Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
WW(J)D - 2AC Blocks

WW(J)D - 2AC Blocks

Ratings: (0)|Views: 21|Likes:
Published by AffNeg.Com

More info:

Published by: AffNeg.Com on Dec 21, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/09/2014

pdf

text

original

 
SDI 2008Arjun VellayappanWW(J)D LVMax Lesser
2AC Blocks
2AC Blocks ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1States CP 2AC (1/2) .....................................................................................................................................................................................2States CP 2AC (2/2) .....................................................................................................................................................................................4Elections 2AC (1/2) .....................................................................................................................................................................................5Elections 2AC (2/2) .....................................................................................................................................................................................72AC Solvency Blocks ..................................................................................................................................................................................8AT: T-Incentives Can’t Be Mandatory .........................................................................................................................................................9India Deal Bad 2AC (1/2) ..........................................................................................................................................................................10India Deal Bad 2AC (2/2) ..........................................................................................................................................................................11Federalism 2AC (1/2) ................................................................................................................................................................................12Federalism 2AC (2/2) ................................................................................................................................................................................13Lopez CP 2AC (1/2) .................................................................................................................................................................................14Lopez CP 2AC (2/2) ..................................................................................................................................................................................15Russian Oil 2AC ........................................................................................................................................................................................16OPEC Flood 2AC ......................................................................................................................................................................................17Capitalism 2AC (1/2) .................................................................................................................................................................................18Capitalism 2AC (2/2) .................................................................................................................................................................................19DA SLAYER ..............................................................................................................................................................................................201
 
SDI 2008Arjun VellayappanWW(J)D LVMax Lesser
States CP 2AC (1/2)
1. Perm do both2. Multi-Actor Fiat Bad
A) Reciprocity – as affirmative we can only advocate the USFG, so the neg should be held to a singleadvocacyB) Not real world – policies are never implemented in unison and uniformly in the real worldC) Justifies Intrinsic Perms – in a world where the neg can use any agent and fiat multiple actors,intrinsic perms are key to check abuseD) Vote them down - its not about what you say, but what you justify
3. Perm
– have the states and the federal government cooperate to solve
It solves alternative energy best
Sanya
Carleyolsen
, PhD candidate Public Policy @ UNC, Summer 20
06
,
“Tangled in the Wires”, 46 Nat. Resouces J. 759, lexis
A transition
to wide-scale RE development
will require continued government efforts
to develop feasible and consistent economic incentives
, comprehensivenational- and state-level energy plans,
and a stronger regulatory environment. State governments need to enhance their energy plans with tighter environmental targets andmore extensive initiatives. Local governments need to expand the scope of planning initiatives to include policies that protect, legitimize, and advance RE development.
All levels of government and public actors need to coordinate RE efforts in order to advance a more effective, cohesive movement.
4. States won’t get modeled internationally
– they aren’t perceived and are unconstitutional under theCompacts Clause
5. CP can’t solveA) Federal action is key to avert state patchwork regulations that create uncertainty for the auto industryBusiness Week 02
 
(“Clean-Air Standards: An End Run around Washington”, http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_20/b3783047.htm)Detroit was blindsided. Expecting an assault of environmental legislation from Washington this spring, the auto industry dispatched troops of lobbyists to the banks of the Potomac to make a stand, successfully defeating a push for stricter national fuel-economy standards. But the real threat came from the other coast.
After environmental lobbyists worked their own contacts in California, thestate senate approved a bill on May 2 that would force auto makers to sell cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars
in the state by 2008. "I was elated,"says Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. "This was such a sharp contrast from how Congress has reacted to environmental legislation." The California battle isn't over yet: The stateassembly still needs to approve a final version of the measure, and Governor Gray Davis hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. But if--as expected--the environmental lobby wins this skirmish,it may ultimately prove just as significant as a victory in Washington would have. Why? California is the only state that can create clean-air standards, since its laws predate federal regulations.But
other states have the option of adopting California's rules.
So the environmentalists plan to take the same legislation to like-minded Northeastern states and then deeper into the heartland, ultimatelytargeting key states such as Texas and Florida. "We have accepted the fact that environmental leadership is not coming from Washington," Pope says. "We will focus on consumers and the states."
It's a strategy that could work--andthat has Detroit hopping mad.
After defeating the federal measure that would have required auto makers to boost fuel efficiency in March, the industry thought it had wrapped up the issue. Now, though, Detroit may have to wrestle with the environmentalists in state capitals. In the past,California's clean-air and low-emissions laws have gotten a warm reception in New York and New England, where legislators have adopted California's existing limits on carbon monoxide, smog-causing nitrous oxide, and soot from cars. "Our biggest fear is that this becomes the battle we already fought and won at the federal level,"says Gregory J. Dana, vice-president of environmental affairs for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers in Washington. That's likely to happen, which could ultimately bring the battle right back to Washington.
Since the auto industry doesn't want the stricter California standards adopted state by state, it might agree to somewhat tougher federal fuel economy and emissions laws. Says oneGeneral Motors Corp. insider: "We can't have 50 different states telling us how to build cars. That would be chaos."
And that's exactly what theenvironmental lobby is counting on.
2
 
SDI 2008Arjun VellayappanWW(J)D LVMax Lesser
3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->