Topicality

DDI 2008 <KO>

Daniel Lee
AFF – (C/I) Grants, Loans, Rebates, Tax Credits, Exemptions...............................................................................................................2
AFF – (C/I) Grants, Loans, Rebates, Tax Credits, Exemptions.........................................................................2
AFF – (C/I) Tax Credits...........................................................................................................................................................................3
AFF – (C/I) Tax Credits.........................................................................................................................................3
T – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy” ..........................................................................................................................................4
T – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy” ......................................................................................................4
More Cards – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy”...........................................................................................................................5
More Cards – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy”.....................................................................................5
T – (BQ Patents AFF) “increase” ............................................................................................................................................................6
T – (BQ Patents AFF) “increase” ........................................................................................................................6
T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 1/2..................................................................................................................................7
T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 1/2..............................................................................................7
T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 2/2..................................................................................................................................8
T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 2/2..............................................................................................8
More Cards – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive”......................................................................................................................9
More Cards – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive”.................................................................................9
T – (BQ|CM Natives AFF) “increase”...................................................................................................................................................10
T – (BQ|CM Natives AFF) “increase”................................................................................................................10
T – (GT Airforce AFF) “alternative energy”..........................................................................................................................................12
T – (GT Airforce AFF) “alternative energy”.....................................................................................................12
T – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”.........................................................................................................................................................13
T – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”......................................................................................................................13
More Cards – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”.........................................................................................................................................14
More Cards – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”....................................................................................................14

1
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

AFF – (C/I) Grants, Loans, Rebates, Tax Credits, Exemptions

Grants, loans, rebates, tax credits and exemptions for income, sale and
property are all incentives for alternatives to energy
Susan Gouchoe, Valerie Everette, and Rusty Haynes, No Date Given, North Carolina State Institute, authors of State
Incentives for Renewable Energy: Case studies on Program Effectiveness
<http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/PolicyPublications/Case_Studies_Paper_ASES_2003.pdf>

Over the years, states have provided various financial incentives to promote the use of renewable energy technologies. Such
incentives include grants, loans, and rebates, as well as credits or exemptions for income, sales, and property taxes. While
existing databases such as the National Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE, www.dsireusa.org) have
documented what incentive programs are available, the effectiveness of such programs is not well understood. Understanding
the impact of financial incentives on the deployment of renewable energy technologies and the factors which influence their
effectiveness is critical to a variety of stakeholders, particularly for states considering new incentives or interested in improving
or discarding existing ones.

Loans are incentives to develop alternatives to energy

Susan Gouchoe, Valerie Everette, and Rusty Haynes, No Date Given, North Carolina State Institute, authors of State
Incentives for Renewable Energy: Case studies on Program Effectiveness
<http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/PolicyPublications/Case_Studies_Paper_ASES_2003.pdf>

Government-subsidized loans are used to encourage the installation of renewable energy technologies by helping customers
overcome the financial barrier associated with high up-front equipment costs. Interested, but cash challenged customers who
could not otherwise purchase a system outright can buy one with the help of such loans, which typically provide lower interest
rates, more favorable terms, and lower transaction costs relative to private lending arrangements. There are at least 22 active
loan programs in 18 states that provide low cost financing for renewables. Some programs are funded by revolving loan funds
which were established with petroleum violation (“oil overcharge”) escrow funds, while others are funded through annual
appropriations, the sale of bonds, or air quality noncompliance penalty fees. More recently established programs are funded by
a system benefits charge. Total funding for loan programs varies as well, with some programs operating with as little as
$200,000 per year while others lend up to $200 million per year. While the majority of loan programs promote energy
efficiency improvements in addition to renewable energy technologies, a handful of states have designed programs specifically
for the promotion of renewables. Approximately half of the loan programs apply to homeowners and businesses, while others
are available only to government and/or non-profit and institutional entities. Interest rates vary from 1% to over 6%, with some
programs setting rates on a case-by-case basis. Loan repayment terms range from three to 20 years, with some established
based on individual project needs. Maximum loan amounts for residential applications are typically in the $10,000 to $25,000
range. Programs financing larger projects cap loan amounts as high as $10 million. Loan applications typically involve a
technical description that is evaluated by program administrators. A couple of the recently implemented loan programs require
pre-approved contractors and post-installation inspections.

2
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

AFF – (C/I) Tax Credits

Tax incentives are incentives for development
CFED, 2008, <http://www.cfed.org/focus.m?parentid=2&siteid=1629&id=1630>
What Are Development Incentives?
Development incentives refer to inducements state and local governments use to attract and retain companies and facilities.
These incentives take two principal forms: tax incentives and non-tax incentives.
Tax incentives. The traditional workhorse of business climate policy is the tax incentive. Tax incentives include various types
of abatements, exemptions, reductions, and moratoria. These may take a variety of forms, such as corporate income tax
exemptions, sales/use tax exemptions on new equipment, and tax exemptions or moratoriums on equipment and machinery.
Included in this category are also other tax-related investment incentives, such as investment and tax credits, research and
development tax incentives, and accelerated depreciation of industrial equipment. A special kind of tax incentive program that
has received much attention in recent years is the Enterprise Zone (EZ) concept (also known as Empowerment Zones and
Empowerment Communities). EZs have been used by the federal government and even more widely by many states. Ohio, for
instance, created 310 separate zones! Despite their popularity, however, research has not, by and large, found them to be very
effective tools for economic development.2
Non-tax incentives. These are a growing form of inducement, including grants, creative financing subsidies and customized
worker training. The mainstay is the Industrial Development Bond, or IDB. These are used by almost every state to offer low-
interest loans to firms. A variation on the IDB is the use in many states of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts. TIF allows
governments to float bonds to help companies based on their anticipated future tax impact. Some states also compete in
important non-tax ways by offering watered-down environmental regulations, "right to work" laws that inhibit union
organizing, and so on.

3
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy”

A. Interpretation – Alternatives to energy must be renewable
US Department of Interior, 7/16/08 "Alternative energy programs, definitions" Minerals Management Service
http://www.mms.gov/offshore/AlternativeEnergy/Definitions.htm

Alternative energy: Fuel sources that are other than those derived from fossil fuels. Typically used interchangeably for
renewable energy. Examples include: wind, solar, biomass, wave and tidal energy.

Hydrogen itself is not a viable alternative to energy – it’s derived from fossil
fuels and results in a net loss of energy
Laurence O’Sullivan, president of Energy Conversion, July 9, 2008, Hydrogen as an Alternative Energy Source, <http://energy-
conservation.suite101.com/article.cfm/hydrogen_as_an_alternative_energy_source>

Hydrogen is Not a Source of Energy

Commercially, hydrogen is mainly produced from fossil fuel and to a lesser extent by electrolysis using energy produced from
fossil fuels. Basic Research Needs for the Hydrogen Economy states, “Hydrogen is currently produced on an industrial scale (9
Mtons/yr in the U.S.) through steam reforming of natural gas.” Hydrogen produced from either fossil fuels or by electrolysis
involves a loss of energy and results in high emissions of greenhouse gases. In the Future of the Hydrogen Economy: Bright or
Bleak? published on April 15 2003, Ulf Bossel says on page 13, “The efficiency of hydrogen production by autothermal
reforming is about 90%, but may be less”, and further on says, “Also, more CO2 is released by this indirect process than by
direct use of the hydrocarbon precursors.” Marking Hydrogen a Renewable Fuel. To make hydrogen a renewable fuel it should
use renewable energy, such as wind power or solar power, for production. A report carried on Solar Today by Susan Hock,
Carolyn Elam and Debra Sandor, titled “Can We Get There” states, “Due to the relatively low cost of wind power, along with
recent dramatic growth in wind energy, wind/electrolysis is well positioned to become the first economical renewable hydrogen
production system.” Another example of using wind to make hydrogen was reported in the UK Daily Telegraph of June 21
2008. The Isle of Unst, Britain’s most northerly settlement, uses two wind turbines to “create hydrogen gas to run a hydrogen-
powered car and cooking facilities while the rest is captured as hydrogen fuel cells to provide back-up when the wind dies.” As
an alternative fuel hydrogen is ideal, producing little or no emissions, with a plentiful supply available. But hydrogen produced
by conventional means is not renewable or carbon neutral. Wind power is a totally renewable energy source with no
greenhouse gas emissions, but due to its unpredictability, has problems integrating with national grids. Combined together,
wind and hydrogen can cancel out their inherent defects and be an effective tool in the battle against carbon dioxide and global
warming.

B. Violation – the AFF only increases incentives for Hydrogen fuel cells.

C. Standards
1. Predictable limits – using energy outside the topic justifies using any fuel,
exploding the topic. The AFF can claim advantages off of harnessing sulfur as
a source of energy

2. Ground – the NEG loses specific links to proper alternatives to energy,

crushing topic specific education

3. Research burden – the AFF chooses to lie outside the resolution, forcing the
NEG to research all types of fuels

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction

4
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

More Cards – (BQ Military AFF) “alternative energy”

Hydrogen is not a renewable alternative to energy
CARE, Canadian Association for Renewable Energies, No Date Given, ‘Hydrogen – let’s make it Renewable
<http://www.renewables.ca/h.html>

Hydrogen is touted as the energy carrier of the future; billions of dollars / Euros / yen have been allocated for R,D&D into
hydrogen and fuel cells. Most of the world's current supply of hydrogen is derived from fossil fuels and, therefore, most
hydrogen does not eliminate the emission of GHG pollutants that are connected with climate change. The Canadian
Association for Renewable Energies argues that, only when an eligible renewable energy technology is used for
electrolysis or non-hydrocarbon derivation process, can the resulting hydrogen be considered as renewable or the fuel cell
considered as clean.

5
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (BQ Patents AFF) “increase”

A. Interpretation – Increase means to add in quantity. Decreasing a
disincentive does not always result in an increase.
WordNet 2003
increase
n 1: a quantity that is added; "there was an addition to property taxes this year"; "they recorded the cattle's gain in weight over
a period of weeks" [syn: addition, gain] 2: a change resulting in an increase; "the increase is scheduled for next month" [ant:
decrease] 3: a process of becoming larger or longer or more numerous or more important; "the increase in unemployment"; "the
growth of population" [syn: increment, growth] [ant: decrease] 4: the amount by which something increases; "they proposed an
increase of 15 percent in the fare" [syn: increment] [ant: decrease] 5: the act of increasing something; "he gave me an increase
in salary" [syn: step-up] [ant: decrease] v 1: become bigger or greater in amount; "The amount of work increased" [ant:
decrease] 2: make bigger or more; "The boss finally increased her salary"; "The university increased the number of students it
admitted" [antonym: decrease]

B. Violation – the AFF re–establishes the TSM test, not increasing incentives.

C. Standards
1. Predictable limits – decreasing any disincentive explodes the topic by
justifying any mechanism. The AFF can claim big advantages off of removing
tariffs on imports to not discourage people from buying the products

2. Ground – the AFF trades off with NEG links to mechanism DA’s and CP’s

3. Research burden – the AFF chooses to lie outside the resolution, forcing the
NEG to research all types of mechanism

4. FX T illegit –
a) Limits: allows the AFF to take an infinite number of steps to attain solvency

b). Prima facie burden – different authors strung together could create a
solvency story – force them to stick to the plan text

c). Potential Abuse – the AFF doesn’t force solvency either – this allows
abusive cases. Disqualify any AFF that step outside the predictable limits

d) Brightline – it’s either topical or not. The AFF forces you to look at their
solvency to decide. Adding shades of grey blurs the role of topicality

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction

6
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 1/2

A. Interpretation – tax credits are not incentives for wind farms
AWEA, July 29, 2005, Energy Bill Extends Wind Power Incentive through 2007, <
http://www.awea.org/news/energy_bill_extends_wind_power_072905.html>

Washington, D.C.—The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) hailed today the extension of the wind energy
Production Tax Credit (PTC) included in the wide-ranging energy bill that Congress just adopted and President Bush is soon
expected to sign into law. The PTC, which was scheduled to expire on December 31, 2005, provides a 1.9 cent-per-kilowatt-
hour (kWh) tax credit for electricity generated with wind turbines over the first ten years of a project’s operations, and is a
critical factor in financing new wind farms. “This is the first time that an extension of the production tax credit for wind energy
has been approved before the credit expires, and, following the past six years of boom-and-bust cycles caused by successive
expirations, that is very good news for the industry,” said AWEA Executive Director Randall Swisher. “The timely extension of
the credit allows companies to plan for growth, create jobs, and provide more clean power to customers nationwide.” Up to
2,500 megawatts of wind energy capacity are scheduled to come on line in the U.S. this year, bringing new power to the
equivalent of 700,000 homes and injecting over $3 billion of investment into the power generation sector. With the timely
extension of the PTC, the American Wind Energy Association anticipates that strong growth momentum will continue in 2006
and 2007. “The PTC extension was secured thanks to the leadership of tax committee chairmen Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
and Representative Bill Thomas (R-CA),” said AWEA Legislative Director Jaime Steve. “AWEA is also very appreciative of
the leadership of energy committee chairmen Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM) and Representative Joe Barton (R-TX), and of
the Bush Administration’s support for an extension of the PTC.” “AWEA also thanks Senators Max Baucus (D-MT), Jeff
Bingaman (D-NM), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Larry Craig (R-ID), Tim Johnson (D-SD), Ron Wyden (D-
OR), and Representatives John Dingell (D-MI) and Ralph Hall (R-TX), all of whom served on the conference committee for
their efforts in gaining an extension of the PTC,” said AWEA’s Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs Jon Chase. “In addition,
we commend Representatives Jim McCrery (R-LA), Mark Foley (R-FL), Earl Pomeroy (D-ND), Richard Pombo (R-CA) and
Mark Udall (D-CO), and Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Gordon Smith (R-OR) and Tom Harkin (D-IA)
for their contributions. Other key players included Senators Mike Crapo (R-ID), Ken Salazar (D-CO), Wayne Allard (R-CO),
and Jim Jeffords (I-VT), and Representatives Jim Nussle (R-IA), Greg Walden (R-OR), Dave Camp (R-MI), Bob Beauprez (R-
CO), Tom Reynolds (R-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA), Jay Inslee (D-WA), Zach Wamp (R-TN), Dennis Rehberg (R-MT), Ron
Kind (D-WI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Tom Latham (R-IA), Jerry Weller (R-IL) and others. By simply changing the PTC
expiration date to December 31, 2007, the extension leaves in place the PTC’s current 1.9 cent per kilowatt-hour value, the
annual inflation adjustment provision, and the 10-year term to generate credits following the installation of a wind turbine. The
bill does not contain restrictions on the availability of the PTC or place limits on offshore wind projects, as some anti-wind
lawmakers had proposed. The final energy bill does not include the Senate provision calling for 10% of the nation’s electricity
to be generated from renewable sources like wind and solar by 2020, also referred to as the Renewables Portfolio Standard
(RPS). “By failing to include in the energy bill this provision to boost renewable energy development over the longer term,
Congress missed a unique opportunity to enact forward-looking energy, economic, security, and environmental policy all at
once,” said Swisher. The bill also does not include an incentive for small wind systems for homeowners and small
businesses, although it provides a 30% credit capped at $2,000 for residential solar systems and fuel cells. Such incentives
are needed to help reduce the up-front cost of purchasing such systems.

7
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive” 2/2

Incentives must be positive rewards
USAID, No Date Given, Quality Assurance Project, Healthcare and Workforce improvement, "Glossary of useful terms",
http://www.qaproject.org/methods/resglossary.html

Incentive
A tangible or intangible reward that is designed to motivate a person or group to behave in a certain way. For example, in an
effort to reduce fertility, community health workers may be given a small amount of money for each woman they refer to the
health clinic for family planning services.

B. Violation – the AFF doesn't offer a reward, they offer tax credits

C. Standards
1. Limits – Opens the floodgates to doing anything to promote alternative energy; they
could kidnap oil barons to increase development for alternatives to energy

2. Ground – incentives in alternatives to energy provide links for politics and spending

3. Predictability – there are any number of threats; this moots ability to get links off of
the type of incentive

4. FX T illegit – wind farms result from tax credits

a) Limits: allows the AFF to take an infinite number of steps to attain solvency

b) Prima facie burden – different authors strung together could create a

solvency story – force them to stick to the plan text

c) Potential Abuse – the AFF doesn’t force solvency either – this allows abusive
cases. Disqualify any AFF that step outside the predictable limits

d) Brightline – it’s either topical or not. The AFF forces you to look at their
solvency to decide. Adding shades of grey blurs the role of topicality

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction.

8
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

More Cards – (BQ|CM|GT|SS Natives AFF) “incentive”

Incentives are distinct from tax credits
Gary Bingel, senior manager of state and local taxes with Smart and Associates LLP, summer 2004, "Getting to the STATE'S
CAPITAL: Negotiating Business Incentives", Pennsylvania CPA Journal, proquest

When considering financial assistance from governmental authorities, it is important to keep in mind the definitions of
"incentive" and "credit." "Incentive" is something that stimulates one to take action,1 and "credit" is to give deserved
commendation for; to commend one for.2 These concepts are at the root of why governments give assistance to businesses in
the form of incentives and tax credits. Incentive programs are usually offered to stimulate businesses to take some form of
action, and are considered forward-looking. Tax credits are often offered to reward businesses that took some form of desired
action, and are a reaction to steps already taken. There are some programs, however, that combine these concepts, such as
negotiated tax credits and those that require preapproval, that are used to promote some future action. There are also incentives
programs that, while negotiated and subject to preapproval, are only rewarded once a specified action, or promise, has been
fulfilled. The following discussion will focus on true incentives programs, those that require preapproval and negotiation, as
opposed to pure tax credits, which merely reward past behavior and that do not require any form of preapproval or negotiation.

9
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (BQ|CM Natives AFF) “increase”

A. Interpretation – Increase means to become greater
WordNet 2003
increase
n 1: a quantity that is added; "there was an addition to property taxes this year"; "they recorded the cattle's gain in weight over
a period of weeks" [syn: addition, gain] 2: a change resulting in an increase; "the increase is scheduled for next month" [ant:
decrease] 3: a process of becoming larger or longer or more numerous or more important; "the increase in unemployment"; "the
growth of population" [syn: increment, growth] [ant: decrease] 4: the amount by which something increases; "they proposed an
increase of 15 percent in the fare" [syn: increment] [ant: decrease] 5: the act of increasing something; "he gave me an increase
in salary" [syn: step-up] [ant: decrease] v 1: become bigger or greater in amount; "The amount of work increased" [ant:
decrease] 2: make bigger or more; "The boss finally increased her salary"; "The university increased the number of students it
admitted" [antonym: decrease]

B. Violation – the AFF changes the nature of tax credits and makes them
tradable
\
C. Standards
1. Predictable limits – changing the nature of existing mechanisms explodes
the topic. The AFF can claim big advantages off of changing the nature of
existing policies to increase incentives

2. Ground – the AFF trades off with NEG links to mechanism DA’s and CP’s

3. Research burden – the AFF chooses to lie outside the resolution, forcing the
NEG to research all types of mechanism

4. Extra T illegit – changing the properties of tax credits is not increasing

incentives
a) Supplements resolution – by requiring extra-topical planks, the AFF
concedes that the resolution is not enough to justify a policy change

b) Severance is abusive – it’s impossible and unfair for the NEG to debate a
different plan each speech. They chose this plan, and if they can’t justify it in
its entirety, they should lose.

c) Multitude of advantages – the AFF claims ridiculous internal links and

advantages off of a change in to tradable tax credits

d) Kills debate – makes clash irrelevant because the AFF can always be extra
topical and use unfair advantages to win

e) Brightline – any extra topical plank means the entire plan isn’t topical. Even
if the ball lands halfway outside the line, it’s the other team’s point

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction

10
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

11
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (GT Airforce AFF) “alternative energy”

A. Interpretation – Algae biomass fuels are not renewable alternatives to
energy
ScienceDaily, July 6, 2005, Ethanol And Biodiesel From Crops Not Worth The Energy,
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/07/050705231841.htm>

ScienceDaily (July 6, 2005) — ITHACA, N.Y. -- Turning plants such as corn, soybeans and sunflowers into fuel uses much
more energy than the resulting ethanol or biodiesel generates, according to a new Cornell University and University of
California-Berkeley study. "There is just no energy benefit to using plant biomass for liquid fuel," says David Pimentel,
professor of ecology and agriculture at Cornell. "These strategies are not sustainable."Pimentel and Tad W. Patzek, professor of
civil and environmental engineering at Berkeley, conducted a detailed analysis of the energy input-yield ratios of producing
ethanol from corn, switch grass and wood biomass as well as for producing biodiesel from soybean and sunflower plants. Their
report is published in Natural Resources Research (Vol. 14:1, 65-76). In terms of energy output compared with energy input for
ethanol production, the study found that: * corn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; * switch grass
requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and * wood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than
the fuel produced. In terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that: *
soybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and * sunflower plants requires 118 percent more
fossil energy than the fuel produced. In assessing inputs, the researchers considered such factors as the energy used in
producing the crop (including production of pesticides and fertilizer, running farm machinery and irrigating, grinding and
transporting the crop) and in fermenting/distilling the ethanol from the water mix. Although additional costs are incurred, such
as federal and state subsidies that are passed on to consumers and the costs associated with environmental pollution or
degradation, these figures were not included in the analysis. "The United State desperately needs a liquid fuel replacement for
oil in the near future," says Pimentel, "but producing ethanol or biodiesel from plant biomass is going down the wrong road,
because you use more energy to produce these fuels than you get out from the combustion of these products." Although
Pimentel advocates the use of burning biomass to produce thermal energy (to heat homes, for example), he deplores the use of
biomass for liquid fuel. "The government spends more than $3 billion a year to subsidize ethanol production when it does not
provide a net energy balance or gain, is not a renewable energy source or an economical fuel. Further, its production and use
contribute to air, water and soil pollution and global warming," Pimentel says. He points out that the vast majority of the
subsidies do not go to farmers but to large ethanol-producing corporations. "Ethanol production in the United States does not
benefit the nation's energy security, its agriculture, economy or the environment," says Pimentel. "Ethanol production requires
large fossil energy input, and therefore, it is contributing to oil and natural gas imports and U.S. deficits." He says the country
should instead focus its efforts on producing electrical energy from photovoltaic cells, wind power and burning biomass and
producing fuel from hydrogen conversion.

B. Violation – the AFF only increases incentives for the procurement of algae
biofuels

C. Standards
1. Predictable limits – using energy outside the topic justifies using any fuel,
exploding the topic. The AFF can claim advantages off of harnessing sulfur as
a source of energy

2. Ground – the NEG loses specific links to proper alternatives to energy,

crushing topic specific education

3. Research burden – the AFF chooses to lie outside the resolution, forcing the
NEG to research all types of fuels

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction

12
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

T – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”

A. Interpretation – Government incentives are financial subsidies
Lloyd C. Irland, Lecturer and Senior Scientist, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, 4/22/2007, Financial
Incentives/Subsidies, <http://forestryencyclopedia.jot.com/WikiHome/Forest%20Incentives>

Across the Americas, governments have used incentives and subsidies in different ways to affect how private land owners
manage their forests. In this article, we consider only direct financial grants and similar incentives, and not tax provisions, land
grants, or property rights rules. Incentives were traditionally justified on the basis of the long production period in forestry, and
they originated in northern regions where this is true. Yet, they are often used for short-rotation stands in the tropics where that
argument does not apply. Economic development may be more relevant in these regions, and indeed forestry subsidies have
been used to build entire forest-based manufacturing sectors. Incentive grants can take the form of free or low cost seedlings,
cash payments per acre, or payments of a given percentage of establishment cost (cost-share programs). In one program, the
US Conservation Reserve, annual payments are made to owners who maintain lands in cover crops or trees. Much of the
forest based industry in Latin America started subsidies for tree planting, icluding in Brazil, Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay.
Changing Objectives
Objectives of incentive programs vary, and have shifted over time. In many countries, erosion control, water quality, or other
environmental goals were prominent. In the US and Canada, strains on commercial agriculture have led to the cessation of
cropping on large areas, especially during the crisis of the Great Depression. As part of efforts to ease social conditions in rural
areas, and to seek alternate productive uses for unneeded farmland, US and Canadian governments funded extensive tree
planting programs. Generating rural employment was one objective of these programs. Future wood production was often of
secondary importance.

Incentives must be positive rewards

USAID, No Date Given, Quality Assurance Project, Healthcare and Workforce improvement, "Glossary of useful terms",
http://www.qaproject.org/methods/resglossary.html

Incentive
A tangible or intangible reward that is designed to motivate a person or group to behave in a certain way. For example, in an
effort to reduce fertility, community health workers may be given a small amount of money for each woman they refer to the
health clinic for family planning services.

B. Violation – The AFF removes a barrier instead of subsidizing hemp

C. Standards
1. Limits – Opens the floodgates to doing anything to promote alternative energy; they
could bomb Iranian oil fields to increase development for alternatives to energy

2. Ground – incentives in alternatives to energy provide links for politics and spending

3. Predictability – there are any number of threats; this moots ability to get links off of
the type of incentive

D. Voters for fairness, education and jurisdiction

13
Topicality
DDI 2008 <KO>
Daniel Lee

More Cards – (CO Hemp AFF) “incentives”

Incentives are government subsidies
Windustry’s, April 11, 2005, Wind Farmers Network,
<http://windfarmersnetwork.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7970060672/m/1850009363>

Wind energy does not need government incentives just because other energy sectors have them. The logic is nice; but if this
were the reality, then all sectors would enjoy the same level of government incentive. With regard to wind energy, government
incentives promote the investment required to build the infrastructure of an infant industry. These incentives, or subsidies,
come from federal, state, and local level of government in different forms for different beneficiaries but all contain the
incentive to increase capital expenditure thus facilitating economic expansion greater than the level of subsidy.

14