You are on page 1of 12

FILE NAME

DDI 2008 <GT>


Your Name

A/T Indiana Politics…………………………………………………………………………...…….11-12..........1


A/T State Spending................................................................................................................................................2
A/T State Spending DA.........................................................................................................................................3
A/T Montana DA....................................................................................................................................................4
A/T Montana DA....................................................................................................................................................5
A/T Montana DA....................................................................................................................................................6
N/U – Brown will win.............................................................................................................................................7
A/T California ptx..................................................................................................................................................8
A/T Georgia State D/A...........................................................................................................................................9
A/T Georgia State D/A.........................................................................................................................................10
A2: Indiana Politics..............................................................................................................................................11
A2: Indiana Politics..............................................................................................................................................12
A/T Indiana Politics…………………………………………………………………………...…….11-12

1
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T State Spending


1. STATES ARE SPENDING TONS ON RENEWABLES NOW
Thomas D. Peterson, Robert B. McKinstry, Jr., & John C. Dernbach 07 –and climate change. He has also taught international law,
administrative law, and sustainability and the law. “DEVELOPING A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE
POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES THAT FULLY INTEGRATES LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC SECTORS”
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1020740
The magnitude of existing state actions that reduce GHGs is underappreciated. In combination, 36 Some of these
actions arose because of related policy objectives, while others were designed expressly for GHG abatement. In
addition, a majority of states now have comprehensive inventories and forecasts of emissions and reporting
systems to support implementation of policies and plans. Regional areas now aggregate and expand upon
individual state actions, particularly in sectors where markets transcend state boundaries, such as electricity
generation and sales. A majority of states currently have state GHG plans or state GHG plans in progress.37

States spending continues to grow


Dennis Cauchon, 6/22/2003. USA Today. “Economy not to blame for states’ budget woes.”
<http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-06-22-state-spending-cover_x.htm>

But one thing has remained constant throughout the crisis: State spending keeps growing.

It went up 6.3% for the fiscal year that ended June 30, 2002, and it's on track to rise about 5% in the 12 months that end June 30. The
number of people on Medicaid, which pays for health care and nursing homes for the poor, remains at a near-record 40 million. That
number is up 30% since 1998, the result of efforts to sign up people who qualify. And despite anecdotal reports of layoffs — Oregon
furloughed 130 state troopers, for example — state governments have added 74,000 workers (an increase of 1.5%) in the past two
years while the private sector has registered a net loss of 2.6 million jobs (a decline of 2.4%).

. No link – states will pay through a public benefit tax – means no deficit
spending
Nadel and Kushler 2K,(Steven Nadel and Marty Kushler co-lead the Utilities and Public Benefits Program for the American Council for
an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), Washington, DC, a nonprofit research organization specializing in programs and policies for
promoting energy efficiency October, “Public Benefit Funds: A Key Strategy for AdvancingEnergy Efficiency”, The Electricity
Journal, Science Direct)

As of this writing, a total of 23 states and the District of Columbia have formally passed an electric restructuring policy, either through legislation or regulatory order. In
addition, two states (Vermont and Wisconsin) have passed statewide public benefits funding legislation without adopting restructuring. Of these 26 states, 20 have
included specific requirements to support energy efficiency in their legislation and/or regulatory orders. By far the most common policy mechanism
enacted is the use of a small, nonbypassable per-kWh charge attached to the distribution service bill (typically called a “system benefit
charge” or “public benefit charge”). These surcharges are commonly set based on historic expenditures for public benefit programs.
But by transferring the charge to distribution service, the cost is shared evenly by all customers, regardless of whether they purchase
electricity from a traditional utility or a new independent provider. The amount of this charge has generally been in the range of 0.5 to
3.0 mills per kWh (a mill is a tenth of a cent). Table 3 lists funding levels by state. 5 B. Accomplishments While it is of course too
soon to draw firm conclusions about the relative success of public benefit fund policies regarding energy efficiency, the early
indications are quite positive. Collection of the fund revenues and actual implementation of the energy efficiency programs has begun
in at least 10 states, with several states having had their programs “in the field” now for at least two years. Some of these states are
briefly discussed below. In addition, these public benefit policies receive high marks from various stakeholders in the respective states. As part of an
ongoing study, ACEEE has been interviewing multiple parties (i.e., administrators, utilities, advocate groups, etc.) in each of the states with such public benefit policies
in place. Respondents were asked to assign a letter grade (A to F) to two aspects of the situation in their state: 1) the adequacy/quality of the “on paper” policy that their
state had adopted, and 2) the administrative execution/ implementation of that policy thus far. The results from approximately 50 interviews spread
across the states indicate that respondents had an overall fairly positive regard for the public benefits policies adopted by their state.
The median “grade” assigned was a B, and over 80 percent of respondents assigned a B or an A. Grades assigned for
“implementation” to date tended to be about the same or slightly lower, although in about one-third of cases respondents felt it was too
soon to make a judgement.

2
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T State Spending DA


3. STATE ACTION FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY KEY TO ECONOMIES
Thomas D. Peterson, Robert B. McKinstry, Jr., & John C. Dernbach 07 – Dr. Peterson founded the Center for Climate Strategies (CCS) to assist
state and regional governments with climate change policy development and implementation. Dr McKinstry is a partner in the Litigation Department, the
Environmental Group, which he co-founded, the Energy and Project Finance Group and the Climate Change Group. John C. Dernbach is Professor of Law at Widener's
Harrisburg campus, teaching environmental law, property, international environmental law, and climate change. He has also taught international law, administrative law,
and sustainability and the law. “DEVELOPING A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY IN THE UNITED STATES THAT FULLY
INTEGRATES LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT AND ECONOMIC SECTORS”
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1020740

A second group of assumptions that underlie other federal proposals, such as those putting a cap on costs of emissions control or those
basing their approach on the questionable concept of GHG intensity, are also flawed. Specifically, the assumptions that economic
growth is closely tied to energy prices and that energy prices will rise due to climate policy are incorrect. State actions provide
substantial evidence on the economic benefits of climate change mitigation. Recent state plans show net economic savings from the
combined effects of specific, proven actions at the state level when combined with long-term transitions toward new technologies,
systems, and practices. The economic performance of these plans is driven both by the new energy economy and by opportunities to
save energy and diversify supply through a host of reform actions. Today, energy prices are significantly higher than a decade ago
when international treaty negotiations peaked, and they are widely expected to increase for the indefinite future.

4. STATES ARE COST EFFECTIVE


Adler, Professor of Law and Co-Director, Center for Business Law and Regulation, Case Western Reserve University School of Law,
07 (Jonathan H., “WHEN IS TWO A CROWD? THE IMPACT OF FEDERAL ACTION ON STATE ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATION”, 31 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev. 67, Lexis)
There is empirical evidence that, at least in some areas, state regulation may do a better job of addressing local environmental
concerns in a cost-effective manner. Several states clean up abandoned hazardous waste sites at lower cost and more rapidly than the
federal Superfund program. n148 Similarly, federal regulations may hinder the adoption of more effective pollution control or
resource conservation strategies, and state policy-makers may be more sensitive to such concerns. The federal CAA requires many
states to adopt suboptimal pollution control strategies when equally stringent--but differently targeted--measures would produce better
results. n149 In the wetlands context, states took the lead in evaluating wetland functions and incorporating the ecological value of
particular wetlands into the regulatory process when there was no evidence that similar considerations entered the federal permitting
process. n150 In other words, [*108] at a given level of stringency, some states were beginning to incorporate ecological
considerations so as to maximize the environmental value of regulations on wetland development when the federal government was
doing no such thing.

3
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T Montana DA
1. No link – the counterplan is a state based energy policy – the link is based off of federal energy policies and even if it was
a federal policy the blame would be put on senators not the governor

2. No impact – The Globe and Mail says that there has been mining since 1897 – no reason why right now is the key time for
biodiversity loss or why extinction of a few species in Montana will cause a total collapse of biodiversity AND Species
extinction is natural – no impact

Marc Morano and Kent Washburn, WorldNet Daily, 2000


Part 1 Shaky science behind save-rainforest effort New TV documentary finds skeptics among researchers,
http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/ag-forst/2000-July/015413.html

Stott agrees that the focus on species loss is misguided from a scientific point of view. "The earth has gone through many
periods of major extinctions, some much bigger, let me emphasize, than even being contemplated today and 99.9999
percent (of all species) and I wouldn't know the repeating decimal have gone extinct. Extinction is a natural process," he asserts.

3. If Schweitzer wins he will drill for as much oil as he can

MIKE DENNISON, Gazette State Bureau, 8-3-08 (“Schweitzer defends his record on oil production”
http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/08/03/news/state/21-schweitzer.txt)

Schweitzer said Brown can talk all he wants, but oil production during his administration is higher than under administrations of three
prior Republican governors - and Montana is one of only several states where oil production has increased since 2004.

Schweitzer believes production will continue to be fairly strong in Montana, and that he deserves some credit for the increase under
his administration. Leasing of state lands for oil and gas has doubled under his administration, he said, and he's traveled to Canada to
entice producers, put on seminars for producers about Montana's tax and regulatory structure, and pressed for more pipeline capacity
to move Montana products.

"I love oil production, and I'm bragging about it," Schweitzer said. "If I was on the other side, I wouldn't bring this issue up."

4
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T Montana DA

Increased drilling in Montana will have devastating affects on the wildlife –


killing key species
MIKE DENNISON, Gazette State Bureau 1-18-08, (“Wildlife groups, energy firms debate development”
http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/01/18/news/state/26-developmentdebate.txt)

HELENA - This weekend in Great Falls, hunting groups, wildlife managers and others will raise the alarm about how runaway oil-
and-gas development in Montana could have a huge effect on wildlife.
"As we looked at this issue more and more, and what's occurred in Wyoming and Colorado, we (thought), 'We don't want to be like
them,' " said Craig Sharpe, executive director of the Montana Wildlife Federation. "We don't want the large footprint, the damage that
has occurred in Wyoming."
Yet oil-and-gas industry officials - some of whom will attend Saturday's symposium sponsored by the federation - wonder what the
big deal is.
They agree that Montana could see more oil-and-gas development in the coming years. But they say it's not likely to be anywhere near
the scale of Wyoming's gas boom - and therefore, Montana shouldn't rush into new restrictions to protect wildlife from something that
isn't going to happen.
"We agree that we need to look at this holistically," said Dave Galt, executive director of the Montana Petroleum Association. "But if
we have a problem, let's identify the problem. And there is a lot of disagreement on whether we have a problem or not."
The symposium is an educational event that the Wildlife Federation puts on for its members and the public every two years, Sharpe
said. This year's goal is to "have hunters and anglers far more engaged in oil-and-gas development and the impacts of oil-and-gas
development," he said.
Wildlife groups started becoming concerned early last year, in part after they saw a PowerPoint presentation by the state Department
of Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
The presentation showed intensive natural-gas drilling and road building in Wyoming and Alberta, suggesting that the same could
happen in Montana and possibly harm such species as sage grouse and mule deer.
"Energy development in Montana, along with urban development, will have more impact to fish and wildlife resources during the next
10 years than we have seen over the past 50," one of the slides in the PowerPoint presentation said.
Industry officials objected to the slide show, saying it grossly overstated what might happen in Montana.
For example, it showed extensive gas drilling and road building in Wyoming's Jonah field, which has reserves of about 10 trillion
cubic feet of gas.
The entire state of Montana has only about 1 trillion cubic feet of natural-gas reserves, state energy officials say.
"We don't have the geological structure that created the Jonah field," said Tom Richmond, administrator of the Montana Board of Oil
and Gas Conservation.
Wyoming's Powder River Basin, which has seen extensive drilling and production for coalbed natural gas, also has far greater reserves
than does the same basin in Montana, Richmond said.
Oil production in Montana more than doubled from 2002 to 2006, natural-gas production increased about 17 percent, and the number
of wells went from 8,000 to 10,000.
Yet Montana production is dwarfed by that in Wyoming, where thousands of wells produced nearly 20 times the natural gas produced
in Montana in 2006 and 50 percent more oil.
Fish and game officials stopped showing the PowerPoint presentation last year, after the industry objected. They created a new one
that looks at current oil and gas development in Montana, primarily near the North Dakota border.
T.O. Smith, energy coordinator for the state Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said he'll show that presentation at the beginning
of Saturday's symposium.
Those sites may have fewer wells than the Wyoming and Alberta sites shown in the original PowerPoint, but they still demonstrate the
potential effects that natural-gas drilling can bring to a prairie landscape, Smith said.
Wildlife managers fear if this type of drilling occurs more often in other areas of Eastern Montana, species like the sage grouse could
be harmed. They point to recent studies by University of Montana wildlife biologist Dave Naugle, showing that gas drilling and its
accompanying roads can disrupt grouse breeding grounds.

5
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T Montana DA

Uniqueness overwhelms the link –


Brown can barely get half of his party to vote for him – one energy policy wont
tilt the tables enough
IR State Bureau - 07/08/08 (“Polls show Schweitzer leading Brown”
http://www.helenair.com/articles/2008/07/08/state/65st_080708_govpoll.txt)

Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer leads Republican challenger Roy Brown by 61 percent to 32 percent, a Rasmussen Reports poll
taken last week shows.

The telephone poll of 500 likely Montana voters showed Libertarian Stan Jones with 3 percent, while 5 percent were undecided. The
margin of error is plus or minus 4.5 percentage points. (The numbers in the poll don’t always add to 100 percent because of rounding.)

A Lee Newspapers poll of 625 likely Montana voters, conducted May 19-21 by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, showed Schweitzer
ahead of Brown, 55 percent to 30 percent, with Jones getting 2 percent. It found 13 percent of the voters undecided. The Lee poll had
a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Schweitzer is seeking re-election, while Brown has been a Billings legislator since 1999.

The Rasmussen Reports poll found Schweitzer leading Brown among men, 61 percent to 30 percent, and among women, 60 percent to
34 percent.

Ninety-six percent of Democrats and 25 percent of Republicans said they support Schweitzer, while Brown drew the backing of 68
percent of Republicans and 3 percent of Democrats, the Rasmussen Reports poll found.

29 percent lead proves people in Montana love what Schweitzer has done
Alden Downing, KLRU – The Spirit of Montana, 7-7-08 (“POLL SHOWS SCHWEITZER WITH SIGNIFICANT LEAD”
http://www.kulr8.com/news/state/24048599.html)

HELENA - As the election season heats up state democrats are encouraged by the latest Rasmussen poll, which shows Governor Brian
Schweitzer to have a very comfortable lead over republican opponent Roy Brown.
According to the poll, Schweitzer holds the support of 61% of voters compared to Brown's 32%. Even reportedly capturing 25% of
republican voters. But it's no surprising news to state democrats.
"Any time you see someone up 29% it kind of sends you back. If you remember Governor Schweitzer has had a very high stratosphere
of numbers all along," commented Democratic Party spokesperson Kevin O'Brien. "Four years ago he promised a new day in Montana
and he's delivered. And I think those numbers are a testament to that."

6
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

N/U – Brown will win

Polls don’t matter – Brown is doing the better campaigning that will propel him
to victory
Alden Downing, KLRU – The Spirit of Montana, 7-7-08 (“POLL SHOWS SCHWEITZER WITH SIGNIFICANT LEAD”
http://www.kulr8.com/news/state/24048599.html)

In a statement, Brown Campaign spokesperson Chris Wilcox said, "This poll does show a couple of things very clearly, and they're
things Roy Brown has been focused on since day one of his campaign.
First, Montanans expect you to earn their vote, and Roy Brown has been actively doing just that, visiting towns and cities all around
Montana, and calling on the governor to join him at debates in towns all around our state. Roy is working hard to earn their votes and
he'll continue to visit with every Montanan, even if they don't live in the biggest cities in the state."

Brown will win – Schweitzer is all talk and no game


Montana News Station, 7-14-08 (“Schweitzer over Brown in new poll”
http://www.montanasnewsstation.com/Global/story.asp?S=8631387)

Roy Brown's campaign sent the news station an email with their response on Tuesday. The email is written: "We don't run our
campaign based on polls. We're not going to just tell people what they want to hear. This election is about leadership and results, and
eventually the people of Montana will realize that the Governor is telling them everything they want to hear but in four years he hasn't
produced the results to back up his rhetoric."

7
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T California ptx


1. Non-unique – the title of the article they cut their internal link to is “It's
Official: The Crash of the U.S. Economy has begun.”
2. Non-unique internal link – Californian green spending is one of the highest
in the nation right now.
3. Turn – the Californian Republican party thinks incentives for alternative
energy are awesome – this is from their fucking website, prefer it.

Californian Republican Party - http://www.cagop.org/index.cfm/about_party_platform.htm - April 24, 2008

The California Republican Party is the party that believes in long-term responsible stewardship of California's bountiful natural
resources for future generations. We believe we can have both a healthy economy and a healthy environment and support
environmental policies based upon sound science, innovation, new technologies, and incentives rather than regulation, taxation, and
litigation. Environmental regulations must be balanced and tempered by the effect they will have on workers and on the economy. We
believe that the Kyoto Treaty is fundamentally flawed because it ignores the fact that the largest source of pollution in the world is
China, which is exempt from the requirements of Kyoto. We believe California industry should be the world's leader in developing
and manufacturing safe, renewable, and sustainable energy. We encourage the development of these new technologies and systems for
use in the domestic market, as well as for export to large polluters like India and China. We believe that entrepreneurs using
technology, innovation, and incentives are more likely to solve environmental problems than are bureaucrats. We support the creation
of tax credits to homeowners and builders who incorporate alternative energy systems into their homes, and also support offering tax
credits to people who turn in older, high-polluting cars. Our current dependence on foreign oil threatens both our national security and
economic prosperity by making us vulnerable to the will of dangerous foreign dictators. Through private initiative and enterprise, we
support the development of energy independent from foreign sources. To protect lives and property, we must thin many of our forests
using modern, environmentally sound methods to reduce the extremely high fire hazard. Our overgrown forests cannot safely be
allowed to burn "naturally," since they are in an unstable and unnatural condition. We believe city governments should be held to the
same standards of cleaning waste water that apply to private industry.

4. Non-unique – the Californian budget delay is already into its 8th week.

By JIM CARLTON August 4, 2008; http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121781229824208861.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California enters its eighth week after a budget deadline with no deal in sight between Republican and
Democratic lawmakers on a spending plan, a delay that brings the nation's most populous state closer to having to slash services
deeper and borrow at premium rates

5. This puts them in a double bind – either a) the impacts should have
happened 8 weeks ago and are empirically denied or
b) the impacts are occurring in the status quo –
terminally non-unique.

8
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T Georgia State D/A


1. Their Legislative Update card indicated that MRR had over 60 million
appropriated only down 5 million from previous years and never says that the
plan would cause a tradeoff.

2. Their Huff card indicates that MRR is a fundamental priority for schools in
Georgia, no reason why the Georgian state government would trade that off
with the plan if MRR for schools is that important

3. Their Huff card never says that MRR is key to schools in Georgia

4. No link- MRR provides renovation to schools in Georgia no reason why lack


of renovation would immediately lead to Georgia school collapse

5. Governor Sonny Perdue has been committed to the growth of Georgia’s


economy-no way he would allow this trade off if it so vital to the economy.
Also Georgia economy is one of the best in the country and is continually
growing- no way they collapse

Georgia Department of Economic Development, August 1, 2008,


http://www.georgia.org/PressCenter/NewsItems/Business/Georgia+Announces+Double+Digit+Increases+in+Jo
bs+Investment+for+Fiscal+Year+2008.htm?Popup=true
Governor Sonny Perdue announced today that 321 economic development projects located or expanded in the state during Fiscal Year
2008, resulting in double-digit growth percentages in the number of the projects, amount invested and jobs created. These companies,
who were assisted by the Georgia Department of Economic Development (GDEcD), will bring 19,668 jobs and $3.26 billion in
investment to the state. “As Governor I have made increasing jobs and investment a priority for my administration,” said Governor
Perdue. “I am very pleased our hard work is paying off as we continue to see companies show interest in Georgia’s business-friendly
environment and talented workforce.” These results represent a strong upward trend for Georgia, with investment increasing 17
percent over fiscal 2007 and jobs increasing 13.1 percent over the same period. The number of announcements increased 14.2 percent
as well. All areas of the state have benefited from the economic growth, with rural projects (outside the Atlanta, Columbus, Macon
and Savannah metro areas) accounting for 60 percent of all the new jobs announced and 56 percent of the investment. On Thursday,
Forbes.com released its annual ranking of the best states for business, and Georgia moved up to 5th, the biggest jump of any state.
Earlier in the week, Georgia was ranked as having the third best business climate among the 50 states, according to a survey of U.S.
corporate executives conducted every three years by Development Counsellors International (DCI). Georgia was identified by 20.4
percent of the 281 respondents to the 2008 survey as having the most favorable business climate. Georgia has above average economic
growth when compared with the rest of the country. Its gross domestic product increased by 2.8 percent in calendar year 2007,
according to a Bureau of Economic Analysis report. Georgia now has the fastest-growing economy in the Southeast and ranks 11th in
the country in terms of growth. “We are continuing to promote Georgia’s key assets, including a strong workforce, excellent
transportation network and competitive cost of doing business, to garner more economic successes for the state,” said Ken Stewart,
commissioner of the Georgia Department of Economic Development. “Our team is out every day aggressively marketing Georgia
across the globe, and I’m proud to see positive results.”

9
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A/T Georgia State D/A


6. Their Business Wire Card
A. Is talking about the Atlanta economy not the Georgia Economy
B. Never says that the Georgia economy is key to regional economy or
that the regional economy is key to the United States economy.
C. Outlines that all the regional economy are reasonably balanced in the
national economy
D. The card also indicates that there will be no recession in the U.S.

7. Georgia wouldn’t cut spending to programs, empirically proven when


Georgia’s economy got worse the governor used reserve funds instead of
cutting programs. Also Georgia’s economy bad now-impacts should have
already happened

Wainwright Jeffers, July 17, 2008, http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=8695574&nav=5kZQ/


Georgia's economy is going through a tough time. Governor Sonny Perdue dipped deep into the state's reserve fund to keep the budget
balanced, and this fiscal year's budget just went into effect two and a half weeks ago. The state is in trouble because revenue
collections are far from revenue projections. And the less we spend the less the state collects. New Revenue Figures for June showed
the state 168-million dollars less that it did last June. That's a decrease of almost 10%. Even though the new budget year just started,
the Governor ordered the transfer of 600 million dollars from reserves to cover expected shortfalls. Now instead of running a budget
deficit, they're able to balance the deficit without making additional spending cuts," said Aaron Johnson, Assistant
Economics Professor at Darton College.

<insert impact defense>

10
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A2: Indiana Politics


1. The economy and daylight savings overwhelm the link
Indiana University, their source, Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics, 5-2-08,
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/gubernatorial%20poll%20release%2005.pdf
What is the most important issue in Indiana?
As was the case on the national level, the economy was by far the most important issue with 49% of the 1,274 respondents
selecting that as the issue the next governor should focus on ahead of other issues. This is virtually unchanged from two weeks ago.
Property taxes came in a distant second at 26% (21% two weeks ago). Two issues that some thought would be important are
government privatization (3%) and daylight saving time (5%), but neither ranked very high.

2. Thompson wont win – uniqueness overwhelms the link

A. Special Interest connections


Targeted News Service 7/7/08 “Indiana GOP: Hoosiers for Jill? Apparently Not” Lexis
Unable to attract support from the people she hopes to represent, Democratic candidate for governor Jill Long Thompson is relying
almost entirely on out of state special interest groups to fund her campaign. In the first quarter of 2008, more than 75 percent of
her funding came from donors outside of Indiana. With 70 percent coming from Washington, D.C., alone, Indiana Republican
Party Chairman Murray Clark said it is obvious who Jill Long Thompson would represent as governor. "Jill Long Thompson should
change her campaign name from 'Hoosiers for Jill' to 'D.C. Special Interests for Jill,' because Hoosiers don't appear to be
supporting her campaign," Clark said Second quarter finance reports will become public on July 15, but according to her
supplemental filings, she has received $805,000 from out-of-state sources in the second quarter of 2008. Washington D.C. based
groups EMILY'S List and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) have contributed $700,000 of that sum. "Jill Long
Thompson's reliance on her friends in Washington D.C. to fund her campaign raises serious questions about her plan for
Indiana," Chairman Clark said. "Why are these special interests playing such a big role in her campaign?"

B. Divided Unions
AP 7/28/08 “Unions slow to back Thompson in governor's race” Lexis
A rivalry among organized labor groups and a dispute over state workers' bargaining rights are costing Democrat Jill Long
Thompson money and volunteers in her bid to upset incumbent Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels. Although Democrats
traditionally are supported by major union groups, the United Auto Workers union and AFL-CIO which supported Long
Thompson's opponent in the May primary have refused to fully endorse her candidacy. Long Thompson's ties to another
major union, the Service Employees International Union which has contributed nearly $1 million to her campaign are
complicating matters. Ray Scheele, a political science professor at Ball State University, told The Journal Gazette of Fort Wayne for
a story published Monday that the UAW and AFL-CIO have weakened since the SEIU split and the groups are now battling each
other for membership and dues. That battle appears to be at the heart of the problem for Long Thompson, along with the debate
over her commitment to restoring the bargaining rights of state workers if she were to defeat Daniels.

C. Republican criticism
Journal Gazette 8/3/08 “GOP rips Long Thompson ad before it airs” <
http://www.journalgazette.net/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080803/LOCAL0202/808030477/1002/LOCAL>
Jill Long Thompson’s first TV ad of the general election cycle wasn’t even on the air yet when the Indiana Republican Party
labeled it a negative attack. “Jill Long Thompson is keeping with past practice,” GOP state party Chairman Murray Clark said in a
prepared statement. “She has a long history of negative campaigning and we’re not surprised in the least that the first ad from her
Washington D.C.-based campaign would choose cynicism over substantive policy ideas.”

D. Prefer our evidence, its 2 months newer – there evidence does not account
for the other democratic candidate dropping out

11
FILE NAME
DDI 2008 <GT>
Your Name

A2: Indiana Politics

3. No internal link
A. Daniels has been governor for 4 years since their ev, no reason why post-
election he would ban gay marriage.
B. Gay marriage would have to go through the state congress – Daniels not key
to the ban

4. Indiana steel industry in decline


Argonne National Laboratory, their author, 4-11-03, http://www.anl.gov/Media_Center/News/2003/news030411.htm
The U.S. steel industry produces more than 100 million tons of steel annually. Blast furnaces that convert iron into molten iron are
crucial components of steel companies, many of which are located in northwest Indiana. Because of aging technology, Indiana's
steel industry is losing its competitive edge.

5. Alt causes to heg


A. Military overstretch – not enough troops to be deployed all around the world
B. Iraq and Afghanistan has destroyed our international credibility to deter
asymmetric threats

12