NIB Neg UPS (MBA)

Edgemont Debate
File Title 1
nib neg mba
export-import bank pic 1nc barstow dl

[CP TEXT: United States federal government should expand the mandate of the Export-Import bank to include domestic transportation infrastructure investment through loans and loan guarantees and relax all other restrictions and mandates on the Export-Import Bank. United States federal government should implement reforms to increase efficiency and transparency of the Export-Import bank. United States federal government should not establish a transportation-only national infrastructure bank to substantially increase its transportation infrastructure investment through loans and loan guarantees.] Well clarify. CP is competitive national infrastructure bank is a term of art which refers to the creation of an independent entity
Matt Compton, November 2011 (Deputy Director of Online Content for the Office of Digital Strategy, White House, http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/11/03/five-facts-aboutnational-infrastructure-bank >:) Today, the Senate is set to take up one idea that the President touted -- the
creation of a national infrastructure bank. Here's how it would work: 1) Congress new bank would identify transportation, energy, and water infrastructure projects that lack funding, offer a clear benefit for taxpayers, and are worth at least $100 million or $25 million for rural projects.
would appropriate an initial $10 billion in startup money to capitalize the bank. 2) The
Creation of an NIB under the ExIm bank solves faster and avoids backlash our evidence is comparative
Ed Crooks and Michelle Quadt, April 20th, 2012 (vice president and in principal @ Booz Allen, Rethinking http://gov.aol.com/2012/04/20/rethinking-infrastructure-funding/ >:)
Infrastructure Funding,
Creating a NIB will not be easy. But much of the challenge can be mitigated by increasing funding for an existing program with a long-term vision of reforming the system, rather than setting up a new government agency which would be much more costly and less effective. Both the U.S. Ex port-Im port Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) have experience in infrastructure lending, internal project screening and approval processes and staff of investment professionals experienced in project finance and related due diligence. Both have a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects, albeit in emerging markets. Housing the NIB under one of th os e institutions could help jumpstart the U.S-focused infrastructure credit program in a shorter period of time and potentially with a better public reception than setting up a brand new agency.
1nc westminster lp
[CP TEXT: United States federal government should expand the mandate of the Export-Import bank to include domestic transportation infrastructure investment and relax all other restrictions and mandates on the Export-Import Bank. United States federal government should implement reforms to increase efficiency and transparency of the Export-Import bank. United States federal government should not substantially increase its transportation infrastructure investment in the United States through an infrastructure bank.] Well clarify. CP is competitive infrastructure bank is a term of art which refers to creation of an independent entity
Edgemont Debate File Title 2 Michael Cooper, March 15, 2011 (national correspondent covering politics, urban affairs and the impact of the economic downturn on state and local governments for the New York
Times, his work has been recognized by the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, the Society of Silurians, the New York Press Club and the Legislative Correspondents Association, graduated from Stuyvesant High School and Columbia College [hes a smarticle], Group Wants New Bank to Finance Infrastructure, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/us/politics/16infrastructure.html?_r=0 >:)
The proposal sponsored by Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas would establish an independent bank to provide loans and loan guarantees for projects of regional or national significance. The idea is to attract more infrastructure investment from the private sector: by creating an infrastructure bank with $10 billion now, they say, they could spur up to $640
billion worth of infrastructure spending over the next decade. We have a choice, Mr. Kerry said at a news conference in Washington. We can either build, and compete, and create jobs for our people, or we can fold up, and let everybody else win. I dont think thats America. I dont believe anybody wants to do that. To underscore the need for better infrastructure, two frequent rivals were on hand at the news conference: Richard Trumka, the president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the main business lobby. With a nod to the strange-bedfellows experience of having a labor leader as an ally, Mr. Donohue said, He and I are going to take our show on the road as the new Odd Couple. But the proposal may not have clear sailing. While Senators Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, will undoubtedly support the measure, Senate officials said the outlook for such a program is dim, given the current fiscal constraints. And Congress, like state governments, has been hesitant to cede control of choosing which projects to finance, even as their spending priorities have often been questioned. President Obama since his 2010 campaign. His budget calls for establishing one and gives it the catchier name I-Bank that
has called for establishing an infrastructure bank would work somewhat differently: it would create a $30
billion bank that would invest in transportation projects alone, and that would provide grants as well as loans. With an expanded reach that includes water and energy projects, the bank being proposed in the Senate would be able to spur investment from more types of private funds, and back projects in a wider swath of the nation, said Michael B. Likosky, the author of Obamas Bank: Financing a Durable New Deal.
Creation of an NIB under the ExIm bank solves faster and avoids backlash our evidence is comparative
Creating a NIB will not be easy. But much of the challenge can be mitigated by increasing funding for an existing program with a long-term vision of reforming the system, rather than setting up a new government agency which would be much more costly and less effective. Both the U.S. Ex port-Im port Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) have experience in infrastructure lending, internal project screening and approval processes and staff of investment professionals experienced in project finance and related due diligence. Both have a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects, albeit in emerging markets. Housing the NIB under one of th os e institutions could help jumpstart the U.S-focused infrastructure credit program in a shorter period of time and potentially with a better public reception than setting up a brand new agency.
2nc top-level
The plan mandates the creation of an independent government agency which can provide loans and grants to the private sector for development of transportation infrastructure the CP expands the mandate of the United States Export-Import bank to include investments in domestic transportation infrastructure, and provides the resources and funding necessary to give ExIm the capability to give out loans and grants This solves case best the ExIm has a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects and previous experience in infrastructure lending, which means it can already make good investment decisions furthermore, the NIB would take several years to get started up, but housing it under the ExIm bank can jumpstart the infrastructure credit program in no time at all thats Crooks and Quadt Well make a couple of framing issues Necessity vs. Sufficiency they might win that the plan solves case better than the CP but make them prove an impact to their solvency deficits Specificity only our evidence speaks to the mechanism of the CP their generic independent bank key arguments dont assume creating the bank under the Ex-Im Comparative evidence outweighs only we read evidence which directly says that having Ex-Im do TI investments is comparatively better than the aff outweighs the line-by-line since its impossible to quantify impact defense and solvency deficits and whatnot, which means you should just defer to expert comparisons
Edgemont Debate
File Title 3
ExIm solves authorized and organized, solves PPPs best, and avoids politics expanding the mandate solves
Tanya Snyder, October 7th, 2011 (Capitol Hill editor, Streetsblog, Does the Elusive http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/10/07/does-the-infrastructure-bank-of-our-dreams-already-exist/ >:) Last week, three Washington heavy-hitters brought a
Infrastructure Bank Already Exist?
new contribution to the debate over a national infrastructure bank: They said we already
have one.
Mark Alderman of the Obama-Biden transition team, former U.S. Senator Evan Bayh, and Howard Schweitzer, former vice president of the Export-Import Bank co-wrote an
op-ed for the Washington Post saying that
the Export-Import Bank was already authorized and organized to do exactly what an infrastructure bank is supposed to do: Is this what you had in mind, I-bank proponents? It's the Export-Import Bank -- but some experts believe it could serve the same function as a national infrastructure bank. Photo: GSA Many of those pushing for an infrastructure bank say that publicprivate partnerships are part of the solution. This basic concept combines private capital with some form of public support to finance large projects. That is the Ex port- Im port Bank s bread and butter. Put another way, the United States already has a bank that knows how to balance investor return with lender (i.e., taxpayer) protection often a major stumbling block to public-private deals. They go on to say, A newly expanded Ex port- Im port Bank could facilitate private-sector investment in projects such as repairing roads and bridges, modernizing the energy grid, and maintaining our dams and levees creating jobs while rebuilding the country. Its a compelling argument, especially in the face of skepticism about creating a new quasi-government entity, especially in a political environment suspicious of Big Government. Some fear an I-bank will be too much like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; some would rather just stick with the TIFIA loan program; others want to encourage state infrastructure banks instead of a big national one. If making a few tweaks to an existing structure could yield the same benefits as a national infrastructure bank, isnt that easier? The Ex-Im bank has a similar financial model to the Kerry-Hutchison Ibank proposal (which the president has adopted) and a similar governing structure an independent, though government-owned, corporation. Even better, the Ex-Im Bank makes money for the U.S., depositing money into the Treasury, not taking it. The Ex-Im bank already has some of that staff in place and an established history of success, fiscal responsibility, and a low risk to taxpayers, said bank expert Scott Thomasson of the Progressive Policy Institute. And there actually is a window to expand the mandate of the Ex-Im Bank if there is political support to do that. Theres not a lot of interest on Capitol Hill yet about this idea, but it could become the compromise that saves the whole I-bank concept. For now,
some say, politicians that have been on the forefront of the bank idea would rather stick with their own idea (which they can then take credit for).
ALSO, the risk of a politics link only goes one way since we solve all their link turns our argument is not that the CPs not perceived, its that the CP eases Congressional concerns about big government, which is our link argument sure there might be aspects of a NIB that are popular with Republicans, but the CP does those things without doing all the horrible stuff that Congress hates <line by line>
2nc if they mess it up

[_] 2AC reads zero evidence that says an independent government agency is critical to creation of an effective infrastructure bank the fact that all their evidence says that US transportation infrastructure investments are horrible in the squo proves its not that a new government agency is necessary, its just that we have no entity dedicated to making those investments in the first place expanding the jurisdiction of ExIm to include transportation infrastructure investment and providing the funding and resources to re-task ExIm solves the aff theres only a risk of our offense dont allow new 1AR arguments about how an independent agency is key we base block strategy off of 2AC coverage its also sandbagging and just a jerk move in general
2nc at: p/ cp (barstow dl)

CP is competitive Use of the term national infrastructure bank in the plan text means the permutation severs creation of an independent entity thats COMPTON indicates that all previous uses of the term national infrastructure bank in Congress have referred to a new bank, not the expansion or reform of an old bank the CP is distinct because it simply changes the mandates of the Export-Import bank, an already existing bank in the United States prefer our definition since Comptons the Deputy Director of Online Content for the Office of Digital Strategy of the White House and hes citing Congressional intent
Edgemont Debate
File Title 4
INDEPENDENTLY establish means to bring into being on a stable basis

Dictionary.com no date (I love this website omguh, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/establish >:) establish /stbl/ Show Spelled verb (used with object) 1. to university; to establish a medical practice. found, institute, build, or bring into being on a firm or stable basis: to establish a
That means the perm severs since the aff must defend bringing a bank into being, i.e. creating a bank the CP does not bring a new bank into being, rather it just changes the function of an old bank Severance is bad MOVING TARGET aff gets to continually reformat we base 1NC strategy off of the plan text it makes the aff conditional, cross-apply their condo arguments GROUND they can sever out of all our links guts 1NC strategy kills time allocation and skews ground in favor of the aff
2nc at: p/ cp (westminster lp)

CP is competitive Use of the term infrastructure bank in the plan text means the permutation severs creation of an independent entity thats COOPER all previous uses of the term infrastructure bank in Congress have referred to a new bank, not the expansion or reform of an old bank the CP is distinct because it simply changes the mandates of the Export-Import bank, an already existing bank in the United States prefer our definition since it cites usage of the term by Kerry and Obama, both of whom have tried to push through infrastructure bills in the past Congressional intent is best White House flows neg
creation of a n ational infrastructure bank. Here's how it would work: 1) Congress would new bank would identify transportation, energy, and water infrastructure projects that lack funding, offer a clear benefit for taxpayers, and are worth at least $100 million or $25 million for rural projects.
appropriate an initial $10 billion in startup money to capitalize the bank. 2) The
INDEPENDENTLY increase means net increase

Words and Phrases, 5 (Cummulative Supplementary Pamphlet, v. 20a, p.295) Term increase, as used in statute giving the Energy Commission modification jurisdiction over any alteration, replacement, or improvement of equipment that refers to net increase in power plants total generating capacity; in deciding whether there has been the requisite 50-megawatt increase as a result of new units being incorporated into a plant, Energy Commission cannot ignore decreases in capacity caused by retirement or deactivation of other units at plant. Wests Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code 25123.
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991. results in increase of 50 megawatts or more in electric generating capacity of existing thermal power plant,
That means the perm severs since they have to defend making net more investment the CP does not increase investment, rather it redirects the current funding of the Ex-Im bank by mandating that it invest in domestic transportation infrastructure Severance is bad MOVING TARGET aff gets to continually reformat we base 1NC strategy off of the plan text it makes the aff conditional, cross-apply their condo arguments GROUND they can sever out of all our links guts 1NC strategy kills time allocation and skews ground in favor of the aff
2nc at: overburden (thomassen)
Edgemont Debate
File Title 5
CP solves an overburdened ExIm relaxing restrictions and mandates and implementing reforms to increase efficiency and transparency means the ExIm would be run far more smoothly and could easily accommodate transportation infrastructure investment This evidence says nothing the only responsive part of the card says that, quote, we should be cautious about assuming we can re-task a well established bureaucracy with an entirely new mission that requires different financing expertise and a different institutional culture the CP solves re-tasking by providing the necessary resources and financial expertise, and they have no warrant as to why re-tasking ExIm would fail only we read actual evidence that indicates expanding the mandate of ExIm would be an easy transition, and could easily fill the role of an NIB We control uniqueness ExIms focusing on transportation projects now the transition is happening
and Elizabeth Lowell, May 1st, 2011 (*Director of Economic Policy @ American Action Forum, **research analyst, same place, Export-Import Bank: Obstacles and Options for Reform, http://americanactionforum.org/sites/default/files/Ex-Im%20Final%20Draft21.pdf >:)
Ike Brannon
The Export Promotion Cabinets plan already calls to increase exports by focus ing Ex-Ims efforts in industries where there is potential to support greater levels of exports such as in medical technology, industial machinery, energy production, transportation , and the service sector.31 This sensible, uncontroversial statement nevertheless reflects a major change from how the Bank currently operates. It also represents a recognition that using most of its funds to finance purchases from a single company simply may not be politically viable in the long run.
Broaden Participation across Industries
2nc at: jurisdiction

CP solves we expand the mandate of ExIm to include domestic transportation infrastructure investment ExIm has legal auth jurisdiction is irrelevant
Cozen O'Connor Public Strategies, August 16th, 2012 (bipartisan government relations firm, Mark insights/publications/We-already-have-the-infrastructure-bank-we-need >:) Cozen O'Connor Public Strategies principals Mark
Alderman, Howard Schweitzer, and Evan Bayh write We Already Have the Infrastructure Bank We Need in the Washington Post, http://copublicstrategies.com/newsAlderman and Howard Schweitzer, along with former U.S. Senator Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) wrote an opinion piece published on September 30 in The Washington Post on using the United States Export-Import Bank as the infrastructure bank called for in President Obamas Jobs Act. In the American Jobs Act, President Obama calls for a national infrastructure bank to support private-sector investment in public projects to revitalize the economy. As the piece points out, even if the presidents proposal were enacted tomorrow, it would be years before such a new bank would be fully operational. So, in the alternative, Alderman, Schweitzer and Bayh suggest adding domestic infrastructure projects to the Ex port-Im port Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) mandate. Currently, the Export-Import Bank only handles such projects internationally; however, it does have the legal authorization to do stateside.
2nc at: brannon and lowell

Brannon and Lowell conclude neg relaxing restrictions and implementing reforms can resolve all issues with ExIm
and Elizabeth Lowell, May 1st, 2011 (*Director of Economic Policy @ American Action Forum, **research analyst, same place, Export-Import Bank: Obstacles and Options for Reform, http://americanactionforum.org/sites/default/files/Ex-Im%20Final%20Draft21.pdf >:)
Ike Brannon
The Export Promotion Cabinets plan already calls to increase exports by focusing Ex-Ims efforts in industries where there is potential to support greater levels of exports such as in medical technology, industial machinery, energy production, transportation, and the service sector.31 This sensible, uncontroversial statement nevertheless reflects a major change from how the Bank currently operates. It also represents a recognition that using most of its funds to finance purchases from a single company simply may not be politically viable in the long run. Prioritize and Set Achievable Goals Another way to improve Ex-Ims efficacy at creating jobs would be to relax some of the myriad restrictions Congress has placed on it. For instance, while small businesses may constitute a pillar of the U.S. economy as well as a key political constituency, allocating a significant portion of Ex-Ims capital to support their exports is probably not the most cost- effective way to leverage the banks capital. Similar considerations apply to the requirement that Ex-Im devote significant resources to supporting renewable energy investments. The foreign content restrictions and
Broaden Participation across Industries
Edgemont Debate File Title 6 the mandate that companies receiving Ex-Im support use U.S. flagged vessels make U.S. companies less competitive when pursuing business abroad. Increase Efficiency and Transparency Ex-Im could clearly benefit from reform to its internal processes. For example, it should simplify its information technology systems, modernize and simplify its application process, make its economic analysis procedure more transparent and consistent, and restructure its teams in a way so as to maximize accountability and efficiency. Being audited by a private entity may bring valuable perspective into how to achieve these goals. FINAL REFORM ISSUES
The primary problem the Export-Import Bank seeks to address is the uneven playing field U.S. exports face in the global economy, yet some U.S. and world trade policies actually contribute to this uneven playing field; for instance, China receives over $2.5 billion a year from foreign governments for 31 Report to t he President on the National Export Initiative: The Export Promotion Cabinets Plan for Doubling Exports in Five Years, September 2010 (p. 42). http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/nei_report_9-16- 10_full.pdf development aid, while at the same time it largely closes its market to foreign products. Also, the World Banks Global Environment Facility has funded $421 million in projects to fight climate change in China, virtually none of which U.S. businesses can compete for due to Chi nas mercantilist policies. Simply forcing China to allow U.S. companies access to its markets as a condition of receiving
None of these issues can be ameliorated by Ex-Im, but they do represent a much better place for Congress to weigh in on trade issues than in micro-managing Ex-Ims funding decisions. A lean, productive Ex-Im would do more diverse lending, albeit likely concentrated in a relatively small number of industries dominated by larger corporations. The impositions placed on U.S. companies with customers benefiting from Ex-Im financing would be slight. It would be able to easily and simply report its activities to Congress, provide up-to-date information on where its money goes, and extensively monitor companies receiving loan guarantees. In such a world it would be able to create more jobs with less money while incurring fewer risks. It would also operate in a world with more free trade agreements and more defined rules governing trade between nations.
such aid would make Ex- Ims job much easier.32
2nc at: delay

CP solves delay the only warrant for delay is that ExIm would take a long time to invest since it would have to spend more time worrying about meeting political and Congressional requirements the CP solves that by relaxing restrictions and mandates AND the CP text literally says that we, quote, implement reforms to increase efficiency. That would resolve all delay problems since the ExIm would be able to work much faster Irrelevant make them prove an impact to this thats the top of da flow necessary vs. sufficient yall
overseas private investment pic 1nc westminster lp

[CP TEXT: United States federal government should expand the mandate of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to include substantial domestic transportation infrastructure investments. United States federal government should not substantially increase its transportation infrastructure investment in the United States through an infrastructure bank.] Well clarify. CP is competitive infrastructure bank is a term of art which refers to creation of an independent entity
Michael Cooper, March 15, 2011 (national correspondent covering politics, urban affairs and the impact of the economic downturn on state and local governments for the New York Times, his work has been recognized by the Society of American Business Editors and Writers, the Society of Silurians, the New York Press Club and the Legislative Correspondents Association, graduated from Stuyvesant High School and Columbia College [hes a smarticle], Group Wants New Bank to Finance Infrastructure, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/us/politics/16infrastructure.html?_r=0 >:)
The proposal sponsored by Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas would establish an independent bank to provide loans and loan guarantees for projects of regional or national significance. The idea is to attract more infrastructure investment from the private sector: by creating an infrastructure bank with $10 billion now, they say, they could spur up to $640
billion worth of infrastructure spending over the ne xt decade. We have a choice, Mr. Kerry said at a news conference in Washington. We can either build, and compete, and cre ate jobs for our people, or we can fold up, and let everybody else win. I dont think thats America. I dont believe anybody wants to do that. To underscore the need for better infrastructure, two frequent rivals were on hand at the news conference: Richard Trumka, the president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the main business lobby. With a nod to the strange-bedfellows experience of having a labor leader as an ally, Mr. Donohue said, He and I are going to take our show on the road as the new Odd Couple. But
Edgemont Debate
which projects to finance, even as their spending priorities have often been questioned. President
File Title 7
the proposal may not have clear sailing. While Senators Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, will undoubtedly support the measure, Senate officials said the outlook for such a program is dim, given the current fiscal constraints. And Congress, like state governments, has been hesitant to cede control of choosing
Obama has called for establishing an infrastructure bank since his 2010 campaign. His budget calls for establishing one and gives it the catchier name I-Bank that would work somewhat differently: it would create a $30 billion bank that would invest in transportation projects alone, and that would provide grants as well as loans. With an expanded reach that includes water and
energy projects, the bank being proposed in the Senate would be able to spur investment from more types of private funds, and back projects in a wider swath of the nation, said Michael B. Likosky, the author of Obamas Bank: Financing a Durable New Deal.
Creation of an NIB under the OPIC solves faster and avoids backlash our evidence is comparative
Creating a NIB will not be easy. But much of the challenge can be mitigated by increasing funding for an existing program with a long-term vision of reforming the system, rather than setting up a new government agency which would be much more costly and less effective. Both the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) have experience in infrastructure lending, internal project screening and approval processes and staff of investment professionals experienced in project finance and related due diligence. Both have a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects, albeit in emerging markets. Housing the NIB under one of th os e institutions could help jumpstart the U.Sfocused infrastructure credit program in a shorter period of time and potentially with a better public reception than setting up a brand new agency.
1nc st marks bm
[CP TEXT: United States federal government should expand the mandate of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to include substantial domestic transportation infrastructure investments. The United States federal government should not create a transportation only national infrastructure bank in order to substantially increase its investment in transportation infrastructure.] Well clarify. CP is competitive national infrastructure bank is a term of art which refers to the creation of an independent entity
creation of a national infrastructure bank. Here's how it would work: 1) Congress new bank would identify transportation, energy, and water infrastructure projects that lack funding, offer a clear benefit for taxpayers, and are worth at least $100 million or $25 million for rural projects.
would appropriate an initial $10 billion in startup money to capitalize the bank. 2) The
Creation of an NIB under the OPIC solves faster and avoids political backlash our evidence is comparative
Creating a NIB will not be easy. But much of the challenge can be mitigated by increasing funding for an existing program with a long-term vision of reforming the system, rather than setting up a new government agency which would be much more costly and less effective. Both the U.S. Export-Import Bank and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) have experience in infrastructure lending, internal project screening and approval processes and staff of investment professionals experienced in project finance and related due diligence. Both have a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects, albeit in emerging markets. Housing the NIB under one of th os e institutions could help jumpstart the U.Sfocused infrastructure credit program in a shorter period of time and potentially with a better public reception than setting up a brand new agency.
2nc top-level
Edgemont Debate
File Title 8
The plan mandates the creation of an independent government agency which can provide loans and grants to the private sector for development of transportation infrastructure the CP expands the mandate of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to include investments in domestic transportation infrastructure, and provides the resources and funding necessary to give OPIC the capability to give out loans and grants This solves case best the OPIC has a proven track record of being successful in leveraging private investment for large projects and previous experience in infrastructure lending, which means it can already make good investment decisions furthermore, the NIB would take several years to get started up, but housing it under the OPIC can jumpstart the infrastructure credit program in no time at all thats Crooks and Quadt Well make a couple of framing issues Necessity vs. Sufficiency they might win that the plan solves case better than the CP but make them prove an impact to their solvency deficits Specificity only our evidence speaks to the mechanism of the CP their generic independent bank key arguments dont assume creating the bank under the OPIC Comparative evidence outweighs only we read evidence which directly says that having OPIC do TI investments is comparatively better than the aff outweighs the line-by-line since its impossible to quantify impact defense and solvency deficits and whatnot, which means you should just defer to expert comparisons ALSO, the risk of a politics link only goes one way since we solve all their link turns our argument is not that the CPs not perceived, its that the CP eases Congressional concerns about big government, which is our link argument sure there might be aspects of a NIB that are popular with Republicans, but the CP does those things without doing all the horrible stuff that Congress hates <line by line>
2nc if they mess it up

[_] 2AC reads zero evidence that says an independent government agency is critical to creation of an effective infrastructure bank the fact that all their evidence says that US transportation infrastructure investments are horrible in the squo proves its not that a new government agency is necessary, its just that we have no entity dedicated to making those investments in the first place expanding the jurisdiction of OPIC to include transportation infrastructure investment and providing the funding and resources to re-task OPIC solves the aff theres only a risk of our offense dont allow new 1AR arguments about how an independent agency is key we base block strategy off of 2AC coverage its also sandbagging and just a jerk move in general
2nc solvency+
NIB should be housed under the OPIC yall
William J. Mallett, Steven Maguire and Kevin R. Kosar, December 14, 2011 (*Specialist in Transportation Policy, **Specialist in Public Finance, ***Analyst in American National Government, Congressional Research Service, National Infrastructure Bank: Overview and Current Legislation, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42115.pdf >:) How might
an infrastructure bank be structured? Congress has established numerous banking entities taking a wide range of institutional forms. To cite four examples: The National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity Facility was established in 1978 through statute (12 U.S.C. 1795) as a cooperative corporation that is owned by federal credit unions. It is managed by the board of the National Credit Union Administration (12 U.S.C. 1751) and can borrow from the U.S.
Treasury. Its purpose is narrow to serve as a lender of last resort to credit unions needing liquidity due to unforeseen or unusual circumstances.55 Government-sponsored enterprises, such as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac), are structured as privately held, for-profit corporations designed to serve a public purpose.56 Some of these entities were designed to be investor owned, while others, such as the Federal Home Loan Bank System and the Farm Credit System, are owned cooperatively by their borrowers. The extent of direct federal involvement varies. The Rural Telephone Bank, established in 1971 (7 U.S.C. 941) to provide credit to telecommunications companies in rural areas, was designed as a mixedownership corporation. The federal government capitalized the bank by purchasing its dividend-yielding A class stock,
Edgemont Debate
File Title 9
and other classes of stock were sold to private investors. The bank liquidated itself in 2007.57 The mixedownership structure was earlier used for the First Bank of the United States, which was chartered by Congress in 1791 (1 Stat. 192 Section 3) to stabilize the currency and provide a safe depository for funds and a source of credit. The banks shares were owned by both the U.S. government and private shareholders. Congress has established many lending institutions that are wholly owned government corporations. The Export-Import Bank, mentioned earlier in this
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC; 22 U.S.C. 2191). OPIC was established in 1969, and it offers loans, loan and risk insurance, and other services to U.S. investors operating in overseas markets.58 Like the Export-Import Bank, OPIC serves a governmentally defined purposes, and it supports its operations through commercial activities. The three bills considered in this report, S. 652, S. 936, and H.R. 402, all would establish infrastructure banks that are wholly government owned.
report, is an example, as is
2nc at: p/ cp
CP is competitive Use of the term infrastructure bank in the plan text means the permutation severs creation of an independent entity thats COOPER all previous uses of the term infrastructure bank in Congress have referred to a new bank, not the expansion or reform of an old bank the CP is distinct because it simply changes the mandates of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, an already existing bank in the United States prefer our definition since it cites usage of the term by Kerry and Obama, both of whom have tried to push through infrastructure bills in the past Congressional intent is best White House flows neg
creation of a n ational infrastructure bank. Here's how it would work: 1) Congress would new bank would identify transportation, energy, and water infrastructure projects that lack funding, offer a clear benefit for taxpayers, and are worth at least $100 million or $25 million for rural projects.
appropriate an initial $10 billion in startup money to capitalize the bank. 2) The
INDEPENDENTLY increase means net increase

Words and Phrases, 5 (Cummulative Supplementary Pamphlet, v. 20a, p.295) Term increase, as used in statute giving the Energy Commission modification jurisdiction over any alteration, replacement, or improvement of equipment that results in increase of 50 megawatts or more in electric generating capacity of exis ting thermal power plant, refers to net increase in power plants total generating capacity; in deciding whether there has been the requisite 50-megawatt increase as a result of new units being incorporated into a plant, Energy Commission cannot ignore decreases in capacity caused by retirement or deactivation of other units at plant. Wests Ann.Cal.Pub.Res.Code 25123.
Cal.App.2 Dist. 1991.
That means the perm severs since they have to defend making net more investment the CP does not increase investment, rather it redirects the current funding of the OPIC by mandating that it invest in domestic transportation infrastructure Severance is bad MOVING TARGET aff gets to continually reformat we base 1NC strategy off of the plan text it makes the aff conditional, cross-apply their condo arguments GROUND they can sever out of all our links guts 1NC strategy kills time allocation and skews ground in favor of the aff
2nc at: links to politics

The plans creation of an independent agency links reforming an existing government bank avoids political battles
Creating a NIB will not be easy. But much of the challenge can be mitigated by increasing funding for an existing program with a long-term vision of reforming the system, rather than setting up a new government agency which would be much more costly and less effective.
Congress likes da CP
Edgemont Debate File Title 10 Patricia Hammes and Robert Freedman, June 14th, 2011 (*partner in the Project Development & Finance Group at Shearman & Sterling in New York, has been named a
leading lawyer in project finance by Chambers USA, Chambers Global and IFLR1000, ** partner in the Project Development & Finance Group at Shearman & Sterling in New York, has been named a leading lawyer in project finance by Chambers USA, Chambers Latin America, IFLR 1000 and Guide to the Worlds Leading Project Finance Lawyers, Closing the gap: Proposals for rebuilding US infra, http://www.shearman.com/files/upload/PDF-061411-Closing-the-gap-Proposals-for-rebuilding-US-infra.pdf >:)
the President is not the only national leader pushing this type of proposal. Senators John Kerry, Kay Bailey Hutchison, and Mark R. Warner have recently introduced a bill, the BUILD Act, that would create an American Infrastructure Financing Authority, or AIFA[4][5]. AIFA would All content Copyright 2011 Emap Limited, all rights reserved. be a national infrastructure bank, offering loans and loan guarantees for deserving infrastructure projects. The BUILD Act proposal contemplates an initial US$10 billion contribution by the Federal government with a goal of ultimately becoming a self funding bank in a manner similar to the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).
A national infrastructure bank could create opportunities and capitalise on others, and
ex-im mandates pic 1nc berkeley prep dx

[CP TEXT: United States federal government should - substantially increase transportation infrastructure loans in the United States commensurate with establishment of an independently governed National Infrastructure Bank sans incorporation into the Export-Import Bank of the United States, - pass legislature to authorize the Export-Import Bank of the United States for 10 years, and - expand the lending authority of the Export-Import Bank of the United States to $200 billion] Well clarify. Ex-Im is organizationally overburdened only a completely external bank can solve
Scott Thomasson 2011, Economic and Domestic Policy Director Progressive Policy Institute Testimony of Scott Thomasson Progressive Policy Institute October 12, 2011, United States House Of Representatives Committee On Transportation And Infrastructure: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Highways and Trans it National Infrastructure Bank: More Bureaucracy and Red Tape October 12, 2011, http://republicans.transportation.house.gov/Media/file/TestimonyHighways/2011-10-12%20Thomasson.pdf Myth #7: We dont need a separate infrastructure bank, because we can si mply expand existing programs like TIFIA or the Export-Import Bank. Reality: Both
TIFIA and the Export-Import (Ex-Im) Bank are well-run programs that are effective in achieving the specific missions they are charged with. There are structural similarities between AIFA and both TIFIA and Ex-Im that make the idea of transforming either program to act like an infrastructure bank very interesting on paper and perhaps worth exploring more. However, the organization and governance of the infrastructure bank would be materially different from TIFIA, and its mission and expertise would not necessarily be compatible with the Ex-Im Bank. TIFIA
is already oversubscribed with only a handful of staff to process loan applications. Some people familiar with the workings of the TIFIA program believe it will not be able to handle the additional workload that will accompany recent proposals to super -size its budget authority. Throwing
more money at the TIFIA program without an enhanced organizational structure will run the same risks of questionable underwriting decisions that the Solyndra critics allege of the DOE loan guarantee program. An independent and professionally staffed infrastructure bank is the best response to the increasing need for expansion and better management of federal credit programs. A properly structured national bank achieves this first
and foremost by replacing politically driven decision making with a more transparent and merit-based evaluation process overseen by a bipartisan and expert board of directors. This feature of the bank becomes even more important as the federal government moves toward financing larger, big-ticket projects that are beyond the scale of anything existing programs have taken on before. With
respect to the idea that we can create an infrastructure bank within the Ex-Im Bank, we should be cautious about assuming we can re-task a well established bureaucracy with an entirely new mission that requires different financing expertise and a different institutional culture. It is probably better to avoid big changes to a program that is currently functioning well, and instead to look to it as a model to be drawn upon and replicated instead of forcing a merger of two very different programs under the one roof.
Expanding the lending authority and passing legislature to authorize Ex-Im for the next decade solves the second advantage
McDermott, 1AC author, 12 (Hon. Jim McDermott, U.S. House of Representatives, In Support of the Export-Import Bank, Congressional Record Volume 158, Number
63, Extensions of Remarks, p.E713, 5-7-2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2012-05-07/html/CREC-2012-05-07-pt1-PgE713-3.htm) Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, we
have spent months in this House watching the Republicans create an unstable business environment and hurt U.S. jobs while they delay the reauthorization of the Export- Import Bank. While the Export-Import Bank
File Title 11 have been stuck between their radical teaparty ideology of pure free-markets on one side and the Republican Majority's relationship with Delta Airlines on the other. We now have a compromise that does not extend the Bank for as long as it needs to be or for as much as it needs to be long-term. We also have a real lack of understanding in the Congress and in the Public of what this Export- Import Bank does. Over 50 countries have export-import banks and all Edgemont Debate
supports hundreds of thousands of American jobs every year at no cost and no risk to the taxpayer, the Republicans of the them are growing right now. While they are competing and running faster, the Republicans have us sitting on our hands and unilaterally disarming. I could fill this chamber with the bipartisan, non-partisan, expert studies telling us for decades that we here in the United States don't do a good job promoting our exports. My constituents, the port in my district and the huge
The current deal that's being worked on only reauthorizes the Export- Import Bank for a few years. My bill uses the same bipartisan framework that exists today and would authorize it for 10, through 2021. Building on this bipartisan framework, my bill would also truly expand the Export-Import Bank's lending authorities, doubling it to $200 Billion. The Export-Import Bank makes money for the taxpayer, is virtually no risk, and the lending authority should be big enough so that it will actually keep up with our exports into the foreseeable future. This higher authority, along with the longer extension, will create the stability businesses and their workers need.
number of exporting businesses in my district need the same kind of support from their government that all of their Chinese, and Indian, and European competitors are getting.
Net benefit increasing Congressional mandates on Ex-Im makes preventing fraud impossible.
Ike Brannon and Elizabeth Lowell, 5-1-2011, Export-Import Bank: Obstacles and Options for Reform, http://americanactionforum.org/sites/default/files/ExIm%20Final%20Draft21.pdf
Satisfying a variety of different mandates has presented significant managerial challenges for Ex-Im, especially with respect to mitigating fraud risk and achieving targets for small business participation. / Fraud. Ex-Im has faced a number of fraud cases, due both to the risk inherent in being a government lender and a lack of adequate risk evaluation procedures. The OIG identifies Ex-Ims loan guarantee program and export credit insurance programs as particularly susceptible to fraud schemes. 23 It elaborates that criminals tend to exploit these programs by submitting false financial statements or false documentation concerning exports. Ex-Ims Medium Term Loan Program has been
a primary target for fraud schemes. The acting Inspector General, Osvaldo Luis Gratacs, testified in front of Congress that there were two significant fraud cases related to the program that
While every bank faces the risk of fraud, a variety of factors make this risk even more acute for the ExportImport Bank, such as Ex-Ims mission to provide credit too risky for the private sector in over 160 countries with varying business and legal systems; its public disclosure of underwriting standards, which can guide the misrepresentation of financial statements; the disincentive for private sector participants to conduct thorough due diligence given the governments guarantee; and the banks own limited resources to conduct thorough due diligence and pursue defrauders. 25 / Ex-Im procedures have been inadequate to mitigate its increased risk of fraud in a number of cases. In his testimony before the House Committee on Financial Services in September, 2010, Acting IG Gratacs noted
cost Ex-IM $200 million. 24 / that an improper implementation of due diligence and underwriting practices, inadequate monitoring tools, and lack of compliance functions contributed to Ex-Ims losses in the MediumTerm Loan Program. / The OIG has also linked the fraud cases with conflicting directives faced by the bank: to take loans too risky for the private sector, ensure reasonable assurance of repayment, and reduce administrative burdens. 26 In particular, the impetus to reduce administrative burdens lead to rolling back credit policies for managing fraud and credit risk. 27 However, Ex-Im receives criticism both for insufficient and overly burdensome procedures. For example, the 2010 Ex-Im Advisory Committee commented that Ex-Ims internal processing procedures continue to be a source of frustration for exporters and lenders, due in part to its stringent underwriting procedures. 28 In short,
Ex-Im is caught in a thicket of
procedural challenges that it shows no ability to overcome. / Other Management Issues.
Ex-Im faces a number of managerial challenges associated with its ongoing attempts to increase the participation of small businesses, such as the need to update its inefficient and ineffective IT platform, enhance its due diligence process in the face of an increasing number of applications, simplify the application process as well as Ex-Ims messaging to small businesses, define performance standards and metrics, cooperate with other agencies
The 2010 Advisory Committee notes other problems related to Ex-Ims organizational structure, which does not establish accountability with a single individual within operating groups. Ex-Ims managerial challenges seem to be typical of government bureaucracy; they result from the challenges of processing a large number of applications efficiently and transparently while attempting to follow a variety of congressional directives.
such as the Small Business Administration and the Department of Commerce, ensure uniform procedures for delegated authority, and cope with limited staff resources. 29
Fraud harms the entire economy by increasing unemployment.

Mark Jenner, 12-22-2011, forensic
accountant specialising in criminal defence, Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Certified Fraud Examiner and has a Masters Degree in Fraud Management, Would Increased Fraud Awareness
Reduce The Economic Impact Of Fraud? http://www.sooperarticles.com/law-articles/criminal-law-articles/would-increased-fraud-awareness-reduce-economic-impact-fraud-754662.html
Businesses keep society and the economy running. They provide jobs and wealth for many people. When a business fails the employees lose their jobs and often may have difficulty finding new employment. When a director runs a company fraudulently, burdening its trading activity by diverting profits to his own pocket, so that it eventually fails, it is not just the creditors and suppliers that lose out but many others as well.
It is a mistake to think fraud is only a problem for businesses.
barstow dl
Edgemont Debate
File Title 12
1nc econ
Economic downswings dont cause war 93 empirical examples
Miller 2K
(Morris Miller, economist, adjunct professor in the University of Ottawas Faculty of Administration, consultant on internati onal development issues, former Executive Director and Senior Economist at the World Bank, Winter 2000, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, Vol. 25, Iss. 4, Poverty as a cause of wars? p . Proquest) The question may be reformulated. Do wars spring from a popular reaction to a sudden economic crisis that exacerbates poverty and growing disparities in wealth and incomes? Perhaps one could argue, as some scholars do, that it is some dramatic event or sequence of such events leading to the exacerbation of poverty that, in turn, leads to this deplorable denouement. This exogenous factor might act as a catalyst for a violent reaction on the part of the people or on the part of the political leadership who would then possibly be tempted to seek a diversion by finding or, if need be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the process leading to war. According
to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the C arnegie E ndowment for I nternational P eace, there would not appear to be any merit in this hypothesis. After studying ninety-three episodes of economic crisis in twenty-two countries in Latin America and Asia in the years since the Second World War they concluded that:19 Much of the conventional wisdom about the political impact of economic crises may be wrong ... The severity of economic crisis - as measured in terms of inflation and negative growth - bore no relationship to the collapse of regimes ... ( or, in democratic states , rarely) to an outbreak of violence ... In the cases of dictatorships and semidemocracies, the ruling elites responded to crises by increasing repression (thereby using one form of violence to abort another).
Manufacturing jobs are growing that is the key turning point for the economy
Markit 12/14 (Leading, global financial information services company with over 2,300 employees. The company provides independent data, valuations and trade processing across all
asset classes in order to enhance transparency, reduce risk and improve operational efficiency. Its client base includes the most significant institutional participants in the financial market place, Markit Flash U.S. Manufacturing PMI, pdf ;) The
U.S. manufacturing sector is showing signs of regaining momentum as the year comes to a close. Producers reported the largest monthly increase in output since April, with the rate of growth picking up for the third month in a row, suggesting output is now growing at an annualised rate of around 4% compared to the contraction seen back in October. Such a steady run of improved growth of production is a good indication of a turning point in the economy as a whole , especially as it is feeding through to higher employment. The
manufacturing sector has been acting as a drag on the official payroll numbers in recent months, but this situation looks to be changing as firms take on increasing numbers of workers in line with fuller order books. Companies
reported that demand showed further signs of picking up in the domestic market, while at the same time seeing new signs of life in export markets. With exports rising for the second month, foreign trade gains as well as increased production should help to boost economic growth in the fourth quarter.
Stimulus worsens the economy empirically proven

Steve Stanek, March 11th, 2011 (research fellow at the Heartland Institute, managing editor of Budget & Tax News, Two
years of epic stimulus failures:
Keynesian spending creates nothing but a wealth of debt, pg. l/n >:) We've just passed the second anniversary of "economic stimulus" under President Obama. Aside from spending on the stimulus itself - the actual price tag soon climbed from $787 billion to $821 billion - not much else has been stimulated. Nearly a trillion dollars have been poured into the U.S. economy, courtesy of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Result? Unemployment has barely budged, housing prices continue to fall in many markets and more mortgages slip into foreclosure. How can this be happening when so many people in government assure us that government spending spurs the economy? Because it's not true. For government to pour money into the economy, it must take money out of the economy in the first place. To hand out money, government must first take money from taxpayers. It's like moving money from the left pocket to the right pocket. It doesn't make us any wealthier. What it really stimulates is more government, not more economic activity. Or government can borrow money, which is simply taking money now and promising to pay it back later with money that will come from taxpayers who are around when "later" arrives. Government borrowing reduces the amount of money available for private businesses and individuals to borrow. The federal government also can create money, which leads to price inflation, making today's dollars worth less than yesterday's. We're already seeing the impact of a less-valuable dollar in items ranging from gold and silver to cotton and gasoline, all of which are at or near record prices. As high prices for essentials such as food and energy work their way through the economy, consumers will have less money to spend on everything else. The nonsensical idea that government should spend more in economic downturns stems from "Keynesianism," which is all the rage in government policy circles today, and for good reason. It provides cover to people who believe in expansive, interventionist government. Keynesianism claims government can spur demand for goods by spending money to make up for what private businesses and consumers are not spending. This provides an excuse to grow government, even when - especially when - the economy is slowing or contracting, and it gives government more power. But if government spending can boost an economy, how did the U.S. economy ever decline in the first place? When George W. Bush became president, total federal spending was $1.8 trillion. When he left office eight years later in January 2009, federal spending topped $3.4 trillion. And by 2009, the country was in the second year of the worst economic downturn since the 1930s. Spending under Mr. Bush increased at more than twice the rate of increase under President Clinton during the 1990s, a decade many Democrats now clamoring for even more government spending point to as years of strong economic growth. And let us not forget state and local governments. They did their part to supposedly prevent
Edgemont Debate File Title 13 an economic slowdown by expanding their spending by more than $1 trillion - from $1.74 trillion in 2000 to $2.83 trillion in 2008 - when the financial crisis began. Record government spending did nothing to stop the recession. More government spending will do nothing to end it. Ah, but what about World War II spending, ending the Great Depression, you say? It did no such thing. Keynesian economists in the 1940s warned the end of war spending and return of millions of soldiers would result in an economy every bit as bad as or worse than we had during the Depression. Instead, federal spending plummeted from 40 percent of the economy to less than 15 percent (it's about 25 percent today), unemployment fell [falling] to less than 4 percent, and the economy boomed - the opposite of what many government economists said would happen, and another refutation of Keynesianism. The way to end this recession is for government to cut spending, shrink the deficit, end corporate welfare, stop using taxpayer money to bail out politically connected businesses and industries, and reduce regulations that make investing for the future more difficult.
No impact to failing transportation infrastructure congestions inevitable

Why Traffic Congestion Is Here to Stay and Will Get Worse, http://www.uctc.net/access/25/Access%2025%20-%2004%20-%20Traffic%20Congestion%20is%20Here%20to%20Stay.pdf >:)
Anthony Downs, October 1st, 2004 (Senior Fellow @ Brookings, scholar in public policy and public administration,
EVERYONE HATES TRAFFIC CONGESTION. But despite all attempted remedies, it keeps getting worse. Why dont they do something about it? The answer: because rising traffic congestion is an inescapable condition in all large and growing metropolitan areas across the world, from Los Angeles to Tokyo, from Cairo to So Paulo. Peak-hour traffic congestion is a result of the way modern societies operate , and of residents habits that cause them to overload roads and transit systems every day. Traffic congestion is not essentially a problem. Its the solution to our basic mobility problem, which is that too many people want to move at the same times each d ay. Efficient operation of the economy and our school systems requires that people go to work, go to school, and run errands during about the same hours so they can interact with each other. We cannot alter that basic requirement without crippling our economy and society. This problem marks every major metropolitan area in the world. In the U nited S tates, the vast majority of people wanting to move during rush hours use private vehicles , for two reasons. One is that most Americans reside in low-density settlements that public transit cannot serve effectively. Second, for most people private vehicles are more comfortable, faster, more private, more convenient in trip timing, and more flexible than public transit. Therefore, around the world, as household incomes rise, more and more people shift from less expensive public modes to privately owned cars and trucks. With 87.9 percent of Americas daily commuters using private vehicles, and millions wanting to move at the same times of day, our basic mobility problem is this: the road system does not have enough capacity to handle peak-hour loads without forcing people to wait in line for limited road space. Waiting in line is the definition of congestion.
NIB cant solve congestion or job growth small scope of projects

Orski 11-[Ken, New Geography, Infrastructure Bank: Losing Favor with the White House, 8/30/2011, http://www.newgeography.com/content/002408-infrastructure-bank-losing-favorwith-white-house, DKP]
If the proposed entity is to be a true bank as proposed in a recent bill sponsored by Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) and endorsed by the AFL-CIO and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce its scope would be confined to projects that can repay interest and principal on their loans with a dedicated stream of revenue in other words, the Bank could finance only income-generating facilities such as toll roads and bridges. By all estimates, such projects will constitute only a small fraction of the overall inventory of transportation improvements needed to be financed in the years ahead, the bulk of which will be reconstruction of existing toll-free Interstate highways. Hence, a true Infrastructure Bank would be of limited help in creating jobs and reviving the economy, critics argue.
Econs resilient innovations solve

Leonhardt, New York Times, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2005 [David, October 8, Business Cycle Data]
MEMPHIS - The nearly empty Airbus 310 was coasting through the Alabama night sky when a message flashed in the cockpit. "DIVERT," it said, before using code to order the plane to land in Atlanta. The pilot banked the jet to the east and a half-hour later it was on the ground. There, its cargo door opened up to a group of waiting FedEx employees who began filling it with 17,000 pounds of cargo. It had been a busy day for Georgia businesses, and FedEx's regular nightly flights from Atlanta to the company's Memphis hub were overbooked with packages. So the local crew made a call to a sprawling, low-slung room here at headquarters, where people hunch over computer screens showing weather maps and flight plans, and asked for help from the five empty FedEx jets that roam over the United States every night. The recent birth of that small fleet, at a multimillion-dollar price tag, explains a lot about how the
nation's economy has become so much more resilient. Think of it as the FedEx economy, a system that constantly recalibrates itself to cope with surprises. The United States has endured an almost biblical series of calamities in recent years - wars, hurricanes, financial scandals, soaring oil prices and rising interest rates - but the economy keeps chugging along at an annual growth rate of roughly 3 percent. It has been able to do so with the help of technology that allows businesses to react ever more quickly to changes. But with little notice, those reactions have also created a new feature of the business cycle: the micro-recession. When one of them strikes, activity slows for a few weeks, sometimes in just certain sectors or regions, as companies adjust to a dip in demand. It has happened much more often in the last few years than in earlier expansions, but growth has picked up each time, thanks in part to the adjustments that businesses have made. No
company embodies this change, for better and worse, quite like FedEx. When Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve chairman, sees Frederick W. Smith, FedEx's chief executive, during halftime of Washington Redskins games, Mr. Greenspan uses the company's vast reach to check in on the economy. "He always asks, 'We still O.K.?' " said Mr. Smith, a part-owner of the team whose stadium suite abuts the one Mr. Greenspan uses. More formally, Federal Reserve staff members rely on FedEx and the nearly six million packages it delivers every day for real-time data that helps set interest rate policy. The company's around-the-world flights - fuller coming from Asia than going to it - are the shipping lanes of the global economy, bringing goods from
Edgemont Debate
then watch the replacement move through the supply chain from their computer screens. All
File Title 14
Chinese factories to American shelves in just days. FedEx technology helps Procter & Gamble managers send more Crest to Wal-Mart whenever somebody buys a tube, and the managers can
this - combined with financial innovations that allow companies to hedge their bets and, some say, the deregulation of pivotal transportation industries - has helped mute the economy's swings. The business cycle has certainly not been eliminated, as some dreamers suggested during the 1990's boom, but recessions really do seem to happen less often. There have been only two recessions in the last two decades. From the late 1960's through the early 80's, the economy endured four [recessions] of them, including two of the deepest in decades, which left millions of people out of work. "The more flexible an economy, the greater its ability to self-correct after inevitable, often unanticipated disturbances," Mr. Greenspan argued in a recent speech. "The impressive performance of the U.S. economy over the past couple of decades, despite shocks that in the past would have surely produced marked economic contraction, offers the clearest evidence of the benefits of increased market flexibility." Of course, new technologies and global shipping lanes are also big reasons that job growth has been so disappointing during this expansion and that the gains from
recent economic growth have gone mainly to highly skilled white-collar workers. In Woodbridge, N.J., for example, a large FedEx shipping center can sometimes seem void of human beings. And revenue at the express-shipping division has grown almost 30 percent since 2002, while the full-time work force has declined slightly. The number of part-time workers has grown. Across the economy, quick reactions, like asking workers to put in more hours one week and fewer the next, have helped lead to the business cycle's new hiccups. Mr. Smith calls them "minirecessions."
Data cooking turn public investment is manipulated by project managers who cook the data to win project approval exaggerates aff benefits and causes massive cost overruns
Flyvbjerg, 10 [Bent, Professor of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Sad Business School and is Founding Director of the University's BT Centre for Major
Programme Management. He was previously Professor of Planning at Aalborg University, Denmark and Chair of Infrastructure Policy and Planning at Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, Survival of the unttest: why the worst infrastructure gets builtand what we can do about it, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 25, Number 3, 2009, pp.344367, Oxford Journals Online] This situation may need some explication, because it may sound to many like an unlikely state of affairs. After all, it may be agreed that project managers and other professionals involved in major infrastructure provision ought to be interested in being accurate and unbiased in their work. It is even stated in the Project Management Institute (PMI)s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (PMI, 2006, pp. 4, 5) that project managers should provide accurate information in a timely manner and they must not engage in or condone behaviour that is designed to deceive others. Economists, engineers, planners, and others involved in major infrastructure provision have similar codes of conduct. Bu t there is a dark side to their work,
project managers and planners lie with numbers. as Wachs (1989) are busy not with getting forecasts and business cases right and following the PMI Code of Ethics but with getting projects funded and built. And accurate forecasts are often not an effective means for achieving this objective. Indeed, accurate forecasts may be counterproductive, whereas biased forecasts may be effective in competing for funds and securing the go-ahead for a project. The most effective planner, says Wachs (1989, p. 477), is sometimes the one who can cloak advocacy in the guise of scientic or technical rationality. Such advocacy would stand in direct opposition to PMIs ruling that project managers should
which is remarkably underexplored in the literature (Flyvbjerg, 1996). On the dark side, has aptly put it. They make decisions and take actions based on the best interests of society (PMI, 2006, p. 2). Nevertheless, seemingly rational forecasts that underestimate costs and overestimate benets have long been an established formula for project approval as we saw above. Forecasting is here mainly another kind of rent-seeking behaviour, resulting in a make-believe world of
The consequence is, as even one of the industrys own too many projects proceed that should not. One might add that many projects do not proceed that probably should, had they not lost out to projects with better misrepresentation (Flyvbjerg et
misrepresentation which makes it extremely difcult to decide which projects deserve undertaking and which do not. organs, the Oxford-based Major Projects Association, acknowledges, that al., 2002). In this situation, the question is not so much what project managers can do to reduce inaccuracy and risk in forecasting, but what others can do to impose on project managers the checks and balances that would give managers the incentive to stop producing biased forecasts and begin to work according to their Code of Ethics. The challenge is to change the power relations that govern forecasting and project development. Better
forecasting techniques and appeals to ethics will not do here; organizational change with a focus on transparency and accountability is necessary . As argued in Flyvbjerg et al. (2003), two basic
types of accountability dene liberal democracies: (i) public -sector accountability through transparency and public control; and (ii) private-sector accountability via competition and the market mechanism. Both types of accountability
may be effective tools to curb misrepresentation in project management and to promote a culture which acknowledges and deals effectively with risk, especially where large amounts of taxpayers money are at stake and for projects with signicant social and environmental impacts, as is common with major infrastructure projects.
Data cooking creates economic disasters the worst projects are approved, and necessary infrastructure loses out this turns the case
Flyvbjerg, 10 [Bent, Professor of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Sad Business School and is Founding Director of the University's BT Centre for Major
Programme Management. He was previously Professor of Planning at Aalborg University, Denmark and Chair of Infrastructure Policy and Planning at Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, Survival of the unttest: why the worst infrastructure gets builtand what we can do about it, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Volume 25, Number 3, 2009, pp.344367, Oxford Journals Online] In sum, the UK study shows that strong
interests and strong incentives exist at the project-approval stage to present projects as favourably as possiblethat is, with benets emphasized and costs and risks de-emphasized. Local authorities, local developers and land
owners, local labour unions, local politicians, local ofcials, local MPs, and consultants all stand to benet from a project that looks favourable on paper and they have little incentive actively to avoid bias in estimates of benets, costs, and risks. National bodies, such as certain parts of the Department fo r Transport and the Ministry of Finance who fund and oversee projects, may have an interest in more realistic appraisals, but so far they have had little success in achieving such realism, although the situation may be changing with the initiatives to curb bias set out in HM Treasury (2003) and UK Department for Transport (2006).
Wachs (1986, 1990) found similar results for transit planning in the
USA. Taken together, the UK and US studies both account well for existing data on cost underestimation and benet overestimation . Both studies falsify the notion that in situations
with high political and organizational pressure the underestimation of costs and overestimation of benets is caused by non -intentional technical error or optimism bias. Both studies support the view that in such situations promoters and forecasters intentionally use the following formula in order to secure approval and funding for their projects: underestimated costs + overestimated benets = funding Using this formula, and thus showing
the project at its best as one interviewee said above, results in an inverted Darwinism, i.e the survival of the unttest . It is not the best projects that get implemented, but the projects that look best on paper. And the projects that look best on paper are the projects with the largest cost underestimates and benet overestimates , other things being equal.
Edgemont Debate File Title 15 But the larger the cost underestimate on paper, the greater the cost overrun in practice. And the larger the overestimate of benets, the greater the benet shortfall. Therefore the projects that have been made to look best on paper in this manner become the worst, or unttest, projects in reality, in the sense that they are the very projects that will encounter most problems during construction and operations in terms of the largest cost overruns, benet shortfalls, and risks of non-viability. They have been designed like that, as disasters waiting to happen .
Stimulus bad government spending decreases private investment which is the only way to create growth
Riedl, 10 [1/09/10, Brian M. Riedl, Grover M. Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs at The Heritage Foundation, holds a B.A. in Economics and Political Science from the
University of Wisconsin and an M.A. in Public Affairs from Princeton University, Why Government Spending Does Not Stimulate Economic Growth: Answering the Critics, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646551469288292.html?mod=WSJ_latestheadlines] Government spending can affect long-term economic growth, both up and down. Economic
growth is based on the growth of labor productivity and labor supply, which can be affected by how governments directly and indirectly influence the use of an economy's resources. However, increasing the economy's productivity rate--which often requires the application of new technology and resources-- can take many years or even decades to materialize. It is not short-term stimulus.[13] In fact, large stimulus bills often reduce long-term productivity by transferring resources from the more productive private sector to the less productive government. The government rarely receives good value for the dollars it spends. However, stimulus bills provide politicians with the political justification to grant tax dollars to favored constituencies. By increasing the budget deficit, large stimulus bills eventually contribute to higher interest rates while dropping even more debt on future generations.
2nc miller xt
NO IMPACT to growth collapse thats MILLER Ninety-three empirical examples prove it doesnt cause war empiricism outweighs theory its definitionally a reflection of reality their authors are speculating in a vacuum The current recession is not unique. Ninety-three crises have included every permutation of cause, attempted prevention, and method of recovery. Its their burden to prove fantastic historical uniqueness. Zero conflicts happening today over multiple databases can be attributed to economic downturn.
Barnett, senior managing director of Enterra Solutions LLC, contributing editor/online columnist for Esquire, 8/25/09
(Thomas P.M, The New Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis, Aprodex, Asset Protection Index, http://ww w.aprodex.com/the-new-rules--security-remains-stable-amidfinancial-crisis-398-bl.aspx) When the global financial crisis struck roughly a year ago, the blogosphere was ablaze with all sorts of scary predictions of, and commentary regarding, ensuing conflict and wars -- a rerun of the Great Depression leading to world war, as it were. Now, as global economic news brightens and recovery -- surprisingly led by China and emerging markets -- is the talk of the day, it's
globalization's first truly worldwide recession has had virtually no impact whatsoever on the international security landscape. None of the more than three-dozen ongoing conflicts listed by GlobalSecurity.org can be clearly attributed to the global recession. Indeed, the last new entry (civil conflict between Hamas and Fatah in the Palestine) predates the economic crisis by a year, and three quarters of the chronic struggles began in the last century. Ditto for the 15 low-intensity conflicts listed by Wikipedia (where the latest entry is the Mexican "drug war" begun in 2006). Certainly, the Russia-Georgia conflict last August was specifically timed, but by
interesting to look back over the past year and realize how most accounts the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics was the most important external trigger (followed by the U.S. presidential campaign) for that sudden spike in an almost twodecade long struggle between Georgia and its two breakaway regions. Looking over the various databases , then, we see a most familiar picture: the usual mix of civil conflicts, insurgencies, and liberation-themed terrorist movements. Besides the recent Russia-Georgia dust-up, the only two potential state-on-state wars (North v. South Korea, Israel v. Iran) are both tied to one side acquiring a nuclear weapon capacity -- a process wholly unrelated to global economic trends. And with the United States effectively tied down by its two ongoing major interventions (Iraq and Afghanistan-bleeding-into-Pakistan), our involvement elsewhere around the planet has been quite modest, both leading up to and following the onset of the economic crisis: e.g., the usual counter-drug efforts in Latin America, the usual military exercises with allies across Asia, mixing it up with pirates off Somalia's coast). Everywhere else we find serious instability we pretty much let it burn, occasionally pressing the Chinese -- unsuccessfully -- to do something. Our new Africa Command, for example, hasn't led us to anything beyond advising and training local forces.
2nc jobs growing

Manufacturing jobs are growing and solve both advantages thats MARKIT Newest predictions report from last month shows that manufacturing jobs are up, and that marks the key point in which growth and job creation will continue firms are taking on more and more workers that will spill over to revive expert markets and increase production
Edgemont Debate
File Title 16
1nc competitiveness
US competitiveness is inevitable
and James A. Robinson, April 19th, 2012 (co-authors of Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, World's next technology leader will be US, not China if America can shape up, http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Global-Viewpoint/2012/0419/World-sDaron Acemoglu next-technology-leader-will-be-US-not-China-if-America-can-shape-up >:) But what
matters for global leadership is innovation, which is not only the key driver of per capita income growth but also ultimately the main determinant of US that proved after Pearl Harbor how a prosperous economy can rapidly increase its military power and preparedness when push comes to shove. So the right question to ask is not who will be the military leader of the next century, but who will be the technological leader. The answer must be: most probably the US but only if it can clean up its act. OPINION: 3 reasons why China isn't overtaking the US The odds favor the US not only because it is technologically more advanced and innovative than China at the moment, with an income per capita more than six times that of China. They do so also because innovation ultimately depends on a countrys institutions. Inclusive political
military and diplomatic leadership. It was the institutions distribute political power equally in society and constrain how that power can be exercised. They tend to underpin inclusive economic institutions, which encourage innovation and
US institutions are broadly inclusive, and thus more conducive to innovation. Despite all of the resources that China is pouring into science and technology at the moment, its political institutions are extractive, and as such, unless overhauled and revolutionized soon, they will be an impediment to innovation.
investment and provide a level playing field so that the talents of a broad cross-section of society can be best deployed. Despite all of the challenges that they are facing,
Outsourcing turn the plan causes it which tanks the economy and strengthens Chinese competitiveness
PRESTOWITZ 2011 - president of the Economic Strategy Institute and writes on the global economy for FP (Clyde, Where the jobs went. July 11.
http://prestowitz.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/07/11/where_the_jobs_went)
The idea of stimulus incorporated in the standard economic models is that it will create demand for goods and services produced in America and thereby drive investment in new factories and jobs to produce more of those goods and services. The difficulty is that we do not want to stimulate a lot more construction or finance (those were the bubbles that collapsed after all), and greater stimulus to create demand for things we largely import does not drive new investment or creation of new jobs in America. It only increases our debt. What is needed is not just demand in the American economy, but demand that results in domestic production and that does not increase domestic or international debt. Think about this in the wake of the recent New York Times article reporting on the new Oakland Bay Bridge being made in and imported from China. Building infrastructure like bridges is a time-honored way of creating demand in the economy that creates jobs. Indeed, just this past weekend President Obama called for creation of an Infrastructure Bank that would enable a dramatic ratcheting up of U.S. investment in critical infrastructure. It's a good idea and one that I, along with others, have long promoted. But if the decision of the state of California to have the main structural elements of the Oakland Bay Bridge made in China is a harbinger of things to come, then an Infrastructure Bank is likely to create more jobs in Asia than in the United States. No doubt former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and his cabinet thought they would save about $400 million on steel by buying the bridge in China because Chinese steel production has been heavily subsidized and China's government manages its yuan to be artificially undervalued versus the dollar. But what they didn't consider was that those subsidies tend to make U.S.-based production uncompetitive and not only put American workers out of jobs but exert downward pressure on wages generally while eroding critical investments in equipment and human skills, reducing state, municipal, and federal tax revenues, and contributing to the shrinkage of the national educational base. No one in California
took a look at even the whole state picture, let alone the national picture, to determine whether buying a bridge in China was really going to be a net gain for the state (as it turns out, in the past two years the price of Chinese steel has risen much faster than that of U.S. steel so that even the initially projected savings are unlikely to be realized). Even worse, no
one at the federal level of the U.S. government has any responsibility for evaluating the net impact of these kinds of deals or for reducing the leakage of stimulus spending abroad and maximizing the domestic production impact of government spending. Until our economists and officials begin to wrestle with the need for the United States not only to stimulate its economy but to do so in ways that will lay the basis for America to increase its wealth-producing capacity and pay its way, they are likely to find themselves in a continuous state of shock.
Ecology Turn the NIBs cost-benefit analysis model cant take environmental impacts into account
Rich Steinman, Federal Transit Administration, May 17 2010 Panel on Challenges of Applying Benefit/Cost Analysis: A Modal Perspective http://tti.tamu.edu/group/tec/files/2011/09/benefit-cost10-proceedings.pdf NCHO
Environmental benefits are easier to measure, but still difficult to monetize. The travel forecasts can be used to estimate reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and reductions in emissions. It is more difficult to turn these estimates into improvements in air quality, and even more difficult to estimate the value of those changes. While environmental impacts can be measured, placing a dollar value on them is not easy.
Edgemont Debate
File Title 17
Every ecological loss reduces Earths sustainability makes long-term extinction inevitable
Bruce E. Tonn, Urban Planning Prof @ Tennessee, November 2007, Futures v. 39, no. 9, Futures Sustainability, ln
The first principle is the most important because earth-life is needed to support earth-life. Ecosystems are composed of countless species that are mutually dependent upon each other for nutrients directly as food or as by-products of earth-life (e.g., as carbon dioxide and oxygen). If the biodiversity of an ecosystem is substantially compromised, then the entire system could collapse due to destructive negative nutrient cycle feedback effects. If enough ecosystems collapse worldwide, then the cascading impact on global nutrient cycles could lead to catastrophic species extinction. Thus, to ensure the survival of earthlife into the distant future the earth's biodiversity must be protected.
China war wont go nuclear no first use

Pan Zhenqiang, Professor of International Relations at the Institute for Strategic Studies, National Defence Un iversity of the Peoples Liberation Army of China, Beijing, where he earlier served as Director of the Institute, retired Major General of the Peoples Liberation Army, China Insistence on No -First-Use of Nuclear Weapons, 2005, http://www.irchina.org/en/news/view.asp?id=403 First, NFU highlights Chinas
philosophical belief that nuclear weapons can only be used to serve one purpose, that of retaliation against a nuclear attack, pending complete nuclear disarmament. Indeed, their extremely large destructive capabilities render nuclear weapons the only truly
inhumane weapon of mass destruction and are of little other use to China. Faced with U.S. nuclear blackmail in the 1950s, China had no alternative to developing its own nuclear capability so
Beijing vowed that having a nuclear capability would only serve this single purpose. From the very beginning of acquiring a nuclear capability, Beijing announced that it would never be the first to use nuclear weapons under any conditions; it also pledged unconditionally not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear weapon states. This claim is not merely rhetoric that cannot be verified, as some Western pundits accused. On the contrary, Chinas nuclear rationale has determined the defensive nature of its nuclear force, its posture, size and operational doctrine, which have been highly visible and have stood the test of time. It is in this sense that China is NOT a nuclear weapon state in the Western sense. Unlike all the other nuclear weapon states, for example, China has never intended to use its nuclear capability to make up for the inefficiency of conventional capabilities vis--vis other world powers nor has China an interest in joining a nuclear arms race with other nuclear states. And thanks to the insistence of this policy based on NFU, China succeeds in reducing the nuclear element to
as to address the real danger of being a target of a nuclear strike. But even so, the minimum in its relations with other nuclear nations, avoiding a possible nuclear arms race, and contributing to the global strategic stability at large. If this policy serves well its core security interests, why should Beijing change it?
Economic nationalism is inevitable

GOLDSTONE 7 - PhD candidate in the Department of Political Science and a member of the Security Studies Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a nonresident research fellow at the Center for Peace and Security Studies, Georgetown University (P.R.,Does Globalization Bring War or Peace?. September 25. http://www.alternet.org/audits/62848/?page=entire)
Trade creates vested interests in peace, but these interests affect policy only to the extent they wield political clout. In many of the states whose behavior we most wish to alter, such sectors -- internationalist, export-oriented, reliant on global markets -- lack a privileged place at the political table. Until and unless these groups gain a greater voice within their own political system, attempts to rely on the presumed constraining effects of global trade carry substantially greater risk than commonly thought. A few examples tell much. Quasi-democratic Russia is a state whose principal exposure to global markets lies in oil, a commodity whose considerable strategic coercive power the Putin regime freely invokes. The oil sector has effectively merged with the state, making Russia's deepening ties to the global economy a would-be weapon rather than an avenue of restraint. Russian economic liberalization without political liberalization is unlikely to pay the strong cooperative dividends many expect. China will prove perhaps the ultimate test of the Pax Mercatoria. The increasing international Chinese presence in the oil and raw materials extraction sectors would seem to bode ill, given such sectors' consistent history elsewhere of urging state use of threats and force to secure these interests. Much will come down to the relative political influence of export-oriented
American policymakers should beware claims of globalization's axiomatic pacifying effects. sectors heavily reliant on foreign direct investment and easy access to the vast Western market versus the political power of their sectoral opposites: uncompetitive state-owned enterprises, energy and mineral complexes with important holdings in the global periphery, and a Chinese military that increasingly has become a de facto multi-sectoral economic-industrial conglomerate. Actions to bolster the former groups at the expense of the latter would be effort well spent. At
home, as even advanced sectors feel the competitive pressures of globalization, public support for internationalism and global engagement will face severe challenges. As more sectors undergo structural transformation, the natural coalitional constituency for committed global activist policy will erode; containing the gathering backlash will require considerable leadership. Trade can indeed be a palliative; too often, however, we seem to think of economic interdependence as a panacea; the danger is that in particular instances it may prove no more than a placebo .
Chinas nuke arsenal sucks they cant use it even if they wanted to
Lieber, and Press, 6
(Keir A, Assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Notre D ame, AND Daryl G, Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth, The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy, Foreign Affairs, Vol 85, No 2, NJ)
China's nuclear arsenal is even more vulnerable to a U.S. attack. A U.S. first strike could succeed whether it was launched as a surprise or in the midst of a crisis during a Chinese alert. China has a limited strategic nuclear arsenal. The People's Liberation Army currently possesses no modern SSBNs or long-range bombers. Its naval arm used to have two ballistic missile submarines, but one sank, and the other, which had such poor capabilities that it never left Chinese waters, is no longer operational. China's medium-range bomber force is similarly
File Title 18 and vulnerable to attack. According to unclassified U.S. government assessments, China's entire intercontinental nuclear arsenal consists of 18 stationary single-warhead ICBMs. These are not ready to launch on warning: their warheads are kept in storage and the missiles themselves are unfueled. (China's ICBMs use liquid fuel, which corrodes the missiles after 24 hours. Fueling them is estimated to take two hours.) The lack of an advanced early warning system adds to the vulnerability of the ICBMs. It appears that China would have no warning at all of a U.S. submarine-launched missile attack or a strike using hundreds of stealthy nuclear-armed cruise missiles. Edgemont Debate
unimpressive: the bombers are obsolete
Bureaucracy guts solvency

FIND, a Federal Research Group, 2011 (Federal Information and News Dispatch Inc. , Oct 12 2011,
<http://proxy.library.georgetown.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/897899921?accountid=11091> National Infras tructure Bank Would create More Red Tape & Federal Bureaucracy, article quotes experts, RR) Today's witnesses concurred that infrastructure proposals should focus on reducing the size of the federal bureaucracy and streamlining the project approval process. Creating a National Infrastructure Bank would duplicate existing programmatic authority, grow the government and add more federal layers to a process already too bogged down in red tape. Oklahoma Department of Transportation Secretary Gary Ridley testified that, "the concept that a new 'government corporation' and Federal Authority will somehow enhance the ability to finance infrastructure seems untimely and entirely unnecessary. Especially when considering that many of the proclaimed new ideas encompassed by the Authority already appear to closely parallel the provisions of other existing federal financing programs. "In addition to recognizing the apparent federal duplications of the proposed National Infrastructure Bank, most States already have or can easily obtain the expertise necessary to facilitate infrastructure banks and other innovative transportation financing methodologies. States can choose to work with the existing federal bureaucracy or seek the assistance of private financial institutions, knowledgeable investors and even other experienced states. "Quite simply, the bureaucracy is already in place to finance public infrastructure projects and an additional federal layer in the form of a new 'government corporation' will add no value. "It is much more likely that efficiencies will be gained through regulatory reforms and red tape reductions, rather than through the creation of new government corporations and additional bureaucracy," said Ridley. Ron Utt, Senior Research Fellow with the Heritage Foundation, questioned the logic of creating a National Infrastructure Bank. "If current levels of credit availability for existing federal transportation credit programs are deemed to be insufficient by some, why not propose that these existing channels be improved and/or expedited? "If spending is thought to be deficient, why not simply provide more grants through the existing mechanism rather than going through the costly and complicated process of setting up and operating a new federal transportation entity, which President Obama's budget estimates would cost upwards of $270 million to create and staff? "In
this era of fiscal austerity and yawning budget deficits, wouldn't there be better uses for this money than a redundant bureaucracy?"
Edgemont Debate
File Title 19

NIB Neg UPS (MBA)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NIB Neg UPS (MBA)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Edgemont Debate

nib neg mba

export-import bank pic 1nc barstow dl

Infrastructure Bank Already Exist?

op-ed for the Washington Post saying that

2nc if they mess it up

2nc at: p/ cp (barstow dl)

INDEPENDENTLY establish means to bring into being on a stable basis

2nc at: p/ cp (westminster lp)

INDEPENDENTLY increase means net increase

2nc at: overburden (thomassen)

2nc at: jurisdiction

2nc at: brannon and lowell

2nc at: delay

overseas private investment pic 1nc westminster lp

2nc if they mess it up

INDEPENDENTLY increase means net increase

2nc at: links to politics

ex-im mandates pic 1nc berkeley prep dx

Ex-Im is caught in a thicket of

procedural challenges that it shows no ability to overcome. / Other Management Issues.

Fraud harms the entire economy by increasing unemployment.

Stimulus worsens the economy empirically proven

years of epic stimulus failures:

No impact to failing transportation infrastructure congestions inevitable

NIB cant solve congestion or job growth small scope of projects

Econs resilient innovations solve

2nc jobs growing

China war wont go nuclear no first use

Economic nationalism is inevitable

Bureaucracy guts solvency

You might also like