You are on page 1of 12

WNDI 2008 1

Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg


Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg..........................................................................................................................1
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg.............................................................................................1
1NC Shell....................................................................................................................................................................2
1NC Shell........................................................................................................................................2
1NC Shell....................................................................................................................................................................3
1NC Shell........................................................................................................................................3
1NC Shell....................................................................................................................................................................4
1NC Shell........................................................................................................................................4
Uniqueness..................................................................................................................................................................5
Uniqueness......................................................................................................................................5
Uniqueness..................................................................................................................................................................6
Uniqueness......................................................................................................................................6
Uniqueness..................................................................................................................................................................7
Uniqueness......................................................................................................................................7
Uniqueness..................................................................................................................................................................8
Uniqueness......................................................................................................................................8
Links............................................................................................................................................................................9
Links................................................................................................................................................9
Internal Links to Elections........................................................................................................................................10
Internal Links to Elections..........................................................................................................10
Impact........................................................................................................................................................................11
Impact............................................................................................................................................11
Impact........................................................................................................................................................................12
Impact...........................................................................................................................................12
WNDI 2008 2
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

1NC Shell
Uniqueness- The Oil Speculation bill won’t pass now
Rascoe, Ayesha. (Staff Writer). Reuters. “Deal offered to move Senate speculation bill”. Date Published: 28
July 2008. Date Accessed: 28 July 2008. < http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_
3_MOLT/idUSN 2830704220080728>.
Senate Democratic leaders on Monday offered their Republican counterparts a deal to move forward
with legislation aimed at reining in excessive energy speculation, but one key lawmaker doubted the
bill would pass before Congress adjourned for its month-long August recess. In an effort to break an
impasse over the measure, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid late on Monday gave Republicans the
chance to offer four amendments to the bill that would, in part, expand offshore oil drilling and
develop vast oil shale fields in the West. Republicans had wanted to offer almost two dozen
amendments to the speculation bill, but Reid said there was not enough time to debate that many
proposals with other important legislation pending and the clock ticking down to the August recess.
"We have introduced comprehensive proposals that would lower gas prices in the short term while addressing
the root cause of the problem for the long term," Reid said. The chairman of the Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committee doubted the bill would move any time soon. "I'm not optimistic by the
end of this week, when we're scheduled to adjourn before August, we're likely to see legislation in this
area passed unless there is a change of heart," Sen. Jeff Bingaman told reporters.

Link- Alternative energy is a key issue for the Democrats


Hulse, Carl. (NY Times Writer). New York Times Online. “Spotlight on Gas Prices, and Parties in Stalemate”.
Date Published: 24 July 2008. Date Accessed: 28 July 2008. < http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/us/24
cong.html>.
Congressional Republicans and Democrats agree that high gasoline prices are the driving domestic
political issue of the moment, spurring new campaign advertisements and maneuvering almost every
day. But that is about all they can agree on when it comes to the national panic at the pump. Making it
increasingly clear that the Congressional debate is more a matter of political positioning than policy creation,
the Senate failed Wednesday to come to terms on the ground rules for considering an energy bill, delaying a
proposal to curb speculation in oil futures and stymieing a broader review of energy initiatives. The
stalemate is drawing sharp contrasts for the November election. On the one side is the Democratic
leadership, pushing its view that oil companies must be pressed to explore their current holdings and
that the nation should pursue more alternative energy sources without opening areas now off limits to
drilling. On the other are Republicans with their dominant message: Drill. “We should come out for
developing more American energy, and not rely on expensive foreign sources,” said Senator Thad Cochran of
Mississippi, senior Republican on the Appropriations Committee. “We can develop our offshore resources far
from the coastline in the Gulf of Mexico, for example, and add to our energy supply.” Republicans say they
are willing to back alternative energy proposals and conservation as well but drilling has been their priority.
And in an election season when the terrain has been steeply tilted against them, Republicans say they have
finally struck pay dirt on an issue they can exploit with some success. Polls show that Americans want
cheaper gasoline and that many are willing to embrace new drilling if it can bring down the price.
Democrats, worried about defections in the ranks, are scrambling to avoid votes on expanded drilling
and this week canceled a series of Senate committee sessions that could have provided an opening for
Republicans. In the House, Democrats are increasingly bringing legislation to the floor under rules
that deny Republicans the chance to counter with a drilling proposal.
WNDI 2008 3
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

1NC Shell
2. Concessions to democrats key to COFTA passage
Inside U.S. Trade, Erik Wasson, 3/14/2008, “Pelosi links TAA to Colombia FTA, business nervous about
forcing vote,” lexis
But a Democratic lobbyist cast doubt that the speaker has outlined a trade-off between TAA passage and
support for the Colombia FTA. He said that it is unlikely the TAA bill would be sufficient to sway
Democrats to vote for the Colombia FTA, and said the White House would have to offer concessions
far more meaningful to Democrats to strike a deal. But any such concession would unlikely be acceptable
to Republican members, he speculated. Pelosi did not insist that the administration accept the comprehensive
House passed bill, which it threatened to veto last year, but said Democrats could work with the
administration on the exact terms of a bill. "It would have to be robust, addressing not only income and
health and other considerations,"she said. Pelosi was reacting to the announcement by Schwab on March 12
that the Bush administration plans to send up the final implementing bill for the FTA shortly after the Easter
recess even if the congressional leadership does not agree. But Pelosi expressed doubt that the administration
would carry out that threat. "I don't think it's going to happen, but there have been soundings coming from
the administration that they are going to send this bill over," she said. "And I would say this: we have a
consultation process that I think should be honored." Business supporters of the Colombia FTA make the
point that despite Schwab's announcement, there has been no formal White House decision signed off by
President Bush to actually send the implementing bill to Congress over the objection of the House leadership.
This may be partially due to the fact that the high-level outreach by the administration to Pelosi by cabinet-
level officials such as Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has only gone on for four weeks, which some see as
too short to bear fruit, one lobbyist said. Pelosi met with Paulson on March 5, roughly three weeks after she
met with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Feb. 13. In the meeting with Paulson, Pelosi said she would
discuss the Colombia FTA with House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY) who
has been hospitalized in New York. She also said she wanted to discuss the issue with members of the
caucus, but her spokesman said that would not necessarily mean a formal caucus meeting. As of mid-week,
anti-FTA Democrats said they had not been approached by Pelosi on the Colombia FTA, according to House
aides. In addition, Reps. Betty Sutton (D-OH), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Mike Michaud (D-ME) and Phil Hare
(D-IL) may call for a caucus meeting to debate the issue if there is any sign from Pelosi that she would
consider allowing a vote, they said. Hare called on the leadership in a March 12 statement to use "all the tools
in its power to ensure the flawed Colombia FTA is not enacted." The Change to Win federation issued a
March 12 statement and print ad urging Congress to vote down the Co-lombia agreement. A labor source said
that the unions will use the FTA vote in close House races in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan and New York.
The issue could help unseat vulnerable House Republicans like Reps. Thomas Reynolds (R-NY), Phil
English (R-PA) and elect a Democrat to the seat of retiring Rep. James Walsh (R-NY), he said. The labor
source said that traditionally pro-free trade Democrats Reps. Joseph Crowley (D-NY) and Adam Smith (D-
WA) will not face negative consequences from a no vote on Colombia given their overall record. Given that
Demo-crats are in the majority, such members will not face a reduction in business contributions, he said.
Schwab and Deputy USTR John Veroneau emphasized this week that their threat of sending up the bill was
meant to foster a negotiation with the leadership. "We have not yet had a negotiation that we would like to
have with the con-gressional leadership that lays out a path forward to facilitate that vote," Veroneau
said in a March 12 press briefing at the White House. One pro-FTA source called Schwab's announcement on
forcing a vote a "big mistake," saying that it could stiffen opposition instead of leading to negotiations,
possibly endangering the entire trade agenda. The administration seems to assume that once the bill is
submitted and a vote is certain, supporters will be able to generate sufficient votes for passage. Supporters
of the FTA estimate that they need between 30 and 40 Democrats to support the deal, depending on
how many Republicans will vote for it.
WNDI 2008 4
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

1NC Shell
This allows the Republicans to add their oil drilling amendments to the Oil Speculation
Bill, which results in increased oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.

Oil Drilling Kills Biodiversity-


ANWR is the most important repository of biodiversity in North America
M. Lynne Corn, Bernard A. Gelb Resources, and Pamela Baldwin, Congressional Research Service,
August 28, 2002, “ANWR,” Almanac of Policy Issues,
http://www.policyalmanac.org/environment/archive/crs_anwr.shtml
The FLEIS rated the Refuge's resources highly: "The Arctic Refuge is the only conservation system unit that
protects, in an undisturbed condition, a complete spectrum of the arctic ecosystems in North America" (p.
46). It also said "The 1002 area is the most biologically productive part of the Arctic Refuge for wildlife and
is the center of wildlife activity" (p. 46). The biological value of the 1002 area rests on the very intense
productivity in the short arctic summer; many species arrive or awake from dormancy to take advantage of
this richness, and leave or become dormant during the remainder of the year. Caribou have long been the
center of the debate over the biological impacts of Refuge development, but other species have also been at
issue. Among the other species most frequently mentioned are polar bears, musk oxen, and the 135 species of
migratory birds that breed or feed there.
WNDI 2008 5
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Uniqueness
Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- Republicans are blocking it until they get oil drilling
amendments
Talley, Ian. (Writer for the Dow Jones Newswire, Former Associated Press Writer). Wall Street Journal
Online. “Senate Energy-Speculation Bill Is Blocked”. Date Published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July
2008. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121702679230086263.html>.
Senate Republicans on Friday blocked a vote on legislation to rein in speculation in the energy markets,
instead calling for energy votes that would expand domestic petroleum production and more nuclear
power development. Democrats, in a 50-43 vote, failed to gain the 60 votes needed to bring the
speculation bill forward for consideration on the Senate floor. Now they face another week of energy
debate as Republicans threatened to hold the measure up to hammer home their "drill more, use less"
policy. The Democrats' legislation would require the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to set limits
on the amount of speculative trades that can be made by participants who aren't buying futures to offset their
exposure to the actual commodity, including in over-the-counter markets and other exchanges exempt from
the same oversight as the New York Mercantile Exchange. "There's clearly nothing more important in the
country for Congress to deal with ... than the price of gas at the pump," said Sen. Mitch McConnell
(R., Ky.). The minority leader said his party would continue to hold up business on the Senate floor
until Democrats allowed them to offer a series of amendments on expanded offshore drilling, oil-shale
development, nuclear power and other energy alternatives.

Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- Republicans can block it until the recess
Bloomberg News. (Bloomberg.com is among the top five most-trafficked financial sites on the Web. It is regarded
as a premier site for news and financial information). The Boston Globe Online. “Oil-speculation bill blocked”. Date
Published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2008/07/26/oil_
speculation_bill_blocked/>.
Senate Republicans blocked action yesterday on legislation proposed by the Democrats to curb
speculation in energy markets and reduce record oil prices. The measure, sponsored by Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid, didn't get the 60 votes required to end debate and bring it to a final vote. The tally was
50-43. Republicans want to be able to debate numerous amendments to the legislation, including
expanding offshore drilling for oil and natural gas. Reid, of Nevada, said the Republicans were trying to
talk the legislation to death. He proposed limited amendments, with the goal of moving the measure before
Congress leaves for its August break. "It looks increasingly unlikely that the Senate will move Reid's
aggressive antispeculation measure before the August recess," Christine Tezak, analyst for Stanford
Group Co. in Washington, said in a note yesterday.
WNDI 2008 6
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Uniqueness
Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- Bipartisan standoff, Concessions to Republicans are
necessary
Doggett, Tom. Reuters. “UPDATE 2-U.S. Senate energy speculation bill fails key vote”. Date Published: 25 July
2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.reuters.com/article/etfNews/idUSN2549227020080725>.
Sixty "yes" votes were required in the 100-member Senate for the bill to move forward, but the
measure received only 50 "yes" votes, while 43 lawmakers opposed. Senate Democrats said the
legislation was needed to give the government new powers to curb speculators, whom many lawmakers
accused of being behind the run-up in crude oil and gasoline prices. Senate Majority Leader Harry
Reid said "we'll come back and visit" the legislation, though he did not specify when. "Republicans once
again have run away from an opportunity to provide a short-term solution to our energy crisis," Reid
said. "While Democrats have worked to stop greedy speculators who artificially inflate oil prices,
Republicans have chosen to protect them." Senate Republicans strongly opposed the bill because it
focused only on speculation, and they argued the legislation should be modified to also boost U.S. oil
production by allowing more offshore drilling and developing vast oil shale fields in the West.
Republicans said tight petroleum supplies that were unable to keep up with demand were the cause of
high energy prices. "Americans are insisting we do more. They want us to do something to cut the
price of gas and lessen our dependence on Middle East oil," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch
McConnell. "And so I ask my friends (Democrats) on the other side the same simple question I asked them
yesterday: If you won't act now, with dialysis patients cutting back on treatments because of high gas
prices, when will you? What is it going to take?" McConnell said.

Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- Republicans have enough votes to block it
Doggett, Tom and Ferraro, Thomas. Reuters. “Republicans have votes to kill oil speculator bill”. Date Published:
24 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.reuters.com/article/etfNews/idUSN2444564520080724>.
U.S. Senate Republicans said they had the votes to block on Friday a Democratic bill that seeks to curb
excessive speculation in the energy markets. Democrats want to rein in speculators, whom they blame
for soaring crude oil and gasoline costs. Republicans say going after speculators alone is not the answer
and more domestic oil production is needed to bring down prices. Democrats, who control the Senate
51-49, need 60 votes in the 100-member chamber to clear the procedural hurdle erected by Republicans
demanding consideration of amendments to the bill that would add language opening offshore areas to oil
drilling and allow the development of oil shale fields in the West. But Don Stewart, a spokesman for
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, said on Thursday that Republicans had enough support
to stop the bill from going forward.
WNDI 2008 7
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Uniqueness
The Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass- Republican opposition
Hulse, Carl. (NY Times Writer). New York Times Online. “Senate Energy Debate at Impasse”. Date
Published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/26/
washington/26senate.html>.
The political fight over high fuel prices produced little progress in Congress on Friday as Senate
Republicans blocked a Democratic effort to force a vote on legislation intended to curb what
lawmakers consider excessive speculation in oil futures. By a vote of 50 to 43, the Senate fell 10 votes
short of the 60 needed to cut off debate on the speculation measure as Republicans demanded that they
be allowed to offer amendments on lifting a ban on coastal oil drilling, expanding the use of nuclear
power, removing oil from Western shale and other energy production proposals. “Give us a week to
present issues that the American people will understand,” said Senator Pete V. Domenici of New Mexico,
senior Republican on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. “And let’s vote on them. That’s what
this is about.” Democrats said Republicans were essentially filibustering a measure they supported since
there is a bipartisan sentiment that speculation has been a factor in the jump in oil prices. Democrats accused
the Republicans of stalling since Democrats had offered a chance for at least one broad amendment that
could encompass oil drilling and other initiatives. “They don’t want to do anything on energy except talk
about it,” said Senator Harry Reid, Democrat of Nevada, the majority leader. The impasse in the Senate,
coupled with a similar stalemate in the House, puts Congress on the verge of leaving next week for an
extended break over the month of August without either the House or Senate approving new legislation
intended to lower gasoline prices, a topic developing into the chief domestic issue of the presidential
campaign.

The Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- shift in public attitude
Kirchgaessner, Stephanie and Weitzman, Hal. (Financial Times writers). Financial Times.com. “Curbs on
energy speculators halted”. Date published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008.
<http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ebef 96d0-5aab-11dd-bf96-000077b07658.html>.
A US Senate proposal designed to curb speculation and increase transparency in the energy markets
was blocked by Republican legislators yesterday.
The move frustrates Democratic efforts to show the party is taking action on record petrol prices. The
Stop Excessive Speculation Act, sponsored by Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, fell 10 votes
short of clearing a procedural hurdle.
The defeat strengthened the view that the Republicans are gaining traction in the public debate over
how to address record oil prices - an issue that has taken centre stage in the presidential election campaign.
The vote marks a victory for the futures industry and Wall Street banks, such as Goldman Sachs, which
lobbied heavily against Mr Reid's proposal, and is a setback for the airline and trucking industries, which
strongly supported it.
WNDI 2008 8
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Uniqueness
Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now- democrats divided, Pelosi refuses to allow Republican
amendments
Chaddock, Gail Russell. (Staff Writer of the Christian Science Monitor). Christian Science Monitor Online.
“Congress Deadlocked on Ways to Lower Gas Prices”. Date Published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008.
<http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0726/p25s37-usec.html>.
Two potential solutions fell short on key votes this week. On Thursday, the House rejected a measure
that would have released about 70 million barrels of oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve. On
Friday, Senate Republicans blocked a move that would have led to a vote on a bill to stop excessive
speculation in energy markets. Both foundered on the same issue: whether to lift a congressional ban
on exploration and drilling in protected offshore areas and in the Arctic wilderness. Republicans are
eager to lift the ban and promote more drilling. It's one of only a few GOP issues that appears to be
gaining widespread support among voters. But for Democratic leaders, the issue is politically toxic.
Senate and House Democrats in hard-hit states, such as Michigan and Ohio, want to lift the ban. Those
representing coastal districts generally oppose it. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she will not allow a
floor vote on offshore drilling. President Bush lifted an executive ban on offshore exploration on the outer
continental shelf on July 14 and challenged Congress to lift its own ban. "What the president would like to
do is to have validation for his failed policy. I'm saying that that's not something that will come easily
to him," she said in a press briefing on Thursday. She says that the White House and oil companies must
first "exhaust other remedies," including drilling onshore in the 68 million acres already open to exploration
and drilling.

Oil Speculation Bill won’t pass now-Concession to Republicans necessary


Barrett, Ted. (CNN Congressional Producer). CNNPolitics.com. “Partisan dispute divides Congress over energy
legislation”. Date Published: 25 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS
/07/ 25/congress.gridlock/>.
Congress is locked in a partisan dispute over energy legislation that has produced plenty of combustible
debate but is unlikely to produce a bill to help lower gas prices anytime soon.
In the Senate, a bill meant to crack down on oil speculation has stalled because of a partisan procedural
fight. On Friday, Republican senators were able to prevent a final vote on the bill by winning a
procedural vote. Democrats got 50 votes, 10 votes short of the 60 required by Senate rules. Forty-three
GOP senators voted against the bill. "The Republican senators have chosen to take a dodge," Senate Majority
Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said after the vote, according to The Associated Press. "If you don't like our
speculation bill, what do you want? Silence. They said they want this energy debate to go on forever." The
fight in the Senate revolves around Republicans wanting to offer up to 28 amendments on a range of
energy issues, including an expansion of offshore drilling, but Democrats want to limit them to two,
saying there is not enough time to consider more. Republicans said they want an open debate and the
opportunity to vote on a wide range of issues. They accused Democrats of trying to limit amendments
to avoid a vote on offshore drilling -- an assertion the Democrats deny. Democrats counter that
Republicans simply want an endless debate and are looking for an excuse to defeat the bill if they don't
get everything they want.
WNDI 2008 9
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Links
The plan is seen as a major democratic win, which forces the democrats to concede the oil
drilling amendment to the Republicans which won’t happen in the Status Quo
Barrett, Ted. (CNN Congressional Producer). CNNPolitics.com. “Partisan dispute divides Congress over energy
legislation”. Date Published: 25 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008. <http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/
07/25/congress.gridlock/>.

On the political front, lawmakers of both parties point to divergent polls that show the majority of
Americans back their approaches. "We know that over 70 percent of the American public believes that we
ought to expand domestic production of oil and gas, both onshore and offshore," Senate Minority Leader
Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said this week. Republican candidates will highlight that poll finding in
their campaigns in the months ahead, GOP aides said this week. Democrats said the public blames the
Bush administration for high gas prices. "Yes, we think energy is going to be a big issue in the fall,"
said Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who heads the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
"We think the American people side with us on getting independent of oil rather than trying to drill
your way out of the problem." Analyst Stuart Rothenberg of The Rothenberg Political Report said both
sides are unlikely to capitulate because "neither party believes that a compromise is in its best interest,
so that it has to compromise." "The Republicans believe that energy is their winning issue," Rothenberg
said, noting that the GOP has major weaknesses when it comes to the economy and the war in Iraq. "They've
decided that this is the issue that they can portray the Democrats as not really interested in lowering
energy prices, getting more energy into the system. "Democrats on the other hand don't see it as a
fundamental weakness," he said. "They don't think it's a big loser for them. They think the election is about
other things, and they believe they have neutralized the Republican attacks by portraying the
Republicans as being in the pocket of Big Oil."

Plan is seen as key to Democrats, especially with upcoming elections


Burns, Alexander. (Staff Writer). Politico. “Lawmakers clash at energy debate”. Date Published: 28 July 2008. Date
Accessed: 28 July 2008. < http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm>.

Reps. Hilda Solis (D-Calif.) questioned why Republicans hadn’t voted more consistently for alternative
energy. And Stupak also hit back at the Republican team, alleging that the House GOP wanted to
maintain financial support for oil companies at expense of taxpayers. “Why do you continue to insist
on subsidies for oil companies that have made more money than any other companies in the universe?”
Stupak asked, provoking laughs as he said energy corporations were richer than companies in “other
galaxies, even.” Stupak argued that drilling could occur in unused land already accessible to oil
companies without opening up new areas, like coastal oil fields and the Arctic National Wildlife
Refuge, to energy firms.
WNDI 2008 10
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Internal Links to Elections


The Oil Speculation Bill will force Democrats to concede that more oil drilling is necessary,
giving McCain the boost he needs to win the election
Kirchgaessner, Stephanie and Weitzman, Hal. (Financial Times writers). Financial Times.com. “Curbs on
energy speculators halted”. Date published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July 2008.
<http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ebef 96d0-5aab-11dd-bf96-000077b07658.html>.
The apparent shift in public attitude could put pressure on Democrats - particularly Barack Obama,
the presidential contender - to revisit their long-held opposition to offshore drilling and give a boost to
John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee. Mr McCain had planned this week to highlight
his support for drilling proposals by flying to an oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico - a plan scuppered by poor
weather. Mr Reid accused Republicans yesterday of failing to support a "short-term solution to our energy
crisis" while protecting "greedy speculators". Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader,
countered by disparaging Democrats' focus on speculation. "The American people have been telling us
for months that the house is on fire and the Democrats just showed up at the scene with a squirt gun,"
he said.

Republicans will use the passage of the Oil Speculation Bill to give McCain the boost he
needs to win the election
Talley, Ian. (Writer for the Dow Jones Newswire, Former Associated Press Writer). Wall Street Journal
Online. “Senate Energy-Speculation Bill Is Blocked”. Date Published: 26 July 2008. Date Accessed: 26 July
2008. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121702679230086263.html>.
“There's clearly nothing more important in the country for Congress to deal with ... than the price of
gas at the pump," said Sen. Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.). The minority leader said his party would continue
to hold up business on the Senate floor until Democrats allowed them to offer a series of amendments on
expanded offshore drilling, oil-shale development, nuclear power and other energy alternatives. Republicans
have been trying to use a swell of public support for increased petroleum production -- including areas
currently closed on the Outer Continental Shelf -- to break Democrats' opposition to lifting a decades-
old drilling moratorium. Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said the
Republicans' strategy boiled down to pure politics. "They believe they have a winning hand, they
believe the 'drill now' is the winning message to take into November," when the country will elect a
new president, he said. Oil prices sank to their lowest in weeks Friday as investors questioned whether
crude has cooled enough to reflect a serious deterioration in demand. Prices at the pump eased to nearly $4 a
gallon, and light, sweet crude for September delivery fell $2.23 a barrel to $123.26 on the New York
Mercantile Exchange. But Americans continue to feel the pinch from high fuel prices, and recent polls
suggest that energy remains a top economic issue for voters.
WNDI 2008 11
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Impact
Their technological improvements cards are lies – Prudhoe Bay proves that drilling will
devastate the local marine environment with oil spills and other toxic chemicals, as well as
significantly contribute to global warming.
Pamela Miller, Arctic Connections, “The Impact of Oil Development on Prudhoe Bay,” No date given,
http://arcticcircle.uconn.edu/ANWR/arcticconnections.htm
There is about a spill a day at Prudhoe Bay. The Prudhoe Bay oil fields and Trans-Alaska Pipeline have
caused an average of 409 spills annually on the North Slope since 1996 (Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation spill database 1996-1999). Roughly 40 different substances from acid to waste
oil are spilled during routine operations. Over 1.3 million gallons spilled between 1996 and 1999, most
commonly diesel and crude oil. Diesel fuel is acutely toxic to plant life. A study of diesel spills in Alaska's
arctic found that 28 years later there were still substantial hydrocarbons in the soil and little vegetation
recovery. The Exxon Valdez studies show petroleum hydrocarbons pose higher risks to fish and wildlife than
previously known and that there is long-lasting ecological damage. Prudhoe Bay is a major source of air
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The oil industry on Alaska's North Slope annual emits
approximately 56,427 tons of oxides of nitrogen, which contributes to smog and acid rain. This is more than
twice the amount emitted by Washington, DC (EPA National Air Pollutant Emissions Trends1900-1998,
2000). North Slope oil facilities release roughly 24,000-114,000 tons of methane, a greenhouse gas.
Substances associated with Prudhoe Bay drilling operations, natural gas facilities, and incinerators were
detected in accumulated snow in the area. Despite improvements in drilling waste disposal techniques over
the years, problems remain: During horizontal drilling of the Colville River pipeline crossing for Arco's
Alpine field, 2.3 million gallons of drilling muds disappeared under the river in 1998. It is unknown where
they ended up and if they will ultimately pollute Alaska's largest arctic river. At Endicott, contractors for
British Petroleum illegally disposed of hazardous drilling wastes containing benzene and other toxics for at
least three years until a whistleblower came forward. Some of the waste reached the surface and workers
were exposed to hazardous fumes. In February 2000, BP was ordered to pay $15.5 million in criminal fines
and to implement a new environmental management program, and to serve 5-years probation for its failure in
reporting the dumping. BP also paid $6.5 million in civil penalties. Its contractor pled guilty to 15 counts of
violating the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and paid a $3 million fine. A huge cleanup job remains across the
North Slope. For example: Hundreds of old exploratory and production drilling waste pits have yet to be
closed out and the sites restored. More than 55 contaminated sites associated with the oil industry exist on the
North Slope (Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation). Many gravel pads are contaminated by
chronic spills. Oil companies will not re-use gravel from many abandoned sites due to concerns about
contamination. Although there have been some pilot studies of rehabilitation techniques for gravel pads in the
arctic oil fields, the technical or economic feasibility of restoring the tens of thousands of acres of roads and
drilling sites has yet to be proven.
WNDI 2008 12
Agenda Politics DA Addendum Neg

Impact
Disadvantage Turns the Case: When we have more oil from drilling, there will be less of a
push for alternative energy
Staff Writer. The Baltimore Sun Online. “Solar Power From Space”. Date Published: 25 July 2008. Date
Accessed: 27 July 2008. <http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/editorial/bal-
ed.space25jul25,0,7791081.story>.
The idea isn't new. It was originally developed by NASA in the 1960s, and it's been revisited periodically by
the departments of Energy and Defense. But each time, it was put aside as cost-ineffective. Oil was just $15
a barrel in the 1960s. Last year, when the report was written, oil was $80 per barrel, and today it's $128. No
wonder recognition that high oil prices threaten both the U.S. economy and the national security of
America is driving renewed interest in this technology. The price tag is daunting. In the 1970s, NASA
estimated infrastructure for a complete system could top $1 trillion. The latest report suggests sharing the
costs of a prototype with other space-faring nations. That's a gamble worth taking. Nations that can harness
the potential of satellite solar power will reap enormous benefits in an era of dwindling fossil fuel
supplies, with all that implies for economic growth and national security. Japan, for example, is planning
a prototype for 2020. We should be too. This is one space race the United States can't afford to lose.

Focusing on drilling trades off with global warming solvency.


Patrick J. Michaels, senior fellow in environmental studies, The CATO Institute, 7/18/08, “Cato Scholars
Comment on President Bush's Push to End the Ban on Offshore Drilling,”
http://www.cato.org/pressroom.php?display=ncomments&id=58
President Bush's call for offshore drilling to fight high oil prices is yet another sign that legislation
dramatically limiting our carbon dioxide emissions -- the main cause of global warming -- will never fly.
$4.00 a gallon gasoline has resulted in a drop in consumption of a few percent, and a rush to exploit new oil
sources. How expensive does gasoline have to get to reduce consumption by 70% -- the target of the
Lieberman-Warner bill recently debated on the Senate floor? This bill enjoyed the enthusiastic support of
Presidential candidate John McCain, who was one of the original authors. It will be very interesting to see
how President Bush defends this decision when the subject of global warming comes up at the G-8 summit in
Japan next month.