bankrolling the first Gulf War (Purrington
1992: 163). In both the Asia-Pacific and beyond, then,
Japan’s vulnerability to energy supply disruptions fortified
its alliance with the US . Given the alliance’s importance in reassuring Japan’s neighbours against the threat of revived Japanese
militarism, its further strengthening significantly reinforced regional stability. The stability-enhancing consequences of Japan’s energy
dependence were additionally evident in the significance of the trade in energy services that cemented the Sino-Japanese entente after 1972.
Although later to become a major energy importer, in the 1970s, China possessed oil and coal reserves significantly in excess of its domestic
consumption requirements (Liao 2007: 27). This endowment provided a ready basis for the commercial cooperation institutionalized under the
1978 Long Term Trade Agreement (LTTA) that accompanied the signing of the Sino- Japanese Treaty of Peace and Friendship. At the core of the
LTTA was a Chinese commitment to export coal and oil to Japan in exchange for wide-ranging economic cooperation, ranging from Official
Development Assistance through to joint development enterprises centred on cultivating China’s industrial base and further strengthening the two
countries’ economic complementarity (Liao 2007: 28). In reality, overly optimistic assessments of the size of Chinese oil reserves meant that
China was unable to mitigate Japan’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil on the scale initially envisaged (Lee 1984: 22–3). This qualification
aside, the Sino-Japanese energy trade nevertheless yielded positive strategic externalities, most notably its provision of a commercial foundation
for the Sino-Japanese leg of the USSino- Japanese entente. Additionally, the enticement of access to China’s fossil fuel reserves gave Japan an
alternative to increased dependence on Soviet oil and gas, while providing China with leverage with which to extract from Japan a diplomatic
commitment to ‘anti-hegemonism’ as well as an economic commitment not to develop Soviet oil and gas resources along China’s northern flank
(Arnold 1989: 423; Woodard 1980: 126). In this way, once again, regional patterns of energy production and consumption reinforced patterns of
strategic alignment, the agreement solidifying the US-Sino-Japanese entente while shoring up the continued containment of Soviet influence in
Northeast Asia. Beyond their influence in shoring up relations among the US-Sino- Japanese entente, Japanese energy security concerns finally
also strengthened Japan’s ties with regional US allies, most notably Australia. Following the second oil shock, International Energy Agency
(IEA) member countries agreed on intensified energy cooperation to insulate themselves from further supply disruptions from the Middle East.
One aspect of this cooperation entailed an agreement to increase collective reliance on coal from member states endowed with surplus coal
reserves, with the latter expected to increase production to make the agreement practically effective (IEA 1995). Despite baulking at committing
to this agreement, Australia’s coal production did nevertheless surge during the 1980s, primarily to feed the voracious demand for energy
emanating from Japan (Leaver 2007: 106). The strategic consequence of this was to solidify Australia’s diplomatic and commercial relationship
with Japan, as Japan grew to be Australia’s largest export market, while Australia emerged as a pivotal contributor to Japan’s energy security
(Leaver 2007: 106). Japanese energy security concerns thus again worked to strengthen regional order, with the booming Australia-Japan energy
trade undergirding America’s ‘hub and spokes’ alliance system with additional economic ballast. The foregoing narrative illustrates that Asian
Japan’s securitization of energy saw it adopt policies that enhanced regional strategic stability down to 1991. In a period otherwise marked by
significant strains in the US-Japan bilateral relationship, Japanese energy security concerns following the first oil shock strengthened Japan’s
alliance with the US, provided a commercial foundation for Sino-Japanese rapprochement, and augmented the ‘hub and spokes’ alliance system’s
economic foundations. Within East Asia more generally, the export of energy services by China and Indonesia during this period additionally
provided both countries with crucial hard currency, supplying the financial wherewithal necessary for them to kick-start export-oriented
modernization programmes that embedded both within a liberal global economic order (Chow 1992: 755; Glassburner 1976: 1106). Beyond East
Asia, meanwhile, India’s poverty and dependence on subsidized Soviet oil conversely limited its impact on global energy markets, irrespective of
its huge population (Duncan 1989: 76). Japanese voracity, Chinese energy abundance and Indian poverty and marginality thus jointly conditioned
Asia’s energy politics during the Cold War. From a human welfare perspective, this configuration was far from optimal. But from a regional
order perspective, it was strongly conducive to strategic stability. Contrarily, the contemporary pattern of regional energy consumption and
production differs radically from its Cold War counterpart and is already feeding into competitive dynamics that bode ill for the region’s future. It
is to a consideration of these dynamics that I now turn. 3. Energy security and Asian regional security, 1991–present Whereas energy security
concerns intersected positively with alignment patterns and the regional military balance during the Cold War, the post-Cold War period has seen
the durability of the post-1972 US-Sino-Japanese entente is
increasingly uncertain. China’s rise has contrasted with two decades of Japanese stagnation,
evoking Japanese fears of being marginalized in a new order dominated by either a resurgent China or a
US-PRC condominium (Hughes 2009: 846). In response, America has sought to reassure Japan and shore
up its primacy through the augmentation of its existing alliances and the establishment of new ‘strategic
the erosion of this fortuitous constellation. Diplomatically,
partnerships’ with countries such as India, Vietnam and Indonesia (Twining 2007: 83–4). These moves have, in turn, prompted Beijing to
strengthen its security ties both with established allies (e.g., Pakistan and Myanmar) as well as with American regional clients (Clarke 2008: 129;
Medeiros 2005: 155–6). Complicating matters further, New Delhi’s fears of Chinese encirclement have simultaneously spurred India to cultivate
The region’s evolving
military balance provides further evidence of the shift towards a more contested Asia . China’s military
its own countervailing security ties with countries including America, Australia and Japan (Rehman 2009: 128).
modernization has already raised the costs of a prospective US military intervention in East Asia as well as undermining the viability of the
United States’ commitment to a strategy of sea control (Shambaugh 2008: 301). The Indian Ocean has likewise seen a growth in naval
competition as China and India’s economic resurgence has triggered an expansion of their maritime interests, alongside a concomitant growth in
their ability and willingness to field the naval capabilities they deem necessary to defend those interests (Kennedy 2010: 142; Pant 2009: 294).
This incipient naval competition has found its terrestrial parallel as both countries have sought to outbid one another in cultivating their
diplomatic, commercial and strategic ties with the countries of the Indian Ocean littoral (Blazevic 2009). Compounding these tensions, states’
security calculations are now also being shaped by the end of the Cold War configuration of Japanese energy hunger, Chinese energy abundance
and Indian marginality. Prior to the 1990s, Japan was Asia’s sole energy super-consumer and its perceptions of energy vulnerability were
mitigated by the reassurance of the US alliance.
China and India’s subsequent rise has yielded two additional Asian
Page | 21
energy super-consumers, which lack indigenous energy reserves adequate to fuel their
modernization and which, furthermore, are not beneficiaries of American security guarantees (Rehman 2009:
137; Zhao 2008: 209). Within a more uncertain strategic environment, the resulting increased
vulnerability to supply disruptions of imported energy services has led both states to redefine energy
as a national security issue, while introducing a new element of friction into relations among Asia’s
Great Powers (Pant 2009: 279–80). The following appraisal of Japanese, Chinese and Indian approaches
to energy security reveals that all three have consequently securitized energy as a policy issue and have,
furthermore, done so in an adversarial manner that is exacerbating regional rivalries . Lacking
indigenous energy resources and having renounced its Great Power ambitions, Japan has historically
depended on global markets embedded within an American-dominated security order to meet its
energy needs. Since 1991, economic and demographic stagnation has curbed the expansion of Japanese energy demand, partially mitigating
supply adequacy concerns (Calder 2008: 127). This has, however, been offset by burgeoning Chinese and Indian demand for the world’s scarce
fossil fuels and by China and Indonesia’s disappearance from the world market as net oil exporters. The turmoil attending the ‘Arab spring’ has
moreover cast doubt on America’s long-term credibility as a guarantor of Japanese access to Middle Eastern energy reserves, while the
Fukushima disaster has also called into question nuclear power’s suitability as a hedge against global energy market volatility. Lastly, Japan’s
conspicuous advocacy of action against climate change also constrains Tokyo from a renewed focus on coal-fired electricity generation and a
traditional
expedients that have previously mitigated Japanese energy concerns are thus unlikely to prove as
effective in doing so in the coming decades. A recognition of this reality appears evident in Japan’s
recent shift towards a more assertive form of energy diplomacy, one that is already stoking a more
corresponding increased reliance on longstanding allies such as Australia to service its energy needs (Choi 2009: 10). The
adversarial relationship with other major energy consumers, most notably China. Energy security
anxieties inflamed Sino-Japanese tensions throughout the 2000s, as both states sought increased access to regional energy
reserves in the context of soaring global commodity prices and increased volatility among traditional Middle Eastern energy suppliers. Efforts to
tap Siberia’s vast oil and gas reserves were thus considerably delayed as China and Japan tussled over the preferred pipeline route for conveying
these resources to Asia’s consumers (Choi 2009: 16–7; Liao 2007: 39), with Japanese mistrust of China scotching initial proposals that the
pipelines traverse Chinese territory. Similarly, notwithstanding periodic efforts to arrive at a final understanding regarding the joint exploration
and exploitation of offshore reserves,
China and Japan remain embroiled in a protracted contest over gas
reserves in the East China Sea (Choi 2009: 10). Despite the existence of a compelling common interest in
developing the region’s energy resources for their mutual benefit, then, energy concerns have emerged as a
significant source of friction in the Sino-Japanese relationship, as both parties have conceptualized
energy as a security issue, rather than an economic one , and have furthermore apprehended the issue
through the lens of an already tense and deteriorating bilateral relationship. While Japan’s tendency to conceptualize
energy as a national security issue is far from new, its increasingly assertive regional energy diplomacy does
constitute a significant departure from Cold War precedents. Nevertheless, Japan’s energy diplomacy
remains constrained within very definite boundaries deriving from factors including its alliance
with the U nited S tates, the longevity and complexity of its enmeshment within global energy markets and its
constitutional commitment to pacifism. The same cannot be said for China, which has by contrast only recently begun
to explicitly identify energy as a national security priority, but which faces far fewer constraints than Japan in aggressively prosecuting its
international energy interests. Unlike Japan, Chinese anxieties about supply adequacy are partially moderated by its capacity to exploit
indigenous coal and oil reserves to meet its energy needs (Leung 2011: 1330). Nevertheless, China’s energy consumption
is
projected to soar in coming decades, making it more dependent on energy imports over time and thus more vulnerable to supply
disruptions (Leung 2011: 1330). Beijing’s recognition of this vulnerability has already seen it move to redefine energy security as a security
issue, rather than a purely economic one, and to accordingly adopt policies that reflect an unmistakeable ambivalence towards the primarily
market-based global energy order. The most well publicized of these policies has been China’s allegedly mercantilistic use of overseas resource
investments to establish control of scarce fossil fuel reserves at the expense of other consumers. Notwithstanding the controversy attending
Chinese resource investments, their net overall impact on the global supply of available energy services nevertheless remains disputed (Victor
2007: 49) and is significant primarily for signalling official misgivings concerning the reliability of global markets in assuring Chinese energy
security. These misgivings are in turn grounded in China’s awareness of the present embeddedness of global energy markets within an Americandominated security order and Beijing’s reluctance to fully integrate into this order lest it thereby submit to forever remaining an American energy
protectorate.
Page | 22
Ensures nuclear war and extinction - multiple nuclear states, overlapping
deterrence relationships, and lack of diplomatic checks
Suto and Tasaki ‘9
(Takaya, director of the Center for the Promotion of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, Hirofumi, senior research
fellow at the Center for the Promotion of Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, both at Japan Institute of
International Affairs, Abolishing Nuclear Weapons: A Debate, pgs. 216
www.carnegieendowment.org/files/abolishing_nuclear_weapons_debate.pdf)
Northeast Asia is one of the most critical regions with regard to nuclear issues. Every state that has direct security stakes in
the region has been closely engaged with nuclear weapons. The United States, Russia, and China are all
parties to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), while North Korea possesses nuclear weapons in violation of the NPT.
Although neither Japan nor South Korea possesses any nuclear weapons, both are under the U.S.
nuclear umbrella. On top of all this, the security environment of this region has remained volatile , even since the end of the
Cold War. The possibility of major armed conflicts erupting in the Korean Peninsula and the Taiwan Strait
has long been worrisome. Additionally, several unsolved territorial disputes exist in Northeast Asia, and the
relationships among regional countries are not necessarily amicable . Furthermore, a rising China has
continued to modernize its military force, including its nuclear capabilities, while its intentions remain unclear. In the
medium to long term, the United States and China may vie for hegemony and influence in the Asia–Pacific region, resulting in confrontation.
Page | 23
Solvency
Increasing ship size is the biggest problem for US port competitiveness - dredging is
key to ensure coastal port depth
American Institute of Marine Underwriters Technical Services Committee 2006
(AIMU Technical Services Committee Dredging & Marine Contractors, May 2006, “Dredging and Marine
Contractors”, http://www.aimuedu.org/aimupapers/Dredging&MarineContractors.pdf)
Dredging is important to the conduct of maritime commerce throughout the U.S. Dredging
activities occur on inland waterways, within ports and harbors, on coastal areas , as well as in support of
new construction projects. Maintenance of navigable waterways depths is a continuous process in
many ports and harbors, whose bottom contours are constantly changing due to silting near the
mouth of rivers. And, as ship’s become larger and draft requirements (depth of the ship’s hull below
the waterline) increase, ports may need to deepen their channels to allow for deeper draft ships, in order to
remain competitive with other ports. In short, dredging is essentially the underwater removal of sand, soil or
silt and its movement from one place to another, for purposes of deepening a channel or navigable waterway.
Dredging often makes use of the removed material, for beach replenishment, land reclamation, or for fill in
commercial or industrial projects.
Dredging solves coastal protection - best evidence that it’s key to environmental
protection
American Institute of Marine Underwriters Technical Services Committee 6
(AIMU Technical Services Committee Dredging & Marine Contractors, May 2006, “Dredging and Marine
Contractors”, http://www.aimuedu.org/aimupapers/Dredging&MarineContractors.pdf)
Over the years, dredging has made a significant contribution to the development of many world
economies. Construction and maintenance of harbors, canals, and waterways have all directly benefited from the
dredging industry. Additionally, dredging is key in coastal protection, land reclamation, and
environmental restoration projects . In addition, there are many other applications to which dredging is key.
In many places, agriculture depends on irrigation and drainage with the use of canals. Dredging is often
used for infrastructure projects such as road construction. Trenches for pipelines and cables and more, are often
aided with the assistance of dredging as well.
Page | 24
Trade Competitiveness Adv
Page | 25
Trade Comp Uq -- Low
The US is lagging behind in port dredging
Buchanan 14
(Susan Buchanan is a contributor for Marine Link, the home of breaking news regarding events, legislation and
developments in the maritime industry.) http://www.marinelink.com/news/dredging-growth-budget371913.aspx
The FY 2015 civil works budget at USACE, the federal agency most engaged in dredging, is smaller
than in 2014. Members of Congress this spring expressed concern about the new budget . The United States is
lagging a number of nations in port modernization and needs to do more deepening to fully
participate in global trade, they said. And, this goes beyond the need to deepen deep draft coastal ports. Inland
rivers, vital to moving raw materials and grain to the export markets, need constant attention. Factors driving
world dredging, including growth in sea trade, bigger container ships, climate change and sea level
rise have kept U.S. dredging from declining further. Globally, port and harbor expansions, new
ports, enlarged navigation channels and maintenance work account for nearly three-fifths of
dredging activity. Data obtained from the USACE for actual costs and dredging activities dating
back to 1963 shows activity down, but costs soaring. China, the world’s largest dredge market, and
the United States are both “closed” or inaccessible to foreign competitors, Netherlands-based Rabobank
noted in its dredging outlook in September. European dredge markets are mostly open; non-Chinese Asian markets
are mixed; and Latin America, the Middle East and Australia are open. In the most recent data available, China
accounted for 29 percent of world dredging work in 2011, followed by Europe with 13 percent. Since then, China’s
CCCC, the parent company of dredgers CHEC, has signaled plans to become more active in global dredging.
Page | 26
Ports k to Trade
Improvements in port efficiency solve trade
USAID 4
“THE BROAD ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PORT INEFFICIENCY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO
PORTS”
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADC612.pdf
More and more studies of the impact of transportation on trade and welfare are focusing on ports and border
crossings. Clark, Dollar, and Micco (CDM) (2001) declare that port efficiency can affect transportation
costs and that an inefficient port can increase the distance to a shipper’s export market by 60
percent. In a study of Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) countries, Wilson, Mann, and Otsuki (WMO)
(2003) explore the importance of port efficiency relative to other factors that enhance or constrain trade, such as
customs performance, the regulatory environment, and e-business. Calculating indicators for each factor, WMO
find that improvement in port efficiencies yields the largest increases in trade flows; specifically, an
improvement of just 0.55 percent in the port efficiency indicator has the same impact as 5.5 and 3.3
percent improvements in customs performance and e-business indicators, respectively
Ports key to foreign trade and jobs
DCA ‘07
(The Dredging Contractors of America is a non-profit trade association that has represented the interests of the U.S.
dredging and marine construction industry and its members for over thirty years. The present membership includes ten large
companies, fifteen small companies and three associate members that operate on the Atlantic, Gulf and Pacific coasts, the Great
Lakes, the inland rivers, and in Hawaii and Alaska.) http://www.dredgingcontractors.org/about.htm
Up and down the U.S. coastline, in every port city, the dredging industry is keeping our nation's
trading gateways open for business. Together, these seaports handle 95 percent of
America's foreign trade. The Port of Oakland, one of the largest general cargo ports in the
United States, lost market share over the last decade due to navigation channels that were
unable to handle the world's largest container ships. After many stops and starts, a project to
improve the Port's shipping lanes has been brought to fruition. With deeper channels, the
Port's expansion generates 4,100 new jobs, $500 million in annual business
revenues and $15 million in new state and local taxes. In addition to fulfilling the
need for a productive port industry to keep U.S. products competitive, our seaports are responsible
for contributing $780 billion to the Gross Domestic Product and for 15 million jobs. While the primary
goal of dredging is to create and maintain safe and efficient navigation channels, the excavated soil is often used for
environmentally beneficial purposes, including the creation of fish and wildlife habitats. In most cases, when beachquality sand is dredged, it is placed either directly on the shore or in the surf zone to be delivered to the shore by
natural processes. Without the nation's inland and coastal waterways, the cost of most products that American
businesses and consumers rely on would increase. That's because the towing and barge industry provides the most
cost-effective mode of transporting freight. In each of the 41 states served by our inland waterways,
maintenance dredging is essential. Without periodic dredging, the cost advantage provided by
water transportation would be lost. Throughout the year, dredging contractors work to ensure the safe and
secure transportation of agricultural and forest products and of strategic chemical and energy resources in bulk. As a
by-product of dredging, sand is reclaimed for low-cost aggregate and fill material. This aggregate is used to
construct and maintain roads, to rebuild levees, or for other public purposes.
Dredging Today, 6/24/14
http://www.dredgingtoday.com/2014/06/24/dredging-already-pays-off-for-yuzhny-port-ukraine/
Access to capesize vessels (over 200,000 deadweight tons) provides a competitive advantage during
transportation of ore and coal cargoes. Ukraine, with a water depth of 15 meters, was able to
ensure the use of only 70% of the tonnage of such vessels and the vessels had to complete loading in the
Page | 27
roads (i.e. in the approaches to the port area). This significantly increased the cost of freight, as well as the
time and cost of loading. Competition in the market has become so fierce in recent years that
domestic ports and stevedoring companies have been forced to develop a whole system of
technological measures for completing the loading of capesize vessels in the roads in order to meet
the growing demand for transportation via this type of vessels. “Cargo owners working with iron
ore transported it with Capesize vessels because it is cost-effective. It was necessary to implement
this project in order to provide a high level of customer service, preserve transit goods, and attract
additional cargo flows, thereby increasing port revenue and revenues into budgets of all levels. The
source of funding for the investment project is exclusively the earmarked port charges that ship
owners pay when ships are entering the port. In this case, the investment in this project is the result
of the net profit after payment of taxes and duties into budgets of all levels, as well as payment of
dividends to the state,” the Yuzhny port’s Director Oleksandr Lahosha said in 2012, a few months before the
start of the dredging of the approach channel and waters of two berths to a depth of 21 meters, which is one of the
most ambitious infrastructure projects in Ukraine
Ship size has increased in the last 50 years, and trade ports will grow if we dredge
ports.
Nick McCrea 2014 (reporter for BDN)
Searsport’s harbor needs to be deeper if Maine is going to tap into growing trade potential along
the East Coast, the state’s transportation commissioner and other officials said Wednesday. Maine Department of
Transportation Commissioner David Bernhardt; Jim Theriault, vice president of materials handling for Sprague
Energy and Capt. David Gelinas of the Penobscot Bay Pilots Association highlighted the project during a meeting of
the Action Committee of 50 at Hollywood Casino on Wednesday morning. AC50 is a nonprofit economic
development corporation geared toward improving trade and logistics in Maine as a way of attracting and retaining
jobs in the region. Searsport’s last major harbor project was completed in 1964. It increased the depth
of the channel 35 feet, allowing for large commercial cargo vessels to dock at Mack Point to offload
or receive goods. Maine’s second-busiest commercial shipping channel hasn’t been touched since.
“The ships have gotten bigger in the past 50 years,” Bernhardt said. “I don’t see this project as being
any different than upgrading and maintaining our state’s highways and bridges.” The proposed $12
million dredging project would increase the depth of the channel by 5 feet and expand the channel’s dimensions. In
all about 929,000 cubic yards of material would be removed from the harbor, according to the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, which is planning the project. Currently, if a large ship wants to dock in Searsport, it has to
wait for high tide or come with a lighter load so it doesn’t sit as low in the water. Both options
increase transportation costs and affect the bottom lines of companies who choose to ship through
Maine. “We need this project now for the ships that are coming now,” he said. While the project would
improve safety for the ships the port currently sees, it also would make trips feasible for larger ships with deeper
drafts. Opponents to the dredging project have expressed concerns about stirring up toxins in the silt and that the
materials pulled out of the channel might be disposed of too close to the mouth of the Passagassawakeag River. The
project goes before the Civil Works Review Board this summer. The Army Corps of Engineers says that in relation
to other dredging projects across the country, this one is small. For example, Boston is seeking approval for a $300
million project to dredge its harbor. That is expected to take three or four years and will include underwater drilling
and blasting. The Searsport dredging project carries implications for the rail industry as well, as train tracks tie the
port to much of Maine, the Canadian provinces and the Midwest. Bernhardt said the state is closely watching Maine,
Montreal and Atlantic Railway’s bankruptcy sale to Fortress Investment Group. Fortress has significant capital and,
according to Bernhardt, a “commitment to make this work.” Fortress has said little about its plans for MM&A’s rail
network, and Bernhardt said he hopes those plans won’t involve abandoning the tracks in the future. To this point,
there’s been no indication that is part of Fortress’ plan, he said. Investments in railway improvements will be vital to
Maine’s trade and industry future, according to Bernhardt. Dredging the port will bring more goods for
Maine’s rail industry to transport and ease its recent struggles, he added.
Page | 28
AT Competitiveness Theory Wrong
Competitiveness isn’t illusory – infrastructure strongly affects economic
performance.
Ron MARTIN Economic Geography @ Cambridge ‘6 in Economic Geography: Past Present and Future eds.
Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen and Helen Smith p.162-163
However, just as in a Coasian view of the world, where it is the organisation of productive assets in a firm that gives
rise to the analysis of the firm as a unit of production, so nations, regions and cities too can be seen as
collections of assets, variously organised, so that it is reasonable to think in terms of the competitiveness
of that bundle of assets, even if Krugman is right in advocating caution about making analogies
between the firm and the nation or region. Furthermore, although most regional units used for policy and
analytical purposes are based on political or administrative boundaries that need bear little correspondence to
economic relationships, there are certain features about such 'official' regions that do give them some
measure of meaning as economic entities. Thus regional authorities often have tax -raising powers and
responsibilities for spending on public services, utilities and infrastructure , all of which impact on
local firms. Also, as noted above, regional authorities and bodies are becoming increasingly active in
other areas of local economic governance, whether as the delivery agents of decentralised national
government policies, or as active policy agents in their own right and capacity. It may be that regions are difficult to
define as 'essential' economic units, but the fact is that a process of 'regional institutionalisation' of policy
intervention and responsibility appears to be underway that is endowing politically and administratively defined
regions with some degree of functional economic meaning. It is as part of this institutionalisation process that
regional authorities and bodies are busy devising policies to improve and upgrade the
competitiveness and productivity of the businesses, workers and organisations in their jurisdictions. If only
because of this rise of the region as an arena of economic governance and intervention, and the
increasing trend for policymakers to think of regions as the sites of competitive advantage, it is
important to appraise the different senses in which the term 'regional competitiveness' is used.
Krugman’s model is flawed – regional competitive advantages assist growth.
Allen SCOTT Urban Planning @ UCLA ‘6 in Economic Geography: Past Present and Future eds. Sharmistha
Bagchi-Sen and Helen Smith p. 64-65
Four specific lacunae of the core model merit turther attention in this connection: First, the model identifies
productive activity only in terms of monopolistically competitive tirms with fixed and variable costs. In its initial
tormulation it makes no reterence whatever to the dynamics of the social division of labor and the networks of
transactional relations that How trom this process. In later tormulations (e .g. Krugman and Venables 1996;
Venables 1996) an intermediate goods industry is assumed by fiat to exist in the model. However, the model is silent
on the endogenous relations that exist in reality between the vertical structure of production and spatially dependent
transactions costs. These relations tend to be of special interest and importance in clustered economic systems where
intra and inter-firm transactional structures are usually extremely complex (e.g. Scott 1983). Accordingly, the
model pays inadequate attention to the wider logic of locational convergence/divergence, and, in particular, it is
deficient in its grasp of the individual regional economy as a source of competitive advantage (cf
Porter 2001 ). Second, these tailings are compounded by the model's neglect of local labor market processes, such as
information flows, job search patterns, labor-force training, and so on (Peck 1996). True enough, Krugman pays
lip service to the existence of processes like these, but makes no effort to incorporate them into the
workings of the core model. Third, region -based learning and innovation processes are conspicuous
by their absence from the core model. A consequence of this absence is that the core model pays little or no
attention to patterns of temporal change in the qualitative attributes and competitive advantages of
Page | 29
regional production systems. The rich parallel literature by economists such as Jatle et al. (1993), Audretsch
and Feldman (1996), or Acs (2002) on regional innovation systems compensates in some degree tor this omission,
but the model itself remains more or less impervious to conceptions of technology-led growth (Acs and
Varga 2002). Fourth, given its resolute commitment to microeconomic forms of analysis, the model actively
suppresses the possibility that collective region-based strategies of economic adjustment might
playa role in the construction of localized competitive advantages (Neary 2001). In practice, such
strategies are often highly developed in regions with active production systems, both in the private sphere (e .g.
interfirm collaboration), and in the public sphere (e.g. local economic development and training programs under the
aegis of regional agencies) . Numerous researchers have shown time and again that strategies like these
are critical to the creation of regional competitive advantages and an important tool in the search
tor improved rates of local economic growth (Bianchi 1992; Cooke 1999; Saxenian 1994; Storper and Scott
1995). Some of the lacunae pointed out here can no doubt be dealt with in part by appropriate reformulations of the
model (such as the introduction of commuting costs to reflect the spatial organization of local labor markets, or
explicit reference to coalition formation processes), but at the cost of enormous increases of algebraic complexity.
The Krugman model is for the most part a black box that occludes what by many accounts must be
seen as some of the most important aspects of regional economic growth and development. As such, it
casts only a very limited light on the full play of externalities, competitive advantage, and locational agglomeration
in economic geography. Needless to say, the model is silent on wider social and political issues of relevance to the
analysis of agglomeration, such as, tor example, region -specific forms of worker socialization and habituation, the
emergence ofl ocal governance structures, or the historical shifts that occur periodically in technical -organizational
structures of accumulation, and that greatly impact regional trajectories of development.
Competitiveness is economically important – the quality of networks determines
capital investment and growth.
Roberto CAMAGNI Department of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano ‘2
“On the Concept of Territorial Competitiveness: Sound or Misleading?” Urban Studies 39 (13) p. 2397-2398
In this field, two opposite and extreme positions confront each other. On the one side, the pessimistic one, merging
(and sometimes adding up) different and disparate concerns, from the survival of local cultures to the fear about the
economic and political power of multinational corporations, from the possibility of environmental dumping to the
challenge of emerging countries to employment levels in rich countries. On the other side, the optimistic, ‘don’t
worry’ position, claiming that open markets have sufficient self-adjusting mechanisms to ensure
local well-being and that the law of comparative advantage will assure each country a role in the
international division of labour, irrespective of its international competitiveness. On the political side, what has been
called ‘localisation’—namely, ‘the growing desire of people for a greater say in their government’ (World Bank,
1999) through higher levels and effective ways of participation in decision-making (OECD, 1999a)—derives exactly
from a growing feeling of insecurity among citizens about the capability of governments to take care of them and
rightly interpret their needs. In fact, globalisation affects their lives in many respects, destroying the shelters once
provided by physical space (local captive markets), by local specificities (consumption and production habits), local
organisational models and the ‘patriotism’ of local forms. On the other hand, national governments increasingly give
up policy tools that in the past proved effective, from monetary policies (attributed to supranational authorities,
managing wide—optimal?— currency areas), to fiscal policies (due to tight budget constraints), from exchange rate
policies (in monetary unions) to many industrial policies (replaced by common supranational regulations and trade
agreements). Concerns are real, at least because they in fact exist, and are rational in many respects, as will be
shown later in the paper; demands for greater participation and regional federalism are also perfectly correct, the
danger residing in possible policy outcomes totally oriented towards defensive attitudes, separatism and closure—
the regional equivalent of national protectionism. On the purely economic side, one may judge opportunities
and threats generated by globalisation as equivalent, balanced and therefore neutral in terms of
spatial effects. But this judgement changes radically if one considers some new, qualitative aspects of
the present international economic picture: the increasing importance of knowledge factors, of
immaterial elements linked to culture, taste and creativity in present economic processes and the characteristics of
what could be called the production function of these elements and the ways of their accumulation. In fact, these
Page | 30
immaterial elements develop through slow learning processes, fed with information, interaction and
long-term investments in research and education (Amin and Wilkinson, 1999; Keeble and Wilkinson, 2000). Like all
learning processes, they are inherently localised and cumulative, as they are embedded in human
capital, interpersonal networks, specialised and highly skilled local labour markets and local innovative
milieux (Camagni, 1991b; Lundvall and Johnson, 1994; Asheim, 1996). When analysed in an international
perspective, technical progress ceases to be a public good, perfectly mobile and accessible to
everybody; on the contrary, it circulates rapidly only inside some restricted networks, as it requires
high-quality immaterial assets in order to be properly adopted and its profits appropriated (Savy
and Veltz, 1995, ch. 1). While forms can access an increasing stock of codified knowledge, they require greater
investments in tacit knowledge, such as human capital, management and organisation, to derive tangible benefits
from technological change and innovation. … Firms may now benefits less from imitation and ‘free’
technology spillovers, as they require substantial investments in innovation and in cooperation and
networking to access the stock of global knowledge (OECD, 1999b, p. 3). We see here a complex dialectics
and confrontation between the hyper-mobility of some production factors and the territorial ‘anchorage’ of some
others, which act as crucial location factors for the more advanced production processes. The likely result is the
cumulative strengthening of the centripetal forces of growth (scale and scope economies, all sorts of increasing
returns) and the centrifugal forces of territorial exclusion and decline. It is perfectly true that technologies and
capital goods may be marketed and utilised almost everywhere (better: they have to be used everywhere, as they
impose internationally shared standards in product and process quality) and that telecommunication networks and
facilities are (more or less) ubiquitous, but the skills and relational capital required for their proper or innovative use
are by no means available everywhere (Graham, 1999).
Page | 31
AT Competitiveness Not k to Hege
Competitiveness is key to growth differential -- 1ac Tellis says that’s key to
hegemony
Roberto CAMAGNI Department of Management, Economics and Industrial Engineering, Politecnico di Milano ‘2
“On the Concept of Territorial Competitiveness: Sound or Misleading?” Urban Studies 39 (13) p. 2400-2401
(3) Krugman warns us against a fast acceptance of the policy implications of the ‘strategic trade
theory’, to which he himself gave relevant contributions. In a world of increasing returns (at the firm level and at
the level of the local milieu), where history, chance, accident and policy intervention explain international
specialisation and trade patterns better than factor proportions or the attributes and inherent differences of single
countries, strategic industrial policy could be very effective and justified. Krugman’s opposition in this case
regards the difficulty, costs and risks involved in attributing to a public administration the choice of
sectors and products that will prove successful in the future. I think though that some risks are worth taking
up, especially if the target is not a product but
and if the strategic approach
means taking into account the potential effects of general political decisions, not directly concerned
with tariffs or export support. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the explicit political decision by the Italian
government to postpone the introduction of colour-tv broadcasting meant imposing a competitive disadvantage on
the domestic electronic industry that was never later made up, with wide negative external effects on the entire
technological trajectory. Conversely, in many countries, the early introduction of environmental
regulations on emissions meant the early development of an environmental technology industry,
taking advantage of all kinds of positive feed-back effects. Certainly, a careful assessment of alternative
strategies should be made (for example, military expenditure vs medical care and research), but it is the kind of
evaluation that public administrations should normally make, in all intervention fields (for example, in infrastructure
provision). Moreover, intervention policies may well be horizontal, nonsectoral policies, like those
addressed to the improvement of the quality of production factors: human capital, social overhead
capital, regional accessibility, information and communication networks, to which we can add
institutional interventions on rules and regulations. These are not policies targeted (selectively and ‘strategically’) to
specific sectors, but may be crucial for many important ones.7 Is this neo-mercantilism? Once again, yes, in the
progressive sense of historical mercantilist thought and practice. We owe to the mercantilist view the abatement of
feudal restrictions on goods mobility inside each country, the improvement of internal infrastructure in order to
enhance accessibility to (national and international) markets, the utilisation of the trade surplus in order to widen
money supply, reduce interest rates, speed up investments and encourage entrepreneurship (Tiberi, 1999). (4)
Considering not just international trade patterns (as in international trade theory) but also factors movements, and
international capital flows in particular, a competitive production system may mean not just a good
export performance but more interestingly an international attractiveness with respect to both
‘real’ and ‘financial’ capital. This last fact may easily turn a potential export surplus into a trade balance deficit,
allowing the country to pay for its (cheap) imports and for a rising standard of living through the international trust
of the capital markets (the present condition of US external accounts comes close to this last picture). This is why
competitiveness and technical change should never be hampered in an open country, through any sort of social
resistance to change. David Ricardo, the father with Robert Torrens of the comparative advantage principle, even if
convinced of the job-killing nature of technology, in his famous chapter “On machinery” affirmed that The
employment of machinery could never be safely discouraged in a State, for if a capital is not allowed to get the
greatest net revenue that the use of machinery will afford here, it will be carried abroad, and this must be a much
more serious discouragement to the demand for labour, than the most extensive employment of machinery (Ricardo,
1817/1971, p. 388).8 Leaving the assumption of factor immobility of the abstract model of international trade and
assuming a dynamic perspective, the relevance of concerns about the efficiency of the local production sectors visa`-vis the other countries appears very clearly: not only will a reduced efficiency hamper external demand, but it will
force both capital and labour to migrate, as it will be shown later on.
Page | 32
AT Heg Doesn’t Solve Wars
Hegemony prevents GPW
Thayer 7—Prof of Political Science @ Mo State
Bradley, Professor @ Missouri State, American Empire: A Debate, pg. 42
Peace, like good health, is not often noticed, but certainly is missed when absent. Throughout
history, peace and stability have been a major benefit of empires. In fact, pax Romana in
Latin means the Roman peace, or the stability brought about by the Roman Empire. Rome's
power was so overwhelming that no one could challenge it successfully for hundreds of years.
The result was stability within the Roman Empire. Where Rome conquered, peace, law,
order, education, a common language, and much else followed. That was true of the British
Empire (pax Britannica) too. So it is with the United States today. Peace and stability are
major benefits of the American Empire. The fact that America is so powerful actually
reduces the likelihood of major war. Scholars of international politics have found that the
presence of a dominant state in international politics actually reduces the likelihood of war
because weaker states, including even great powers, know that it is unlikely that they could
challenge the dominant state and win. They may resort to other mechanisms or tactics to
challenge the dominant country, but are unlikely to do so directly. This means that there will
be no wars between great powers. At least, not until a challenger (certainly China) thinks it
can overthrow the dominant state (the United States). But there will be intense security
competition-both China and the United States will watch each other closely, with their
intelligence communities increasingly focused on each other, their diplomats striving to
ensure that countries around the world do not align with the other, and their militaries seeing
the other as their principal threat. This is not unusual in international politics but, in fact, is
its "normal" condition. Americans may not pay much attention to it until a crisis occurs. But
right now states are competing with one another. This is because international politics does
not sleep; it never takes a rest. "
Page | 33
Decline in Hegemony causes global conflict
Auslin 10—Resident Scholar @ The American Enterprise Institute
Michael, Three Strikes against U.S. Global Presence, 4/2/10, http://www.aei.org:80/article/101869
Are these three strikes the writing on the wall, the blueprint for how American power will
decline in the world, with a whimper and an empty purse? The choice to reverse these trends
will grow increasingly difficult in coming years, until we reach a point of no return, as did
Great Britain and Rome. The result, unhappily, will not be a replay of the 20th century, when
Washington stepped up after London's decline. It will almost certainly be the inauguration of
decades, if not centuries, of global instability, increased conflict, and depressed economic
growth and innovation. Such is the result of short-sighted policies that reflect political
expedience, moral weakness, and a romantic belief in global fraternity. Happily for us,
perhaps, is that the lessons of history still hold, and that we can chose to fight the dimming of
our age if we but understand the stakes at hand.
Page | 34
Food Price Spikes  War
Blips in food prices kill billions
Tampa Tribune, 1-20-96
On a global scale, food supplies - measured by stockpiles of grain - are not abundant. In 1995, world production
failed to meet demand for the third consecutive year, said Per Pinstrup-Andersen, director of the International Food
Policy Research Institute in Washington, D.C. As a result, grain stockpiles fell from an average of 17 percent of
annual consumption in 1994-1995 to 13 percent at the end of the 1995-1996 season, he said. That's troubling,
Pinstrup-Andersen noted, since 13 percent is well below the 17 percent the United Nations considers essential to
provide a margin of safety in world food security. During the food crisis of the early 1970s, world grain stocks were
at 15 percent. "Even if they are merely blips, higher international prices can hurt poor countries that import
a significant portion of their food," he said. "Rising prices can also quickly put food out of reach of the 1.1
billion people in the developing world who live on a dollar a day or less." He also said many people in lowincome countries already spend more than half of their income on food.
Food shortages lead to World War III
Calvin 98
William Calvin, theoretical neurophysiologist at the University of Washington, Atlantic Monthly, January, The
Great Climate Flip-Flop, Vol 281, No. 1, 1998, p. 47-64)
The population-crash scenario is surely the most appalling. Plummeting crop yields would
cause some powerful countries to try to take over their neighbors or distant lands -- if only
because their armies, unpaid and lacking food, would go marauding, both at home and across
the borders. The better-organized countries would attempt to use their armies, before they
fell apart entirely, to take over countries with significant remaining resources, driving out or
starving their inhabitants if not using modern weapons to accomplish the same end: eliminating
competitors for the remaining food. This would be a worldwide problem -- and could lead to a
Third World War -- but Europe's vulnerability is particularly easy to analyze. The last abrupt
cooling, the Younger Dryas, drastically altered Europe's climate as far east as Ukraine.
Present-day Europe has more than 650 million people. It has excellent soils, and largely
grows its own food. It could no longer do so if it lost the extra warming from the North
Atlantic.
Page | 35
AT Heg Decline Inevitable
Heg sustainable
Beckley 12-- Research Fellow, Belfer Center
Michael, "China's Century? Why America's Edge Will Endure" International Security, volume 36, issue 3, pages 4178
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/21649/chinas_century_why_americas_edge_will_endure.html?utm_s
ource=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%253A+belfer%252Fpublications+%2528Belfer+Cen
ter+for+Science+and+International+Affairs+-+Latest+Publications%2529
Two assumptions dominate current foreign policy debates in the United States and China. First,
the United States is in decline relative to China. Second, much of this decline is the result of
globalization and the hegemonic burdens the United States bears to sustain globalization. Both
of these assumptions are wrong. The United States is not in decline; in fact, it is now wealthier,
more innovative, and more militarily powerful compared to China than it was in 1991. Moreover,
globalization and hegemony do not erode U.S. power; they reinforce it. The United States derives
competitive advantages from its hegemonic position, and globalization allows it to exploit these
advantages, attracting economic activity and manipulating the international system to its benefit.
The United States should therefore continue to prop up the global economy and maintain a robust
diplomatic and military presence abroad.
Decline isn’t inevitable and heg is key to global stability
Friedman and Mandelbaum Nov. 11—World Renowned Journalist, Professor and
Director of the American Foreign Policy program at the Johns Hopkins University,
School of Advanced International Studies
Thomas and Michael, America Really Was That Great
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/america_really_was_that_great?page=0,1
In 2011, a robust American global role continues to be vital. With the Arab world in upheaval; with
Europe's common currency, the euro, in crisis and the future of the European Union itself in
doubt; and with China, the world's fastest-growing economy and fastest-rising power, having all
but exhausted the possibilities of its model for economic growth based on an undervalued
currency and ever-rising exports, a dynamic American economy and a stabilizing, reassuring
American global presence are as important now as they have ever been, if not more so. Sustaining
them, though, depends on America's rising to meet its major challenges, and doing so immediately.
Somehow it has fallen slightly out of fashion to talk about "American power." Those on the left
often do not fully understand its constructive uses, concentrating instead on the occasional
abuses that always attend the exercise of power. Those on the right often do not fully understand
its sources -- that American power is not simply a matter of will but of means, and those means
need to be constantly renewed and refreshed. In the second decade of the 21st century, that
depends on successfully meeting the country's four major domestic challenges. Can America
respond to them in appropriate fashion? We are optimistic that it can. While the country is paralyzed
at the top -- the political system is stuck and is not generating the necessary public policies -- it
remains extraordinarily vibrant at the grassroots. If one were to design a country ideally suited to
flourish in the 21st century, it would look more like the United States than any other. In a world in
which individual creativity is becoming ever more important, America supports individual
achievement and celebrates the quirky. In a world in which technological change takes place at
warp speed, requiring maximal economic flexibility, the American economy is as flexible as any on
the planet. In a world in which transparent, reliable institutions, and especially the rule of law,
are more important than ever for risk-taking and innovation, the United States has an
Page | 36
outstanding legal environment. In a world in which even the cleverest inventors and
entrepreneurs have to try and fail before succeeding, American business culture understands
that failure is often the necessary condition for success. None of these traits has gone away
during the current crisis. Over the course of its history, the United States has rarely failed to meet its
major challenges. It is in fact the current failure to do so that is unusual -- one might even say
"exceptional." When tested, from the days of the revolution in the 18th century to the drawn-out
Cold War struggle in the 20th, America and Americans have found ways to excel. To continue to
do so, the country would do well to learn from the experience of one of its iconic companies,
IBM, which is celebrating its centennial this year. IBM essentially invented the personal
computer, but didn't fully understand the implications of its own creation. The company, like
too many Americans, came to think of its exceptional status as self-perpetuating and permanent.
This led to complacency and strategic mistakes that almost proved fatal. How did IBM lose sight
of the world it invented? Listen carefully to the answer of Samuel Palmisano, IBM's current
chairman and CEO, when we asked him that question: "You spend more time arguing amongst
yourselves over a shrinking pie than looking to the future," he said, and so "you miss the big
turn" that you have entered, even a turn that your own company invented. When you
mistakenly start thinking of other departments and colleagues in your own company as the
opposition -- rather than the other companies against which you must compete -- you have lost
touch with the world in which you are operating. This can be as lethal for countries as it is for
companies. America's political parties today have strayed off course, Palmisano told us,
"because they have focused on themselves" more than on the priorities of the country as a
whole. IBM got back on track, under new leadership, by focusing on and coming to understand
the new environment in which it was operating and then mobilizing and inspiring the whole
company to master the next big change in technology, networked computing. America needs to
do something similar. It is obvious what its core competency is in the 21st century. The United
States has greater potential than any other country to thrive in the future by becoming the world's most
attractive launching pad -- the place where everyone wants to come to work, invent, collaborate,
or start something up to get the most out of our new hyperconnected world. And they will want to
come to America because it has the best infrastructure, the most dynamic schools, the most open
economy, the most inviting immigration policies, the most efficient and stable markets, the most
government-funded research, and the best rules to promote risk-taking and prevent recklessness. That
is how America remains as "exceptional" in this century as it was in the last two -- not by
launching another moon shot but by becoming the world's favorite launching pad for millions of
moon shots. American power and prosperity, and global stability and prosperity, are all riding on the
country's success in meeting its challenges. A world influenced by a United States powerful enough to
provide political, economic, and moral leadership will not be a perfect world, but it will be a better
world than any alternative we can envision. That means that the status of American exceptionalism
is more than an academic controversy or a partisan political squabble in the United States.
Everyone, everywhere, has an interest in America taking the steps necessary to remain an
exceptional country.
Page | 37
Trade Good Generic
Trade solves war
Emiel Awad October 29, 2013 ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM faculty of Social Sciences, Master
Thesis in International Public Management and Public Policy. “Economic Interdependence, Trade, and War: A
Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”
War and trade do not merely differ in their strategic consequences, they also differ in the amount of costs.
War is generally a costly endeavor, whilst trade is mostly a cheap way to achieve material gains . In
order to start a war, it is necessary to build and uphold a military force, while the costs of trade are
(among other things) made up of transportation costs. These transportation costs are throughout history
always lower than the costs of building a military force. For this reason, liberals argue that economic
interdependence increases the benefits associated with allowing free trade and joining the division
of labor, and lowers the value of war when holding the benefits of war constant. War is not
necessary if free trade is a more efficient option. Rosecrance (1986) shows this by making a distinction
between so-called ‘trading- states’ and ‘military-political’ or ‘territorial states’. The former realize that trade
is a more valuable option, while the latter believe war is the most efficient means to achieve national
ends. The conquest of territory is generally a negative sum game,” or at best a zero sum game, while
the goal of economic welfare of trading-states is mostly a positive sum-game. There is less reason for
conflict between states in positive sum-games than negative sum-games, as both can achieve gains
from peaceful cooperation with trade. Liberals tend to emphasize that states are ‘trading-states’, which receive
benefits from an economic interdependent system. This provides reasons for sustaining peaceful coexistence:
Even if trade incentivizes war in the short term, the long term cost is always greater
than gains
Emiel Awad October 29, 2013 ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM faculty of Social Sciences, Master
Thesis in International Public Management and Public Policy. “Economic Interdependence, Trade, and War: A
Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”
The main argument that is brought up to support the positive e ffects of economic interdependence is mainly built on
the costly long-run effects of war. When a state decides whether to uphold friendly or unfriendly
relations with another state, the state considers the long-run effects of its short-run actions.
Although economic dependence increases the value of war, this increase is only an increase in the
short-run. In the long-run, an attacked state no longer allows free trade with the aggressor. We have
shown earlier that economic dependence increases the value of free trade. For this reason, a potential
aggressor incurs a larger cost when economic dependence is high, and it therefore is less willing to
use war to obtain the goods. With this line of argumentation, the effect of economic interdependence on the
occurrence of war is ambiguous, as in the short-run the benefits of war increase, but in the long-run the
value of war decreases. War thus has a
large opportunity cost, which means that peace is more likely to occur. For this line of argumentation to
succeed however, it is necessary to assume that the long-run costs have a higher weight than the short-run benefits.
Below, we will use the last argument as our starting point of the model. The notion that war has a long-run
opportunity cost is one of the main arguments of liberal theorists. After explaining the liberal position, we will show
that this line of argumentation is problematic using predominantly realist arguments.
War post world war 2 has decreased dramatically and trade has increased
Jackson and Nei 14
Matthew O. Jackson, professor of economics at Stanford and Stephen Nei member of the dept. of economics at
Stanford. “Networks of Military Alliances, Wars, and International Trade” February 2014
Page | 38
https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=NASM2014&paper_id=368
The relationship between trade and wars is a complicated one. One thing that is evident, is that the number of
wars per country has decreased dramatically post World War II, and that this decrease comes even
though the number of countries has increased - so that there are many more pairs of countries that could be
going to war. For example, the average number of wars per pair of countries per year from 1820 to
1959 was .00056 while from 1960 to 2000 it was .00005, less than a tenth of what it was in the
previous period.16 We see this in Figure 8 5.1.2 Trade International trade has had two major periods of
growth over the last two centuries, one in the latter part of the nineteenth century and beginning of the
twentieth, disrupted by the first world war, and then picking up again after the second world war,
recovering to its 1914 levels through the 1960s and then continuing to grow at an increasing rate
thereafter. In particular, Estevadeordal et al. (2003) finds that trade per capita grew by more than 1/3 in each
decade from 1881 to 1913, while it grew only 3 percent per decade from 1913 to 1937.
Page | 39
Coastal Erosion Adv
Page | 40
Yes Resource Wars
Resource wars are possible and occur - climate change creates stressors that make
them likely, adaptation is key
Klare 6
Professor of peace and world security studies @ Hampshire College[Michael Klare, “The Coming Resource Wars,”
TomPaine.com, Date: March 11, 2006, pg.
http://www.waterconserve.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=53710&keybold=water%20land%20conflict.
"As famine, disease, and weather-related disasters strike due to abrupt climate change," the Pentagon
report notes, "many countries' needs will exceed their carrying capacity" -- that is, their ability to provide
the minimum requirements for human survival. This "will create a sense of desperation, which is likely to
lead to offensive aggression " against countries with a greater stock of vital resources. "Imagine eastern
European countries, struggling to feed their populations with a falling supply of food, water, and energy, eyeing
Russia, whose population is already in decline, for access to its grain, minerals, and energy supply."
Similar
scenarios will be replicated all across the planet, as those without the means to survival invade or migrate
to those with greater abundance -- producing endless struggles between resource "haves" and "have-nots."
It
is this prospect, more than anything, that worries John Reid. In particular, he expressed concern over the inadequate
capacity of poor and unstable countries to cope with the effects of climate change, and the resulting risk of state
collapse, civil war and mass migration. "More than 300 million people in Africa currently lack access to safe water,"
he observed, and "climate change will worsen this dire situation" -- provoking more wars like Darfur. And even if
these social disasters will occur primarily in the developing world, the wealthier countries will also be caught
up in them, whether by participating in peacekeeping and humanitarian aid operations, by fending off unwanted
migrants or by fighting for access to overseas supplies of food, oil, and minerals.
When reading of these
nightmarish scenarios, it is easy to conjure up images of desperate, starving people killing one another with knives,
staves and clubs -- as was certainly often the case in the past, and could easily prove to be so again. But these
scenarios also envision the use of more deadly weapons. "In this world of warring states," the 2003 Pentagon report
predicted, "nuclear arms proliferation is inevitable." As oil and natural gas disappears, more and more countries will
rely on nuclear power to meet their energy needs -- and this "will accelerate nuclear proliferation as countries
develop enrichment and reprocessing capabilities to ensure their national security."
Although speculative, these
reports make one thing clear: when thinking about the calamitous effects of global climate change, we must
emphasize its social and political consequences as much as its purely environmental effects. Drought, flooding and
storms can kill us, and surely will -- but so will wars among the survivors of these catastrophes over what remains of
food, water and shelter. As Reid's comments indicate, no society, however affluent, will escape involvement in these
forms of conflict.
Page | 41
Oceanic Region k to US Economy
Oceanic region key to the US economy - crucial for trade, fisheries, and energy use
Cicin-Sain et al 6
(Biliana, Director, Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, and Professor, College of Earth, Ocean, and
Environment, Department of Political Science and International Relations, and School of Urban Affairs and Public
Policy, University of Delaware, Additional authors: Miriam C. Balgos, Shelby M. Hockenberry, Amanda A.
Wenczel, and Kateryna M. Wowk -- “Toward a Vision for Maryland’s Ocean”, Report Presented to the Coastal
Zone Management Division, Maryland Department of Natural Resources by the Gerard J. Mangone Center for
Marine Policy, University of Delaware, December 2006,
http://www.ceoe.udel.edu/cmp/Toward_Vision_for_MD_Ocean_July30_07.pdf)
The ocean provides a host of services which greatly contribute to local, state, and national economies.
Ninety percent of world trade is carried by ships . The United States, the world’s largest trading
nation, accounts for 19 percent of world imports and 12 percent of world exports of merchandise. In
total, 67 percent of consumer goods in the U nited S tates come by ship (IMO 2006). Furthermore,
coastal zones yield 90 percent of the global fisheries on which 400 million fishers rely (Cicin-Sain et
al. 2004). On the United States east coast, the coastal states from Maine to North Carolina receive $1 billion of
economic benefits annually from the fisheries of the ecosystem (EPA 2005), yet 76 percent of global marine
fish stocks cannot withstand additional fishing pressure (Cicin-Sain et al. 2006). Concerning energy use in
the United States, development on approximately 43 million acres leased on the outer continental shelf
produce more than 25 percent of domestic natural gas and more than 30 percent of domestic oil
supplies (MMS 2007). Travel and tourism is the largest industry in the world, with $3.5 trillion of revenues in
1999. Much of this revenue is related to ocean activities (IOC 2003). In Maryland, ocean-related businesses in
Worcester County generated statewide economic impacts of over $900 million (Table IV.2). Finally, newer uses
of ocean space and resources, including offshore aquaculture and offshore wind power, are
currently evolving and have the potential to generate additional revenue.
Page | 42
Solvency
Page | 43
Dredging Key
Dredging is necessary to ensure ships can enter the ports- and prevents pollutants
AAPA 09—American Association of Port Authorities (“Questions and Answers about America's Ports and the
Harbor Maintenance Tax”, 2009, http://www.aapa-ports.org/Issues/content.cfm?ItemNumber=1004)
Today's modern ships can require drafts of up to 45 or 50 feet. Sediment also has to be removed to
provide turning basins for ships and adequate water depth along waterside facilities. Without
routine dredging, areas of navigation channels could change from 40 to 35 feet in one year. Such a
dramatic change would prohibit many ships from entering the channel or force ships to carry only
a fraction of their intended load. Channels that accumulate sediment become dangerous because
they increase the risk of ships running aground. Groundings are expensive not only in cargo and
time lost, but groundings may also pollute the environment if ships’ hulls are breached are cargo is
spilled.
Page | 44
Inherency
Page | 45
AT WRRDA
WRRDA only ensures port projects in a few ports, doesn’t solve all
MTS 2014 (MTS Matters, “Congress got it done”, May 23, http://mtsmatters.com/2014/05/23/congress-got-itdone/)
Project ideas graduate from feasibility studies to be authorized for funding by Congress. WRDA is how
the Harbor Maintenance Tax and Trust Fund became law in 1986. It is how the near-completed 50foot deepening in the Port of New York/New Jersey was authorized in 2000. And it is how the Corps
of Engineers will be given the go-ahead to deepen and otherwise modify channels in the ports
of Boston, Savannah, Jacksonville, Canaveral, Palm Beach, Freeport, and Corpus Christi.
The WRRDA focuses on inland waterways, not ocean ports
Ohio Country Journey 14
(June 10th, “Obama signs WRRDA”, http://ocj.com/2014/06/obama-sign-wrrda/)
President Obama signed the long-awaited Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014.
This final reauthorization bill, which will improve the reliability and efficiency of the U.S. inland
waterways system, was passed by the House on May 20 and the Senate on May 22. "This legislation
provides an important step toward the infrastructure improvements vital to our nation's inland
waterway system, and we thank the President for signing this bi-partisan bill into law," said Martin Barbre,
National Corn Growers Association president. "Our locks and dams transport our cargoes today, but were built in
the 1920s and 1930s to accommodate far smaller loads and far less river traffic. For farmers in particular, this is
crucial, as more than 60% of the nation's grain exports are transported by barge. The need is urgent; U.S. farmers
and businesses rely upon this transportation channel to create economic opportunities at home and supply markets
abroad. Now, it is imperative that we continue our momentum related to waterways improvements by passing the
diesel user fee."
Page | 46
Offcase Answers
Page | 47
AT States CP - Jurisdiction
States and local ports are bound by federal regulations which require federal
funding before new projects can begin
Gibbs, 2011 – Subcommittee Chairman (Bob, “Memorandum on the Hearing on “The Economic Importance of
Seaports: Is the United States Prepared for 21st Century Trade Realities?”, October 21, 2011,
http://republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/112th/Water/Water%20Briefing%20Memo%20%20%201026-11.pdf)//MM
Infrastructure Investment Investing in ports not only creates jobs during the construction period, but supports wider and long lasting opportunities.
Knowing the value of maritime trade, localities and port authorities have invested in the infrastructure of their ports. The AAPA finds that
American ports are investing $2 billion annually in marine terminal capital improvements. The Port of New Orleans has spent $400 million in recent
years on landside improvements that make it more efficient and attractive to shippers. Acknowledging that 12% of the country's international containers
pass under the Bayonne Bridge, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey have pledged $1 billion toward the bridge retrofit that will allow
for Post Panamax ships to sail under it and into the Atlantic Coast's busiest port. The cost benefit analysis of the project estimates that this single
project will provide a $3.3 billion dollar annual national benefit. Local
investments optimize existing infrastructure and
increases port efficiency; however, many projects are required to utilize Federal funds and
processes .
The operation and maintenance of shipping channels is paid for by the Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund (HMTF), which is funded from a .125% ad valorum tax levied on cargo imports at American ports. The HMTF is a user fee that grows
based on the value of cargo coming to ports. These monies pay for the necessary dredging that keeps navigation channels open for business. In
fiscal year 2010, the
HMTF grew by $1.3 billion; however, only $828,550,000 was spent in total
operations of the fund as the balance was diverted to deficit spending. Because the HMTF is not _off-'book' on paper there is a balance,
however the reality is that all of the balance has been used to offset other government spending. Because of this inequitable
allocation, many of the country's most valuable navigation channels are under maintained,
reducing the cost effectiveness and efficiency of maritime trade.
While some FY 2012 presidential budget requests reflect goals of the NEI, in the areas of navigation there appears to be a disconnect between the
production of exports and the transportation of exports overseas. The International Trade Administration request was $526 million towards the
administration costs of implementation. Thirty million dollars of Small Business Administration grants are to be disbursed to states to support
export activities. Transportation is addressed in the President's budget request with a sweeping surface transportation authorization request and
$70.5 billion to fund the Federal Highway Administration. However, maritime trade, the most prevalent form of exportation, does not receive as
much funding necessary to support a significant development much less doubling exports.
The President's Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works program appropriation request in the Administration's FY 2012 budget submittal is $4.631 billion,
which is approximately 6.1% below the annualized Continuing Resolution for FY 2011 of $4.929 billion. These funds are distributed to the many missions
of the Corps civil works program including investigations, construction, operations and maintenance, levee safety, flood control and environmental
restoration. The
Corps budget has a profound effect on waterborne commerce as it shoulders the bulk
of coastal infrastructure development and operation and maintenance activities. Unlike surface
transportation funding, there is no Federal credit assistance programs for the construction,
operation and maintenance of ports' navigation channels. Even local ports with willing investors
are often required to wait on Federal appropriations to pursue needed projects. Two accounts within the
budget of the Corps have significant impact on maritime trade:
Construction - The President's budget requests $1.48 billion for the Construction account. This is $210 million less than the FY 2011 annualized
Continuing Resolution of $1.69 billion. These funds are used for the construction of river and harbor, flood damage reduction, shore protection,
environmental restoration, and related projects specifically authorized or made available for selection by law. Almost half of this budget request
is for flood damage reduction projects. However, more alarming is that approximately $470 million are for ecosystem restoration projects that
provide Rule or no economic benefits, while navigation projects would only receive $280 million.
Operation and Maintenance - The President's budget also requests $2.314 billion for expenses necessary for the preservation, operation,
maintenance, and care of existing river and harbor, flood control and related projects. This is $47 million less than the FY 2011 annualized
Continuing Resolution of $2.361 billion.
The budget would use only $691 million from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund resulting in an increase in the estimated balance from $6.12
billion to $6.93 billion at the end of FY 2012. In addition, while proposing paltry amounts be appropriated from the Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund, the President's budget proposes to expand the authorized purposes of the fund for activities not typically associated with the Corps of
Engineers maintenance of navigation channels.
Among the persistent barriers to trade, only one-third of the nation's federal navigation projects are currently at their authorized depths and
widths, and 8 out of the nation's 10 largest ports are not at their authorized depths and widths. Exporters are required to wait for high tide to get
out of port or are forced to ship in lighter loads. This reality is especially burdensome for the many raw material exporters whose products are
heavy and whose ships require deeper drafts.
Page | 48
Overall, the President's proposal does not address some of the nation's most profound infrastructure needs. It does not direct Congress to pursue
multiyear reauthorizations that provide stability and predictable funding to projects. Developing world-class infrastructure cannot be hurried to
completion in two years to comply with a truncated funding schedule. Even beyond funding, a transportation infrastructure bill could include no
The proposed legislation does not streamline the permitting
processes, an action that would expedite valuable projects. Permit backlog delays the timeline for
construction and increases costs associated with navigation projects that could promote maritime
trade. Also, legislation that would support maritime trade would allow non-federal project sponsors to supply more capital to navigation
projects without having to wait on the appropriations process. Re-authorizations, permanent policy changes, and
regulatory reduction would unlock private capital and hasten project completion, benefitting
maritime trade and the economy as a whole existing river and harbor, flood control and related
projects. This is $47 million less than the FY 2011 annualized Continuing Resolution of $2.361 billion.
cost policy changes that would support maritime trade.
Federal law prevents the CP – states can act alongside the federal government – but
they’re still subject to federal requirements
Dyke 10— Business Writer at The Greenville News (David, ”Two options for port funding, Graham says”, The
Greenville News, 11/19, ProQuest,
http://proxy.lib.umich.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/docview/807392435?accountid
=14667) EL
The Ports Authority says it needs to deepen the Charleston harbor to remain competitive following the
widening of the Panama Canal in 2014. The widening is expected to quicken a trend toward
megaships that will change global logistics and open new business opportunities for South Atlantic
shipping facilities. The Charleston port can accommodate the big ships now, but only during high tide. Port
officials have said a $400,000 federal earmark to study the deepening of the Charleston harbor is a critical initial
step in a $300 million expansion. Federal law requires the Corps of Engineers to conduct the study
before improvements to a harbor can be made. Without it, no deepening is permitted and it must be
funded through the appropriations process, the officials said. They said there is no other way. Business
leaders, including executives from Boeing South Carolina, Sonoco, BMW Manufacturing, Milliken
& Co. and Michelin North America, have stressed that the port is South Carolina's single most
important natural asset and will help shape the state's economy for generations. Officials with the
Georgia Ports Authority said they reached a major milestone Wednesday with their plan to expand the Savannah
Harbor. It was reached, the officials said, when the Corps of Engineers released its draft environmental impact
statement to the public and agencies for review and comment. "The study's release is a significant step forward for
the Savannah harbor expansion project and addresses a critical need of our country's transportation infrastructure,"
said Curtis J. Foltz, the Georgia authority's executive director. The $40 million scientific study details plans to avoid
impacts to natural resources and proposes mitigation for any unavoidable impacts of the project. GPA officials say
larger vessels offer more capacity and lower the cost per container compared to current Panamax vessels. That's an
important economic consideration for such companies as BMW and Michelin, which both have large Upstate
operations and are major users of the Port of Charleston. The Georgia harbor expansion will deepen the Savannah
River from its current 42-foot depth to as much as 48 feet. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported the project
would cost an estimated $551 million with 70 percent borne by the federal government. Georgia's legislators have
approved $102.3 million of the remaining costs, the newspaper reported. Long term, DeMint said he wants to
restructure the way the Corps of Engineers identifies priorities and funds projects. He also wants to reform the
Harbor Maintenance Trust fund to allow South Carolina to get back the money it contributes. Currently, the fund
can't be used for new construction to make a port deeper, as Charleston proposes. He said he wants to meet with
officials from the port, the Corps of Engineers and legal advisers to determine if the port can proceed with its own
feasibility study and have that study recognized by the federal agency. Graham has said states have the right
to fund such studies on their own. However, federal officials have rejected port studies conducted
that way and states didn't get reimbursed for the money they spent, he said. Port officials worry
that if they pay the initial feasibility-study cost, it will jeopardize federal funding for the project.
Normally, a cost-sharing system is in place where the federal government will pay 40 percent of the
construction bill to deepen the harbor, with the state paying the remaining 60 percent, a port spokesman said.
DeMint told The News recently that he understands the port's importance to the state and its economy, but it was
Page | 49
time to draw the line on earmarks. Graham this week joined DeMint and Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate
Republican leader, in calling for a two-year ban on the practice. Raju Chebium of Gannett's Washington Bureau
contributed to this report.
Federal construction contracts are legally binding – attempts to circumvent will
cause the ports to be sued
Edmonson 5—associate editor of the Journal of Commerce (Robert G., “In a deep hole”, Journal of Commerce,
3/21, ProQuest,
http://proxy.lib.umich.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/docview/312932173?accountid
=14667) EL
"I think we have nine or 10 projects on the suspended list. It means that the president is not making a budget request
for those projects. That's a grave concern for us," Sanford said. " We've entered into legally binding project
cooperation agreements with the government . Our ports have put pretty sophisticated funding
mechanisms in place to pay their part of the cost. The government can pull out of these contracts
with no recourse, but project cooperation agreements are written such that the ports can't pull out
without being dragged into federal district court ."
A port that's unable to complete a channel deepening could find itself at a competitive disadvantage
with a rival that has recently dug its channels to 45 or 50 feet. East Coast ports are already beginning to
see more calls from post-Panamax container ships that have been bumped off Pacific trade lanes by 8,000-TEU
vessels. Now those 5,000- to 6,000-TEU ships are being routed to Atlantic ports from Asia via the Suez Canal.
"It's already happening. We're seeing lightering - Freeport, Bahamas, comes to mind. They're making a good living
essentially lightering off the large ships, or spreading the cargoes to smaller vessels," Sanford said.
Page | 50
AT States CP - Federal Funding Key
The states can’t fund coastal and deep sea ports - it’s a violation of the constitution comparative evidence that dredging is the most federal responsibility of the USFG
AAPA, 11 (American Association of Port Authorities, March 2011, “Getting Back to Basics: The U.S.
Government’s Historic Role in Developing and Maintaining Landside and Waterside Connections to
Seaports,” http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/Transportation%20and%20the%20Constitution1.pdf)
Over time these constitutional responsibilities have been further defined and our Constitution has formed the
basis for the U.S. government to play a significant role in our nation’s transportation and
infrastructure system. As established in the timeline on page 2, over the years the leaders of our country saw that
it was in the national interest to ensure that our ports , waterways, railways and highways benefited
from federal oversight and support. For four centuries, beginning with the founding of the Jamestown colony,
seaports have served as a vital economic lifeline for America by bringing goods and services to people, creating
economic activity and enhancing the overall quality of life. Seaports continue to be the critical link for
access to the global marketplace here in the United States handling more than 99 percent of cargoes.
Maintaining our national infrastructure that supports foreign and interstate commerce is not only a
federal responsibility but is in the national interest as established by our forefathers. In fact, improving
waterways and coastal ports for navigation and national security is the most federal of infrastructure
responsibilities , dating to the early missions assigned the Continental Army by then General George
Washington.
Federal investment key to solve trade competitiveness - state funding trades off with
inland waterways and raises transportation costs
AAPA 09—American Association of Port Authorities (“Questions and Answers about America's Ports and the
Harbor Maintenance Tax”, 2009, http://www.aapa-ports.org/Issues/content.cfm?ItemNumber=1004)
Requiring local ports to raise their own funding for maintenance dredging could pit U.S. ports against each other, the
result of which could impact commerce and national security. The concept also alters the fundamental
Federal role in maintaining the national navigation system. Like a tonnage tax, local funding, if passed
on to port users, could increase transportation costs , pricing bulk commodities out of international markets
either through increased charges at the currently utilized port(s) or by increasing inland transportation costs
due to diversion from the inland waterway system.
Federal matching is key - state funding is already happening now, only federal
money can resolve gaps in funding
Nagle, 2012- President and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities (Kurt J., “Testimony of Kurt J.
Nagle President and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities Before the United States House of
Representatives Appropriations Committee Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee”,
Budget Hearing- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Assistant Secretary, Chief of Engineers, March 7, 2012,
http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/EWTestimony%20Mar2012%20Final.pdf)
Ports are dynamic, vibrant centers of trade and commerce, but what is most important to understand is that seaports
rely on partnerships. Seaports invest more than $8 billion every year to maintain and improve their
infrastructure. In recent years, however, this commitment has not been adequately matched by the
federal government. Federal funding for dredging federal navigation channels has slowed and
Page | 51
decreased , especially for new construction. Further, maintenance dredging is sorely underfunded, despite
a more than $6 billion (and growing) surplus in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
Page | 52
AT States CP - Race to the Bottom
Race to the bottom means the counterplan doesn’t solve trade competitiveness creates congestion at the biggest ports that magnifies transportation costs
Nagle, 2012- (President and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities (Kurt J., “Testimony of Kurt
J. Nagle President and CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities Before the United States House of
Representatives Appropriations Committee Energy and Water Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee”,
Budget Hearing- U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Assistant Secretary, Chief of Engineers, March 7, 2012,
http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/EWTestimony%20Mar2012%20Final.pdf)
Some may suggest that we should concentrate federal investment in just a few ports, but we must take
a closer look at the diversity of port cargo and the impact of only deepening a few ports. Often a container port
doesn’t handle significant bulk cargo, dangerous cargo or refrigerated cargo. Additionally, often smaller ports
are located near key U.S. manufacturers to aid in their imports and exports . Each of our 50 states
relies on about 15 seaports to handle its imports and exports. Concentrating port activity to a smaller
geographic area will result in increased transportation costs and more congestion on roads and rails.
Total throughput should not be the only calculation in determining federal investment.
Page | 53
AT 24/7 Ports CP -- Union Strikes Turn
The counterplan makes high transportation costs inevitable -- either it massively
raises dock worker wages or it leads to union strikes
Depillis 13
Lydia Depillis, writer for the Huffington post, “Chinese ports operate around the clock. Why don’t America’s?”
August 5, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/05/chinese-ports-operate-around-theclock-why-dont-americas/
It's no secret that China exports a lot of stuff, nor that the country's ports are the busiest in the world -- seven of the
top 10 ports by container volume are Chinese. But it's harder to get information about how productive those ports
are. For competitive reasons, ports themselves don't want to disclose how quickly ships are loaded and unloaded,
and most national governments don't require it. But here's who does want to know that: Shipping lines, as well as the
companies that own the goods they carry. Five years ago, a shipping trade publication called the Journal of
Commerce embarked upon a project to collect that data, and convinced 17 carriers representing 70 percent of global
ocean transport to turn over what they knew about how quickly containers move and how long their vessels remain
in their berths. The result is awhite paper ranking the world's ports by how effective they are in moving cargo for
their size. Surprise surprise: U.S. ports come out looking pretty dismal. The U.S., not that great at operating ports.
(Journal of Commerce) Why are China, Japan, South Korea, and the UAE so much better at moving containers
around than the United States? They're not, necessarily -- it's more a matter of down time. Chinese ports, for
example, operate around the clock with gangs of dockworkers who aren't paid that much or treated that well. Most
U.S. ports operate only one or two shifts a day, since longshoremen's union contracts require
overtime pay for working in the middle of the night (and their pay is already higher than it is for
any other blue-collar trade, reaching into the six figures). So even if they're as efficient at moving
containers on a per-hour basis, they'll still be less productive overall. That has real consequences
for shipping companies , since their vessels can't simply dump their cargo, pick up another load, and move on.
Instead, they have to book it to the next port of call, which is less fuel efficient than moving at a more leisurely pace,
costing them tens of thousands of dollars more for gasoline. In addition, it slows down the pace of goods
generally, which raises costs for consumers. " It's a bottleneck in the supply chain , and it requires extra
planning on the part of Wal-Mart, so they can get their goods in their stores when they need to be," says the Journal
of Commerce's Peter Tirschwell, who oversaw the report. "All supply chain disruptions raise costs for the consumer,
no question about it." Not only that, but they can simply push business elsewhere. A relatively new port north
of Vancouver, Prince Rupert, has been attracting ships that used to go to Seattle and Tacoma, since containers can
get to the Midwest faster and cheaper from there via train than they would if they were snarled for days in a
congested port. Tirschwell says that even though U.S. imports and exports cooled off during the recession, they're
still rising, and ships are getting bigger. If U.S. ports don't get more productive, costs will just keep going up, putting
a real pinch on the stuff we're able to buy and sell overseas. The barely-avoided longshoremen strikes last
year show how difficult it can be to change how ports operate . But it seems like making it easier to work
during the night would be a good way to start.
Union strikes are a death knell to transportation competitiveness
The Economist 2
(“Dock around the clock”, November 28th 2002, http://www.economist.com/node/1468299)
Last year the ports handled goods worth $310 billion. For retailers and manufacturers who rely on
goods and materials from Asia, and access to its markets, this trade is vital. When the employers
shut the ports for ten days in October, five car factories had to shut down as their “just-in-time”
supply chains ground to a halt . President Bush, invoking the Taft-Hartley act for the first time in 24 years,
Page | 54
sent a federal negotiator to bring the sides together within the 80-day period called for in the act. That negotiator has
earned his turkey on this week's Thanksgiving Day.
Page | 55
AT Politics - Bipartisanship
Port maintenance has bipartisan support
The Advocate, 6/12/14
http://theadvocate.com/news/opinion/9227495-123/our-views-good-step-for
If Louisiana has a particular interest in any legislation on water projects, the general interest of the United
States, as well as our own state’s interests, appears to be served by the new water projects bill. While
the entire Louisiana delegation in Congress deserves commendation for support of the measure, a leading role was
played by U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La. As the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works
Committee, he worked on the bill and was the lone Louisiana representative on the House-Senate conference
committee that produced the final bill. It clearly bears at least some of Vitter’s handiwork, as he has been a longtime
critic of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the water bill bears many specific injunctions to the Corps on water
development. There is also authorization for the Morganza-to-the-Gulf hurricane protection project for coastal
Louisiana. It’s also a good sign that Congress — so tragically divided over policy and personalities — can get
together to pass anything. So Vitter and colleagues had to exercise a healthy bit of compromise. Those muscles are
atrophying for lack of use these days. Further, it’s worth noting that an authorizing bill is not the same thing as a
funding bill, so eventually appropriations will be needed to fund the projects. But the authorizations are likely to
lead to action and in the case of the nation’s ports, it’s a key issue . Both parties are interested in foreign
trade, from President Barack Obama to House Republicans, with the leading dissents being from
national unions. Yet the president’s goal of doubling American trade is not possible if the nation
fails to maintain its ports, railroads and highways — all expensive propositions. The new bill “gives
us the green light to maintain our ports, dredge our waterways and build the critical water
infrastructure we need to create jobs and to protect the people and communities that power our
nation’s economy,” said U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La. Following up on a cause championed in the House by
U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany, R-Lafayette, the bill frees up more money, misdirected for years in the
federal budget, to be spent on ports and dredging. This involves no tax increase, but uses the money
collected in cargo fees but misdirected in recent budgets. Trade is a big issue, but water
development is one of the elements in growing the nation — and Louisiana — economically. “More
than one in five jobs in the United States is supported by trade,” Boustany noted. “In Louisiana alone,
over 400,000 jobs are supported by trade.” That is the reason we hope to see continued support in our
delegation for the Port of New Orleans and the many other important ports in Louisiana, and the new
water bill helps that longterm process along with its provisions.
Port dredging has bipartisan support in congress
Atlanta Journal-Constitution 11 (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, December 17, 2011, newspaper
for Atlanta, “Ga. senators applaud deal to fund deeper ports” http://www.ajc.com/news/ga-senatorsapplaud-deal-1263143.html) MB
Georgia's U.S. senators Saturday applauded a bipartisan deal in Congress that frees up federal
dollars to deepen waterways to East Coast seaports such as Savannah, the nation's fourth busiest
container port. The breakthrough was part of the year-end spending bill that passed the Senate by a 67-32
vote Saturday. The bill contains a new $460 million account for port projects, which previously were
funded either through the president's spending recommendations or via earmarks requested by members
of Congress for pet projects in their home states. However, the federal budget crisis took earmarks off the
table, with Republican lawmakers refusing to seek them and President Barack Obama vowing to veto
them. In a statement Saturday, Georgia Sens. Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss called this new
source of ports money a "commonsense approach toward funding of the critical harbor deepening
projects at our nation's ports now that earmarks are a thing of the past." They issued the statement
jointly along with fellow Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who gave details of
the port-funding plan to reporters Friday. The Georgia ports authority is funding for a $600 million
Page | 56
proposal to dredged the river channel to the Port of Savannah, and needs the federal government to foot
about $360 million of the bill. Port officials are pushing to get final construction permits by next summer.
PORTS Caucus is rallying bipartisan support now
Keller 11 (Robert Kellar, Oct, 25, 2011, “Hahn and Poe Found Bipartisan PORTS Caucus”
http://hahn.house.gov/press-release/hahn-and-poe-found-bi-partisan-ports-caucus) MB
Washington, DC – Today, Congresswoman Janice Hahn (D-CA) and Congressman Ted Poe (R-TX) announced
the formation of the bipartisan House Ports Opportunity, Renewal, Trade, and Security (PORTS)
Caucus. The caucus’ mission will be to promote the importance of our ports to the nation’s economy
and the need to secure them. United States ports support 13.3 million jobs and account for $3.15 trillion in business activity to the
economy. “As a long-time advocate for the Port of Los Angeles, I understand how vital the ports are for our nation’s economy,” explained Rep.
Hahn. “This
bi-partisan caucus will bring together Members who represent diverse ports across the
country, so we will find ways together to promote our ports and keep them safe.” “Promoting and protecting our nation’s ports is critical to
both national security and economic security,” said Rep. Poe. “Ports are the gateway in and out of the United States. They are our country’s link
to the rest of the world and the global economy. I look forward to working with Representative Hahn to building an effective congressional
caucus that advocates on the behalf of ports nationwide.” The United States is served by more than 350 commercial sea and river ports that
support 3,200 cargo and passenger handling facilities. Each day United States ports move both imports and exports totaling some $3.8 billion
worth of goods through all 50 states. Additionally, ports move 99.4 percent of overseas cargo volume by weight and generate $3.95 trillion in
international trade. Given the importance of ports to our national economy, they must remain competitive and secure. “Ports are a critical piece
of our nation's economic infrastructure,” said Geraldine Knatz, Executive Director of the Port of Los Angeles. “Maintaining secure, reliable and
efficient seaports will generate much needed jobs and make American businesses more competitive abroad. Because our nation’s seaports must
remain a national priority, we stand ready to support Rep. Hahn and Rep. Poe’s efforts to advance the issues of ports and the communities they
serve.” “We support Congressman Poe’s efforts to raise awareness of all the nation’s ports and port communities,” said Floyd Gaspard, Executive
Director of the Port of Port Arthur. “Our ports represent a vital part of our nation’s economic engine and are key to continued success. Seaports of
all sizes from all regions of the country create sustainable jobs and economic growth. The benefits of a efficient port reach every American in
every state. As a region and a nation, sound investments in port infrastructure create supply chain efficiencies and make us globally
competitive.” Every congressional district in the country is dependent on U.S. ports, from the products on store
shelves to the technology in our living rooms. Ports allow businesses, large and small, access to markets around the world and the opportunity to
grow and create new American jobs.
Page | 57
AT Biodiversity DA -- Impact Defense
This evidence disproves uniqueness and turns impact- Biodiversity is higher than
ever AND extinctions always result in an increase in biodiversity
Donald Dodds (President of North Pacific Research, an environmental think tank) 2007 “THE MYTH OF
BIODIVERSITY” Online
Biodiversity is a corner stone of the environmental movement. But there is no proof that biodiversity is important to
the environment. Something without basis in scientific fact is called a Myth. Lets examine biodiversity through out
the history of the earth. The earth has been a around for about 4 billion years. Life did not develop
until about 500 million years later. Thus for the first 500 million years bio diversity was zero. The
planet somehow survived this lack of biodiversity. For the next 3 billion years, the only life on the planet
was microbial and not diverse. Thus, the first unexplainable fact is that the earth existed for 3.5 billion years,
87.5% of its existence, without biodiversity. Somewhere around 500 million years ago life began to diversify
and multiple celled species appeared. Because these species were partially composed of sold material they left better
geologic records, and the number of species and genera could be cataloged and counted. The number of genera on
the planet is a indication of the biodiversity of the planet. Figure 1 is a plot of the number of genera on the planet
over the last 550 million years. The little black line outside of the left edge of the graph is 10 million years. Notice
the left end of this graph. Biodiversity has never been higher than it is today. Notice next that at least ten
times biodiversity fell rapidly; none of these extreme reductions in biodiversity were caused by
humans. Around 250 million years ago the number of genera was reduced 85 percent. Now notice
that after this extinction a steep and rapid rise of biodiversity. In fact, if you look closely at the curve, you
will find that every mass-extinction was followed by a massive increase in biodiversity. Why was that?
Do you suppose it had anything to do with the number environmental niches available for exploitation? If you do,
you are right. Extinctions are necessary for creation. Each time a mass extinction occurs the world is filled
with new and better-adapted species. That is the way evolution works, its called survival of the fittest. Those
species that could not adapted to the changing world conditions simply disappeared and better species evolved. How
efficient is that? Those that could adapt to change continued to thrive. For example, the cockroach and the shark
have been around well over 300 million years. There is a pair to draw to, two successful species that any creator
would be proud to produce. To date these creatures have successful survived six extinctions, without the aid of
humans or the EPA. Now notice that only once in the last 500 million years did life ever exceed 1500
genera, and that was in the middle of the Cretaceous Period around 100 million years ago, when the
dinosaurs exploded on the planet. Obviously, biodiversity has a bad side. The direct result of this explosion in
biodiversity was the extinction of the dinosaurs that followed 45 million years later at the KT boundary. It is
interesting to note, that at the end of the extinction the number of genera had returned to the 1500 level almost
exactly. Presently biodiversity is at an all time high and has again far exceeded the 1500 genera level. Are we over
due for another extinction? A closer look at the KT extinction 65 million years ago reveals at least three things. First
the 1500 genera that remained had passed the test of environmental compatibility and remained on the planet. This
was not an accident. Second, these extinctions freed niches for occupation by better-adapted species.
The remaining genera now faced an environment with hundreds of thousands of vacant niches.
Third, it only took about 15 million years to refill all of those niches and completely replaced the dinosaurs, with
new and better species. In this context, a better species is by definition one that is more successful in dealing with a
changing environment. Many of those genera that survived the KT extinction were early mammals, a more
sophisticated class of life that had developed new and better ways of facing the environment. These genera were
now free to expand and diversify without the presences of the life dominating dinosaurs. Thus, as a direct result of
this mass extinction humans are around to discuss the consequences of change. If the EPA had prevented the
dinosaur extinction, neither the human race, nor the EPA would have existed. The unfortunate truth is that the allpowerful human species does not yet have the intelligence or the knowledge to regulate evolution. It is even
questionable that they have the skills to prevent their own extinction. Change is a vital part of the environment. A
successful species is one that can adapt to the changing environment, and the most successful
species is one that can do that for the longest duration. This brings us back to the cockroach and the shark.
This of course dethrones egotistical homosapien-sapiens as god’s finest creation, and raises the cockroach to that
exalted position. A fact that is difficult for the vain to accept. If humans are to replace the cockroach, we need to use
Page | 58
our most important adaptation (our brain) to prevent our own extinction. Humans like the Kola bear have become
over specialized, we require a complex energy consuming social system to exist. If one thing is constant in the
universe, it is change. The planet has change significantly over the last 4 billion years and it will continue to change
over the next 4 billion years. The current human scheme for survival, stopping change, is a not only wrong, but
futile because stopping change is impossible. Geologic history has repeatedly shown that species that become
overspecialized are ripe for extinction. A classic example of overspecialization is the Kola bears, which can only eat
the leaves from a single eucalyptus tree. But because they are soft and furry, look like a teddy bear and have big
brown eyes, humans are artificially keeping them alive. Humans do not have the stomach or the brain for controlling
evolution. Evolution is a simple process or it wouldn’t function. Evolution works because it follows the simple law:
what works—works, what doesn’t work—goes away. There is no legislation, no regulations, no arbitration, no
lawyers, scientists or politicians. Mother Nature has no preference, no prejudices, no emotions and no ulterior
motives. Humans have all of those traits. Humans are working against nature when they try to prevent
extinctions and freeze biodiversity. Examine the curve in figure one, at no time since the origin of life
has biodiversity been constant. If this principal has worked for 550 million years on this planet, and science is
supposed to find truth in nature, by what twisted reasoning can fixing biodiversity be considered science? Let alone
good for the environment. Environmentalists are now killing species that they arbitrarily term invasive, which are in
reality simply better adapted to the current environment. Consider the Barred Owl, a superior species is being killed
in the name of biodiversity because the Barred Owl is trying to replace a less environmentally adapted species the
Spotted Owl. This is more harmful to the ecosystem because it impedes the normal flow of evolution based on the
idea that biodiversity must remain constant. Human scientists have decided to take evolution out of the hands of
Mother Nature and give it to the EPA. Now there is a good example of brilliance. We all know what is wrong with
lawyers and politicians, but scientists are supposed to be trustworthy. Unfortunately, they are all to often, only
people who think they know more than anybody else. Abraham Lincoln said, “Those who know not, and know not
that the know not, are fools shun them.” Civilization has fallen into the hands of fools. What is suggested by
geologic history is that the world has more biodiversity than it ever had and that it maybe overdue
for another major extinction. Unfortunately, today many scientists have too narrow a view. They are
highly specialized. They have no time for geologic history. This appears to be a problem of inadequate education not
ignorance. What is abundantly clear is that artificially enforcing rigid biodiversity works against the laws
of nature, and will cause irreparable damage to the evolution of life on this planet and maybe beyond . The world
and the human species may be better served if we stop trying to prevent change and begin trying to
understand change and positioning the human species to that it survives the inevitable change of evolution. If history
is to be believed, the planet has 3 times more biodiversity than it had 65 million years ago. Trying to
sustain that level is futile and may be dangerous. The next major extinction, change in biodiversity, is as
inevitable as climate change. We cannot stop either from occurring, but we can position the human species to
survive those changes.
Biodiversity collapse doesn’t cause extinction
Sagoff 1997 (Mark, Senior Research Scholar @ Institute for Philosophy and Public policy in School of Public
Affairs @ U. Maryland, William and Mary Law Review, “INSTITUTE OF BILL OF RIGHTS LAW SYMPOSIUM
DEFINING TAKINGS: PRIVATE PROPERTY AND THE FUTURE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION:
MUDDLE OR MUDDLE THROUGH? TAKINGS JURISPRUDENCE MEETS THE ENDANGERED SPECIES
ACT”, 38 Wm and Mary L. Rev. 825, March, L/N)
Although one may agree with ecologists such as Ehrlich and Raven that the earth stands on the brink of an episode
of massive extinction, it may not follow from this grim fact that human beings will suffer as a result. On the
contrary, skeptics such as science writer Colin Tudge have challenged biologists to explain why we need
more than a tenth of the 10 to 100 million species that grace the earth. Noting that "cultivated
systems often out-produce wild systems by 100-fold or more," Tudge declared that "the argument that humans
need the variety of other species is, when you think about it, a theological one." n343 Tudge observed that "the
elimination of all but a tiny minority of our fellow creatures does not affect the material well-being of humans one
iota." n344 This skeptic challenged ecologists to list more than 10,000 species (other than unthreatened microbes)
that are essential to ecosystem productivity or functioning. n345 " The human species could survive just as
well if 99.9% of our fellow creatures went extinct, provided only that we retained the appropriate 0.1% that
we need." n346 [*906] The monumental Global Biodiversity Assessment ("the Assessment") identified two
Page | 59
positions with respect to redundancy of species. "At one extreme is the idea that each species is unique and
important, such that its removal or loss will have demonstrable consequences to the functioning of the community or
ecosystem." n347 The authors of the Assessment, a panel of eminent ecologists, endorsed this position, saying it is
"unlikely that there is much, if any, ecological redundancy in communities over time scales of decades to centuries,
the time period over which environmental policy should operate." n348 These eminent ecologists rejected the
opposing view, "the notion that species overlap in function to a sufficient degree that removal or loss of a species
will be compensated by others, with negligible overall consequences to the community or ecosystem." n349 Other
biologists believe, however, that species are so fabulously redundant in the ecological functions they
perform that the life-support systems and processes of the planet and ecological processes in
general will function perfectly well with fewer of them, certainly fewer than the millions and millions we
can expect to remain even if every threatened organism becomes extinct. n350 Even the kind of sparse and
miserable world depicted in the movie Blade Runner could provide a "sustainable" context for the human economy
as long as people forgot their aesthetic and moral commitment to the glory and beauty of the natural world. n351
The Assessment makes this point. "Although any ecosystem contains hundreds to thousands of species interacting
among themselves and their physical environment, the emerging consensus is that the system is driven by a small
number of . . . biotic variables on whose interactions the balance of species are, in a sense, carried along." n352
[*907] To make up your mind on the question of the functional redundancy of species, consider an endangered
species of bird, plant, or insect and ask how the ecosystem would fare in its absence. The fact that the creature is
endangered suggests an answer: it is already in limbo as far as ecosystem processes are concerned. What crucial
ecological services does the black-capped vireo, for example, serve? Are any of the species threatened with
extinction necessary to the provision of any ecosystem service on which humans depend? If so, which ones are they?
Ecosystems and the species that compose them have changed, dramatically, continually, and totally in virtually
every part of the United States. There is little ecological similarity, for example, between New England today and
the land where the Pilgrims died. n353 In view of the constant reconfiguration of the biota, one may
wonder why Americans have not suffered more as a result of ecological catastrophes. The cast of
species in nearly every environment changes constantly-local extinction is commonplace in nature-but the crops still
grow. Somehow, it seems, property values keep going up on Martha's Vineyard in spite of the tragic disappearance
of the heath hen. One might argue that the sheer number and variety of creatures available to any
ecosystem buffers that system against stress. Accordingly, we should be concerned if the "library" of
creatures ready, willing, and able to colonize ecosystems gets too small. (Advances in genetic engineering may well
permit us to write a large number of additions to that "library.") In the United States as in many other parts
of the world, however, the number of species has been increasing dramatically, not decreasing, as a
result of human activity. This is because the hordes of exotic species coming into ecosystems in the
United States far exceed the number of species that are becoming extinct. Indeed, introductions may outnumber extinctions by more
than ten to one, so that the United States is becoming more and more species-rich all the time largely as a result of human action. n354 [*908] Peter Vitousek and colleagues estimate that over 1000 non-native plants grow in
California alone; in Hawaii there are 861; in Florida, 1210. n355 In Florida more than 1000 non-native insects, 23 species of mammals, and about 11 exotic birds have established themselves. n356 Anyone who waters a lawn or hoes a
garden knows how many weeds desire to grow there, how many birds and bugs visit the yard, and how many fungi, creepy-crawlies, and other odd life forms show forth when it rains. All belong to nature, from wherever they might
hail, but not many homeowners would claim that there are too few of them. Now, not all exotic species provide ecosystem services; indeed, some may be disruptive or have no instrumental value. n357 This also may be true, of
course, of native species as well, especially because all exotics are native somewhere. Certain exotic species, however, such as Kentucky blue grass, establish an area's sense of identity and place; others, such as the green crabs
showing up around Martha's Vineyard, are nuisances. n358 Consider an analogy [*909] with human migration. Everyone knows that after a generation or two, immigrants to this country are hard to distinguish from everyone else.
The vast majority of Americans did not evolve here, as it were, from hominids; most of us "came over" at one time or another. This is true of many of our fellow species as well, and they may fit in here just as well as we do. It is
possible to distinguish exotic species from native ones for a period of time, just as we can distinguish immigrants from native-born Americans, but as the centuries roll by, species, like people, fit into the landscape or the society,
changing and often enriching it. Shall we have a rule that a species had to come over on the Mayflower, as so many did, to count as "truly" American? Plainly not. When, then, is the cutoff date? Insofar as we are concerned with the
ecosystems together, extinction seems not to pose a general problem because a far greater number
of kinds of mammals, insects, fish, plants, and other creatures thrive on land and in water in America today than in
prelapsarian times. n359 The Ecological Society of America has urged managers to maintain biological diversity as
a critical component in strengthening ecosystems against disturbance. n360 Yet as Simon Levin observed, "much of
the detail about species composition will be irrelevant in terms of influences on ecosystem properties." n361 [*910]
He added: "For net primary productivity, as is likely to be the case for any system property, biodiversity matters
only up to a point; above a certain level, increasing biodiversity is likely to make little difference." n362 What
absolute numbers of "rivets" holding
about the use of plants and animals in agriculture? There is no scarcity foreseeable. "Of an
estimated 80,000 types of plants [we] know to be edible," a U.S. Department of the Interior document says,
"only about 150 are extensively cultivated." n363 About twenty species, not one of which is endangered, provide ninety percent of the food the world takes from plants. n364
Any new food has to take "shelf space" or "market share" from one that is now produced. Corporations also find it difficult to create demand for a new product; for example, people are not inclined to eat paw-paws, even though they
are delicious. It is hard enough to get people to eat their broccoli and lima beans. It is harder still to develop consumer demand for new foods. This may be the reason the Kraft Corporation does not prospect in remote places for rare
nonflowering plants (including mosses, lichens, and
seaweeds) available, farmers ignore virtually all of them in favor of a very few that are profitable. n365 To be sure,
any of the more than 600,000 species of plants could have an application in agriculture, but would they be preferable
to the species that are now dominant? Has anyone found any consumer demand for any of these half-million or more
plants to replace rice or wheat in the human diet? There are reasons that farmers cultivate rice, wheat, and corn
and unusual plants and animals to add to the world's diet. Of the roughly 235,000 flowering plants and 325,000
Page | 60
rather than, say, Furbish's lousewort. There are many kinds of louseworts, so named because these weeds were
thought to cause lice in sheep. How many does agriculture really require? [*911] The species on which
agriculture relies are domesticated, not naturally occurring; they are developed by artificial not natural selection;
they might not be able to survive in the wild. n366 This argument is not intended to deny the religious, aesthetic,
cultural, and moral reasons that command us to respect and protect the natural world. These spiritual and ethical
values should evoke action, of course, but we should also recognize that they are spiritual and ethical values. We
should recognize that ecosystems and all that dwell therein compel our moral respect, our aesthetic appreciation, and
our spiritual veneration; we should clearly seek to achieve the goals of the ESA. There is no reason to assume,
however, that these goals have anything to do with human well-being or welfare as economists understand that term.
These are ethical goals, in other words, not economic ones. Protecting the marsh may be the right thing to do for
moral, cultural, and spiritual reasons. We should do it-but someone will have to pay the costs. In the narrow sense
of promoting human welfare, protecting nature often represents a net "cost," not a net "benefit." It is largely for
moral, not economic, reasons-ethical, not prudential, reasons- that we care about all our fellow creatures. They are
valuable as objects of love not as objects of use. What is good for [*912] the marsh may be good in itself even if it
is not, in the economic sense, good for mankind. The most valuable things are quite useless.
Page | 61
AT Biodiversity DA -- Link Turn
Dredging solves the environment - erosion, water quality, and habitat
restoration
IADC 5 “Dredging: The Facts” IADC, IAPH, PLANC, WODA, CEDA, EADA, WEDA, Marsha Cohen.
International Association of Dredging Companies and International Association of Ports and Harbors.
http://www.iadc-dredging.com/ul/cms/fck-uploaded/documents/PDF%20Publications/dredging-literature-dredgingthe-facts.pdf
Dredging can be undertaken to benefit the environment in several ways. Dredged materials are
frequently used to create or restore habitats. Recent decades have also seen the increasing use of
dredged materials for beach replenishment. These schemes are designed to prevent – or reduce the
likelihood of – erosion or flooding. Such beach nourishment or recharge is achieved by placing dredged sand or
gravel on eroding beaches. This represents a “soft-engineering” solution, an important alternative to – often more
costly – structural solutions such as rock armour or concrete walls. Another environmental use of dredging
has been in initiatives designed to remove contaminated sediments, thus improving water quality
and restoring the health of aquatic ecosystems. This so-called “remediation” or “clean-up” dredging is
used in waterways, lakes, ports and harbours in highly industrialised or urbanised areas. The removed material
may be treated and used afterwards, or disposed of under strict environmental controls. Under
proper conditions a viable alternative to removal is in-situ isolation, i.e. the placement of a covering or a cap of clean
material over the contaminated deposit.
Dredging solves water quality and aquatic ecosystems
IADC 5 “Dredging: The Facts” IADC, IAPH, PLANC, WODA, CEDA, EADA, WEDA, Marsha Cohen.
International Association of Dredging Companies and International Association of Ports and Harbors.
http://www.iadc-dredging.com/ul/cms/fck-uploaded/documents/PDF%20Publications/dredging-literature-dredgingthe-facts.pdf
Another environmental use of dredging has been in initiatives designed to remove contaminated
sediments, thus improving water quality and restoring the health of aquatic ecosystems. This socalled “remediation” or “clean-up” dredging is used in waterways, lakes, ports and harbours in highly
industrialised or urbanised areas. The removed material may be treated and used afterwards, or
disposed of under strict environmental controls. Under proper conditions a viable alternative to removal is in-situ
isolation, i.e. the placement of a covering or a cap of clean material over the contaminated deposit
Dredging is often used to enhance wildlife habitats
David J. Yozzoa et al 2004 David J. Yozzoa, Pace Wilberb,
Robert J. Willc,
Journal of
Environmental Management Volume 73, Issue 1, October 2004, Pages 39–52 Beneficial use of dredged material for
habitat creation, enhancement, and restoration in New York–New Jersey Harbor
Beneficial use of dredged material includes ‘all productive and positive uses of dredged material, which covers
broad use categories ranging from fish and wildlife habitat development, to human recreation, to
industrial/commercial uses’ (USACE, 1986). Historically, the USACE placed dredged material in open waters and
wetlands near Federal channels, provided the material would not become a navigation hazard or readily slump back
into the channel. In 1973, the USACE initiated the Dredged Material Research Program (DMRP),
authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) of 1970. This program examined of the effects of dredging
and dredged material placement on fish and wildlife habitats and developed recommendations for
how those habitats could be enhanced or created with dredged material (Lunz et al., 1978, Landin, 1982
and Landin et al., 1989). Beneficial use projects have been constructed in association with navigation improvement
projects within a number of USACE Districts along all the US coastlines and in the Great Lakes. Representative
Page | 62
projects include intertidal marsh and mudflat creation, bird and wildlife island establishment,
beach nourishment, land reclamation, erosion control, and underwater reef and berm construction.
Dredging solves aquatic habitats
Jones 12
(Brad, ,The science — and politics — of dredging”, 7-28
http://www.goldprospectors.org/Communication/ArticlesandInformation/tabid/153/EntryId/537/Dredging-doesn-tharm-fish-experts-say.aspx, DOA:)
Suction dredge mining does not harm fish and can actually improve fish habitat, scientists say. Claudia
Wise and Joseph Greene, worked for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for more than 30 years. Wise is a
retired physical scientist and Greene is a retired research biologist. Both scientists have done extensive
research on the issue and cannot find any evidence to substantiate claims made by environmental
activists that suction dredging harms fish or fish habitat. They say suction dredging can benefit salmon and
other species of fish by improving habitat in rivers and streams. The science of dredging “ Any negative effects of
suction dredging on fish or fish habitat are insignificant. The benefits definitely outweigh any of the negative
effects in any of the studies I’ve ever seen,” Wise said in recent interview. In almost every study, the
environmental impact of suction dredge mining on fish — including salmon — and fish habitat has been
proven to be “less than significant,” Greene said. Dredging improves fish habitat by creating pockets
in the bottoms of riverbeds and streambeds. These depressions are ideal places for fish, especially
salmon, to spawn when there are limited natural areas of loose gravel, called refugia. “It’s a pool of water within
the river you might say. If it is three feet deep, it’s considered refugia, which is a depression in the river bottom that
is under the main currents where fish prefer to rest in cooler water, lots of times at the mouth of a tributary,” she
said. “There are so many benefits to it,” said Wise, explaining that the gravels in many rivers and streams have
become so compacted over the years that the fish cannot always find a natural place to spawn. Because suction
dredgers break up or loosen the gravels and create small pockets in the bottoms of streams, it often creates manmade
refugia, where none had previously existed. While opponents of suction dredging argue that fresh dredge tailings
(gravels), are not as stable as natural gravel beds, they are better than nothing where natural gravels don’t exist,
Wise said. “However, the salmon are smart enough to recognize the difference between natural and manmade
refugia,” Greene said. If there is no suitable place to spawn, the fish will spawn anyway. “The eggs will just be
floating down river and be eaten by any predator that would eat them. They have to get through the gravel to build
that nest.” he said. After dredge tailings have settled for a year, they become more stable and more attractive to
salmon. “By the next year, you’ve got great spawning gravel,” Wise said. So, adding more refugia means salmon
have more places to spawn which helps to increase salmon populations. Even one redd (nest of salmon eggs) can
contain thousands of salmon eggs, she said.
Private sector finds solution for dredged materials
Burson, 1/27/14
(Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review magazines
and web sites. Patrick is a widely-published writer and editor who has spent most of his career covering international
trade, global logistics, and supply chain management)
http://www.logisticsmgmt.com/view/private_sector_partnerships_sought_for_port_dredging_options/sustainability
Seaports across the nation are confronting one similar challenge: how to develop a sustainable
strategy for distributing dredged materials. The Port of Baltimore believes partnering with privatesector third parties is the answer. Continuing their commitment to attract private-sector expertise to address
unique transportation challenges, the Maryland Department of Transportation’s Maryland Port Administration
(MPA) recently issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking ideas and best practices for
converting material dredged from Baltimore Harbor shipping channels into an environmentallysafe aggregate used in the construction / building industries. MPA is exploring the potential of developing
a public-private partnership (P3) to take material already placed at the Cox Creek Dredged Material Containment
Facility and convert it into a light-weight aggregate used in masonry blocks, concrete, hot-mix asphalt and
geotechnical fill. “Dredging is the lifeline of the Port of Baltimore,” says MPA Executive Director
James J. White. “Without properly maintained shipping channels, the huge ships of today and
Page | 63
supersized ones of tomorrow could not safely travel to and from the port. With a 50-foot-deep
shipping channel, Baltimore is one of only two ports on the U.S. East Coast currently able to handle
large Super Post-Panamax ships that will use the newly enlarged Panama Canal when construction
is completed by 2015. To maintain these shipping channels, approximately 1.5 million cubic yards
of material must be dredged from the Baltimore Harbor annually. Dredged material from the Harbor is
then placed at containment facilities, including Cox Creek and Masonville. While capacity remains at these sites ,
the MPA has been investigating best practices to increase dredged material placement capacity
while researching possible beneficial reuse ideas. The MPA successfully completed a demonstration
project in January 2012 by converting dredged material into a light-weight aggregate. The RFI will
help the State determine if there is a cost effective and competitive marketplace for the environmentally-safe
aggregate. Now that the RFI responses have been received, MPA will analyze the industry feedback to determine the
potential for a P3 and develop next steps for a possible solicitation process. MPA is targeting late winter 2014 for a
decision regarding next steps for a potential solicitation process.
Page | 64
AT Biodiversity DA -- No Link/Internal Link
Coral reefs recover from dredging and there are multiple alt causes to oceanic
sedimentation
Allsop et al 9
(Michelle, research consultant based at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories, located within the School of
Biosciences at the University of Exeter, UK, Phd in Biomedicine from University of Exeter, Paul Johnston,
principal scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories and head of the Science Unit for Greenpeace
International, Phd from University of London, David Santillo, senior scientist with the Greenpeace Research
Laboratories, Phd from University of London, State of the World’s Oceans, pg. 20)
Sedimentation: Developments in coastal areas can increase the flow of sediments onto coral reefs
(Australian Institute of Marine Science 2004). When sediment is stirred up in the water, light penetration is reduced
and this may affect photosynthe- sis on coral reefs. Sediments may also smother corals. Such effects from increased
sedimentation can result in coral mortality. For example, at K0-Phuket, Thailand, dredging for a deep-water
port over an 8-month period caused a significant decrease in coral cover on reefs adjacent to the activity.
A year after the dredging, the corals were showing rapid signs of recovery (Brown 1997). Sediment
release into the oceans is increasing due to the development of coastal areas for expanding population and
increases in agriculture (Australian Institute of Marine Science 204). Aquaculture operation can be a
considerable source of both sediments and nutrients into coastal waters (Edinger et al. 1998). Clear felling
of tropical forests in coastal zones can also be a major contributor to increased sedimentation (Australian Institute of
Marine Science 2004).
Their evidence assumes old techniques -- newest port dredging strategies have no
negative environmental impacts
EPA 7
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC “The Role of the Federal Standard in the Beneficial Use of
Dredged Material from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New and Maintenance Navigation Projects” October 2007
Since the passage of the landmark Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1986, there has been a
major evolution of law and policy concerning the beneficial use of dredged material. Environmental
restoration is now a priority mission of USACE, along with the traditional mission areas of flood damage
reduction and inland and coastal naviga- tion. New laws have established the authority of USACE to use dredged
material for environmentally beneficial purposes, and programs have been initi- ated to implement these laws. The
remaining chal- lenges to increasing the number of beneficial use projects include educating those with an interest in
these new opportunities and creating partnerships to develop and implement them. Beneficial uses of dredged
material involve the placement or use of dredged material for some productive purpose. Examples
of beneficial uses of dredged material include habitat development (e.g., wetland restoration or creation,
fishery enhance- ment); development of parks and recreational facilities (e.g., walking and bicycle trails,
wildlife viewing areas); agricultural, forestry, and horticultural uses; strip-mine reclamation/solid
waste management (e.g., fill for strip mines, landfill capping); shoreline construction (e.g., levee and dike
construction); construction/industrial development (e.g., bank stabilization, brownfields reclamation); and beach
nourishment (e.g., restoration of eroding beaches).
Page | 65
AT Biodiversity DA -- UQ Overwhelms Link
UQ overwhelms the link -- massive marine biodiversity loss is inevitable -- nothing
we can do to stop it
Suurkula 4
World-wide cooperation required to prevent global crisis; Part one— the problem, Physicians and Scientists for
Responsible Application of Science and Technology, February 6, 2004
http://www.globalissues.org/article/171/loss-of-biodiversity-and-extinctions
A new global study concludes that 90 percent of all large fishes have disappeared from the world’s
oceans in the past half century, the devastating result of industrial fishing. The study, which took 10 years to
complete and was published in the international journal Nature, paints a grim picture of the Earth’s current
populations of such species as sharks, swordfish, tuna and marlin. The loss of predatory fishes is likely to
cause multiple complex imbalances in marine ecology. Another cause for extensive fish extinction is the
destruction of coral reefs. This is caused by a combination of causes, including warming of oceans, damage from
fishing tools and a harmful infection of coral organisms promoted by ocean pollution. It will take hundreds of
thousands of years to restore what is now being destroyed in a few decades. According to the most
comprehensive study done so far in this field, over a million species will be lost in the coming 50
years. The most important cause was found to be climate change.
Page | 66
AT Biodiversity DA -- Mudflats Turn
Mudflat habitats are threatened now - changes in sedimentation
Butler & Weiss 9
“Salt Marshes: A Natural and Unnatural History” By Carol Butler, and Judith Weis Rutgers University Press, Jul 16,
2009
Mudflats, rather than salt marshes, are considered the most biologically productive of the West Coast
estuarine habitats because they are teeming with invertebrates of all kinds. Marine worms, crustaceans, and
mollusks support the hundreds of thousands of shorebirds that inhabit the estuary. When Eastern cordgrass
dominates marshes above the mudflats, it displaces native cordgrass and other native plants,
creating a single ecological zone that eliminates the many transitional areas native species need. It
reduces the organisms and modifies benthic communities. It reduces the species richness of benthic organisms
modifies benthic communities. It is ironic that while Spartina altermflora ( cordgrass, see fig. 2.1 in chapter 2) is
valued in East Coast marshes, in West Coast Elliimarshes it is considered a noxious, invasive species because
it converts valued mudflat areas into it is a "weed" that is smothering San Francisco Bay's mudflats It has
displaced native flora, changed sedimentation , decreased invertebrate algal populations, eliminated foraging
sites used by 'into Willapa Bay in the late 1800s or early 1900s as packing material for oyster shipments from the
East Coast. From the middle of the twentieth century the plant spread rapidly throughout Willapa Bay. In the 1970s,
the Army Corps of Engineers deliberately introduced it to stabilize flood- control levees on Alameda Island in San
Francisco Bay because it grows much faster than the native cordgrass (S.foliosa). Unfortunately, S. aIterm'- flora
both outcompetes hybridizes with S. foliosa, the hybrid is particularly invasive, choking off small creeks in the
marshes that are used by the endangered California clapper rails and covering mudflats that provide food for the
rails other shorebirds. By 2005, about 10 percent of the acres of tidal tlats in the San Francisco Bay estuary had been
invaded by the hybrid. In Washington State, it was accidentally introduced about one hundred years ago, but for
some unknown reason it has not hybrid- ized there. Loss of mudflat habitat harms marine species such as
the juvenile chum salmon, Dungeness crab, and English sole that rely on these habitats as food
sources.
Dredging  mudflat protection -- solves contaminated sediment and water quality
IADC 5 “Dredging: The Facts” IADC, IAPH, PLANC, WODA, CEDA, EADA, WEDA, Marsha Cohen.
International Association of Dredging Companies and International Association of Ports and Harbors.
http://www.iadc-dredging.com/ul/cms/fck-uploaded/documents/PDF%20Publications/dredging-literature-dredgingthe-facts.pdf
Dredged material is increasingly regarded as a resource rather than as a waste. More than 90% of
sediments from navigation dredging comprise unpolluted, natural, undisturbed sediment, which is
considered acceptable for a wide range of uses. The DMAF recognizes this and requires that, as a first step in
examining dredged material management options, possible beneficial uses of dredged material is considered.
Beneficial use may be defined as “any use which does not regard the material as a waste”. A great variety of
options are available, and the main types can be coastal protection, e.g. beach nourishment,
onshore/offshore feeding, managed retreat; agriculture, horticulture, forestry; habitat development or
enhancement, e.g. aquatic habitats, bird habitats, mudflats , wetlands; amenity development or enhancement,
e.g. landscaping; raising low-lying land; land reclamation, e.g. for industrial development, housing, infrastructure;
production of construction material, e.g. bricks, clay, aggregates; construction works, e.g. foundation fill, dikes.
Operational feasibility, that is, the availability of suitable material in the required amount at a particular time, is a
crucial aspect of many beneficial uses.
Page | 67
Mudflats are key to marine ecosystem health -- they’re a pollution buffer and the
key geographic link between ecosystems -- crucial for internationally important
migratory species
Northern Ireland Dept. of the Environment 3
(“Northern Ireland Habitat Action Plan Mudflats Final Draft – April 2003”,
http://www.doeni.gov.uk/niea/mudflats_web_version_april_03-3.pdf)
1.1.1 Mudflats are intertidal habitats created by sedimentary deposition in low energy coastal environments,
particularly in estuaries and other sheltered areas such as sea loughs. The substrate is formed mainly from silts and
clays and has a high organic content. In higher energy environments, such as the mouths of estuaries, the proportion
of sand in the substrate increases. Physical processes link mudflats to many other coastal habitats such
as soft cliffs and saltmarshes. They often form the transitional habitat between subtidal channels and vegetated
saltmarshes. In larger estuaries they can reach several kilometres in width and are commonly the most extensive part
of the estuarine intertidal area. 1.1.2 Mudflats play an important role in dissipating wave energy, thus
reducing the risk of erosion of saltmarshes, damaging coastal defences and flooding low-lying land .
The surface of mudflats plays an important role in intertidal nutrient chemistry. In polluted
environments, organic sediments may sequester contaminants and may contain high
concentrations of heavy metals. 1.1.3 Mudflats are typified and characterised by high biological
productivity (based on detritus) and they support an abundance of organisms , but have low macrofaunal
diversity with few rare species. The mudflat biota reflects the prevailing physical conditions. When salinity is low,
large numbers of oligochaetes occur. A wider diversity of polychaete worms are found in areas with increased
proportions of sand. Coarser substrates provide habitat for seagrasses Zostera spp. and mussel beds in particularly
stony areas. Occasionally these stony areas can provide attachment for stands of fucoid macroalgae such as Fucus
spiralis and F. vesiculosus. 1.1.4 Mudflats may appear to be devoid of vegetation, but mats of benthic microalgae are
common. These communities produce mucopolysaccharide mucilage that binds the sediment together. In nutrient
rich environments, mats of Enteromorpha spp. or Ulva spp. may be present particularly where salinity is reduced.
1.1.5 Mudflats are highly productive areas which, together with other intertidal habitats, are of great
importance to large numbers of birds and fish . They provide vital feeding and resting areas for
internationally important populations of migratory , overwintering and breeding waterfowl and Annex I
species, specially protected under the EC Birds Directive.
Page | 68
AT Biodiversity DA -- Mudflats Turn Ext
Port dredging key to mudflat habitat survival - solves contaminated sediments
André 8
(Dene, “Dredging - Best Practice of the Day”, Monday, 23 June 2008
http://greenercities.co.nz/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&id=59 (A set of guidelines on dredging best
practice that provides an overview of dredging and its impacts plus a recommended set of conditions to be applied to
any dredging project. Section One – Overview)
In considering the environmental effects of maintenance dredging and disposal, the potential benefits of
these operations should not be overlooked. These include the removal of contaminated sediments
and their relocation to safe, contained areas , and the possible improvement of water quality made
by the restoration of water depth and flow. There can be significant beneficial improvements from the use
of clean maintenance dredgings to enhance mudflat and saltmarsh habitats , and to mitigate losses of
intertidal land through sea level rise and capital dredging operations (Bowles, MAFF personal communication
1999).
Page | 69
AT Competitiveness K
Competitiveness discourse key to mobilizing resources and political coalitions.
Ron MARTIN Economic Geography @ Cambridge ‘6 in Economic Geography: Past Present and Future eds.
Sharmistha Bagchi-Sen and Helen Smith p.170-171
Similarly, the study of regional competitiveness also opens up opportunities for a greater engagement
by geographers with public policy research and debate, of the sort argued for by some commentators (such
as Markusen 1999; Martin 2001). As noted above, regional competitiveness policy has tended to rush
ahead of theoretical understanding and the evidence base. Economic geographers can make valuable
contributions on both fronts. There is a pressing need to constructively interrogate the meaning and nature of
'regional competitiveness', both to provide a fIrmer base for understanding regional differences in economic success
and for informing policy discourse. A geographical-theoretic perspective, for example, would not only highlight the
importance that place makes to economic organisation and performance, and thus how local context matters even in
an increasingly global world, but also - to pick up the argument made by Porter - how the processes influencing
competitive advantage operate and interact at various spatial scales. It would also highlight the need to include
intraregional (or intra-urban) socio-spatial distributional issues into any defInition and analysis of regional or city
competitiveness. Economic geographers are likewise well placed to engage directly with policy
discourse, not only because competitiveness policy is itself increasingly regional and city -based, but
because such policies are often predicated on an explicit comparative argument, involving direct
comparisons between individual regions and cities. Geographical research can help reveal the scope for and limits to
this 'benchmarking' and use of 'exemplar' places that seems now to be an essential part of competitiveness policy at
national, regional and city levels. Certainly, if done properly, regional benchmarking can help identifY a
region's or city'S competitive strengths and weaknesses, and hence form the basis of policy
formulation and priorities. It can help mobilise and articulate the interests of the key actors and
groups in the regional economy: the local business community, workers, and public and private institutions.
And it can help a region's business, political and social communities forge a common sense of purpose in
terms of ambitions for the future, and in presenting the region to the global market place, even in
lobbying efforts to influence government policies and the allocation of resources. Regional
benchmarking can facilitate the development and ongoing review of a vision defIning the region's role in a world
economy characterised by a steadily increasing and ever-shifting division of labour. But such benchmarking is
fraught With dangers and limitations. What precisely does it mean to compare one city, one region, with another?
While it is certainly instructive to examine and learn from successful regions, policymakers should be wary about
treating them as exemplars that can be easily replicated or imitated in their own region. Policies rarely travel well:
successful strategies developed in one region need not transplant easily into other regions (especially in other
countries). Indeed, given that many of the sources of regional competitive advantage are locally based and
embedded, policies necessarily have to respond to, and take account of, regionally-specific circumstances. Together
with the problems in defining, measuring and explaining regional competitive advantage discussed in this chapter, it
follows that there is unlikely to be any 'one size tits all' strategy for enhancing regional competitiveness. Different
regions will face different problems, different types of competition, and require somewhat different policy mixes
and emphases. Economists prefer universal tendencies and transferable policies: economic geographers have a
comparative advantage in recognising and demonstrating the difference that place makes. Whether we like it or not,
whether we agree with it or not, competition is an integral feature of economic, political, social and cultural life . It
is not simply a neoliberal invention. Economic geographers have an important role to play in elucidating the nature
of and limits to the idea of 'regional competitiveness', as a way of thinking about the economic landscape, as an
empirical process, and as a form of policy thinking.
Page | 70
Negative
Page | 71
Biodiversity DA
Page | 72
Biodiversity DA -- 1nc
Climate change places unique stress on marine biodiversity -- only reducing nonclimate stressors can prevent total marine ecosystem collapse
Marine Technical Team 11
(Marine Technical Team of national, government-wide strategy to safeguard fish, wildlife, plants, and the natural
systems upon which they depend, February 4th, 2011, “Marine Ecosystems”,
http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/pdf/Marine_Ecosystems_Paper.pdf)
These physical and chemical changes in the marine environment will directly impact the biological
functions of the species occupying these systems. Thus, as changes occur in ocean temperature or pH, one
can expect changes in nutrient availability, biological productivity, reproductive success, the timing
of biological processes (e.g., spawning), biogeography, migrations, community structure, predatorprey relationships, and entire biomes. For example: Temperature changes in marine ecosystems will affect ecological processes
such as productivity, species interactions, and even toxicity of compounds found in marine systems (Schiedek et al. 2007). Species are adapted to
specific ranges of environmental temperatures. As temperatures change, species can respond by: 1) migrating poleward or deeper; 2) reducing
their climate niche within the existing range; 3) evolve; or 4) go extinct (Mueter and Litzow 2008, Cheung et al. 2009, Nye et al. 2009, Overholtz
et al. 2011), creating new combinations of species that will interact in unpredictable ways. Changes in ocean circulation patterns will change
larval dispersal patterns and the geographic distributions of marine species (Block et al. 2011). Between 2000 and 2100, warming in the North
Pacific is projected to result in a 30 percent increase in the area of the subtropical biome, while areas of the equatorial upwelling and temperate
biomes will decrease by 28 percent and 34 percent, respectively (Polovina et al. 2010). Altered patterns of wind and water circulation in the ocean
environment will influence the vertical movement of ocean waters (i.e., upwelling and downwelling). This coupled with increased stratification of
the water column resulting from changes in salinity and water temperature will change the availability of essential nutrients and oxygen to marine
organisms throughout the water column. Warming of both air and ocean temperatures has resulted in the loss of Arctic sea ice. Retreat of sea ice
has resulted in the loss of habitat for marine mammals such as ice seals and polar bears (Ursus maritimus) which are adapted to live on or engage
in some activities on the ice. Variation in the spatial extent of sea ice and timing of the spring retreat has strong effects on the productivity of the
Bering Sea ecosystem. For example, the timing of the spring phytoplankton bloom is directly tied to the location of the sea ice edge over the
Bering Sea shelf (Stabeno et al 2001). Increased ocean acidification will directly and indirectly impact physiological and biological processes of
Species can respond to gradual
changes in the climate over long time scales of years to decades to centuries and adapt biologically to
new conditions. A primary concern for fish, wildlife, and plants and their ecosystems is the rapid rate of
change currently observed and the fundamental changes in mean ecosystem state to which these organisms
have adapted. While many species can respond to changing conditions over long time frames (decades
or longer) the current rate of change is likely too fast for many species to respond to and biologically adapt.
marine organisms such as growth, development, and reproduction (Le Quesne and Pinnegar 2011).
Regional changes are more relevant to understanding ecological responses to climate change than are global
averages (Walther et al. 2002). Impacts of climate change should therefore not only be studied on ocean basin
scales, but also at regional and local scales by downscaling global climate models (Stock et al. 2010) complimented
with empirical observation, monitoring, and experiments. Impacts of Non-Climate Stressors: The impacts of
climate change on species can be made worse when combined with the impacts of non-climate
stressors . The National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis has mapped2 and published (Halpern et al.
2008) stressors resulting from human activities on marine ecosystems worldwide. Major non-climate stressors
include habitat loss or modification , anthropogenic noise, harmful algal blooms,3 fishing (Hilborn et al.
2003, Pauly et al. 2005, Mora et al. 2009, Worm et al. 2009, Murawski 2010, Branch et al. In Press); agricultural,
industrial, and household activities producing nutrient and contaminant enrichment and introduce
debris in coastal waters (Carpenter et al. 1998, Cloern 2001, Anderson et al. 2002); energy/mineral exploration
and extraction (Paine et al. 1996); and a variety of marine hazards related to human activities (e.g. Crain
et al. 2008). Stresses from these sources have the potential to exacerbate the effect of climate change .
Alternatively, reducing the impacts of these stressors (in association with climate change) presents a
management opportunity to moderate the effect of climate change on marine systems and species ,
while efforts continue to reduce green house gas emissions.
Page | 73
Port dredging ensures massive habitat loss, contaminant spread, and water quality
destruction -- drift ensures contamination is dispersed far beyond initial sources of
dredging
Je et al 7
(Chung-hwan, Department of Environmental Health and Safety, University of Nevada, Reno, Additional Authors:
Donald F. Hayes, Kyung-sub Kim, “Simulation of resuspended sediments resulting from dredging operations by a
numberical flocculent transport model”, Chemosphere, 70 (2007) 187–195)
Sediment contamination is of great environmental concern in lakes or rivers because of its potential
toxic effects on biological and ecological resources and on human health. A large variety of contaminants,
including PCBs, dioxin, pesticides, heavy metals, PAHs and other pollutants from industrial, agricultural, urban, and
maritime activities are associated with sediment particulates, including bottom sediments (Gebler, 2000, Geffard et
al., 2001 and Riley, 2005). Environmental remediations, even for dredging operations , cause
contaminated sediments from the bottom of water bodies to become suspended into the water
column. These resuspended particles pose significant water quality concerns and cause adverse
effects to aquatic organisms . Furthermore, these fine sediment suspensions affect the transport of organic and
inorganic contaminants including nutrients and toxics (Riley, 2005). The authors are specifically interested in water
quality impacts resulting from environmental dredging of bottom sediments with substantial contaminants
concentrations associated with the particles. These dredging actions are usually considered to be one-time
operations requiring predictions of water quality impacts resulting from sediments resuspended during the process
and the potential for toxic contaminant transport. Concerns about these operations usually include biological
and ecological impacts in the immediate vicinity of the dredging operations and the potential for
contaminant spread into previously unaffected areas . In this paper, we present a vertically integrated twodimensional flocculent sediment transport model to better model concentration changes of resuspended bottom
sediments. These contaminated fine particles remaining in suspension typically have low settling velocities and
can remain in suspension for extended periods of time. Consequently, they may be transported
significant distances away from the initial action . Toxic chemicals that can impair water quality are most often associated
with these fine sediment particles and transported along with the sediment particles. The mechanics of suspended sediment transport modeling
have been well developed and described in numerous literatures (O’Connor et al., 1983, Thomann et al., 1993, Wheater et al., 1993, Haan et al.,
1994, Velleux and Endicott, 1994, Chapra, 1997, Prosser and Rustomji, 2000, Ziegler et al., 2000, Parsons et al., 2001, Merritt et al., 2003 and
Büttner et al., 2006). The general suspended sediment transport equation is oc ot ¼ W ðtÞ rðucÞ þ r2ðEcÞ vsc H ð1Þ where c = suspended solids
concentration (mg m3), t = elapsed time (s), W(t) = rate at which suspended sediment is being introduced into the water column (mg s1 m3), u =
current velocity (m s1), E = directional turbulent diffusion coefficient (m2 s1), vs = settling velocity of sediment particles (m s1), and H = water
depth (m). In most applications, the settling velocity is taken as a constant either estimated from Stokes’ law or determined through calibration
with available field data; Kuo and Welch (1985) and Kuo and Hayes (1991) are examples of this approach using Stokes’ law. However, Je and
Hayes (2004) have showed that Stokes’ law significantly underestimates settling velocities for these fine suspensions. In situ calibration of the
settling velocities is an alternative for ongoing actions, but impractical for one-time operations that require an a priori estimate of the magnitude
and extent of water quality impacts.
US marine ecosystems are key to starfish -- they’re a keystone species and on the
brink now -- die-off spills over to the Caribbean, ensures massive biodiversity loss
and extinction
Brown 14
(Desmond, Inter Press Service, Quotes John Mussington -- Marine Biologist, “Caribbean Fears Loss of “Keystone
Species” to Climate Change”, Apr 26 2014, http://www.ipsnews.net/2014/04/caribbean-fears-loss-keystone-speciesclimate-change/)
A marine biologist has cautioned that the mass deaths of starfish along the United States west coast in
recent months could also occur in the Caribbean region because of climate change, threatening the vital fishing sector.
Since June 2013, scientists began noticing that starfish, which they say function as keystone species in the marine ecosystem, have been
mysteriously dying by the millions. “The
cause of the starfish die-off which is taking place in the Pacific Ocean is not
known at this time but it could turn out to be from a number of factors including climate change,” John
Page | 74
Mussington told IPS. “If it turns out that climate change factors such as ocean warming are indeed implicated in the
starfish die-off, then there is the possibility that the same thing could happen in the Atlantic and affect
Caribbean species .” “We are living in an era when the predicted consequences of climate change are now
reality. Large scale die-off of can therefore happen to us in the Caribbean,” Mussington added Starfish play a key
role in marine ecosystems. They eat mussels, barnacles, snails, mollusks and other smaller sea life so their
health is considered a measure of marine life on the whole in a given area. Starfish are in turn eaten
by shorebirds, gulls, and sometimes sea otters . Mussington explained that something similar to what’s happening in California has
happened in the region before. He told IPS that in 1983 there was a Caribbean-wide die-off of the black sea urchin, spreading from as far north as
The Bahamas right down the chain of islands to the south. “The long-spined sea urchin was a keystone species in the Caribbean marine
The designation as ‘keystone’ is due to the
fact that if there is anything affecting their large populations, then this can be interpreted as a
ecosystem, similar to the affected starfish in the Pacific-California ecosystem.
reliable indication of problems in the entire ecosystem that will likely affect other species,” Mussington
said. “Something went very wrong with our Caribbean marine ecosystem in 1983 and the black sea urchin was wiped out – the species is
considered today to be functionally extinct. With the decline of this keystone species, the Caribbean has seen significant decline in its coral reefs
and the marine communities they support, including economically important commercial species.” Mussington said the spiny urchin grazes on
algae and it is important to control the number of algae on coral reefs. Habitat degradation, specifically of coral reefs, has been cited by numerous
studies as the primary cause of ongoing fish declines of Caribbean fish populations Caribbean coral reefs have experienced drastic losses in the
past several decades. Fish use the structure of corals for shelter and they also contribute to coastal protection. Established research has predicted
that the communities located in coastal areas, as well as national economies in the general Caribbean region, are likely to sustain substantial
economic losses should the current trends in coral reef degradation and destruction continue. It has been estimated that fisheries associated with
coral reef in the Caribbean region are responsible for generating net annual revenues, which have been valued at or above approximately 837
million Eastern Caribbean dollars, or about 310 million U.S. dollars. Continued degradation of the region’s few remaining coral reefs would
diminish these net annual revenues by an estimated 95-140 million U.S. dollars annually by 2015. The subsequent decrease in dive tourism could
also profoundly affect annual net tourism revenues “There has to be some balance and
once you have a major species dying
off, it’s going to have repercussions for the entire system . We must not forget that man is a integral part of
this system and the repercussions for us will be serious,” Mussington told IPS. The fisheries sector in the CARICOM Region
is an important source of livelihoods and sustenance. The local population is highly dependent on this resource for economic and social
development. This resource also contributes significantly to food security, poverty alleviation, employment, foreign exchange earnings,
development and stability of rural and coastal communities, culture, recreation and tourism. The subsector provides direct employment for more
than 120,000 fishers and indirect employment opportunities for thousands of others – particularly women – in processing, marketing, boatbuilding, net-making and other support services. But the coordinator for the United Nations Environmental Programme’s Caribbean Regional
Coordinating Unit-Caribbean Environment Programme, Nelson Andrade Colmenares, told IPS the vital sector is being threatened by climate
change. “The
Caribbean Sea, home to a vibrant ecosystem benefitting fisherfolk, the tourism industry
and the region’s people alike is currently threatened,” he said, adding that “over harvesting of fisheries, climate change
and pollution from sewage, agricultural runoff and industrial effluent has led to 75 percent of coral reefs in the region being labeled as at risk.”
Acting permanent secretary in Dominica’s fisheries ministry, Harold Guiste agrees, explaining that the future of the Caribbean’s conch and
lobster fisheries remains under threat despite regional efforts to protect it. Guiste blames the problem of overfishing squarely on nations outside
the Caribbean that trawl the region’s seas illegally. “Globally we have noticed a rush to fish accompanied by a lack of responsible behaviour in
the fishing sector,” he told IPS. “This type of hooligan behaviour has resulted in severe decline in some major fisheries of the world and collapse
in some others.” The Dominican official called for a collaborative approach to safeguard against the depletion of the region’s already challenged
resources. The spiny lobster trade brings in about 456 million US dollars to CARICOM nations but demand has led to overfishing of a once
healthy stocks. While admitting that “some factors are out of our control as it relates to mitigating against global warming”, Mussington said both
developing and developed countries need to do more. “We need to do things which will discontinue the rise in global temperatures and those
things that need to happen have to do with less use of fossil fuels and modification of certain things that countries do,” he told IPS. In fact, the
persons who are going to be suffering most – the people living in these Small Island Developing States – we are not the ones ultimately
responsible in large measure for the problems we are having now, the developed countries are.” “So far the developed countries have been very
resistant to implementing those policies and changes that need to happen,” Mussington added. In the end, he said the annual Conference of the
“It’s a fight that the world has to win if
it is to survive because if the small states don’t win, it means that the globe as a whole does not win ,
which means that Planet Earth will lose out and the human race on planet earth might very well face
Parties (COP) negotiations should not be simply about the smaller countries winning.
total extinction ,” warned Mussington. “That’s what’s facing us. The globe will become unlivable ,” he
added.
Page | 75
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Link
Port dredging kills marine biodiversity -- multiple scenarios
European Commission Staff 11
working document Integrating biodiversity and nature protection into port development Brussels, 08.03.20
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/maritime/doc/comm_sec_2011_0319.pdf
Port infrastructure projects can have a wide range of impacts, notably on Natura 2000, even if not all
port developments concern Natura 2000 sites. Potential impacts of ports on biodiversity cover a wide
range – from degradation, fragmentation or loss of ecosystems and their services due to the land
intake of port infrastructure, over contamination till the intrusion of invasive species, for which
ports are one of the main entry points. Direct spatial impacts include loss of habitats due, e.g., to
infrastructure developments and dredging activities. Indirect impacts comprise disturbances
due to maritime transport operations. To avoid potential impacts, it is essential that both
strategic and detailed project planning fully integrate Natura 2000 considerations to avoid
conflicts, costs and delays. Ports need to be transparent with society about their projects and the
environmental impacts thereof and communicate their efforts to avoid, mitigate or compensate
negative impacts.
Dredging  habitat loss -- displaces marine species
Phernambucq 93 – District Engineer, U.S. Army Engineer (Stanley G, “DREDGING: KEY LINK IN THE
STRATEGIC NATIONAL DEFENSE”, 15 April 1993, http://www.dtic.mil/cgibin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA264544)
There are environmental resources that may be at risk during dredging activities. Dredging is not a
benign activity; it disrupts habitats and redistributes sediments. These activities can significantly effect
the coastal ecosystem and destroy marine life, especially sedentary invertebrates. These
invertebrates are important parts of the food chain and contribute to the feeding of other fish; fish
which are ultimately used for human consumption.
Other aquatic impacts of dredging include habitat loss when the sea bottom is altered. This occurs
when dredged materials are deposited at a location and its material composition is altered. This decreases the
diversity and abundance of certain species. Water circulation can be impacted when mounding
occurs. This action can cause different siltation deposits and lead to the elimination of spawning
areas. Turbidity, or the suspension of sediments into the water column, can result in reduced light penetration and
expose fish to abrasive materials.
Most importantly, dredging has the potential of releasing comparatively large doses of toxic
substances into a new aquatic environment and to make them available to marine organisms. These
materials include heavy metals, PCB's, pesticides, and other toxic materials that are certain to persist in marine life
for quite some time.
Many species of marine life are sensitive to the impacts of dredging. The testing procedures previously described are
designed to preclude the release of materials that could pose an unacceptable risk to marine life. The real dilemma
arises as to how much is acceptable to the environment.2
Non- removed dredged materials cause fish to be sad from pollution
Delia et al. 10
Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, Agricultural University of Tirana, Albania. Laboratory of Fishing and
Aquaculture, Durres, Albania (Etleva Delia, Enkelejda Sallaku, Jerina Kolitan “The Environmental Impact of the
Dredging in Port and Durres City” 5/25/10 http://www.balwois.com/balwois/administration/full_paper/ffp-1648.pdf)
The potential for environmental impact resulting from upland depends on the nature of the material and
characteristics of the disposal site. As dredged material placed in an upland environment dries, the
material oxidizes and becomes lighter in color, accumulations of salt develop on the surface and
precipitations tends to dissolve the salts that may then runoff. The oxidation process may promote
Page | 76
the release of contaminants in surface water and groundwater and volatilizations of some
contaminations may also occur. Fugitive dust may also disperse contaminates . The upland
placement of dredging material can potentially affect water quality, groundwater quality, wildlife,
plants and human health.
Page | 77
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Marine Ecosystems Key
Marine ecosystems are key -- crucial lynchpin to other ecosystems and key to the US
economy
Hourigan 99
(Thomas, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA, “CONSERVING OCEAN BIODIVERSITY: TRENDS AND
CHALLENGES”, http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/websites/retiredsites/natdia_pdf/7hourigan.pdf.)
The ocean’s biological diversity—the living resources that compose it and the ecological processes that sustain
it—forms a foundation for the quality of human life as well as the raw materials to enrich it. Biological
diversity, or biodiversity, refers to the variety and variability among living organisms, and among the ecological
complexes of which they are a part. Marine living resources provide essential economic, environmental,
aesthetic, and cultural benefits to humanity. Sixteen percent of all animal protein consumed worldwide
comes from the ocean. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) estimates the total value to
fishers of the world’s commercial marine catch at $80 billion per year. The comparable value of fishes landed
in the United States is $3.5 billion, and commercial fisheries contribute $21 billion to the U.S. economy. Besides
food, marine living resources provide myriad products including fertilizers, animal feed, medicines, and
aquarium fishes. The value of marine biodiversity extends far beyond fisheries and other products.
Marine ecosystems also provide natural goods and services such as carbon storage, atmospheric gas
regulation, nutrient cycling, and waste treatment. Coral reefs, mangroves, and kelp forests protect
coastal areas from storm damage . Marine algae contribute nearly 40 percent of global
photosynthesis. The values of these marine ecosystem services greatly exceed direct use values, yet they generally
are not incorporated into economic or policy calculations. Globally, the value of marine ecosystem services has been
estimated at $8.4 trillion per annum for open ocean ecosystems, and $12.6 trillion for coastal ecosystems (Costanza
et al. 1997). These services depend on marine biodiversity, even though the processes that underlie this
dependence are still unclear. As human populations increase, demands have accelerated for food,
products, and services from the ocean, as well as for living and recreational space on its shores. The primary
threats to marine biodiversity are fisheries operations (both direct overfishing and indirect fishing impacts—
e.g., bycatch of non-target and protected species, habitat destruction by trawls and other gear or
techniques , and other ecosystem effects that may accompany fishing activities), chemical pollution and
eutrophication, physical alteration of coastal and marine habitats , invasions of exotic species, and
ultraviolet-B radiation damage to phytoplankton and zooplankton resulting from stratospheric ozone depletion (NRC
1995). Looming on the horizon is the threat of human-caused climate change with potentially major negative effects
on tourism, freshwater supplies, fisheries, and biodiversity. These factors also have been identified by the Parties to
the Convention on Biological Diversity2 as key threats (UNEP/CBD 1995).
Page | 78
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Turns Coastal Erosion
Marine biodiversity turns the case -- key to solve disaster response and climate
adaptation
World Wildlife Fund 8
"Biodiversity Loss Puts People At Risk: World Wildlife Fund." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 20 May 2008.
<www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080516112715.htm>.
Future generations face hunger, thirst, disease and disaster if we carry on losing biodiversity. And as biodiversity
plummets our use of resources soars. WWF now estimates that biodiversity has declined by more than a
quarter in the last 35 years. The stark warning comes as WWF launches its 2010 and Beyond: Rising to the
Biodiversity Challenge report which contains the latest Living Planet index – the internationally agreed way to
measure progress towards the global target of reducing biodiversity loss by 2010– and which reveals a continuing
decline in biodiversity. Food, clean water, medicines and protection from natural hazards are important ingredients
in maintaining our security and quality of life. If they are to be maintained then the species, natural habitats and
ecosystems that support them need to be protected. In 2002 the world’s governments set themselves a target to
reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010, but WWF’s report shows that they are clearly not on track.
“ Biodiversity underpins the health of the planet and has a direct impact on all our lives . Put simply,
reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more
vulnerable to pests and disease and where water is in irregular or short supply,” said James Leape, WWF
International’s Director General. “No one can escape the impact of biodiversity loss because reduced global
diversity translates quite clearly into fewer new medicines, greater vulnerability to natural disasters
and greater effects from global warming .
Page | 79
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Generic Biodiversity Loss  Exn
Biodiversity collapse will cause extinction.
Coyne 7
Jerry Coyne, Professor of Ecology at UChicago and Hopi Hoekstra, Professor of Biology at Harvard (9/24/2007
http://www.truthout.org/article/jerry-coyne-and-hopi-e-hoekstra-the-greatest-dying)
Aside from the Great Dying, there have been four other mass extinctions, all of which severely pruned
life's diversity. Scientists agree that we're now in the midst of a sixth such episode. This new one,
however, is different - and, in many ways, much worse. For, unlike earlier extinctions, this one results from
the work of a single species, Homo sapiens. We are relentlessly taking over the planet, laying it to
waste and eliminating most of our fellow species. Moreover, we're doing it much faster than the mass
extinctions that came before. Every year, up to 30,000 species disappear due to human activity alone. At this
rate, we could lose half of Earth's species in this century. And, unlike with previous extinctions,
there's no hope that biodiversity will ever recover, since the cause of the decimation - us - is here to stay.
To scientists, this is an unparalleled calamity, far more severe than global warming, which is, after all, only one of
many threats to biodiversity. Yet global warming gets far more press. Why? One reason is that, while the increase
in temperature is easy to document, the decrease of species is not. Biologists don't know, for example,
exactly how many species exist on Earth. Estimates range widely, from three million to more than 50 million, and
that doesn't count microbes, critical (albeit invisible) components of ecosystems. We're not certain about the rate of
extinction, either; how could we be, since the vast majority of species have yet to be described? We're even less sure
how the loss of some species will affect the ecosystems in which they're embedded, since the intricate connection
between organisms means that the loss of a single species can ramify unpredictably. But we do know some things.
Tropical rainforests are disappearing at a rate of 2 percent per year. Populations of most large fish are down to only
10 percent of what they were in 1950. Many primates and all the great apes - our closest relatives - are nearly gone
from the wild. And we know that extinction and global warming act synergistically. Extinction exacerbates global
warming: By burning rainforests, we're not only polluting the atmosphere with carbon dioxide (a major greenhouse
gas) but destroying the very plants that can remove this gas from the air. Conversely, global warming increases
extinction, both directly (killing corals) and indirectly (destroying the habitats of Arctic and Antarctic animals). As
extinction increases, then, so does global warming, which in turn causes more extinction - and so on, into a
downward spiral of destruction. Why, exactly, should we care? Let's start with the most celebrated case: the
rainforests. Their loss will worsen global warming - raising temperatures, melting icecaps, and flooding coastal
cities. And, as the forest habitat shrinks, so begins the inevitable contact between organisms that have not evolved
together, a scenario played out many times, and one that is never good. Dreadful diseases have successfully
jumped species boundaries, with humans as prime recipients. We have gotten aids from apes, sars from
civets, and Ebola from fruit bats. Additional worldwide plagues from unknown microbes are a very real
possibility. But it isn't just the destruction of the rainforests that should trouble us . Healthy ecosystems the
world over provide hidden services like waste disposal, nutrient cycling, soil formation, water
purification, and oxygen production. Such services are best rendered by ecosystems that are
diverse. Yet, through both intention and accident, humans have introduced exotic species that turn biodiversity into
monoculture. Fast-growing zebra mussels, for example, have outcompeted more than 15 species of native mussels in
North America's Great Lakes and have damaged harbors and water-treatment plants. Native prairies are
becoming dominated by single species (often genetically homogenous) of corn or wheat. Thanks to
these developments, soils will erode and become unproductive - which, along with temperature
change, will diminish agricultural yields. Meanwhile, with increased pollution and runoff, as well as reduced
forest cover, ecosystems will no longer be able to purify water; and a shortage of clean water spells
disaster. In many ways, oceans are the most vulnerable areas of all. As overfishing eliminates major
predators, while polluted and warming waters kill off phytoplankton, the intricate aquatic food web could collapse
Page | 80
from both sides. Fish, on which so many humans depend, will be a fond memory. As phytoplankton
vanish, so does the ability of the oceans to absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen. (Half of the
oxygen we breathe is made by phytoplankton, with the rest coming from land plants.) Species extinction is also
imperiling coral reefs - a major problem since these reefs have far more than recreational value:
They provide tremendous amounts of food for human populations and buffer coastlines against
erosion. In fact, the global value of "hidden" services provided by ecosystems - those services, like waste disposal,
that aren't bought and sold in the marketplace - has been estimated to be as much as $50 trillion per year, roughly
equal to the gross domestic product of all countries combined. And that doesn't include tangible goods like fish and
timber . Life as we know it would be impossible if ecosystems collapsed . Yet that is where we're
heading if species extinction continues at its current pace. Extinction also has a huge impact on
medicine. Who really cares if, say, a worm in the remote swamps of French Guiana goes extinct? Well, those who
suffer from cardiovascular disease. The recent discovery of a rare South American leech has led to the
isolation of a powerful enzyme that, unlike other anticoagulants, not only prevents blood from
clotting but also dissolves existing clots. And it's not just this one species of worm: Its wriggly relatives have
evolved other biomedically valuable proteins, including antistatin (a potential anticancer agent), decorsin and ornatin
(platelet aggregation inhibitors), and hirudin (another anticoagulant). Plants, too, are pharmaceutical gold
mines. The bark of trees, for example, has given us quinine (the first cure for malaria), taxol (a drug highly
effective against ovarian and breast cancer), and aspirin. More than a quarter of the medicines on our
pharmacy shelves were originally derived from plants. The sap of the Madagascar periwinkle contains
more than 70 useful alkaloids, including vincristine, a powerful anticancer drug that saved the life of one of our
friends. Of the roughly 250,000 plant species on Earth, fewer than 5 percent have been screened for pharmaceutical
properties. Who knows what life-saving drugs remain to be discovered? Given current extinction rates, it's estimated
that we're losing one valuable drug every two years. Our arguments so far have tacitly assumed that species are
worth saving only in proportion to their economic value and their effects on our quality of life, an attitude that is
strongly ingrained, especially in Americans. That is why conservationists always base their case on an economic
calculus. But we biologists know in our hearts that there are deeper and equally compelling reasons to
worry about the loss of biodiversity: namely, simple morality and intellectual values that transcend
pecuniary interests. What, for example, gives us the right to destroy other creatures? And what could be more
thrilling than looking around us, seeing that we are surrounded by our evolutionary cousins, and realizing that we all
got here by the same simple process of natural selection? To biologists, and potentially everyone else, apprehending
the genetic kinship and common origin of all species is a spiritual experience - not necessarily religious, but spiritual
nonetheless, for it stirs the soul. But, whether or not one is moved by such concerns, it is certain that our future
is bleak if we do nothing to stem this sixth extinction. We are creating a world in which exotic
diseases flourish but natural medicinal cures are lost; a world in which carbon waste accumulates
while food sources dwindle; a world of sweltering heat, failing crops, and impure water. In the end,
we must accept the possibility that we ourselves are not immune to extinction. Or, if we survive,
perhaps only a few of us will remain, scratching out a grubby existence on a devastated planet.
Global warming will seem like a secondary problem when humanity finally faces the consequences of what
we have done to nature: not just another Great Dying, but perhaps the greatest dying of them all.
Biodiversity loss leads to extinction
Diner gender paraphrased 94
Military Law Review Winter 1994 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161 LENGTH: 30655 words ARTICLE: THE ARMY AND
THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHO'S ENDANGERING WHOM? NAME: MAJOR DAVID N. DINER
BIO: Judge Advocate General's Corps, United States Army.
Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist species, filling
narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less diverse systems.
Page | 81
"The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in
which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can resist collapse better
than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks down as a whole." n79 By causing
widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem
failure. The spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States are relatively mild examples of
what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically, each
new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly
perceived and intertwined affects, could cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction.
Each new extinction increases the risk of disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the
rivets from an aircraft's wings, n80 [hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.
Page | 82
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Oxygen Impact
Sea otters threatened now -- starfish die-off ensures sea otters extinction
Venton & Nature Magazine
(Danielle, Journalist for Scientific American, “Clues Sought for Sea Star Die-Off”, Dec. 16th, 2013,
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/clues-sought-for-sea-star-die-off/)
In their waterproof orange overalls, Hannah Perlkin and Emily Tucker look like commercial fishermen or stormready sailors. But they are biologists on their way to tide pools along a remote stretch of northern California coast.
There they are searching for the cause of a mysterious and unprecedented die-off of sea stars along
North America’s Pacific shores. The syndrome took marine scientists by surprise this summer, when sick and dying
sea stars — also known as starfish — appeared in a host of locations between Alaska and southern California.
Predatory species were the first to succumb, but now the mysterious ailment is appearing in species once thought to
be resistant to its effects. The progression is predictable: white lesions appear on an animal and become infected.
Within hours or days the sea star becomes limp, and its arms may fall off. Necrosis eventually takes over and the
animal dies. “It’s like a zombie wasteland,” says Tucker, who is, like Perlkin, a field technician employed by the
University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). “You'll see detached arms crawling away from their body.” Among
the animals now affected are the scavenger bat star, Asterina miniata; some species of sea urchin, an
important source of food for threatened sea otters ; and recreational and commercially fished species such
as the California spiny lobster (Panulirus interruptus) and sheephead fish (Semicossyphus pulcher).
Sea otters are key to kelp forests -- turns the case -- kelp forests are key to solve
coastline storm surge
Seaotters.com 13
(“Why are Sea Otters Important? No Sea Otters. No Kelp Forests”, http://seaotters.com/2013/05/23/why-are-seaotters-important-no-sea-otters-no-kelp-forests/)
Sea otters are an iconic species, representing the beauty and diversity of marine life found along California’s
coastline. They’re also considered a keystone species because of their critical importance to the
health and stability of the nearshore marine ecosystem. They eat sea urchins and other invertebrates that
graze on giant kelp. Without sea otters, these grazing animals can destroy kelp forests and consequently
the wide diversity of animals that depend upon kelp habitat for survival. Additionally, kelp forests protect
coastlines from storm surge and absorb vast amounts of harmful carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Sea
otters are also considered a sentinel species because their health reflects that of California’s coastal waters.
Impact is extinction -- collapse of kelp forests causes loss of vital oxygen supply -land plants don’t fill-in, makes the Earth unliveable
Hall 11
(Dr. Jack, Chair of the Department of Environmental Studies at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, “The
Most Important Organism?”, September 12, 2011, http://www.ecology.com/2011/09/12/important-organism/)
On a recent fossil collecting trip a friend asked, “What do you think is the most important organism on the
Earth?” She knew full well I would answer, “Humans!” since we are the masters of our domain and without rival in
the animal world (are we good or what?). She was a bit surprised, and gave me the “Are you nuts?” look, when,
without hesitation, I answered, “No doubt about it… hands down the most important organism on this planet is
marine algae.” “ Algae ?!?,” she said. “Yes, Algae,” I answered. “Do you want an explanation or are you going to
take my word on this?” I asked. “Let me think about it and I’ll get back to you on that one,” she said. As we
continued our hunt for shark’s teeth, whale bones and anything else we could find, she finally broke down. “I don’t
Page | 83
get it. We can change the world in so many ways…..what has algae done? “Very simple,” I said. “ Algae allow us
and almost every other organism you can think of, living or dead, to be here.” Suddenly, she got that look.
You know, the one you get when that light bulb in your head clicks on…bing, there it is! “Ah, oxygen, right?”
“Correctomundo!” was my very scientific reply. Life-giving Slime It is estimated that marine plants produce
between 70 and 80 percent of the oxygen in the atmosphere . Nearly all marine plants are single celled, photosynthetic
algae. Yup, that’s right, good ol’ scum on the pond…green gak…..slip slimein’ away. Even marine seaweed is many times colonial algae. They
are a bunch of single cells trying to look like a big plant (see seaweed photo), but they are really individuals. We need marine algae a whole lot
more than they need us. Think about it, 70 percent to 80 percent of all the oxygen we breathe comes from algae! Without them we would really
Trees and other
land plants are very important, no doubt about it. But for pure survival, we couldn’t make it without
be sucking wind, but not for long! At this point, you may be saying, “Yo! What about the trees and other land plants?”
algae . Why does so much of our oxygen come from algae? First of all, remember that the oceans cover about 71 percent of this planet and
land is only about 29 percent. If we assume that every square mile of the ocean produces as much oxygen as every square mile of land, then this
makes sense. The oceans would produce about 71 percent and the land 29 percent of the oxygen we breathe. Looks like we are in the ballpark,
don’t you think? Are Oceans as Productive as Land? Now the question is, “Are the oceans, indeed, as productive as the land?” At first you might
not think so, after all when you look at the land there are trees, bushes and grass and all kinds of plants growing. They must crank out oxygen to
beat the band! They do, but also remember that there are many places on land that don’t have much in the way of plants. How about Antarctica or
the Sahara Desert along with many others? These are good-sized chunks of real estate where plants are rare. How much oxygen is being pumped
Some areas on land have an abundance of plants and produce a large quantity of oxygen,
while others have very few plants and produce very little. The same can be said for the oceans. There
out in these areas?
are some areas that have an abundance of algae living in the waters and other areas that don’t. In the ocean, there are
areas of upwelling where cold, nutrient rich bottom water moves toward the surface. These upwelling waters mix with the surface water and
produce an area that is like liquid fertilizer for plants. They go ballistic and there are billions of the little critters in the water just pumping out
oxygen left and right. Other areas of the oceans don’t have much in the way of nutrients in the water and they are like the deserts on land with
very few plants. Overall, the production of oxygen in the oceans is at least equal to the production on land, if not a bit more. Plants on land are
easy to spot. Plants in the ocean are a bit more difficult to see since they are single cells floating in the water. Even though you may not see them,
they are there. Remember, these little cells go down to over 300 feet below the surface so they have lots of room to spread out. Plants on land and
in the ocean are extremely important to us and we wouldn’t be here without them. Land plants provide us (and other critters) with food, raw
materials like wood and fiber to make cloth and paper. They protect the land from erosion with their roots, provide beauty and shade on a hot day
and produce oxygen as an added bonus although we could probably survive with the oxygen. Marine plants are also used as food, but we tend to
forget about them because they are so small and difficult to see. But remember, the next time you wake up in the morning, stretch and open wide
that breath of fresh air you are getting is due for the most part to our friend, the
algae. If we kill them by polluting the oceans, we are also killing our vital lifeline . More Interesting Facts…
with that big morning yawn,
There are more than 7,000 different species of algae. Most live in the oceans, but they also live in fresh water and even on land. Also, algae
produce about 330 billion tons of oxygen each year. There are three types of algae: red, green and brown. Some algae in the ocean are very small
and drift in the ocean water. Those algae are phytoplankton. The most abundant type of algae is brown algae, with over 5,000 species (not all are
totally brown). Red algae has over 2,000 species, and lives where light is dim, in deeper waters, mostly in temperate and tropical waters. Green
algae are more common on land and in fresh water systems, but are the least common in the ocean where about 800 are known to exist.
**Begin Photo Caption** Kelp is a type of marine algae, or seaweed. Seaweeds come in three different color
varieties, red, green and brown. Kelp is a kind of brown seaweed that grows to be very large. Although kelp
resembles a kind of weed or tree, it is quite different from plants that grow on land. **End Photo Caption**
Page | 84
Biodiversity DA -- 2nc Antibiotics Impact
Marine ecosystem destruction leads to coral reef bleaching -- climate change puts
reefs on the brink, controlling non-climate stressors is key
Marine Technical Team 11
(Marine Technical Team of national, government-wide strategy to safeguard fish, wildlife, plants, and the natural
systems upon which they depend, February 4th, 2011, “Marine Ecosystems”,
http://www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov/pdf/Marine_Ecosystems_Paper.pdf)
Coral reefs are one the most productive ecosystems on Earth. At the heart of the coral reef’s success is
a symbiotic relationship between coral and microscopic algae within the living coral. The coral provides
the nutrients that the algae need to capture CO2 through photosynthesis. The algae, in turn, provide coral with the
carbon they need to build their skeletons—and thus, the reef itself. A changing climate is threatening this
symbiotic relationship and the whole coral reef ecosystem. When sea temperatures rise too much, the coral
expel their alage, a process called bleaching (since the coral become whiter without their symbionts). In 2005,
up to 90 percent of shallow-water corals in the British Virgin Islands bleached in response to increased water
temperatures (Wilkinson and Souter 2008). Bleaching has profound effects on corals and the loss of the
symbionts can ultimately cause the bleached coral to starve to death. Bleaching isn’t the only threat to coral. Rapid
increases in the atmospheric CO2 concentration, and thus, ocean acidification, may be the final insult to these
ecosystems. The absorption of atmospheric CO2 by the world’s oceans contributes to chemical reactions which
ultimately reduce the amount of carbonate making it unavailable to coral to build their skeletons (Hoegh-Guldberg
et al. 2007). An effort is underway to try to protect coral reefs by making them more resilient to
climate change. The Nature Conservancy has started a Reef Resilience program, working in the Florida Keys in
partnership with the State of Florida, NOAA, and Australia’s Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, to
understand the non-climate factors that adversely affect coral reefs such as damage from charter and private vessels
and improper erosion control. The hope is that by reducing these non-climate stressors, the coral will be
better able to resist being bleached when sea temperatures increase . A related approach, being studied
by scientists at the University of Miami, Australia Institute of Marine Science, and elsewhere, is actively inoculating
corals with algal symbionts that are resistant to higher water temperatures.
Coral reefs are key to new medicines, ocean bio-diversity, and the economy
NOAA 8
March 25, 2008 http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/kits/corals/coral07_importance.html
Coral reefs are some of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on Earth. Coral reefs support more species
per unit area than any other marine environment , including about 4,000 species of fish, 800 species of
hard corals and hundreds of other species. Scientists estimate that there may be another 1 to 8 million
undiscovered species of organisms living in and around reefs (Reaka-Kudla, 1997). This biodiversity is
considered key to finding new medicines for the 21st century . Many drugs are now being
developed from coral reef animals and plants as possible cures for cancer, arthritis, human
bacterial infections, viruses, and other diseases. Storehouses of immense biological wealth , reefs
also provide economic and environmental services to millions of people. Coral reefs may provide goods and
services worth $375 billion each year. This is an amazing figure for an environment that covers less than 1 percent
of the Earth’s surface (Costanza et al., 1997) Healthy reefs contribute to local economies through tourism. Diving
tours, fishing trips, hotels, restaurants, and other businesses based near reef systems provide millions of jobs and
contribute billions of dollars all over the world. Recent studies show that millions of people visit coral reefs in the
Florida Keys every year. These reefs alone are estimated to have an asset value of $7.6 billion (Johns et al., 2001).
Page | 85
Antibiotic development is an existential threat -- new medicine development is
key to solve superbugs that ensure extinction
Parady & Kresnawati 14
(Vida & Dr. Windi, members of volunteer team working to raise awareness on the proper use of antibiotics from
NGO Yayasan Orangtua Peduli (YOP) and ReAct, an independent global network for concerted action on antibiotic
resistance, “Saving Antibiotics in the Battle Against Superbugs”,
28 March 2014, http://www.magdalene.co/news-128-saving-antibiotics-in-the-battle-against-superbugs-.html)
American Medical Association (AMA) in 1995: “ The world is faced with increasingly rampant bacteria
that have become resistant against the entire existing antibiotics . It creates extraordinary public health
crisis.” We are currently facing a life-threatening crisis . Curable diseases such as tuberculosis, gonorrhea and
typhoid fever currently cannot be cured due to antibiotic resistance. The improper use of antibiotics does not only
create loss for patients, but also for the environment. The superbugs will infect the entire population, and
nothing will work against it , even if some in the population only use certain antibiotic for the first time.
Page | 86
Politics DA
Page | 87
Partisanship Link
The way port dredging is funded is unpopular
Gale 12
(Kevin Gale, Feb 14, 2012, Editor in Chief- South Florida Business Journal, “Port dredging is a hot topic
in D.C.” http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida /blog/2012/02/port-dredging-is-hot-topic-in-dc.html)
MB
Some members of Congress are starting to get antsy about getting East Coast harbors dredged to
accommodate post-Panamax ships. While PortMiami has $77 million in state funding to help launch
its project, ports further north are fighting for federal funding. In his Fine Print column in The
Washington Post on Tuesday, Walter Pincus tells how the Senate Armed Services Committee grilled
Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Bostick, who has been nominated to lead the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers .
(Bostick is already facing a roadblock from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., over repairs on a dam in his home
state.) The problem for ports and their congressmen is that earmarks aren't supposed to happen
anymore, and that's a classic way for port dredging projects to get funded.
Republicans hate funding port dredging - it’s a partisan issue
Bendavid and McWhirter 10
(Cameron Mcwhirter and Naftali Bendavid, December 1, 2010, Bendavid is he Congressional reporter for
The Wall Street JournalMcwhiter is a staff reporter for The Wall Street Journal “Projects Test Resolve on
Earmarks”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703994904575647152924275836.html?mod=WSJ_Elec
tion_LeftTopStories) MB
SAVANNAH, Ga.—Congressional Republicans are eagerly promoting their promise to abstain
from earmarks, saying the move is necessary to contain federal spending and mollify voters angry
at Washington. But the pledge made on the campaign trail is proving more complicated in practice.
A container ship heads upriver to the Port of Savannah, which is seeking $105 million in federal funds to
begin deepening its harbor. Some senators' resolve is being tested as two of the nation's major ports,
one here and another in Charleston, S.C., urgently seek funding to expand. Port officials say federal
dollars will be crucial next year so they can deepen their harbors to accommodate bigger ships after the
Panama Canal is widened and reopens in 2014. It isn't clear that can be done without earmarking—
special funding that lawmakers request for projects in their home states. The Savannah port is seeking
$105 million for the upcoming fiscal year to begin dredging the port, while Charleston wants $400,000
for a feasibility study for its own deepening project. If the ports cannot receive the mega-ships, Savannah
and Charleston officials say, the cargo will go to New York or Norfolk, Va., which they argue would be
inefficient and deliver an economic blow to the Southeast, costing jobs. Earmarks were denounced by
conservative activists during the recent midterm election campaigns, and Republicans in both
chambers banned them last month. But several GOP senators have suggested they'll make exceptions if
they see fit, including three of the four from Georgia and South Carolina. Spending on items such as
ports, bridges and roads are included in the president's annual budget, which is then reviewed by
congressional committees. It's at that point that lawmakers often go to a committee chairman to get their
earmarked projects inserted. Individual projects could also be funded in free-standing bills, but that would
be impractical, given how numerous such projects are. The controversial nature of earmarks was
highlighted Tuesday when the Senate voted 56-39 against expanding an earmark ban to the full
chamber that was similar to the one adopted by Senate Republicans at a closed-door meeting Nov. 16.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) supports the earmark ban but has vowed to earmark funds for the
Charleston port if necessary. "I'm in a spot where I have to get the port deepened for economic reasons,"
he said. Democrats from the region say the ban never made any sense. "Charleston is going to be dead in
Page | 88
the water because of this short-sighted myopic view that seems to be controlling," said Rep. James
Clyburn (D., S.C.). Savannah, the second-busiest port on the East Coast after the Port of New York/New
Jersey, has been pressing an application with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers since 1999 to dredge the
Savannah River from its current 42-feet depth at low tide to 48 feet. This month, the Corps recommended
dredging to 47 feet. The cost has been estimated at about $600 million—$400 million of which would be
sought in federal funds. Anxious port officials have recruited Kasim Reed, the Democratic mayor of
Atlanta and an ally of President Barack Obama, to push the administration for funding. Some
Republicans had been concerned that their earmark ban would lead to a transfer of power over
budgeting decisions to the president. Curtis Foltz, executive director of the Georgia Ports Authority,
said in an interview that he and other officials had visited Washington repeatedly to lobby the White
House and the state's congressional delegation. Having no port for large ships in the Southeast would
increase the cost of transporting imported and exported goods from one of the fastest-growing parts of the
nation, he said. "This is not infrastructure for a water park or a bicycle path," Mr. Foltz said. "This is
infrastructure that is absolutely necessary for the nation." Georgia's Republican senators are touting their
opposition to earmarks but also suggesting they'll do whatever it takes for the port. "My position has
consistently been, I'm going to support reform or total elimination of earmarks," said Sen. Saxby
Chambliss (R., Ga.). "But if a project is vital to the economy and jobs of my state, I'm sent here by the
people of my state to make sure their interests are looked after." Sen. Johnny Isakson (R., Ga.), who also
supported the ban, said he would "continue to fight for funding for projects such as the expansion of the
Savannah port that is critical to my state and to U.S. trade." Many senators are allowing themselves such
wiggle room. Other Republicans oppose the ban outright and are not committed to abstaining from
earmarks at all. Democrats, who have a majority in the Senate, have not adopted a ban. In the House, the
earmark ban may be more effective, since Republicans will control that chamber and say they won't
advance any bill that includes such projects.
Page | 89
Public Popularity Link
Plan unpopular with the public—perceive ports as a liability
Tirschwell 08 — Senior Adviser of the Journal of Commerce (Peter, “Ports face uphill climb in gaining acceptance”,
Seaports Magazine, Winter, http://www.aapaseaports.com/pdf_issues/AAPASeaports_Winter2008.pdf) EL
The simple fact is one that’s hardly inspiring or even encouraging: As much as those of us connected with seaports might prefer things to be
otherwise, for
the general public, to the extent they think about them, ports are more liability than asset, if
anything a problem waiting to happen or which has already happened. Ports today often find
themselves on the wrong side of the conversation. They are seen as ugly when people want their
surroundings to be pretty. They are seen as dirty when people are insisting their environment be
clean. They facilitate imports that people see as taking away jobs. And they are seen as affording
exposure to a dangerous outside world at a time when people want their communities to be safe.
Thankfully, politicians often appreciate ports for the economic value they provide to cities, regions and the nation,
but, as elected officials, they must balance community interests in ways that can restrict port
activity or expansion. The result of this is that ports constantly find themselves on the defensive in dealing with local journalists,
community groups or elected officials. It can be frustrating for port staff members who understand the value they provide to be constantly forced
to defend their actions against openly hostile interests. Ports
have a steep uphill climb to gain credibility and
acceptance among their communities, and, if a crisis isn’t properly managed, years of effort can be
lost in an instant. I think the first step is to acknowledge this is the way it is, and it probably won’t change. The
frustration ports encounter day to day in dealing with an indifferent or unfriendly press and public cannot divert them from pursuing the longterm goal of greater understanding and acceptance from the community.
Page | 90
States CP
Page | 91
States CP 1nc Solvency
States can do the plan – report from Army Corps proves
AP 12
associated press (The Associated Press, “Price tag to dredge Eastern ports for big ships: $5 billion”, 6/22/12,
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-06-21/southern-ports-expansion/55746890/1) // CB
The Southeast, forecast to undergo the nation's biggest growth in population and trade, remains too shallow from Virginia
to South Florida and across the Gulf to Texas.
The need for expanding port capacity "is likely to be most critical along the U.S. Southeast and
Gulf coasts," the report said.
That's because no shipping channels are at least 50 feet deep, which will be required for the ships — many
from China and other Asian countries — that will begin using the Panama Canal after a major expansion is completed by the end of 2014.
Savannah, Ga., Charleston, S.C., and Miami on the Southeast coast, as well as several ports
in the Gulf, are already undertaking
harbor-deepening projects. None have advanced beyond studies to actual dredging, however.
In April, the Corps completed a 12-year study on the Port of Savannah — the nation's fourth busiest container port — which wants $652 million
in taxpayer funds to deepen more than 30 miles of river.
The Corps said 17 such projects are being studied overall, and the cost of harbor expansions across the Southeast would likely be $3 billion to $5
billion.
"Strategically, we need to find a bucket of money to fund the projects that need to happen to keep our nation competitive," said Curtis Foltz,
executive director of the Georgia Ports Authority, which is seeking final permits and funding to start deepening the Savannah harbor next year.
The budget crisis has made federal funding for port projects extremely tight, especially since Congress and President Obama for the past two
years have sworn off so-called "earmark" spending that was used to fund such projects in the past.
The Army Corps report said current funding levels for port improvements won't cover all the
projects that should be done.
If Congress won't increase the agency's funding for harbor projects, the report said, then perhaps state
governments and private companies such as shipping lines should be required to pay a greater share.
Another alternative would do away with the current cost-sharing system.
Ports would include the cost of deepening in the fees they charge shippers and could borrow from a federal infrastructure bank for major projects.
Page | 92
States CP 2nc Solvency
Savannah funding disputes prove the states can act independently with their own
money
Bynum 4/26
news reporter (Russ, “Georgia would fund Savannah River port deepening if Washington doesn’t, Gov. Nathan Deal
says” Associated Press, 4/26/12, http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20120426/PC05/120429432/1005&slId=6)
// CB
SAVANNAH — once it’s time to start dredging.
Deal, speaking at the Port of Savannah on Tuesday, said Gov.
Nathan Deal said he would have Georgia taxpayers pay
a heftier portion of the $653 million tab to deepen the Savannah harbor rather than delay the
project if the federal government hasn’t funded its share
he believes Washington should honor its commitment to cover 60 percent of the project. But with
federal dollars still tight and time running out before supersized cargo ships can start using an
expanded Panama Canal, the governor said he is willing do what is necessary to begin deepening
the Savannah River as soon as possible.
Asked what would happen if the president and Congress do not find dredging money for the harbor
soon, Deal said, “We’ll spend our money.”
Savannah and other East Coast ports
are racing to deepen their harbors in anticipation of mammoth container ships arriving via
Panama once its canal expansion is finished in 2014
“We hope we don’t get to that point,” he said. “But it may be one of those things that, if that becomes necessary, we begin the project and
hopefully get (federal) funding after the fact to reimburse the state.”
, including Charleston, .
Page | 93
24/7 Ports CP
Page | 94
24/7 Ports CP 1nc Solvency
Text:
Allowing US ports to run 24 hours solves congestion and improves efficiency -impossible to improve pace of shipping without longer hours
Depillis 13
Lydia Depillis, writer for the Huffington post, “Chinese ports operate around the clock. Why don’t America’s?”
August 5, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/05/chinese-ports-operate-around-theclock-why-dont-americas/
It's no secret that China exports a lot of stuff, nor that the country's ports are the busiest in the
world -- seven of the top 10 ports by container volume are Chinese. But it's harder to get information
about how productive those ports are. For competitive reasons, ports themselves don't want to disclose how quickly
ships are loaded and unloaded, and most national governments don't require it. But here's who does want to know
that: Shipping lines, as well as the companies that own the goods they carry. Five years ago, a shipping trade
publication called the Journal of Commerce embarked upon a project to collect that data, and convinced 17 carriers
representing 70 percent of global ocean transport to turn over what they knew about how quickly containers move
and how long their vessels remain in their berths. The result is awhite paper ranking the world's ports by how
effective they are in moving cargo for their size. Surprise surprise: U.S. ports come out looking pretty dismal.
The U.S., not that great at operating ports. (Journal of Commerce) Why are China, Japan, South
Korea, and the UAE so much better at moving containers around than the United States? They're
not, necessarily -- it's more a matter of down time. Chinese ports, for example, operate around the
clock with gangs of dockworkers who aren't paid that much or treated that well. Most U.S. ports operate only
one or two shifts a day, since longshoremen's union contracts require overtime pay for working in the middle of
the night (and their pay is already higher than it is for any other blue-collar trade, reaching into the six figures). So
even if they're as efficient at moving containers on a per-hour basis, they'll still be less productive overall. That has
real consequences for shipping companies, since their vessels can't simply dump their cargo, pick
up another load, and move on. Instead, they have to book it to the next port of call, which is less fuel
efficient than moving at a more leisurely pace, costing them tens of thousands of dollars more for
gasoline. In addition, it slows down the pace of goods generally, which raises costs for consumers.
"It's a bottleneck in the supply chain, and it requires extra planning on the part of Wal-Mart, so they can
get their goods in their stores when they need to be," says the Journal of Commerce's Peter Tirschwell, who oversaw
the report. "All supply chain disruptions raise costs for the consumer, no question about it." Not only that, but they
can simply push business elsewhere. A relatively new port north of Vancouver, Prince Rupert, has been
attracting ships that used to go to Seattle and Tacoma, since containers can get to the Midwest
faster and cheaper from there via train than they would if they were snarled for days in a congested
port. Tirschwell says that even though U.S. imports and exports cooled off during the recession, they're still rising,
and ships are getting bigger. If U.S. ports don't get more productive, costs will just keep going up, putting a real
pinch on the stuff we're able to buy and sell overseas. The barely-avoided longshoremen strikes last year show how
difficult it can be to change how ports operate. But it seems like making it easier to work during the night
would be a good way to start.
Page | 95
24/7 Ports CP 2nc Solvency
24/7 US port service is key to trade competitiveness and reducing transportation
costs -- biggest productivity gap
Tirschwell 13
(Peter, Executive Vice President/Chief Content Officer, The Journal of Commerce Group, “Key Findings On
Terminal Productivity Performance Across Ports, Countries And Regions”, July 2013,
http://www.portoflosangeles.org/Board/2013/September%202013/091913_Agenda_Audit_Committee_Item_3.pdf)
Improving terminal productivity is becoming more urgent, in large part because vessels are getting
ever larger. The largest vessel afloat in 1990 could carry 4,800 20-foot-equivalent container units. Today, vessels
in the major trade lanes typically carry 8,000 to 13,000 TEUs, and Maersk Line is phasing into service the world’s
largest container vessels, each with a capacity of 18,000 TEUs. Several carriers told the JOC that terminal
productivity in the aggregate has seen little to no improvement over several years. The rapidly increasing size
of mega-ships places tremendous strain on all faces of the marine terminal, making productivity —
and the industry’s focus on it — all the more important. Vessel productivity is on the radar screen of shippers
for whom terminals can be a major supply chain bottleneck. “This information is extremely valuable,” said Jonathan
Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy at the National Retail Federation. “It is the key factor in
getting cargo delivered on time.” The JOC Port Productivity data also may be controversial, especially among U.S.
port and terminal interests, because it is based on gross container moves per hour with the clock ticking during the
entire time the vessel is in port. A terminal’s productivity, then, is lower if it doesn’t work nights. Berth productivity
is a more common measurement in Europe and Asia, where terminals operate round-the-clock with little down time.
“Ports like Hong Kong and Dubai work as close to 24 hours a day as possible,” said Mark Sisson, senior
port planner at AECOM, a marine engineering firm that designs terminals worldwide. The closer a port comes
to 24/7 operations, the higher its berth productivity numbers become given that it handles large
container volumes with little down time for its operations. Contrast an Asian port — the Far East,
especially China, dominates the Port Productivity rankings — with a U.S. port such as Oakland
where cargo volumes are much lower. The normal work shift at Oakland is eight hours, and berth
activity ceases for the remaining 16 hours in the day, Sisson said. That down time gets reflected in
Oakland’s numbers . Los Angeles and Long Beach, the two busiest U.S. ports, are ranked highly in berth
productivity, as well they should be, because terminals there work two full shifts a day. When necessary, they add a
costly, five-hour third shift, with longshoremen being paid for eight hours at a premium overtime rate. Long Beach
(along with Elizabeth, N.J.) is the topranked U.S. port and 13th globally, moving an average of 74 containers per
hour while a ship is at berth. Large amounts of down time is why the focus for U.S. ports tends to be on
productivity during actual operation s. Ports in the South Atlantic, for example, prefer to use moves per hour
achieved by individual containers versus productivity measured across the full vessel. Charleston and Savannah
regularly post crane productivity of 35 to more than 40 moves per crane per hour when the cranes are working,
productivity considered at the top of the range within the U.S.
Page | 96
AT Trade Competitiveness Adv
Page | 97
Ag Comp Uq -- High Now
Agriculture exports increasing
Office of the United States Trade Representative 13
4/1/2013, “Expanding food and agricultural exports: successes in reducing sanitary and phytosanitary barriers"
http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/april/expanding-food-agricultural-exports
In 2012, the Obama Administration opened markets for a wide range of food and agricultural
products from across the United States. The Administration’s success in removing unwarranted sanitary and
phytosanitary (SPS) barriers to U.S. exports is a critical element in expanding new markets for U.S.
food and agricultural exports and is an important milestone under the Administration’s National Export
Initiative (NEI). U.S. exporters of food and agricultural products are at the forefront in helping to
achieve the goal of doubling U.S. exports by 2014. U.S. food and agricultural exports reached an alltime high in 2012 at over $145 billion, an increase of $4 billion over 2011.
Page | 98
AT Ports k to Trade
Multiple alternative causalities to port inefficiency
USAID 4
“THE BROAD ECONOMIC IMPACT OF PORT INEFFICIENCY: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO
PORTS”
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADC612.pdf
While these studies illustrate the effect of transport on trade flow patterns and the importance of transport costs to
trade success, some use distance as a proxy for transport costs in their analysis. High transport costs, however,
can be explained by many other factors, such as lower cargo volumes, trade flow imbalances,
inadequate infrastructure, onerous border and cargo processing procedures, and port inefficiencies.
Port costs, for example, represent about 8−12 percent of total transport costs from product origin to destination.
Shippers, who consider port costs as one of the very few, if not the only, controllable costs in the logistics chain,
make shipping decisions in part based on those costs. To the extent that port costs are a proxy for port performance
(efficiency), then port performance influences shippers’ choice of markets.
Alt causes to inefficiencies
Peter Leach, writer for JOC, “Locked in for Growth” Feb 1, 20 10 http://www.joc.com/maritime-news/lockedgrowth_20100201.html
“When cargo starts popping again like it did in 2006 and 2007 , you’re still going to have the same issues at
West Coast ports,” said Roy Schleicher, senior director of trade development and global marketing
at the Jacksonville Port Authority. “You’re still going to have congestion, you’re still going to have ships
anchored and you still may have labor issues, and you’re still going to have the lack of railcars and things
like that.”
Page | 99
AT Dredging k to Trade
Dredging won’t bring expected trade
Gibson, 6/22/14 (William E. Gibson, the Sun-Sentinel's Washington bureau chief for 25 years, has covered six
presidential elections and 13 sessions of Congress, always with South Florida readers in mind. Along the way, he
studied journalism at the University of Kansas and Columbia University.) http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-
06-22/news/fl-port-expansion-payoff-questioned-20140620_1_port-canaveral-port-everglades-panama-canal
WASHINGTON — — The much-ballyhooed expansions of Florida seaports might not bring the bonanza their promoters are promising, some
experts say. Ports in Florida and along the East Coast are racing to dredge their harbors deeply
enough to attract super-sized ships expected to pass through a widened Panama Canal. The
dredging projects, most at taxpayer expense, are expected to set off a wave of jobs and economic
benefits that will ripple across Florida, home to 15 deepwater seaports. But some economists predict that at least a few
ports are bound to bring disappointment and may not generate enough payoff to justify the
investment. They say sending electronics and some other goods across the country by rail or truck
will get them to consumers faster than shipping them through the Panama Canal. The outcome of a competition for
trade
shipping will be especially significant at Port Everglades, which has been eager to expand for 17 years, and to a lesser degree at the Port of Palm
Beach, which expects to get a spillover of increased traffic to Florida ports. Port Canaveral, already benefiting from expanded cruise line service,
hopes to become a bigger economic hub to help Central Florida recover from the loss of jobs along the Space Coast. All three are planning to
dredge deeper with help from Uncle Sam, though hurdles remain at the South Florida ports. " All
of the East Coast ports are
gearing up with the expectation that they are going to see the arrival of behemoth vessels steaming
into port and that they will become the gateway for maritime trade," said Jock O'Connell, trade
adviser for Beacon Economics, a Los Angeles-based consulting firm . "But there will be winners and losers," said
O'Connell. one of the world's leading experts on sea trade. "This will shake out over time. It's likely that not all these
ports will be satisfied with the volume of traffic they will be seeing in the next five, 10 or 20 years.”
The east coast has already invested and there is no guarantee that people will use
ports
Peter Leach, writer for JOC, “Locked in for Growth” Feb 1, 20 10 http://www.joc.com/maritime-news/lockedgrowth_20100201.html
Since the Panama Canal Authority announced plans in 2006 for a third set of locks that can handle
ships twice as big as the current locks, the industry has been girding for the potential shift of trans-Pacific shipments
to the U.S. East Coast. East Coast ports have spent billions of dollars to dredge channels deep enough
to accommodate the big new ships capable of handling up to 12,500 TEUs that will transit the canal when the
new locks open, expected in 2014. Ports and private terminal operators are rushing to expand capacity.
But importers of goods from Asia probably will wait before switching to all-water services to see if
the bigger ships can offer large enough advantages over the mini-landbridge route from West Coast
ports to the Midwest.
Page | 100
AT Competitiveness Theory
Their impact misunderstands trade – when other countries surpass US innovation
efficiency in one area, it gives us comparative advantage in other areas – positive
gains from trade are inevitable
McCloskey 92
(Dierdre, Prof of Economics @ University of Illinois-Chicago, “Competitiveness and the Antieconomics of
Decline”, in McCloskey ed. Second Thoughts: Myths and Morals of U.S. Economic History, pgs. 169-170)
The American story as it is told in the lecture rooms repeats the British story, eerily, but it is a matter of false
rhetoric from the start. British observers in the early nineteenth century, like Americans in the Jazz Age, were
startled at the ease with which the country had taken industrial leadership. Britain was the first, but a few of its
intellectuals were nervously aware of the strangeness of a small island running the world. In 1840, early in British
success, J.D. Hume warned a select committee of Parliament that tariffs on imports of wheat would encourage
other countries to move away from agriculture towards industry themselves, breaking Britain’s monopoly of
world manufacturing:
“[W]e place ourselves at the risk of being surpassed by the manufactures of other countries: and…I
can hardly doubt that [when that day arrives] the prosperity of this country will recede faster than it has
gone forward.”
Nonsense. It is the “competitiveness” rhetoric, and it has always been nonsense , in the 1840s or the
1990s. Britain was made better off by the industrialization of the rest of the world, in the same way
that you would be made better off by moving to a neighborhood of more skilled and healthy people.
British growth continued from 1840 to the present, making Britons richer and richer. Likewise, Americans are
made better off when Japan “defeats us” at carmaking because we then go do something we are
comparatively good at —banking, say, or growing soybeans—and let the Japanese do the consumer electronics.
Richer and richer. According to Maddison, Britian is about three-and-a-half times richer than it was a
century ago; America about five times richer.
It is true that Britain and America have grown slower than some other coutnries, probably because
Britain and American started richer . The story of industrial growth in the past century has been a
story of convergence to British and American standards of excellence. Germans in 1900 earned about
half of what Britons earned; now they are about the same. It is not a “race” that Britain lost. The falling British
share of world markets was no index of “failure,” any more than a father would view his falling
share of the poundage in the house relative to his growing children as a “failure.” It was an index of
maturity. This was also true for America . It is good, not bad, that other nations are achieving
American standards of competence in running supermakers and making food processing equipment. Three
cheers for foreign “competition.”
No impact – Innovation and competitiveness args misunderstand economy
Bhidé, 2009
Amar Bhidé, Glaubinger Professor of Business at Columbia University, Winter 2009, “The Venturesome Economy:
How Innovation Sustains Prosperity in a More Connected World,” Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Vol. 2,
No. 1
Any catch-up, even if it takes place gradually and in the normal course of development, will to some degree reduce
the U.S. “lead.” Furthermore, the global influence of techno-nationalism could accelerate this process. As alarmists
in the United States don’t fail to remind us, governments in “emerging” countries such as China and India—also in
the thrall of techno-nationalist thinking—are making a determined effort to leap ahead in cutting-edge science and
technology. I am skeptical that these efforts are going to do any more good for China’s and India’s economy than
did similar efforts in Europe and Japan in the 1970s and 1980s.11 But put aside the issue of whether investing in
Page | 101
cutting-edge research represents a good use of Chinese and Indian resources; does whatever erosion of U.S. primacy
in developing high-level know-how that this might cause really threaten U.S. prosperity? Should the U.S.
government respond in kind by putting even more money into research? Princeton economist Paul Krugman, in a
1994 Foreign Affairs essay, decried a “dangerous obsession” with “national competitiveness.” The tendency to
think that “the United States and Japan are competitors in the same sense that Coca-Cola competes with Pepsi,”
Krugman pointed out, is widespread; he quoted President Clinton’s claim that “each nation is like a big corporation
competing in the global marketplace.” This premise, which is at the heart of techno-nationalism, Krugman
persuasively argues, is “flatly, completely and demonstrably wrong.”12 Although “competitive problems could
arise in principle, as a practical, empirical matter, the major nations of the world are not to any significant
degree in economic competition with each other.”13 The techno-nationalist claim that U.S. prosperity
requires that the country “maintain its scientific and technological lead” is particularly dubious: the argument fails to
recognize that the development of scientific knowledge or cutting-edge technology is not a zero-sum
competition. The results of scientific research are available at no charge to anyone anywhere in the
world. Most arguments for the public funding of scientific research are in fact based on the unwillingness of private
investors to undertake research that cannot yield a profit. Cutting-edge technology (as opposed to scientific research)
has commercial value because it can be patented; but patent owners generally don’t charge higher fees to
foreign licensors. The then tiny Japanese company Sony was one of the first licensors of Bell Labs’ transistor
patent. It paid $50,000 for a license (after obtaining special permission from the Japanese Ministry of Finance) that
started it on the road to becoming a household name in consumer electronics. If patent holders choose to exploit
their invention on their own (i.e., not grant licenses to anyone), this does not mean that the country of origin secures
most of the benefit at the expense of other countries. Suppose IBM chooses to exploit internally, rather than freely
license, a breakthrough from its China Research Laboratory (employing 150 research staff in Beijing). This does not
help China and hurt everyone else. Rather, as I discuss at length later in this book, the benefits go to IBM’s
stockholders, to employees who make or market the product that embodies the invention, and— above all—to
customers, who secure the lion’s share of the benefit from most innovations. These stockholders, employees,
and customers, who number in the tens of millions, are located all over the world. In a world where
breakthrough ideas easily cross national borders, the origin of ideas is inconsequential. Contrary to Thomas
Friedman’s assertion, it does not matter that Google’s search algorithm was invented in California. After all, a
Briton invented the protocols of the World Wide Web—in a lab in Switzerland. A Swede and a Dane in Tallinn,
Estonia, started Skype, the leading provider of peer-to-peer Internet telephony. How did the foreign origins of these
innovations harm the U.S. economy?
Page | 102
AT Competitiveness k to Heg
Competitiveness not key to heg
Salam, 2009
Reihan Salam, fellow @ the New America Foundation, January 21, pg.
http://www.theamericanscene.com/2009/01/21/robert-pape-is-overheated
Pape spends a lot of time demonstrating that U.S. economic output represents a declining share of
global output, which is hardly a surprise. Yet as Pape surely understands, the more relevant question is
how much and how readily can economic output be translated into military power? The European
Union, for example, has many state-like features, yet it doesn’t have the advantages of a traditional
state when it comes to raising an army. The Indian economy is taxed in a highly uneven manner, and much of
the economy is black — the same is true across the developing world. As for China, both the shape of the economy,
as Yasheng Huang suggests, and its long frontiers, as Andrew Nathan has long argued, pose serious barriers to
translating potential power into effective power. (Wohlforth and Brooks give Stephen Walt’s balance-of-threat its
due.) So while this hardly obviates the broader point that relative American economic power is eroding — that was
the whole idea of America’s postwar grand strategy — it is worth keeping in mind. This is part of the reason why
sclerotic, statist economies can punch above their weight militarily, at least for a time — they are
“better” at marshaling resources. Over the long run, the Singapores will beat the Soviets. But in the long run,
we’re all dead. And given that this literature is rooted in the bogey of long-term coalition warfare, you can see why
the unipolarity argument holds water.
Page | 103
AT Heg Solves War
Doesn’t lead to peace—statistics show it actually leads to war
Montiero 12--Assistant Professor of Political Science at Yale University
Nuno, Unrest Assured, International Security, Vol. 36, No. 3 (Winter 2011/12),
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/Unrest_Assured.pdf
How well, then, does the argument that unipolar systems are peaceful account for the first
two decades of unipolarity since the end of the Cold War? Table 1 presents a list of great
powers divided into three periods: 1816 to 1945, multipolarity; 1946 to 1989, bipolarity; and
since 1990, unipolarity. 46 Table 2 presents summary data about the incidence of war during
each of these periods. Unipolarity is the most conflict prone of all the systems, according to at
least two important criteria: the percentage of years that great powers spend at war and the
incidence of war involving great powers. In multipolarity, 18 percent of great power years were
spent at war. In bipolarity, the ratio is 16 percent. In unipolarity, however, a remarkable 59
percent of great power years until now were spent at war. This is by far the highest
percentage in all three systems. Furthermore, during periods of multipolarity and bipolarity,
the probability that war involving a great power would break out in any given year was,
respectively, 4.2 percent and 3.4 percent. Under unipolarity, it is 18.2 percent—or more than four
times higher. 47 These figures provide no evidence that unipolarity is peaceful .48
Page | 104
AT Heg - Decline Inevitable
Decline is inevitable—rise of the rest
Kupchan 2/6--professor of international affairs at Georgetown University
2k12, Charles, Sorry, Mitt: It Won't Be an American Century,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/02/06/it_won_t_be_an_american_century?page=0,0
Even if Romney's rhetoric were to get more domestic traction, it would still bear no resemblance
to the new global landscape that is fast emerging. The United States is indeed an exceptional nation
-- in its prized geographic location, commitment to freedom and democracy, and brand of
international leadership. But the country's exceptionalism should not be used as an excuse to hide
from global realities. China's GDP will catch up with America's over the course of the next decade.
The World Bank predicts that the dollar, euro, and China's renminbi will become co-equals in a
"multi-currency" monetary system by 2025. Goldman Sachs expects the collective GDP of the top
four developing countries -- Brazil, China, India, and Russia -- to match that of the G-7
countries by 2032. The United States will no doubt exit the current slump and bounce back
economically in the years ahead. Nonetheless, a more level global playing field is inevitable.
Page | 105
AT Heg - Peaceful Transition
Peaceful transition – in context of Obama
Quinn 11 – Professor of Political Science and Int’l Studies
Adam, “The art of declining politely: Obama’s prudent presidency and the waning of American power,”
International Affairs, Volume 87, Issue 4, Wiley Online
As noted in the opening passages of this article, the narratives of America’s decline and
Obama’s restraint are distinct but also crucially connected. Facing this incipient period of
decline, America’s leaders may walk one of two paths. Either the nation can come to terms with the
reality of the process that is under way and seek to finesse it in the smoothest way possible. Or it can
‘rage against the dying of the light’, refusing to accept the waning of its primacy. President Obama’s
approach, defined by restraint and awareness of limits, makes him ideologically and temperamentally
well suited to the former course in a way that, to cite one example, his predecessor was not. He is, in
short, a good president to inaugurate an era of managed decline. Those who vocally demand that
the President act more boldly are not merely criticizing him; in suggesting that he is ‘weak’ and
that a ‘tougher’ policy is needed, they implicitly suppose that the resources will be available to
support such a course. In doing so they set their faces against the reality of the coming American
decline. 97 If the United States can embrace the spirit of managed decline, then this will clear the
way for a judicious retrenchment, trimming ambitions in line with the fact that the nation can no
longer act on the global stage with the wide latitude once afforded by its superior power. As part of
such a project, it can, as those who seek to qualify the decline thesis have suggested, use the
significant resources still at its disposal to smooth the edges of its loss of relative power, preserving
influence to the maximum extent possible through whatever legacy of norms and institutions is
bequeathed by its primacy. The alternative course involves the initiation or escalation of conflictual
scenarios for which the United States increasingly lacks the resources to cater: provocation of a
military conclusion to the impasse with Iran; deliberate escalation of strategic rivalry with
China in East Asia; commitment to continuing the campaign in Afghanistan for another decade;
a costly effort to consistently apply principles of military interventionism, regime change and
democracy promotion in response to events in North Africa. President Obama does not by any
means represent a radical break with the traditions of American foreign policy in the modern
era. Examination of his major foreign policy pronouncements reveals that he remains within the
mainstream of the American discourse on foreign policy. In his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance
speech in December 2009 he made it clear, not for the first time, that he is no pacifist, spelling
out his view that ‘the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace’, and that
‘the United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades
with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms’. 98 In his Cairo speech in June the
same year, even as he sought distance from his predecessor with the proclamation that ‘no
system of government can or should be imposed by one nation on any other’, he also endorsed
with only slight qualification the liberal universalist view of civil liberties as transcendent human
rights. ‘I … have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things,’ he declared. ‘The
ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law
and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from
the people; the freedom to live as you choose. These are not just American ideas.’ 99 His
Westminster speech repeated these sentiments. Evidently this is not a president who wishes to
break signally with the mainstream, either by advocating a radical shrinking of America’s
military strength as a good in itself or by disavowing liberal universalist global visions, as some
genuine dissidents from the prevailing foreign policy discourse would wish. 100 No doubt
sensibly, given the likely political reaction at home, it is inconceivable that he would explicitly
declare his strategy to be one of managed American decline. Nevertheless, this is a president who,
within the confines of the mainstream, embraces caution and restraint to the greatest extent that one
Page | 106
could hope for without an epochal paradigm shift in the intellectual framework of American foreign
policy-making. 101 In contemplating the diminished and diminishing weight of the United States
upon the scales of global power, it is important not to conflate the question of what will be with
that of what we might prefer. It may well be, as critics of the decline thesis sometimes observe,
that the prospect of increased global power for a state such as China should not, on reflection,
fill any westerner with glee, whatever reservations one may have held regarding US primacy. It
is also important not to be unduly deterministic in projecting the consequences of American
decline. It may be a process that unfolds gradually and peacefully, resulting in a new order that
functions with peace and stability even in the absence of American primacy. Alternatively, it
may result in conflict, if the United States clashes with rising powers as it refuses to relinquish
the prerogatives of the hegemon, or continues to be drawn into wars with middle powers or on
the periphery in spite of its shrinking capacity to afford them. Which outcome occurs will
depend on more than the choices of America alone. But the likelihood that the United States can
preserve its prosperity and influence and see its hegemony leave a positive legacy rather than go down
thrashing its limbs about destructively will be greatly increased if it has political leaders disposed to
minimize conflict and consider American power a scarce resource—in short, leaders who can master
the art of declining politely. At present it seems it is fortunate enough to have a president who fits the
bill.
Decline will be peaceful and solves all their offense—only a risk of chain ganging
MacDonald and Parent 11—Profs of Political Science @ Williams and Miami
Paul K. and Joseph M., Graceful Decline?, International Security, Spring 2k11, Volume 35, Number 4, Muse
In short, the United States should be able to reduce its foreign policy commitments in East Asia in the
coming decades without inviting Chinese expansionism. Indeed, there is evidence that a policy of
retrenchment could reap potential benefits. The drawdown and repositioning of U.S. troops in
South Korea, for example, rather than fostering instability, has resulted in an improvement in the
occasionally strained relationship between Washington and Seoul.97 U.S. moderation on Taiwan, rather
than encouraging hard-liners in [End Page 42] Beijing, resulted in an improvement in cross-strait relations and
reassured U.S. allies that Washington would not inadvertently drag them into a Sino-U.S. conflict.98 Moreover,
Washington's support for the development of multilateral security institutions, rather than harming bilateral
alliances, could work to enhance U.S. prestige while embedding China within a more transparent regional order.99
A policy of gradual retrenchment need not undermine the credibility of U.S. alliance commitments
or unleash destabilizing regional security dilemmas. Indeed, even if Beijing harbored revisionist
intent, it is unclear that China will have the force projection capabilities necessary to take and hold
additional territory.100 By incrementally shifting burdens to regional allies and multilateral
institutions, the United States can strengthen the credibility of its core commitments while
accommodating the interests of a rising China. Not least among the benefits of retrenchment is that
it helps alleviate an unsustainable financial position. Immense forward deployments will only
exacerbate U.S. grand strategic problems and risk unnecessary clashes .101
Page | 107
Alt Causalities to Ag Competitiveness
Multiple alt causalities to US agricultural competitiveness A) Lack of value-added food production
Kagochi 7
(John Mwangi, A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, “EVALUATING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF US
AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMODITIES”,
http://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/1382/KAGOCHI_JOHN_16.pdf?sequence=1)
The US traditionally exports primarily bulk commodities with little value added . Although US
exports of processed food products have been increasing in recent times, it still lags relative to world
trade of these products . The declining market share may be due to the tendency of large US firms
to invest in foreign countries rather than to export (Abbot, Brehal, and Reed, 1995). According to Reed (2000)
most large food manufacturers rely more on foreign direct investment (FDI) than exports as their strategy to access
foreign markets. In 2000, the FDI sale of US processed food was five times the US exports, $150 billion versus $30
billion (Marchant, Manukyan, and Koo, 2002). Leading US multinational food processors are clearly expanding US
exports even as they increase investment in foreign food processing facilities. The US food manufacturing firms
have been successful in increasing exports due to high labor productivity and capital intensity (Henderson, Voros,
and Herschberg, 1996; McDonald and Lee, 1994). Hughes (1992) notes free trade will increase trade (imports
and exports) in differentiated food products but also increase competition on international markets
from newly industrializing countries . Given a symbiotic relationship between primary agriculture and
processed foods, the strategic policy should aim at coordination between the two sectors rather than specialization in
one (Gopinath, Roe, and Shane, 1996).
B) Agricultural commodity policies
Kagochi 7
(John Mwangi, A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, “EVALUATING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF US
AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMODITIES”,
http://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/1382/KAGOCHI_JOHN_16.pdf?sequence=1)
Tweeten and Pai (1990) note that US government commodity programs reduce competitiveness by
idling resources, artificial production, inefficient mixes of inputs and outputs, and raising costs.
Commodity programs may also remove land from production that could produce exports. Policies
that subsidize production of raw commodities directly affect prices paid by food processors.
Lowering the price of agricultural commodities leads to lower costs for downstream firms and increases their
competitiveness relative to foreign firms (Dohlman, Schnepf, and Bolling, 2003).
Page | 108
AT Food Scarcity/Food Price Shocks
Multiple alt causes - warming, severe weather, drought, rising populations
Gilbert 12
Dave Gilbert, CNN, 12-5-2012, How severe weather impacts global food supply,
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/04/world/asia/food-price-impact
But 2012's severe weather events around the world have led to low yields in nations such as the U.S.
that export grain. Oxfam fears climate change is responsible and that impoverished people could
be facing a future of high food prices driven by extreme weather trends.¶ Oxfam spokesperson
Colin Roach said: "High and volatile food prices spell misery for millions of people like Jaria
who face a daily struggle to put food on the table. This is man-made misery in a world which
produces enough for everyone to eat."¶ A recent study commissioned by Oxfam into global
warming and food prices, said: "Against a backdrop of rising populations and changing diets which
will see global food production struggle to keep pace with increasing demand, the food security
outlook in a future of unchecked climate change is bleak."¶ Oxfam-commissioned research on
extreme weather and extreme prices¶ It has certainly been a tough year for farmers. While much
of North America baked in the hottest July on record and the Mid-West suffered its worst drought in
56 years, the UK endured its wettest summer in a century.¶ Back in September, CNN reported:
"From Ukraine to Yellowstone, in Pakistan and Kazakhstan, the skies have stayed clear, and the earth
has been parched. And on the world's commodity exchanges, the prices of corn, soybeans, wheat
and tea are surging."
Food shocks are self-correcting
Kharas 8
Homi, The Economist Debate: Rising food prices, The Proposition’s closing statement,
http://www.economist.com/debate/index.cfm?action=article&debate_id=10&story_id=11829068
Images of food riots and hungry people stir deep emotions. But we must debate trade-offs: will
the rise in food prices generate more food for the world and less poverty for poor people in the
future? Are today’s food prices fair to producers and consumers? Yes, because higher food prices
will bring about new investments in agriculture and higher global production. This is already
happening in Asia and other parts of the world, and will accelerate over time. Yes, because without
higher food prices, land use would shift towards corn-for-ethanol and other biofuel crops and we
would have less food available. Yes, because a system with food prices in free fall for 30 years
did not produce any measurable decline in hunger and poverty. But the last time food prices were
as high as they are today we witnessed the Green Revolution and a rapid reduction of rural poverty in
one of the largest population centres of the world, South Asia.
Global markets aren’t key- no impact and aff can’t solve alt causes
Paarlberg 8 - Professor of Political Science – Wellesley College
Robert, “It's Not the Price that Causes Hunger”, The International Herald Tribune, 4-23, Lexis
International prices of rice, wheat and corn have risen sharply, setting off violent urban protests
in roughly a dozen countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America. But is this a ''world food
crisis?'' It is certainly a troubling instance of price instability in international commodity
markets, leading to social unrest among urban food-buyers. But we must be careful not to
equate high crop prices with hunger around the world. Most of the world's hungry people do not
use international food markets, and most of those who use these markets are not hungry.
International food markets, like international markets for everything else, are used primarily by
Page | 109
the prosperous and secure, not the poor and vulnerable. In world corn markets, the biggest
importer by far is Japan. Next comes the European Union. Next comes South Korea. Citizens in
these countries are not underfed. In the poor countries of Asia, rice is the most important staple
, yet most Asian countries import very little rice. As recently as March , India was keeping
imported rice out of the country by imposing a 70 percent duty. Data on the actual incidence of
malnutrition reveal that the regions of the world where people are most hungry, in South Asia
and Sub-Saharan Africa, are those that depend least on imports from the world market. Hunger
is caused in these countries not by high international food prices, but by local conditions,
especially rural poverty linked to low productivity in farming. When international prices are go
up, the disposable income of some import-dependent urban dwellers is squeezed. But most of the
actual hunger takes place in the villages and in the countryside , and it persists even when
international prices are low. When hunger is measured as a balanced index of calorie deficiency,
prevalence of underweight children and mortality rates for children under five, we find that
South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa in 2007 had hunger levels two times as high as in the
developing countries of East Asia, four times as high as in Latin America, North Africa or the
Middle East, and five times as high as in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. The poor in South
Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are hungry even though their connections to high-priced
international food markets are quite weak. In the poorest developing countries of Asia, where
nearly 400 million people are hungry, international grain prices are hardly a factor, since
imports supply only 4 percent of total consumption - even when world prices are low. Similarly
in sub-Saharan Africa, only about 16 percent of grain supplies have recently been imported,
going mostly into the more prosperous cities rather than the impoverished countryside, with
part arriving in the form of donated food aid rather than commercial purchases at world prices.
The region in Africa that depends on world markets most heavily is North Africa, where 50
percent of grain supplies are imported. Yet food consumption in North Africa is so high (average
per capita energy consumption there is about 3,000 calories per day, comparable to most rich
countries) that increased import prices may cause economic stress for urban consumers (and
perhaps even street demonstrations) but little real hunger. Import dependence is also high in
Latin America (50 percent for some countries) but again high world prices will not mean large
numbers of hungry people, because per capita GDP in this region is five times higher than in
sub-Saharan Africa. There is a severe food crisis among the poor in South Asia and sub-Saharan
Africa, but it does not come from high world prices. Even in 2005 in sub-Saharan Africa, a year
of low international crop prices, 23 out of 37 countries in the region consumed less than their
nutritional requirements. Africa's food crisis grows primarily out of the low productivity, year
in and year out, of the 60 percent of all Africans who plant crops and graze animals for a living.
The average African smallholder farmer is a woman who has no improved seeds, no nitrogen
fertilizers, no irrigation and no veterinary medicine for her animals. Her crop yields are only
one third as high as in the developing countries of Asia, and her average income is only $1 a day.
Famine doesn’t cause war – it makes people too hungry to fight
Barnett 2k - Australian Research Council fellow and Senior Lecturer in Development Studies @ Melbourne U.
School of Social and Environmental Enquiry
Jon, Review of International Studies, “Destabilizing the environment-conflict Thesis”, 26:271-288, Cambridge
Journals Online
Considerable attention has been paid to the links between population, the environment and
conflict. The standard argument is that population growth will overextend the natural resources
of the immediate environs, leading to deprivation which, it is assumed, will lead to conflict and
instability either directly through competition for scarce resources, or indirectly through the
generation of ‘environmental refugees’. For example, according to Myers: ‘so great are the
stresses generated by too many people making too many demands on their natural-resource
stocks and their institutional support systems, that the pressures often create first-rate breeding
Page | 110
grounds for conflict’.37 The ways in which population growth leads to environmental
degradation are reasonably well known. However, the particular ways in which this leads to
conflict are difficult to prove. In the absence of proof there is a negative style of argumentation,
and there are blanket assertions and abrogations; for example: ‘the relationship is rarely
causative in a direct fashion’, but ‘we may surmise that conflict would not arise so readily, nor
would it prove so acute, if the associated factor of population growth were occurring at a more
manageable rate’.38 It is possible though, that rather than inducing warfare, overpopulation and
famine reduce the capacity of a people to wage war . Indeed, it is less the case that famines in Africa
in recent decades have produced ‘first rate breeding grounds for conflict’; the more important,
pressing, and avoidable product is widespread malnutrition and large loss of life.
Page | 111
Generic Trade Bad
Interdependence actually increases war
Emiel Awad October 29, 2013 ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM faculty of Social Sciences, Master
Thesis in International Public Management and Public Policy. “Economic Interdependence, Trade, and War: A
Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”
Some neorealists agree that interdependence could have pacifying effects on interstate relations, but
I believe that liberal international economies are structurally unstable so that they have the tendency
“to produce periodic collapses of such magnitude as to destabilize the whole pattern of
international relations.”26 During these periodic collapses, the probability of war increases, as it is
hard to quickly adjust. Due to the division of labor, the structure of the domestic economy increasingly
adapts to this division of labor. This adaption means that the patterns of employment, investment, and
production are not fit for a self-sufficient economy. In a system of interdependence there is no reason for
firms to keep their production in a place where it is inefficient. Therefore, these firms will move to
other countries. However, when these firms produce very valuable and vital goods, ceasing free trade
is accompanied with the loss of these goods, at least for a short period of time. It is impossible to start
up domestic production again, when the domestic economy has adapted to the interdependent
system. When trade breaks down, dependent states lose more than self-reliant states. Due to this loss
in welfare, the utility of force increases more for dependent than for independent states, as wars may
be the only way to survive as a state.27 Independent states are not hurt as much as dependent
states. War may be highly necessary for dependent states, as short-run adaption is impossible.
Hence, if there is no good alternative for war in the short-run, war becomes a likelier option
Trade causes war
Emiel Awad October 29, 2013 ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM faculty of Social Sciences, Master
Thesis in International Public Management and Public Policy. “Economic Interdependence, Trade, and War: A
Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”
Neorealists thin point to the fact that economic interdependence brings great costs to a state. In an
increasingly interdependent system, states increasingly lose autonomy over their territory. Additionally, they
depend on access to foreign markets and on foreign sources of raw materials. Due to the fact that
economic ties are closely knit, financial crises and other problems in other countries have a greater
impact on the own country. '9 In addition, economic interdependence means that a state depends on
another state. This is very costly, because this means that at any point in time, the future of a state is in
the hands of another state. Trade can then be used as a means to coerce a state when
interdependence is high. As neorealists posit that the ultimate goal of states is survival, dependency
should be avoided at all costs. For this reason, Waltz proposes that economic interdependence increase
the likelihood of war. First, states wish to avoid dependency (in other words, they prefer autarky over
dependency),’° therefore interdependent relationships are more likely to erupt into conflicts than
independent relationships. Therefore, when a state has to decide which target he wishes to attack to
obtain a given territory, he will choose a state which he depends on strongly. State A has less reason
to attack state B if economic dependence is low, as even in the case that the war is won and the
territory is captured, autarky is still not reached. It is therefore better to try to capture a territory
that state A depends on strongly, as the capture of the territory would lead to an autarkic position.
Only in that case is dependency avoided, and the desire for territorial expansion reduced.”
Page | 112
Trade causes states to go to war even if it hurts their ecnomy
Emiel Awad October 29, 2013 ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM faculty of Social Sciences, Master
Thesis in International Public Management and Public Policy. “Economic Interdependence, Trade, and War: A
Theoretical and Empirical Analysis”
According to neorealists, trade and economic interdependence lead to war. The main thesis of the
neorealists is portrayed by the following quote of Kenneth Waltz: “(…) close interdependence means
closeness of contact and raises the prospect of occasional conflict. (…) interdependent states whose
relations remain unregulated must experience conflict and will occasionally fall into violence. If
interdependence grows at a pace that exceeds the development of central control, then
interdependence hastens the occasion for war.” States thus avoid becoming economically dependent, as such
dependency results in great risks. Especially the last sentence of the quote above shows the central point of
neorealism. If interdependence grows beyond a state’s control, then the likelihood of war increases, as
when interdependence grows too swiftly, a state’s future is at stake. This is especially costly for states, as they
ultimately care about their survival according to Waltz: Because states are in a self-help system, they
try to avoid becoming dependent on others for vital goods and services. The goal of survival must
precede any other goal. Economic welfare has no importance when the threat of extinction is
present. Because of this, economic interdependence is not as important as military goals. When those
vital goods and services are no longer secure, the state faces great difficulties in surviving hence such a situation
must be prevented.
Only bilateral trade decreases conflict, multilateral trade increases conflict
Jackson and Nei 14
Matthew O. Jackson, professor of economics at Stanford and Stephen Nei member of the dept. of economics at
Stanford. “Networks of Military Alliances, Wars, and International Trade” February 2014
https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=NASM2014&paper_id=368
There are many papers that have investigated the empirical relationship between conflict and trade at a more dyadic
level, and as one might expect causation and the specifics of the relationships are difficult to disentangle. Indeed,
Barbieri (1996) – investigating the period 1870 to 1938 in Europe and including conflicts that fall substantially short
of war – find that although low to moderate levels of economic interdependence may be accompanied
by a decrease in military conflicts; high levels of economic interdependence can be accompanied by
increased incidence of conflicts. This is further nuanced, as Martin et al. (2008) – looking at trade and
militarized disputes over the period 1950-2000 – find that in increase in bilateral trade between two countries
correlates with a decreased likelihood of these countries entering military dispute with each other,
while an increase in one of the country’s multilateral trade (i.e. an overall increase in a country’s
trade share without an increase in the bilateral trade between the two countries) leads to an
increased likelihood of war between the pair. The definition of dispute is broader than that of war and could
include posturing for bargaining
Page | 113
AT No wars post WW2
The reasons there have not been wars post world war 2 is not because of trade
Jackson and Nei 14
Matthew O. Jackson, professor of economics at Stanford and Stephen Nei member of the dept. of economics at
Stanford. “Networks of Military Alliances, Wars, and International Trade” February 2014
https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=NASM2014&paper_id=368
These numbers cannot be taken as evidence for the theory. There are many confounding variables in
the relationship between trade and wars, so although there was an unprecedented growth in trade
post World War II, coincident with an unprecedented drop in the frequency of wars, there was also
a cold-war and many technological changes (the advent of nuclear weapons, for instance) as well as
an increase in income and wealth levels world-wide, which make it difficult to test the theory directly.19
Moreover, one could also hypothesize that the absence of war led to the increase in trade instead of
the reverse. Thus, although we do see a strong correlation that is in line with what our theory would suggest,
there are many confounds which make causation impossible to infer, and there may be multiple forces at
work. Nonetheless, the theory provides one possible explanation.
Page | 114
AT Trade  Economic Growth
Trade hurts income equality
Rosnick 13
David Rosnick, economist at the Center for Economic Policy Research in Washington D.C. “Gains from trade? The
Net Effect of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement on U.S. Wages”. Center for economic and policy research,
September 2013. http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/TPP-2013-09.pdf
To start with, this amounts to a rounding error. According to the (PPZ) model results, the U.S. economy will grow
2.4 percent per year between 2015 and 2025 without the TPP. With the TPP, the researchers estimate the economy
will grow 2.4 percent per year over the same period. In isolation, the annual one-hundredth of 1 percentage point of
growth for 10 years would be better than no additional growth. However, growth is not the only effect of trade
agreements. There are winners and losers from trade, and research has shown that trade contributes
to inequality. In fact, it would take only a very small contribution to inequality due to trade to wipe
out all of the gains that most workers would get from this agreement. From 1990 to 2007,3 wage
inequality in the U.S. increased significantly. As seen in Figure 1, the bottom 90-95 percent of the annual
wage distribution grew more slowly than the average wage. Figure 1 does not look at wages below the 25th
percentile as many of these workers’ wages will be dictated by the minimum wage and not by trade. The median
(50th) percentile) wage fell 7.6 percent relative to the national average, while the wage at the (top) 99th
percentile rose 17.2 percent. If even 10 percent of the change in inequality was the result of increased trade, and
if only 20 percent of increased trade was due to trade agreements, then the median wage fell about 0.34 percent
on account of trade agreement related inequality – three times the estimated average gain from implementing
the TPP. Below we make this argument with a little more rigor. From 1990 to 2007 the intensity of trade (the
amount of trade relative to the economy4 ) increased by an average of 0.4 percentage points per year. The PPZ
model results show intensity of trade increasing by 6 percentage points over 15 years – exactly the same
rate. Thus, we might expect the contribution of trade to inequality to be much the same in the future
as in the past. Previous estimates of the effect of trade on inequality range from 10 to 50 percent of total changes.
A more recent estimate based on an OECD analysis is on the lower end of this range – perhaps 15 percent – though
it does not include indirect effects such as deunionization. Table 1 describes the basic relationship between
inequality and trade intensity. Column 6 shows the percentage change in each wage level (50th percentile, or media;
90th percentile, and 99th percentile) relative to the average wage, over the years 1990-2007. It can be seen that the
median wage fell relative to the average, as did wages up to the 90th percentile; the 99th percentile
rose as compared to the mean. Column 7 divides the percent change in each wage level (50th percentile, or
median; 90th percentile, and 99th percentile), relative to the average wage, by the percentage point change in trade
intensity. It shows that over the period 1990-2007 the median wage fell by about 1.3 percent relative to the average,
for every percentage point increase in trade intensity.
Page | 115
AT Coastal Erosion Adv
Page | 116
Alt Causalities to Coastal Erosion
Multiple alt causalities to coastal erosion -A) Human activities - comparatively bigger than climate change
Nicholls et al. 7
(R.J., Professor of Coastal Engineering at the University of Southampton, Additionl Authors: P.P. Wong, V.R.
Burkett, J.O. Codignotto, J.E. Hay, R.F. McLean, S. Ragoonaden and C.D. Woodroffe, 2007: Coastal systems and
low-lying areas. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P.
Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 315-356.)
Few of the world’s coastlines are now beyond the influence of human pressures, although not all coasts
are inhabited (Buddemeier et al., 2002). Utilisation of the coast increased dramatically during the 20th century, a
trend that seems certain to continue through the 21st century (Section 6.3.1). Coastal population growth in
many of the world’s deltas, barrier islands and estuaries has led to widespread conversion of natural coastal
landscapes to agriculture, aquaculture, silviculture, as well as industrial and residential uses (Valiela,
2006). It has been estimated that 23% of the world’s population lives both within 100 km distance of the coast and
<100 m above sea level, and population densities in coastal regions are about three times higher than
the global average (Small and Nicholls, 2003) (see also Box 6.6). The attractiveness of the coast has resulted in
disproportionately rapid expansion of economic activity, settlements, urban centres and tourist resorts. Migration of
people to coastal regions is common in both developed and developing nations. Sixty percent of the world’s 39
metropolises with a population of over 5 million are located within 100 km of the coast, including 12 of the world’s
16 cities with populations greater than 10 million. Rapid urbanisation has many consequences: for example,
enlargement of natural coastal inlets and dredging of waterways for navigation, port facilities, and pipelines
exacerbate saltwater intrusion into surface and ground waters. Increasing shoreline retreat and risk of
flooding of coastal cities in Thailand (Durongdej, 2001; Saito, 2001), India (Mohanti, 2000), Vietnam (Thanh et
al., 2004) and the United States (Scavia et al., 2002) have been attributed to degradation of coastal
ecosystems by human activities, illustrating a widespread trend . The direct impacts of human
activities on the coastal zone have been more significant over the past century than impacts that
can be directly attributed to observed climate change (Scavia et al., 2002; Lotze et al., 2006). The major
direct impacts include drainage of coastal wetlands , deforestation and reclamation, and discharge
of sewage , fertilisers and contaminants into coastal waters. Extractive activities include sand mining and
hydrocarbon production , harvests of fisheries and other living resources, introductions of invasive species and
construction of seawalls and other structures. Engineering structures, such as damming, channelisation and
diversions of coastal waterways, harden the coast, change circulation patterns and alter freshwater, sediment and
nutrient delivery. Natural systems are often directly or indirectly altered, even by soft engineering solutions, such as
beach nourishment and foredune construction (Nordstrom, 2000; Hamm and Stive, 2002). Ecosystem services on
the coast are often disrupted by human activities. For example, tropical and subtropical mangrove forests
and temperate saltmarshes provide goods and services (they accumulate and transform nutrients, attenuate waves
and storms, bind sediments and support rich ecological communities), which are reduced by large-scale ecosystem
conversion for agriculture, industrial and urban development, and aquaculture (Section 6.4.2).
B) Terrestrial influences & Storms - deforestation, sea ice, and invasive species
Nicholls et al. 7
Page | 117
(R.J., Professor of Coastal Engineering at the University of Southampton, Additionl Authors: P.P. Wong, V.R.
Burkett, J.O. Codignotto, J.E. Hay, R.F. McLean, S. Ragoonaden and C.D. Woodroffe, 2007: Coastal systems and
low-lying areas. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to
the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P.
Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 315-356.)
External terrestrial influences have led to substantial environmental stresses on coastal and nearshore
marine habitats (Sahagian, 2000; Saito, 2001; NRC, 2004; Crossland et al., 2005). As a consequence of activities
outside the coastal zone, natural ecosystems (particularly within the catchments draining to the coast) have been
fragmented and the downstream flow of water, sediment and nutrients has been disrupted (Nilsson et al., 2005;
Section 6.4.1.3). Land-use change, particularly deforestation , and hydrological modifications have
had downstream impacts, in addition to localised development on the coast. Erosion in the catchment has
increased river sediment load; for example, suspended loads in the Huanghe (Yellow) River have increased 2 to 10
times over the past 2000 years (Jiongxin, 2003). In contrast, damming and channelisation have greatly reduced the
supply of sediments to the coast on other rivers through retention of sediment in dams (Syvitski et al., 2005). This
effect will likely dominate during the 21st century (Section 6.4.1). Coasts can be affected by external
marine influences (Figure 6.1).Waves generated by storms over the oceans reach the coast as swell;
there are also more extreme, but infrequent, highenergy swells generated remotely (Vassie et al., 2004). Tsunamis
are still rarer, but can be particularly devastating (Bryant, 2001). Ocean currents modify coastal
environments through their influence on heat transfer, with both ecological and geomorphological
consequences. Sea ice has physical impacts, and its presence or absence influences whether or not
waves reach the coast (Jaagus, 2006). Other external influences include atmospheric inputs, such as dust
(Shinn et al., 2000), and invasive species .
Page | 118
AT Climate Change Inevitable
Climate change not inevitable - aff authors are all hacks who use inevitability to
keep people shoveling coal
Golden 14
(KC, policy director of Climate Solutions, which promotes clean and efficient energy sources. He's former director
of energy policy for the State of Washington, “Global Warming: The Inevitability Trap”,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-loeb/global-warming-the-inevit_b_5274788.html)
It's time to rally around an embattled concept: free will. Having aligned myself against a battalion of seemingly
irresistible forces over the years, I've become a student of "inevitability." How do environmentally destructive
choices become inevitable? Near as I can tell, it starts when the people who will benefit from these
choices simply begin to assert their inevitability . We're especially receptive to inevitability right now.
We're comforted by the notion that amid all the uncertainty and confusion, from the economy to climate
disruption -- some larger forces are at work toward pre-determined outcomes. We're sort of relieved to
hear that something's inevitable, even if it's not necessarily something we like. It clarifies things. It's more pragmatic
to be resigned to the inevitable than to chart a new course through the chaos. Plus, it spares us the disappointment of
pinning false hopes on dysfunctional democratic institutions--or working to change them. So the myth of
inevitability spreads and the prophecy fulfills itself . If the proponents of a particular course can
get a critical mass of folks to believe that it's a foregone conclusion, pretty soon it will be. Those who
assert that conservation and renewables will never replace fossil fuels are using the only strategy
available to them. They propound the myth of inevitability because they know that few of us would
actually choose more waste, and eternal dependence on coal, oil, and gas extracted in ever-more risky and
destructive ways. Having little chance of convincing people that these outcomes are desirable, they tell us we have
no choice in the matter. Think about the arguments that have blocked serious U.S. action on climate change. First, it
wasn't happening. Then it was happening but it wasn't human-caused. (Damn those sun spots.) Now maybe it is
human-caused but there's nothing we can do because China and India's emissions will swamp us anyway--never
mind the American corporations whose manufacturing facilities get counted in their carbon impact. So we might as
well shovel and ship their coal because otherwise they'll just burn someone else's. Responsibility is no one's.
Resistance is futile. But inevitably we do have choices to make . Failing to make them consciously isn't failing
to make them at all; it's just falling for the inevitability trap. It's just giving ourselves an excuse for allowing the
wrong choices to be made, and a feeble excuse at that. Among all the reasons for continuing to choose the path of
evading responsibility for climate disruption, I think the least satisfying, the least noble, the hardest one to forgive
ourselves for is: "It wasn't up to me." Well, it's up to somebody. Who's it gonna be?
Page | 119
AT Oil Supply Shocks
Global spare capacity is huge – zero risk of serious shortages
Gholz and Press 8
(Eugene, Professor of Public Affairs – University of Texas at Austin, and Daryl G., Professor of Government –
Dartmouth College, “All the Oil We Need”, The New York Times, 8-21, Lexis)
WHILE oil prices have declined somewhat of late, the volatility of the market and the political
and religious unrest in major oil-producing countries has Americans worrying more than ever
about energy security. But they have little to fear -- contrary to common understanding, there are
robust stockpiles of oil around the globe that could see us through any foreseeable calamities on the
world market. True, trouble for the world's energy supplies could come from many directions.
Hurricanes and other natural disasters could suddenly disrupt oil production or transportation.
Iran loudly and regularly proclaims that it can block oil exports from the Persian Gulf. The
anti-American rhetoric of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela raises fears of an export cutoff
there. And ongoing civil unrest wreaks havoc with Nigeria's output. Even worse, this uncertainty
comes in the context of worrisome reports that oil producers have little spare capacity, meaning
that they could not quickly ramp up production to compensate for a disruption. But such fears
rest on a misunderstanding. The world actually has enormous spare oil capacity. It has simply
moved. In the past, major oil producers like Saudi Arabia controlled it. But for years the world's
major consumers have bought extra oil to fill their emergency petroleum reserves. Moreover,
whereas the world's reserve supply once sat in relatively inaccessible pools, much of it now sits in
easily accessible salt caverns and storage tanks. And consumers control the spigots. During a
supply disruption, Americans would no longer have to rely on the good will of foreign
governments. The United States alone has just more than 700 million barrels of crude oil in its
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Government stockpiles in Europe add nearly another 200 million
barrels of crude and more than 200 million barrels of refined products. In Asia, American allies
hold another 400 million barrels. And China is creating a reserve that should reach more than
100 million barrels by 2010. Those figures only count the government-controlled stocks. Private
inventories fluctuate with market conditions, but American commercial inventories alone
include well over a billion barrels. Adding up commercial and government stockpiles, the major
consuming countries around the world control more than four billion barrels. Some policy makers
and analysts worry that these emergency stocks are too small. For example, they sometimes
compare the American strategic reserve to total American consumption, so the reserves appear
dangerously inadequate. The United States consumes about 20 million barrels of oil every day,
so the Strategic Petroleum Reserve could only supply the country for 35 days. (Furthermore, the
United States could not draw oil out of the reserve at anything approaching a rate of 20 million
barrels per day.) This is why President Bush in his 2007 State of the Union address called for
doubling the strategic reserve. But this vulnerability is a mirage. The size of plausible
disruptions, not total consumption, determines the adequacy of global reserves. The worst oil
disruptions in history deprived global markets of five million to six million barrels per day.
Specifically, the collapse of the Iranian oil industry during the revolution in 1978 cut production
by nearly five million barrels a day, and the sanctions on Iraq after its conquest of Kuwait in
1990 eliminated 5.3 million barrels of supply. If a future disruption were as bad as history's worst,
American and allied governments' crude oil stocks alone could replace every lost barrel for eight
months.
Page | 120
AT China-Japan War
New Chinese leaders prevent conflict
Lam 13 – adjunct professor of history at the Chinese University of Hong Kong and senior fellow at the
Jamestown Foundation
Willy, 3-8-13, “Meet China’s New Foreign-Policy Team”
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/08/meet_china_s_new_foreign_policy_team?page=0,2
At least in terms of symbolism and atmospherics, however, the new diplomatic trio could take a
more flexible approach to tackling the most worrying flashpoint in Asia: China and Japan's ferocious
wrangling over the sovereignty of a group of islets called the Diaoyu in China and the Senkakus in
Japan.¶ Given widespread perception within the party leadership that the intensification of the
U.S.-Japan defense alliance -- which applies to the Senkakus -- is a centerpiece of Washington's
pivot to Asia, the personnel changes in Beijing could also affect the style, if not the substance, of how
the party will pursue relations with the United States.¶ Wang's return to the Foreign Ministry after five
largely successful years as chief executor of Beijing's Taiwan policy is highly significant. A fluent
Japanese speaker, Wang helped break the impasse in Sino-Japanese ties in 2001-2006, when
Junichiro Koizumi was prime minister of Japan.¶ Koizumi infuriated the Chinese with
provocative actions including annual visits to the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors soldiers killed
in World War II, including 14 war criminals. After Koizumi announced in June 2005 his plans
to retire, Wang led the Chinese effort to mend fences by conducting secret talks with then Chief
Cabinet Secretary Shinzo Abe, the favorite to succeed Koizumi.¶ This discreet diplomacy
resulted in Abe's visiting Beijing in October 2006, less than two weeks after he succeeded
Koizumi as prime minister (Abe, after a five year break, was re-elected prime minister in
December 2012). The visit came despite the ideological affinity between Koizumi and Abe, both
of whom favored a more assertive foreign policy as well as the revision of the Japanese
Constitution, which would enable Japan to convert its self-defense forces into a regular army.¶
The Chinese Foreign Ministry characterized Abe's 2006 trip as "ice-breaking." Abe allegedly
made a private pledge not to visit the shrine while in office, and Beijing offered to focus on
economic cooperation, while temporarily setting aside ideological and historical issues,
according to diplomatic sources in Tokyo and Beijing.¶ Wang has also successfully helped negotiate
the rapprochement over the past few years between the party and its former arch-enemy, the
Kuomintang, the ruling party of Taiwan. Known for his charm and finesse, Wang could
complement Yang, who has the reputation of a cerebral strategist.¶ By promoting Yang to the post of
state councilor in charge of diplomacy, the party leadership may also be sending the signal that it's
contemplating a more nuanced posture toward Obama's pivot, which some in the party leadership
interpret as a move to contain China. Yang has much more experience with the United States than
the outgoing state councilor, Dai Bingguo, who spent most of his career on Russian and East
European affairs. Yang cut his diplomatic teeth by serving as interpreter for former President
George H.W. Bush, when the latter headed the United States' Beijing Liaison Office (the
precursor to the U.S. Embassy) in the mid-1970s. Altogether Yang, a graduate of the London
School of Economics, has served three tours in the Chinese Embassy in Washington.¶ Yang
enjoys cozy ties with American politicians and in particular, business leaders. He wants to devote
more resources to lobbying American multinationals, according to sources close to the diplomatic
establishment. These sources also say that Beijing hopes this will persuade the White House to
put business before ideology in its China policy. And Cui, who attended Johns Hopkins
University while serving in the Chinese delegation to the United Nations in the 1980s, could be a
suitable candidate for pursing this new-look, "people-to-people" diplomacy with the United
States.¶ It is important to note, however, that whatever changes in style and orientation the trio's
appointment may portend do not necessarily signal a de-escalation of Beijing's increasingly
Page | 121
ferocious saber rattling. The generals appear to overwhelmingly favor bellicosity -- they have
enthusiastically echoed Xi's repeated calls over the past two months for China's People's
Liberation Army (PLA) to "get ready to fight well and to win wars." Gen. Wei Fenghe, who is
commander of China's missile forces, said in February that the PLA must "improve its warfighting skills" and "it must fulfill the task of winning wars." And recent commentary in
People's Liberation Army Daily, a military newspaper, argued that the Chinese military must
rid itself of "peacetime inertia and other [bad] habits accumulated over a prolonged period of
peace." Popular military commentator Maj. Gen. Luo Yuan, who in April 2012 called for a
limited war to "punish" the Philippines for allegedly occupying Chinese territories in the South
China Sea, even suggested in a January 2013 interview with Chinese state media that China
"must raise its guard against stealthy [military] attacks launched by other countries." Even as
diplomats such as Fu Ying, the vice foreign minister in charge of Asia, have reiterated Beijing's
commitment to "peaceful development" in global affairs, China has increased the frequency of
its "patrol" of the Diaoyu-Senkakus by marine surveillance and other quasi-military vessels.¶ It
is too early to say whether the promotion of diplomats with decades of experience in pursuing
mutually beneficiary relations with Japan and the United States signals a fundamental change in
the Xi administration's pugilistic stance on power projection in the Pacific. Yet at the very least,
these personnel changes could indicate that top decision-making bodies are contemplating options
other than relentlessly beating the drums of war.
No China – Japan war – 7 reasons
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
China defeat
Economic interdependence
PLA operational effectiveness
Unsettled politics
U.S. intervention
China military policy
China’s socialization
Moss ‘13
Trefor Moss, independent journalist based in Hong Kong. He covers Asian politics, defence and security, and was
Asia-Pacific Editor at Jane’s Defence Weekly until 2009, 2-10-2013, “7 Reasons China and Japan Won’t Go To
War” The Diplomat, http://thediplomat.com/2013/02/10/7-reasons-china-and-japan-wont-go-to-war/
Even as tensions between Beijing and Tokyo grow by the day, there are good reasons to believe outright
conflict can be avoided. The sequel seldom improves on the original. Yet Shinzo Abe, Japan’s newly re-elected prime minister, has
already displayed more conviction during his second spell at the Kantei than in the entire year of his first, unhappy premiership.¶ Political
energy is a plus only when it’s wisely deployed however, and some fear that Abe is picking a fight he can’t win when it comes to his hardline
stance on China.¶ Rather than attempting to soothe the tensions that built between Beijing and Tokyo in 2012, Abe has struck a combative
tone, especially concerning their dispute over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands – a keystone for nationalists in both countries. Each
time
fighter aircraft are scrambled or ships are sent to survey the likely flashpoint, we hear more
warnings about the approach of a war that China and Japan now seem almost eager to wage. The
Economist, for example,recently observed that, “China and Japan are sliding towards war,” while Hugh White of the Australian National
University warned his readers: “Don't be too surprised if the U.S. and Japan go to war with China [in 2013].” News this week of another
reckless act of escalation – Chinese naval vessels twice training their radars on their Japanese counterparts – will only have ratcheted up their
concerns.¶ These
doomful predictions came as Abe set out his vision of a more hard-nosed Japan
that will no longer be pushed around when it comes to sovereignty issues. In his December op-ed on Project
Syndicate Abe accused Beijing of performing “daily exercises in coercion” and advocated a “democratic security diamond” comprising
Australia, India, Japan and the U.S. (rehashing a concept from the 2007 Quadrilateral Security Dialogue). He then proposed defense
spending increases – Japan’s first in a decade – and strengthened security relations with the Philippines and Vietnam, which both share
Tokyo’s misgivings about China’s intentions. An alliance-affirming trip to the U.S.is expected soon, and there is talk of Japan stationing F15s on Shimojijima, close to the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu islands.¶ However, Abe
would argue that he is acting to
strengthen Japan in order to balance a rising China and prevent a conflict, rather than creating
the conditions for one. And he undoubtedly has a more sanguine view of the future of Sino-Japanese relations than those who see
war as an ever more likely outcome. Of course, there is a chance that Chinese and Japanese ships or aircraft will clash as the dispute over the
Senkaku/Diaoyu islands rumbles on; and, if they do, there is a chance that a skirmish could snowball unpredictably into a wider conflict.¶ But
if Shinzo Abe is gambling with the region’s security, he is at least playing the odds. He is calculating that Japan can pursue a more muscular
Page | 122
foreign policy without triggering a catastrophic backlash from China, based on the numerous constraints that shape Chinese actions, as well
as the interlocking structure of the globalized environment which the two countries co-inhabit. Specifically, there
are seven
reasons to think that war is a very unlikely prospect, even with a more hawkish prime minister
running Japan:¶ 1. Beijing’s nightmare scenario. China might well win a war against Japan, but
defeat would also be a very real possibility. As China closes the book on its “century of humiliation” and looks ahead to
prouder times, the prospect of a new, avoidable humiliation at the hands of its most bitter enemy is enough to persuade Beijing to do
everything it can to prevent that outcome (the surest way being not to have a war at all). Certainly, China’s new leader, Xi Jinping, does not
want to go down in history as the man who led China into a disastrous conflict with the Japanese. In that scenario, Xi would be doomed
politically, and, as China’s angry nationalism turned inward, the Communist Party probably wouldn’t survive either. ¶ 2.
Economic
interdependence. Win or lose, a Sino-Japanese war would be disastrous for both participants. The
flagging economy that Abe is trying to breathe life into with a $117 billion stimulus package would take a battering as
the lucrative China market was closed off to Japanese business. China would suffer, too, as
Japanese companies pulled out of a now-hostile market, depriving up to 5 million Chinese workers of their jobs,
even as Xi Jinping looks to double per capita income by 2020. Panic in the globalized economy would further depress both economies, and
potentially destroy the programs of both countries’ new leaders. ¶ 3.
Question marks over the PLA’s operational
effectiveness.The People’s Liberation Army is rapidly modernizing, but there are concerns about how effective it
would prove if pressed into combat today – not least within China’s own military hierarchy. New Central Military
Commission Vice-Chairman Xu Qiliang recently told the PLA Daily that too many PLA exercises are merely for show,
and that new elite units had to be formed if China wanted to protect its interests. CMC Chairman Xi Jinping has also called on the PLA to
improve its readiness for “real combat.” Other weaknesses within the PLA, such as endemic corruption, would similarly undermine the
Unsettled politics. China’s civil and
military leaderships remain in a state of flux, with the handover initiated in November not yet complete. As the new
leaders find their feet and jockey for position amongst themselves, they will want to avoid big foreign-policy
distractions – war with Japan and possibly the U.S. being the biggest of them all.¶ 5. The
unknown quantity of U.S. intervention. China has its hawks, such as Dai Xu, who think that the U.S. would never
intervene in an Asian conflict on behalf of Japan or any other regional ally. But this view is far too casual. U.S. involvement is a
real enough possibility to give China pause, should the chances of conflict increase.¶ 6. China’s
policy of avoiding military confrontation. China has always said that it favors peaceful solutions to
disputes, and its actions have tended to bear this out. In particular, it continues to usually dispatch unarmed or only
lightly armed law enforcement ships to maritime flashpoints, rather than naval ships.There have been calls for a
leadership’s confidence in committing it to a risky war with a peer adversary.¶ 4.
more aggressive policy in the nationalist media, and from some military figures; but Beijing has not shown much sign of heeding them. The
PLA Navy made a more active intervention in the dispute this week when one of its frigates trained its radar on a Japanese naval vessel. This
was a dangerous and provocative act of escalation, but once again the Chinese action was kept within bounds that made violence unlikely
(albeit, needlessly, more likely than before).¶ 7.
China’s socialization. China has spent too long telling the world that it poses no
reputation in Southeast Asia
has taken a hit over its handling of territorial disputes there. If it were cast as the guilty party in
a conflict with Japan –which already has the sympathy of many East Asian countries where tensions China are concerned –
China would see regional opinion harden against it further still. This is not what Beijing wants: It seeks to
threat to peace to turn around and fulfill all the China-bashers’ prophecies. Already, China’s
influence regional affairs diplomatically from within, and to realize “win-win” opportunities with its international partners.¶ In light of these
constraints, Abe should be able to push back against China – so long as he doesn’t go too far. He was of course dealt a rotten hand by his
predecessor, Yoshihiko Noda, whose bungled nationalization of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands triggered last year’s plunge in relations. Noda’s
misjudgments raised the political temperature to the point where neither side feels able to make concessions, at least for now, in an attempt to
repair relations.¶ However, Abe can make the toxic Noda legacy work in his favor. Domestically, he can play the role of the man elected to
untangle the wreckage, empowered by his democratic mandate to seek a new normal in Sino-Japanese relations. Chinese assertiveness would
be met with a newfound Japanese assertiveness, restoring balance to the relationship. It is also timely for Japan to push back now, while its
military is still a match for China’s. Five or ten years down the line this may no longer be the case, even if Abe finally grows the stagnant
defense budget.¶ Meanwhile, Abe is also pursuing diplomatic avenues. It was Abe who mended Japan’s ties with China after the Koizumi
years, and he is now trying to reprise his role as peacemaker, having dispatched his coalition partner, Natsuo Yamaguchi, to Beijing
reportedly to convey his desire for a new dialogue. It is hardly surprising, given his daunting domestic laundry list, that Xi Jinping should
have responded encouragingly to the Japanese olive branch.¶ In the end, Abe and Xi are balancing the same equation: They will not give
ground on sovereignty issues, but they have no interest in a war – in fact, they must dread it. Even if a small skirmish between Chinese and
Japanese ships or aircraft occurs, the leaders will not order additional forces to join the battle unless they are boxed in by a very specific set
of circumstances that makes escalation the only face-saving option. The escalatory spiral into all-out war that some envisage once the first
shot is fired is certainly not the likeliest outcome, as recurrent skirmishes elsewhere – such as in Kashmir, or along the Thai-Cambodian
border – have demonstrated.
Page | 123
Solvency
Page | 124
No Solvency - Funding Mismanagement
Funding for port improvements goes mismanaged
Nagle, 10/31/12
(Kurt Nagle has over 30 years of experience in Washington, DC, related to seaports and international trade. Since
1995, Mr. Nagle has served as President and Chief Executive Officer for the American Association of Port
Authorities (AAPA). Mr. Nagle began working at AAPA, the alliance of the leading public port authorities
throughout the Western Hemisphere, in 1985. Prior to joining AAPA, Mr. Nagle was Director of International Trade
for the National Coal Association and Assistant Secretary for the Coal Exporters Association. Previously, he worked
in the Office of International Economic Research at the U.S. Department of Commerce. Mr. Nagle serves on the
Executive Committee of the Propeller Club of the United States and is a former commissioner of PIANC, the
International Navigation
Congress.)http://www.tradeandindustrydev.com/Industry/Logistics,%20Warehousing%20%2526%20Distribution/i
mproved-freight-connections-america%E2%80%99s-seaports-cr-71
Although our nation’s ports are dynamic, vibrant centers of trade and commerce, they rely on federal and private
partnerships. U.S. seaports and their private-sector business partners anticipate investing more than
$9 billion annually for each of the next five years to maintain and improve their freight- and
passenger-handling infrastructure. Unfortunately, the federal government isn’t adequately
matching this with concomitant investments in connecting land- and water-side infrastructure to
effectively handle increasing cargo volumes. This lack of federal foresight causes inefficiencies in
moving cargo to and from ports, resulting in time delays, reduced international competitiveness for
U.S. exports, and increased prices and product shortages for consumers. Despite there being a federal
Harbor Maintenance Tax on seaport cargo that raises 100 percent of the revenue needed for maintaining America’s
harbors and channels at their required dimensions, only about half of that money is being appropriated for
its intended purpose, resulting in serious dredging needs being neglected. At the same time, federal
funding for constructing deeper navigation channels has all but disappeared, although project
sponsors—usually ports—pay between 35 percent and 60 percent of the cost, depending on project
depth.
Funds have been mismanaged
Goldstein 12
David Goldstein is a staff writer for CBS Los Angeles, “Port of LA spend nearly 200k on a Party”
(http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/news?ContentRecord_id=5ac96d1f-482b-4c88-b41d351bca840a85)
While the City of L.A. is laying off workers and cutting back services, we uncovered one city agency
spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a party. And we obtained the video to prove it. It was
like a Hollywood premiere party, complete with a red carpet and paid with public mone y. Port of L.A.
Executive Director Geraldine Knatz was the host. If the attendees did not look like stars, they might have
felt like them. We found thousands of dollars spent for dancers, wine to toast the party, and even
miniature Oscars. “I’m appalled,” said a fisherman, who has been at the port for 18 years and
thinks some of the money should have been used for improvements in the harbor — not partying.
“That’s one hell of a party. Why weren’t we invited? We paid for it,” he said. The Port of L.A. is the
busiest port in North America and generates millions of dollars each year. But like every city
agency, money is tight. Workers have even had to give back some of their scheduled raises this year.
But that did not stop officials from throwing that lavish party. The party was held in Busan, South
Korea earlier this year for 450 people. It came during the International Association of Ports and
Harbors convention. The event was called “L.A. Night” to promote the convention coming to L.A. in
Page | 125
2013. We obtained the videotape from the port through the California Public Records Act, along with
dozens of pages of receipts revealing a lot more. It apparently was not enough for port officials to just
show clips of Hollywood musicals. The port hired dancers dressed in character — and they were not
local. Six dancers and an assistant were flown in from Los Angeles. The cost: $18,500 just for travel
and hotel, $22,500 for the performance — adding up to a total of $41,000. But for that money they
were at least around the next day to pose with some of the guests. What’s a party without wine? Almost
$12,000 was spent for 192 bottles, an average of just over $61 a bottle. And of course there were
Oscars. The miniatures cost more than $3,800! The total cost for the party was $192,000, but that
does not include airfare. Knatz flew business class. Her round-trip ticket cost the port more than
$13,000, even though she made $307,000 last year. That is more than the mayor and more than the
governor. The port is quick to point out that they do not take any taxpayer money from the city, instead
generating their own income. But they did accept $23.5 million in federal taxpayer subsidized stimulus
money over the past few years. “How do you justify spending almost $200,000 on a party,” I asked? “It
was a professional promotional event,” Knatz responded, saying we got it all wrong. “It was not a party. It
was a professional promotional event,” she said. “It was a party,” I asked? “It was a professional
promotional event,” she responded. It was already a done deal that the convention will be coming to L.A.
in 2013 before the party or promotional event or whatever you call it. But Knatz said it was all worth it
because she is hoping the convention will generate $4 million in revenue. “We wanted to give them a little
bit of flavor of Los Angeles. It had a Hollywood theme,” she said. The expenditures were approved by the
Board of Harbor Commissioners. But L.A. City Councilman Dennis Zine wants to know why. “It’s
absurd, absolutely absurd. Another example of frivolous waste in city government,” Zine said. It is money
residents around the port say should be used to better serve the people, not the partyers.
Los Angeles isn’t the only the example
Barna 2012
John Barna is a staff reporter at the Gloucester County Times, “N.J. Comptroller: Delaware River Port Authority
wasted, 'mismanaged' millions of tollpayer dollars” (http://www.nj.com/sunbeamnews/index.ssf/2012/03/nj_comptroller_delaware_river.html)
A decade of mismanagement and political cronyism at the Delaware River Port Authority wasted
millions of dollars in toll payers’ money, according to a damning report issued Thursday by the
New Jersey comptroller, with bridge fares benefiting the likes of South Jersey political boss George
Norcross. “In nearly every area we looked at, we found people who treated the DRPA like a
personal ATM, from DRPA commissioners to private vendors to community organizations,”
Comptroller Matthew Boxer said. “People with connections at the DRPA were quick to put their hand out
when dealing with the agency, and they generally were not disappointed when they did.” The 77-page report —
requested in July 2010 by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and then Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell
— notes that Norcross’ insurance agency Conner Strong benefited to the tune of $410,000 through
a fee-splitting agreement. The report chides the agency and its 16-member commission — eight
from both New Jersey and Pennsylvania — for the way it distributed $440 million in “economic
development” funds, and alleges that a $700,000 “community giving fund” largely benefited
organizations championed by DRPA commissioners and executives, in particular Chief Executive
Officer John Matheussen of Washington Township. The report also suggests the DRPA held a loose rein on
free access to E-ZPass transponders. According to the report: • Insurance broker Willis of New Jersey paid Conner
Strong $410,000 over six years even though Conner Strong did no direct work for the DRPA. Norcross is executive
chairman of the Marlton-based Conner Strong — formerly known as Commerce Insurance Services — in addition to
being chairman of Cooper University Hospital in Camden. “Willis attributes the payments to Conner Strong’s
efforts in securing the DRPA business for Willis .... Conner Strong takes the position that the payments to Conner
Strong were attributable to general marketing and referral efforts and had nothing to do with the DRPA,” the report
reads. In 2002, the report alleges, Norcross declined an offer by then New Jersey Gov. James McGreevey to be an
insurance broker for the DRPA. “Norcross stated that working for DRPA would be too much of a ‘reputational risk,’
” the report asserts. Asked to recommend another broker, Norcross told Boxer’s staff “he probably would have
Page | 126
recommended Willis.” • The DRPA “established but then failed to abide by detailed application, approval and
monitoring policies concerning its economic development projects.” Projects “were brought to the DRPA’s attention
by a DRPA commissioner, the governor’s office in New Jersey or Pennsylvania, or by some other state official.”
Further, the report claims, “Matheussen did not even know how a project could get evaluated and approved if it
came from the general public.” The DRPA was unable to produce an application for a $3.5 million grant for the
President’s House site in Philadelphia as well as a $3 million grant made in October 2009 for construction and repair
of levees and floodgate facilities along the Repaupo Creek in Logan and Greenwich townships — a project
championed by state Sen. President Stephen Sweeney, D-West Deptford Township, while he was freeholder director
in Gloucester County. “No apologies here, my friend,” Sweeney responded to queries about the award. “The federal
government was not helping. We were looking for any sources to protect that levee.” Former DRPA Deputy General
Counsel Michael Joyce — who resigned in 2010 amid charges that he abused E-ZPass privileges — told Boxer’s
office that when he “questioned the wisdom” of DRPA investing in certain projects, he was “generally admonished
by DRPA executive management and commissioners.” In emptying out its economic development fund in
December, the DRPA gave $6 million to Cooper toward a cancer center. • The DRPA’s chair and vice chair had
final sign-off rights to a $700,000 fund to aid social and civic causes. However, said Boxer’s report, “A common
thread among organizations receiving multiple donations from the fund and those receiving the largest donations
was their connection to DRPA officials.” Former Commissioner Robert Bogel of Pennsylvania “secured 13
payments” totaling $59,180 for newspaper advertisements in the Philadelphia Tribune though Bogel is president and
CEO of the paper and “DRPA did not purchase similar advertisements in any other newspaper.” Such groups as the
“Seaman’s Church Institute, the Battleship New Jersey, the World Trade Center of Greater Philadelphia, the
Philadelphia Sports Congress, the Philadelphia Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Southern New Jersey
Development Council” all received grants. Matheussen was on the boards of directors for those groups, the report
says. Pennsylvania Attorney John Estey was chair designee from 2004 to 2009 and chair from 2009 to January 2011
when he was succeeded by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett. The fund was terminated before Corbett came on
board. Camden County Freeholder Jeffrey Nash has been DRPA vice chairman since 2002. • The DRPA lost “more
than $1 million” in revenue over 10 years through free passage benefits provided to DRPA employees and
commissioners. A review of E-Z Pass records showed that “DRPA directors, commissioners and former
commissioners enrolled individuals such as friends, business associates, in-laws and adult children on their E-ZPass
account, which, in turn, provided them with the benefit of unlimited free passage over DRPA bridges.” Also, the
DRPA’s E-ZPass vendor by mistake gave 53 “random individual” free passage privileges, resulting in a loss
of $4,569 in revenue before the error was noticed. Boxer, in a telephone interview, called the report “a pretty
good top-to-bottom review. We looked at a lot of issues. It was done in an in-depth way.” The report says “more
than 50 current and former DRPA employees and commissioners as well as other individuals” were interviewed by
Boxer’s staff. He acknowledged “to the DRPA’s credit,” a “number of deficiencies identified” in the report have
been corrected or are in the process of being corrected. A statement by DRPA Corporate Communications Manager
Tim Ireland noted the agency has eliminated its Social and Civic sponsorship fund as well as any role in economic
development projects in the region. The DRPA, Ireland said, is “instituting a fixed-fee” model for its insurance
brokers “that does not include percentage-based brokerage commissions.” Further, the statement reads, the only
DRPA employees who receive free E-ZPass privileges are those who won them via “formal arbitration award.” “We
take the concerns expressed by the OSC very seriously, and we will be taking steps to evaluate and address
recommendations in the report as promptly as possible,” the statement reads. “As soon as Gov. Christie took office,
he zeroed in on the DRPA as among the worst offenders in terms of abusing tollpayer money for employee and
commissioner perks and large-scale spending outside the agency’s core mission,” read a statement from the
governor’s press secretary, Michael Drewniak. At least two DRPA executives — neither of whom would go on the
record — observed that Boxer once chaired the Governor’s Authorities Unit. That unit has a representative at each
and every meeting of the DRPA commission, with the state billing the agency $17,000 a year for expenses. In
response, Boxer replied “To put it on the governors is a bit of a stretch.” “So much of what is discussed in the report
never came to the board for action,” Boxer added. He noted the arrangement with Willis and Conner Strong, as well
as a “true-up payment” where the brokers representing both Pennsylvania and New Jersey divided commissions,
“did not come before the board for action” as examples of DRPA actions that were “hidden” from public view. A
statement from Conner Strong and Buckelew said the agency “respectively disagrees” with Boxer’s “observation
that the DRPA lost the opportunity for savings years ago by negotiating insurance commissions. Specifically, New
Jersey law and regulations did not, and do not, permit the DRPA to negotiate lower commissions with its insurance
brokers. As a result, any payment to Commerce by Willis — regardless of the purpose — had zero impact on the
DRPA’s commission rates or amounts. Furthermore, Commerce and Willis had a marketing agreement, not a
commission agreement.” Boxer’s report included an interview with Mary Rita D’Alessandro, who was Estey’s
Page | 127
assistant beginning in 2008. When she questioned the “true-up” split with the brokers, she said, she was told “ ‘You
don’t want to get in the middle of this,’ like I was dealing with the f***ing mob or somethin’.” in reaction to the
report, U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., said “The residents of South Jersey deserve better.”
Lautenberg suggested the allegations levied against the DRPA are “yet another example of how a
corrupt political machine operates to enrich itself and local politicians at the expense of everyday
people.” Norcross responded by saying, “Sen. Lautenberg has been picking the pockets of no-bid, pay-to-play
vendors at the DRPA and other public agencies throughout New Jersey for decades. Aside from the absurdity of his
comments, it’s interesting to note that he never expressed these sentiments when he literally begged for South
Jersey’s support in all of his campaigns for reelection. It’s the height of hypocrisy.
Page | 128
Inherency
Page | 129
No Inherency
Savannah Plan Already Passed
Bluestein 6-10-14
Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Democrats heave sigh of relief as Savannah Port dredging draws near” (
http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2014/06/10/democrats-heave-sigh-of-relief-as-savannah-port-dredging-draws-near/)
President Barack Obama this morning signed HR 3080 into law , clearing the last legislative hurdle
to deepen Savannah’s harbor and waterway from 42 feet to 47 feet. The project has been in the
works for more than a decade and seemed a certainty when Vice President Joe Biden visited
Savannah last year and proclaimed it would happen “come hell or high water.”
Things got a little soggy in March, though, when the Obama Administration stunned many here by
declaring the project not yet ready to go. Georgia leaders scrambled to make sure the project was on track,
while the top Democrats on the ballot struggled to explain the seeming change of heart.
At the time, Jason Carter, who is challenging Gov. Nathan Deal, said the Republican incumbent’s “stick
in the eye” approach to the White House may have hurt Georgia. And Michelle Nunn, the Democratic
nominee for an open Senate seat, was pressed to explain her appearance with Biden at a fundraising event
shortly before the administration’s move.
Republicans quickly ratcheted up the pressure on the White House, saying they simply wanted Obama to
live up to his promise. Deal’s administration quietly explored options to float the full cost of the project
with the hope of getting reimbursed by the federal government later.
Federal lawmakers, though, were able to hammer out an agreement last month, and Obama signed it into
law with a brief ceremony this morning.
That led Carter’s campaign sent out a statement declaring that “cooler heads prevailed” and thank federal
lawmakers for working across party lines to secure the deal.
“Our Congressional representatives did great work breaking through the partisan gridlock in
Washington to hold the federal government accountable to its commitment to Georgia,” said Carter,
who said other leaders had a “knee-jerk reaction” that could have threatened the project.
Nunn’s reaction echoed her post-partisan pitch. She painted the delays as part of a broader dysfunction
and expressed hope that Washington doesn’t put any more roadblocks in the way.
“The fact that it took more than a decade to approve what everyone considers an essential project for our
state and the future of our economy is an embarrassing testament to our broken political process,” she
said.
Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed, one of the key money-chasers for this project, said the deepening
would help position Atlanta as the “logistics hub of the Western Hemisphere.” And Deal’s camp
said that Georgia will be ready to begin work by the year’s end because of proactive leadership
while others were advocating a “wait-and-see approach.”
“We’re all celebrating today,” said his office. “Now it’s time to get to the real work.”
It’s easy to see why the deepening has galvanized both parties like few other issues in Georgia. It’s
widely acknowledged as Georgia’s single most crucial economic development project, and it’s aimed at
helping the bustling port handle the larger ships that could soon be calling on the port after the Panama
Canal’s widening is finished next year. There’s another politician who is particularly happy with today’s
signing. Rep. Jack Kingston of Savannah is locked in a bitter runoff for the GOP Senate nomination
against businessman David Perdue, who is waging an anti-incumbent outsider campaign. For Kingston,
who sent out a release with a reminder that he’s been pushing the dredging since 1999, today’s signing
provides a counterpoint: It takes insider contacts with key Washington figures to pull off a deal like this
one.
Page | 130
Major bills passed through the house- money already spent
Wallbank, 14,Derek Wallbank, Staff Writer from the Bloomberg Magazine, “House Passes PortDredging Bill Boosting Maersk to Nocur”, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-20/house-passes-portdredging-bill-boosting-maersk-to-nucor.html
The U.S. House passed a $12.3 billion water-projects bill that lawmakers said would boost dredging
to accommodate larger ships built to transit the expanding Panama Canal. The measure, passed 412-4,
would be the first water infrastructure bill enacted since 2007. It would authorize 34 projects
including dredging, flood control, hurricane recovery and environmental restoration. The Water
Resources Reform and Development Act, H.R. 3080, would revamp the way major U.S. shipping
projects are funded. The bill would allow ports to pay the cost of deepening harbors up front and
then seek reimbursement from the government once a project is authorized by lawmakers. That
could help facilities such as Port Everglades in South Florida reduce construction time by years. “It is a jobs bill,”
House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Bill Shuster told reporters. In addition to construction
jobs, the Pennsylvania Republican said, “when America invests in its infrastructure and keeps us
competitive, that means our industry and business can be competitive and add jobs on the factory
floor.” The measure would expand the number of U.S. ports that can handle super freighters built
by Maersk Inc. and Mediterranean Shipping Co. to take advantage of the expanding Panama
Canal. Expanded capacity would reduce shipping costs for exporters including Caterpillar Inc. and
Cargill Inc. ‘No’ Votes All four House lawmakers voting against the measure were Republicans: Justin
Amash of Michigan, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Tim Huelskamp of Kansas and Matt Salmon of
Arizona. The bill was the subject of a lobbying campaign that industry groups said they want to make a model for
future infrastructure bills. Shipping industry groups targeted Tea Party lawmakers by stressing the role of interstate
commerce in the Constitution, and emphasizing quotes from founding fathers such as George Washington backing
the construction of canals. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, has said the Senate will act on
the compromise bill this week. By far the biggest spending project authorized in the measure is $6.7 billion for a
Louisiana levee system called Morganza to the Gulf. Other flood-prevention projects in the bill are a diversion
channel for the Red River of the North near Fargo, North Dakota, and Moorhead, Minnesota, as well as levees in
the Natomas Basin in Sacramento, California. The largest navigation project would deepen the Sabine-Neches
Waterway, which connects the oil-refining hub of Beaumont and Port Arthur, Texas, with the Gulf of Mexico.
Keystone Pipeline The Port Arthur area is home to the southern end of the Keystone XL pipeline. Deepening the
port would reduce shipping costs for oil and natural gas processed there by Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM), Total SA
and Cheniere Energy Inc. (LNG) Paul Beard, chairman of the Sabine Neches Navigation District, said he was
“thrilled” by the project’s inclusion. The navigation district, which oversees the waterway on the Texas-Louisiana
border, projects the channel deepening to boost business activity by $5 billion. The measure also would speed
environmental reviews of infrastructure plans, capping review time at three years. Farm Bureau The American
Farm Bureau Federation urged Congress to pass the bill. Farmers “depend on an efficient and reliable inland
waterway system linked to competitive ports,” bureau President Bob Stallman said in a statement today.
Environmental groups objected to the limit on review time, and the measure drew opposition from smallgovernment groups including Heritage Action. “It hikes spending while doing little to reduce bureaucracy and limit
the role of the federal government,” Heritage Action spokesman Dan Holler said in an e-mail urging lawmakers to
vote against the bill. Shuster and House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said the measure
was a success for those who want to trim government. The bill was crafted without earmarks to fund pet
projects in lawmakers’ home states, they said. It also would delete $18 billion in backlogged projects that, while
unlikely to get built, were still technically on government ledgers. It also would create a Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Authority, a federal-private financing program for water
infrastructure. About $175 million in subsidies through 2019 may lead to $1.75 billion in projects,
Bloomberg Industries analyst Brian Friel said. Project Financing JPMorgan Chase & Co. led U.S. project
financing for the year to date, underwriting $89 billion in projects through May 20, according to a Bloomberg
compilation of data. JPMorgan was followed by Bank of America Corp., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Citigroup
Inc. The measure would encourage the use of U.S.-made iron and steel products that could increase demand for
products manufactured by Nucor Corp. and United States Steel Corp., Bloomberg analysts Friel and Brad Barker
said.
Page | 131
Plan Already passed in Louisiana
Office of Senator Mary Landrieu 6-10-14
“President Signs Water Bill That Deepens Port of Iberia Channel, Includes SW La. Priorities First time in 14 years a
President has signed water bill, Landrieu overrode Bush’s 2007 veto”
(http://www.landrieu.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=4469)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mary L. Landrieu, D-La., today attended the signing of the Water
Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) at the White House and praised the passage of
the legislation that includes important Army Corps reforms and critical water infrastructure
projects for Southwest Louisiana, including language to allow the deepening of the Port of Iberia
channel and Sabine-Neches Waterway, along with increased dredging for the Port of Lake Charles.
This is the first time a president has signed a water infrastructure bill in 14 years. In 2007, Sen.
Landrieu led the effort to successfully override President George W. Bush’s veto of the 2007 water bill. It
was the first veto override of Bush’s presidency. The Port of Iberia project’s inclusion comes after
months of work by Sen. Landrieu and her Senate colleagues to overcome the ideological opposition
of House negotiators that considered the project modification an earmark. In the fall 2013, after
passage of the Senate WRDA bill, the Abbeville Harbor & Terminal District and Vermillion Parish Police
Jury passed resolutions in support of the requested revision, but, despite the cost savings, the House failed
to include the language in its bill. “The signing of the water infrastructure bill includes a common-sense
fix so we can invest federal funds to deepen the Port of Iberia channel. The deeper the channel, the greater
the jobs. Energy ports like the Port of Iberia play a critical role in our nation’s domestic energy
production and are integral to both the continued economic growth of Acadiana and our nation’s
energy independence,” Sen. Landrieu said. “To put shovels in the ground and turn dirt, it is going to
take dollars. That is why I successfully fought to establish revenue sharing to bring significant additional
revenues back to Louisiana in the coming years for water infrastructure projects like the Port of Iberia
channel. I hope today marks the beginning of a new partnership between federal, state and local
officials to turn important projects like this into a reality.” The final WRRDA bill includes many
reforms that Sen. Landrieu championed. The bill improves the nation’s ability to operate and maintain
Louisiana’s inland waterways by ensuring that money already being collected from industry and
navigation is used for its intended purposes. It allows us to make smart investments in deepening
federal channels and upgrading our water infrastructure to stay competitive in the 21st century.
The bill provides a path forward for six Louisiana projects that have been mired in red tape awaiting
federal authorization since the last WRDA bill passed in 2007. This is an essential step toward expediting
project implementation and reducing bureaucratic delays, but it will add billions in new projects onto the
existing $60 billion Army Corps backlog. Sen. Landrieu also supported language to extend lock
operations that have been arbitrarily reduced by the Army Corps of Engineers. There is a provision in this
bill that makes it easier for local communities like Calcasieu Parish to contribute funding to maintain or
extend service at these facilities to ensure our waterborne commerce, recreational fisheries, and tourism
industries are not adversely affected. Louisiana does not have the luxury of waiting years for the Army
Corps to study and re-study these essential projects. The Senate’s WRRDA bill will streamline studies,
coordinate agency reviews, and make local parishes and levee districts true partners in the process. It also
adds much needed flexibility to the mitigation program and improves its ability to support ecosystem
restoration efforts, and other priority projects in the Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan.
USFG already spending money on even the most minute of ports
Dredging Today, June 26 2014
“Dredging Included in Redwood City Port 2014-2015 Budget”
(http://www.dredgingtoday.com/2014/06/26/dredging-included-in-redwood-city-port-2014-2015-budget/)
The Redwood City Port Commission has approved its fiscal year 2014-2015 budget, projecting
operating revenues at $6,627,720 and operating expenses at $4,281,890. Operating income of $2.3
million is offset by $660,000 in net non-operating expenses, primarily due to the interest expense on the
Page | 132
Port’s 1999 and 2012 revenue bonds. Subvention of $398,000 to the City of Redwood City is included in the budget,
resulting in a projected net income after subvention of $1.3 million. The FY15 Budget includes $2.9 million for
capital projects. The major projects are “F” dock Marina dredging at an estimated cost of $600,000
and public access improvements between the Seaport Conference Center and the fishing pier
estimated at a cost of $500,000. There will be another installment for the Port’s cost share of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Channel Deepening and Improvement Study of $800,000. Port
Executive Director Michael J. Giari said that the FY15 budget is based on an estimated 1,713,000
metric tons of cargo, an increase over the FY13 actual tonnage and FY14 tonnage forecast. The
tonnage is primarily composed of construction sand and aggregates imported from Canada and recycled scrap metal
exported to Asia. Port Commission Chair Lorianna Kastrop said: “The growth in tonnage and revenue at the
Port will enable us to complete improvements to the waterfront public access areas and guest
berthing for recreational and excursion boats. These improvements, estimated to cost
approximately $1 million, will increase the use and enjoyment of the community’s waterfront.”
Ports are already being dredged at the expense of the government
Phillips 14, Steve Phillips, Senior Reporter at WLOX 2, June 27, 2014,
(http://www.wlox.com/story/25883031/gulfport-dredging-project-to-begin-in-september)
A project to dredge the ship channel at the Port of Gulfport will begin in September. The port
authority board on Thursday approved an agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers to
proceed. We should see dredging starting sometime in early September. It should be about a four or
five month process," said Port Director Jonathan Daniels. The dredging project is channel maintenance,
returning the channel to its authorized depth of 36 feet. "With what goes on with many of our current tenants now,
it's awfully tight. This gets us back to our authorized depth of 36 feet and allows us the opportunity to engage in
even stronger business development activities," said Director Daniels. The port authority board agreed to put
up $8 million to jump-start the maintenance dredging, which is a responsibility of the federal
government. The 10 month process proved more challenging than expected. "You think it would be easy to
provide $8 million of our cash and give it to the federal government for them to take it as part of what their
responsibility is anyways," said Daniels. The $8 million will be credited toward a future channel
deepening project. "Will give us credit toward future cost shares. So it's really a down payment.
We're not just giving money to the federal government. We'll get it back at some point in the
future," said Commissioner Jack Norris. Board members say getting the channel deep enough is critical for
future development. "It means that all the work we're doing down there, we'll be able to accommodate larger ships.
It means the longshoremen that are working their today, as soon as that project is over, Dupont will bring in bigger
ships that will create more man hours. That's what this whole project is about," said Board Chairman John Rester. In
other business, the board approved a contract for the first major construction phase of Dupont's planned
improvement project at the port.