Werth/Walters/Gondalia Spending Disadvantage (Hydropower 2005 energy policy

act) SDSU 2008

Sub-Point A: Uniqueness: Government Spending is in control now

GOVERNMENT SPENDING HAS INCREASED ONLY TO GO WITH INFLATION – HERITAGE

FOUNDATION 2008

The Heritage Foundation (Think Tank) “2008 Federal Revenue and Spending Book of
Charts” Online. http://www.heritage.org/research/features/BudgetChartBook/fed-
rev-spend-2008-boc-S1-Federal-Spending-Has-Increased.html

Federal spending has increased steadily regardless of congressional Leadership.

Real annual federal spending has more than tripled since 1965 and has nearly
doubled since 1980, this data however is inflation-adjusted to 2007 dollars.

Sub-Point B: Link: The Affirmative plan spends money, with the definite possibility of
going over budget

A. THE UNITED STATES PRODUCES MORE THAN 270 BILLION KILOWATT-HOURS

EACH YEAR. MOST OF IT COMES FROM FEDERAL FACILITIES BUT THAT COULD
EASILY BE OVERTAKEN BY PRIVATE COMPANIES. –ENERGY INFORMATION
ADMINISTRATION 2004

Energy Information Administration (Official energy statistics from the United states
government) “Renewable Energy Sources: A Consumer's Guide” Online.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/brochure/renew05/renewable.html accessed 7/11/08

Hydropower is electricity produced from flowing water. As a result, hydropower

output varies widely according to rainfall. Most hydropower is produced at large
facilities built by the Federal Government, such as Grand Coulee Dam on the
Columbia River in Washington State - the largest single electric power facility in the
United States. Most of the largest dams are located on rivers in the western United
States, but there are numerous smaller facilities operating around the country.
Hydropower production varies from year to year, depending on precipitation. In
2004, hydropower dams produced 270 billion kWh, which was about 7% of total U.S.
electricity production and accounted for about 45% of total renewable energy
consumption. The newest “wave” in hydropower technologies is being developed to
harness the energy in ocean tides, waves, and currents.
Werth/Walters/Gondalia Spending Disadvantage (Hydropower 2005 energy policy
act) SDSU 2008

B. THE AFFIRMATIVE PLAN WILL SPEND MORE THAN 20 MILLION DOLLARS EACH
YEAR – ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005

Energy Policy Act of 2005; Title 2; Sub-Title C; Section 242 July 22, 2005 Online.
http://www.epa.gov/oust/fedlaws/publ_109-058.pdf accessed 7/10/08

(1) IN GENERAL.—Payments made by the Secretary under this section to the owner
or operator of a qualified hydroelectric facility shall be based on the number of
kilowatt hours of hydroelectric energy generated by the facility during the incentive
period. For any such facility, the amount of such payment
shall be 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour (adjusted as provided in paragraph (2)), subject
to the availability of appropriations under subsection (g), except that no facility may
receive more than $750,000 in 1 calendar year.
(2) ADJUSTMENTS.—The amount of the payment made to any person under this
section as provided in paragraph (1) shall be adjusted for inflation for each fiscal
year beginning after calendar year 2005 in the same manner as provided in the
provisions of section 29(d)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, except that
in applying such provisions the calendar year 2005 shall be substituted for calendar
year 1979.
(3) SUNSET.—No payment may be made under this section to any qualified
hydroelectric facility after the expiration of the period of 20 fiscal years beginning
with the first full fiscal year occurring after the date of enactment of this subtitle,
and no payment may be made under this section to any such facility after a
payment has been made with respect to such facility for a period of 10 fiscal years.
(4) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated
to the Secretary to carry out the purposes of this section $10,000,000 for each of
the fiscal years 2006 through 2015.

Let me also add here that the affirmative is doubling these figures. Given the link
card a states that 270 billion kilowatts is mostly produced by government
hydroelectric facilities it still allows a substantial number of companies to take
advantage of this incentive. 270 billion times 1.8 cents = 4.86 billion dollars which
is 486 times over budget, money that is guaranteed, and a budget that will
ultimately have to be raised.

Internal Link: Rise in spending contributes to debt.

ANY SUBSTANTIAL RAISE IN GOVERNMENT SPENDING WILL CONTRIBUTE TO A
LARGE RISE IN DEBT – BAKER 2008
The cost of the war is hurting our economy; Growth has slowed as military spending
raises the deficit and diverts federal resources BY DEAN BAKER. Dean Baker is co-
director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington. He is the
author of "The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to
Werth/Walters/Gondalia Spending Disadvantage (Hydropower 2005 energy policy
act) SDSU 2008

Stay Rich and Get Richer" and writes the blog "Beat the Press," about media
coverage of economic issues. February 10, 2008. Online LexisNexis July 10, 2008.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=tr
ue&risb=21_T4136267229&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&result
sUrlKey=29_T4136267236&cisb=22_T4136267234&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&cs
i=306890&docNo=2.

10 years and more than $130 billion after 20 years. This happens because higher
interest rates raise the value of the dollar, making U.S. goods less competitive in
world markets. Over a 20-year horizon, the increase in defense spending would add
more than $2 trillion to the country's foreign indebtedness. This foreign debt will
impose future costs in the same way that the government's debt imposes future
costs. We eventually will have to pay much more than we do now for oil and other
goods that we must import.

Sub-Point C: Impacts: Potential cost of extra spending will harm America and even
the rest of the world.

A. THE INABILITY TO STOP SPENDING WILL KILL THE US ECONOMY AND

EVENTUALLY AFFECT THE WORLD ECONOMY – FARREL 2006
B.
Lawrence P. Farrell (Writer for the National Defense)2006 National Defense
Page 6
Without fundamental reforms, the nation is headed for economic collapse,
cautioned david walker, the U.S. comptroller general. “We could be doing
nothing more than paying interest on federal debt in 2040,” he told lawmakers.
Just this month outgoing Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan expressed
concern that failure to deal with the exploding budget deficit would not only
affect the United States but also the global economy.

C. THE UNITED STATES ECONOMY IS CRUCIAL TO GLOBAL ECONOMIC GROWTH.

–SESIT 2007
D.
Michael Sesit, (Bloomberg news columnist) “Europe, Asia Won't Weather a
U.S. Slowdown: Michael R. Sesit” March 16 2007. Online.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_sesit
&sid=alXkzT5rSN30
The ability of other countries to emerge from the U.S. economy’s long shadow
may reflect more wishful thinking than logic. No doubt, it will eventually
happen, especially as some of the bigger emerging countries mature. Right
now, the world still needs the U.S. consumer. The global economy is too
dependent on exports to the U.S., whose trade deficit was $765.3 billion in
2006, while Asia and Europe lack sufficient domestic demand to offset
reduced U.S. spending on overseas goods, says Stephen Roach, chief
economist at Morgan Stanley in New York.

E. A Rise in debt shows a big threat to global economy

Special Report: Tough times ahead Anna Taing June 30, 2008. Online
LexisNexis July 10, 2008.
Werth/Walters/Gondalia Spending Disadvantage (Hydropower 2005 energy policy
act) SDSU 2008

http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLink
Ind=true&risb=21_T4136670597&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDoc
No=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T4136674601&cisb=22_T4136674600&treeMax=tru
e&treeWidth=0&csi=261521&docNo=3.

Growth in the other three sectors of the economy - agriculture, mining and
manufacturing - has been revised downwards. In particular, manufacturing
growth has been revised down to 4.1% from 6.7%, in line with expectations
that the slowdown in exports will be more pronounced at 4.8% per annum
during the Plan period. This is in view of the fact that the full effect of a
slowdown in the US will be felt by the global economy over the next two
years. The original forecast was 7.1%

F. The global economy slowing constitutes a Global recession

U.S. Downturn Effects May Ease Worldwide Anthony Faiola; Washington Post
Staff Writer January 30, 2008. Online LexisNexis July 10, 2008.
http://www.lexisnexis.com/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLink
Ind=true&risb=21_T4136755754&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDoc
No=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T4136755759&cisb=22_T4136755758&treeMax=tru
e&treeWidth=0&csi=8075&docNo=2.

Analysts caution that a sharper drop in the U.S. economy -- something widely
feared, as evidenced by the global route on stock markets from Paris to Tokyo
last week -- could yet plunge the world economy below the 2.5 to 3 percent
growth range that constitutes a global recession. And around the world,
billions of dollars in losses from America's subprime mortgage morass are still
being accounted for, with experts predicting it will take a deeper financial toll
in various countries by the time the dust clears. The fund is forecasting that
the economic woes will slow U.S. growth in 2008 to 1.5 percent, down from
its earlier estimate of 1.9 percent. But, assuming it is right, economists note
that the world economy may get by better than it once would have.
Werth/Walters/Gondalia Spending Disadvantage (Hydropower 2005 energy policy
act) SDSU 2008