DA Neg Elections 32

8/14/2019 DA Neg Elections 32

1/38

WNDI 2008 1Elections DA Neg

Elections DA Neg

Elections DA Neg........................................................................................................................................................1

Elections DA Neg ............................................................................................................................1

1NC Elections DA......................................................................................................................................................4

1NC Elections DA ..........................................................................................................................4

1NC Elections DA......................................................................................................................................................5

1NC Elections DA ..........................................................................................................................5

1NC Elections DA......................................................................................................................................................6

1NC Elections DA ..........................................................................................................................6

Yes Obama .................................................................................................................................................................7

Yes Obama .....................................................................................................................................7

Yes Obama 8 Yr Jinx................................................................................................................................................8

Yes Obama 8 Yr Jinx ..................................................................................................................8

Yes Obama NV ........................................................................................................................................................9

Yes Obama NV ...........................................................................................................................9

Yes Obama Enthusiasm Gap..................................................................................................................................10

Yes Obama Enthusiasm Gap ....................................................................................................10

Links Nuclear Power .............................................................................................................................................11

Links Nuclear Power ................................................................................................................11

Links Alternative Energy.......................................................................................................................................12

Links Alternative Energy .........................................................................................................12

Links Alternative Energy.......................................................................................................................................13

Links Alternative Energy .........................................................................................................13

Links Ethanol ........................................................................................................................................................14

Links Ethanol ...........................................................................................................................14

Links PHEVs..........................................................................................................................................................15

Links PHEVs .............................................................................................................................15

Links Colorado ......................................................................................................................................................16

Links Colorado .........................................................................................................................16Links Colorado ......................................................................................................................................................17

Links Colorado .........................................................................................................................17

Link/Internals Energy Key.....................................................................................................................................18

Link/Internals Energy Key ......................................................................................................18

Internals West/Colorado Key.................................................................................................................................19

Internals West/Colorado Key ...................................................................................................19


2/38


Internals Bush Popularity Key ..............................................................................................................................20

Internals Bush Popularity Key ...............................................................................................20

Internals Bush Popularity Key ..............................................................................................................................21

Internals Bush Popularity Key ...............................................................................................21

Internals Bush Popularity Key...............................................................................................................................22

Internals Bush Popularity Key ................................................................................................22

Internals Bush Popularity Key (Ohio)...................................................................................................................23

Internals Bush Popularity Key (Ohio) ....................................................................................23

Internals GOP Base Key........................................................................................................................................24

Internals GOP Base Key ...........................................................................................................24

Internals Energy Key..............................................................................................................................................25

Internals Energy Key ................................................................................................................25

Internals-Uniqueness Obama leads Energy...........................................................................................................26

Internals-Uniqueness Obama leads Energy ...........................................................................26

Obama Solves Alt Energy ........................................................................................................................................27

Obama Solves Alt Energy ...........................................................................................................27

Obama Solves Warming ...........................................................................................................................................28

Obama Solves Warming .............................................................................................................28

Obama Solves Ethanol..............................................................................................................................................29

Obama Solves Ethanol .................................................................................................................29

Obama Solves Competitiveness ...............................................................................................................................30

Obama Solves Competitiveness .................................................................................................30

Impacts NMD Bad.................................................................................................................................................31

Impacts NMD Bad ....................................................................................................................31

Impacts Leadership................................................................................................................................................32

Impacts Leadership ..................................................................................................................32

Impacts Tax Cuts....................................................................................................................................................33

Impacts Tax Cuts .......................................................................................................................33

Impacts Health Care...............................................................................................................................................34

Impacts Health Care .................................................................................................................34

Impacts Health Care ..............................................................................................................................................35

Impacts Health Care ................................................................................................................35

Impacts Iraq Withdraw...........................................................................................................................................36

Impacts Iraq Withdraw ............................................................................................................36

Impacts CTBT........................................................................................................................................................37

Impacts CTBT ...........................................................................................................................37


3/38


AT: McCain Good....................................................................................................................................................38

AT: McCain Good .......................................................................................................................38


4/38


1NC Elections DA

( ) Obama leads but the race is close

Steve Kornacki, op-ed writer, 7-18-2008, State Polls Indicate Obamas Tidal-Wave Potential, But NationalPolls Are Tight; Both Are Right, The New York Observer, http://www.observer.com/2008/politics/state-polls-indicate-obamas-tidal-wave-potential-national-polls-are-tight-both-are-rig

If you look at the national-level data, BarackObama seems to be underachieving. In the latest Gallupdaily tracking poll, the presumptive Democratic nominee holds a scant two-point edge over John McCain.The margin is also two points in Rasmussen's daily pollwhich also shows a dead-even race when"leaners" are factored in. Some other recent polls have been a little more favorable to Obama, but thecombined weight of the available national data strongly suggests that Obama, despite his personalpopularity and the enormous built-in advantages his party enjoys this year, is locked in a much closerrace than he should be.

( ) Plan is popular and energy is key to the election

Reuters, 7-24-2008, LCV and NRDC Outline the Future of Global Warming Legislation and Steps to AddressHigh Gas Prices, http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS214817+24-Jun-2008+PRN20080624

"Tied into both the economy and the environment, energy will be the defining issue of this election," LCVPresident Gene Karpinski said. "The American people demand a new energy policy that breaks ouraddiction to oil and dirty coal. Members of Congress who fight for a clean, renewable energy future willbe back to fight next year, but those who stand in the way will have to answer to the voters in

November. A Gallup poll released today indicates that energy is the top issue priority for 51% Americanvoters. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/108331/Obama-Has-Edge-Key-Election-Issues.aspx). "Americans arefeeling pain at the pump and many experts say high gas prices are here to stay," NRDC's Energy AdvocateJim Presswood said. "With prices set in the global marketplace and only 2 percent of the world's oil reserveshere at home, there is simply nothing we can do to impact prices by drilling. The real solution is clear: wemust take bold action to break our addiction to oil and transition to a clean energy future. A future where newcars like plug-in hybrids go farther on a gallon of gas, enhanced public transit systems give Americans moretransportation options, and renewable sources of energy power our communities.

( ) Bush popularity is key to McCain

John McKinnon, 7-2-2008, How Bush Ratings Complicate McCains Presidential Fight,http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121493389576919869.html?mod=googlenews_wsjWASHINGTON -- President Bush's record unpopularity is playing an unprecedented role in the 2008campaign, complicating John McCain's task among key constituencies. Mr. Bush received a 66%disapproval rating in The Wall Street Journal/NBC poll for June, tying his own record for the highest everfor any president in the Journal/NBC poll. The previous highs were a 56% rating for Mr. Bush's father in late1992, and a 50% score for President Clinton in 1993. In the long-running Gallup Poll, Mr. Bush's disapprovalrating reached 69% this spring -- a record going back to the Truman administration. His disapproval rating inthe Journal poll is particularly striking among a number of key voter blocs for Mr. McCain in the Novemberelection: older voters (67%), women (71%) and independents (75%). Mr. Bush's second-term slide in thepolls has been especially sharp among independents, a group that Sen. McCain depends on. Now forMr. McCain to win in November, "at least one-third of McCain's voters will have to be people whodisapprove of the job George Bush is doing," most of them independents , says Republican pollster NeilNewhouse. And Sen. McCain must accomplish that feat while continuing to align himself with Mr. Bushon some of the administration's most controversial policies, notably the Iraq war.


5/38


1NC Elections DA

( ) McCain would hurt US science competitiveness.

Michael Feldman, Editor for HPCwire. 2-1-2008. HPCwire, Looking for a Tech-Savvy President.http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc/2089255.html

Romney andMcCain strike me as science and technology lightweights, especially in the realm of federalfunding forbasicresearch and science/math education. Since the Republican mantra for government is"less is more," I'm not sure what else we should expect. That said, I assume both candidates wouldsupport bipartisan COMPETES-type initiatives in the future, but commitment to funding is the real issue here(see below). On the other hand, Romney and McCain are both tech business-friendly, not just in their supportfor more H-1B visas, but also in other areas, such as reducing corporate tax rates and making the R&D taxcredit permanent. While neither candidate has shown any interest in politicizing science, as has been done inthe current administration, overall Romney andMcCain have demonstrated little enthusiasm for scienceand technology issues. If I had to pick one, I'd go with McCain for his Senate support for NASA and theCOMPETES Act. Buthis penchant for low taxes, high military spending and fiscal conservatismsuggests he's going to leave a lot of U.S. science and technology up to the private sector. While the

Republicans may think this approach is favorable to businesses, tech companies are unlikely to be

enthusiastic . In a recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Intel Chairman Craig Barrett expresses hisfrustration about the bipartisan failure of Congress to fund the science research and education agenda set out

in the COMPETES Act. Writes Barrett: "The funding decisions on the America COMPETES Act took placea few days after Congress passed a $250 billion farm bill. In the eyes of our political leaders, apparently, cornsubsidies to Iowa farmers are more important for our competitiveness in the next century than investing a fewbillion in our major research universities."

( ) That kills US heg

Zalmay Khalilzad, RAND, Losing the Moment? The Washington Quarterly 1995U.S. superiority in new weapons and their use would be critical. U.S. planners should therefore give higherpriority to research on new technologies, new concepts of operation, and changes in organization, with theaim of U.S. dominance in the military technical revolution that may be emerging. They should also focus onhow to project U.S. systems and interests against weapons based on new technologies. The Persian Gulf Wargave a glimpse of the likely future. The character of warfare will change because of advances in militarytechnology, wherethe [US] United Stateshas the lead, and in corresponding concepts of operation and

organizational structure.The challenge is to sustain this lead in the face of the complacency that the currentU.S. lead in military power is likely to engender. Thosewho areseeking to be rivalsto the United Statesarelikely tobe very motivated to explore new technologies and how to use them against it. A determinednationmaking the right choices, even though it possessed a much smaller economy, couldpose an enormouschallenge byexploitingbreakthroughs that mademore traditionalU.S. military methods less effectivebycomparison. For example, Germany, by making the right technical choices and adopting innovative conceptsfor their use in the 1920s and 1930s, was able to make a serious bid for world domination. At the same time,Japan, with a relatively small GNP compared to the other major powers, especially the United States, was atthe forefront of the development of naval aviation and aircraft carriers. These examples indicate that a majorinnovation in warfare provides ambitious powers an opportunity to become dominant or near-dominantpowers. U.S. domination of the emerging military-technical revolution, combined with the maintenance ofa force of adequate size, canhelp todiscourage the rise of a rival power by makingpotential rivals believethatcatching upwith the United Statesisahopelessproposition and that if they try they will suffer the same

fate as the former Soviet Union.


6/38


1NC Elections DA

( ) Sparks nuclear war

Zalmay Khalilzad, RAND, The Washington Quarterly, Spring 1995Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of aglobal rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guidingprinciple and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which theUnitedStates exercises leadership wouldhave tremendous advantages. First, the global environment wouldbe more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second,such a world would have a better chance of dealingcooperativelywith the world's major problems, such asnuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony byrenegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S.leadership wouldhelppreclude the rise of anotherhostileglobalrival, enabling the United States and theworld to avoid another global cold or hot warandall the attendant dangers, including a global nuclearexchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or amultipolar balance of power system.


7/38


Yes Obama

( ) Obama leads, but the race is fluid

CBS News, 7-15-2008, CBS Poll: Obama Leads But Race Looks Fluid,http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/15/opinion/polls/main4263422.shtml

(CBS) Presumptive Democratic nominee BarackObama leads Republican counterpart John McCain 45percent to 39 percent in the latest CBS News/New York Times poll of registered voters nationwide. The sixpercentage point spread is unchanged since June, when Obama led McCain 48 percent to 42 percent. Butmore than 1 in 10 voters now say they are undecided between the candidates - twice as many ,percentage-wise, as last month - and 28 percent of those who did express a preference say they might stillchange their mind. The race between McCain and Obama appears to be more fluid than the 2004 battlebetween Democratic nominee John Kerry and President George W. Bush. Four years ago this month, just 6percent of those surveyed were undecided between the candidates. And only 20 percent of those askedindicated their minds weren't yet made up.


8/38


Yes Obama 8 Yr Jinx

( ) Running for third consecutive GOP term ensures McCain defeat

Robert David Sullivan, guest columnist and managing editor of CommonWealth Magazine, 7-14-2008, McCainversus the eight-year electoral jinx, The Boston Globe,http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/07/14/mccain_versus_the_eight_year_electoral_jinx/

PRESIDENT BUSH has leftpresumptive GOP nominee John McCain with a lot of problems, but thebiggest may be the weak 50.7 percent of the vote that Bush received when running for reelection . That'sa problematic number because American political parties almost always lose support when trying tosecure a third term in the White House. The last time that a party improved its vote percentage after twoterms was in 1928, when Republican Herbert Hoover soundly beat Democrat Al Smith, the first Catholic tobe nominated to the presidency. Maybe Barack Obama's status as another "first" will bring about anotherexception to the rule. Then again, Smith wasn't on the ballot during an unpopular war and a scaryeconomy. Since 1928, there have been six elections in which one of the major parties was seeking a thirdconsecutive term in the White House - three for each major party. Only two attempts were successful.Democrat Franklin Roosevelt won a third term in 1940, and Republican George H. W. Bush succeededRonald Reagan in 1988; in both cases, the vote was much closer than it had been in the previous election.Not so lucky were Richard Nixon in 1960, Hubert Humphrey in 1968, Gerald Ford in 1976, and Al Gore in

2000. In 24 states, the party seeking a third term lost ground in all six elections. These includeMichigan, which the McCain campaign is targeting as its best chance to pick up a state won by John Kerryin 2004, and also the states ofColorado, Ohio, and Virginia, which the GOP is struggling to keep in itscolumn this year.


9/38


Yes Obama NV

( ) Obama will win Nevada new registration numbers

Don Frederick, LAT Political Blogger, 7-7-2008, In Nevada, the numbers game tilts Democratic, LA TimesBlog, http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/07/in-nevada-the-n.html

In Nevada, the numbers game tilts Democratic Nevada's vote in the 2000 and 2004 presidential electionswas relatively stable -- good news for Republicans. Its party registration figures, though, have beenundergoing a transformation, which this November might translate into glad tidings for Democrats .Emphasis on "might." Eight years ago, George W. Bush carried the Sagebrush State against Al Gore by21,597 votes out of about 609,000 cast (giving him a winning margin of roughly 3.5 percentage points).Four years ago, Bush won Nevada over John Kerry by 21,500 votes; with almost 830,000 cast, thepresident's margin was reduced a bit, to about 2.6 percentage points. Democrats could at least take solace inthe trendline. But they are finding much greater joy in a new set ofnumbers -- the voter registrationbreakdown, as of June, from the Nevada secretary of state's office. On its list of "active" voters, Democratsoutnumber Republicans by 55,560 -- an edge of about 5% among this entire pool of registrants, whichnumbers a bit more than 1 million. Especially encouraging for Democrats, as state Democratic Party officialKirsten Searer pointed out to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, is that at this point in 2004, the GOP had a 1%advantage in voter registration. We've got to give credit to Zac Moyle, executive director of the NevadaRepublican Party; he didn't try to sugarcoat the matter, saying, "We're disappointed by the numbers." Most

distressing must be ... ... the change so far this year. Since January, the GOP voter figure in Nevada hasactually gone down, by more than 5,000, while the number ofDemocrats has increased by close to 40,000.


10/38


Yes Obama Enthusiasm Gap

( ) Obama will win enthusiasm gap

Stephen F. Hayes, senior writer, 7-21-2008, The Enthusiasm Gap, The Weekly Standard,http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/320jlvio.asp?pg=2

There are risks to this strategy and the enthusiasm gap is chief among them. A Washington Post/ABC Newspoll last month found that nearly half ofthe liberals surveyed are enthusiastic about supporting BarackObama, while only 13 percent of conservatives are enthusiastic about McCain. More generally, 91percent ofself-identified Obama supporters are "enthusiastic" about their candidate; 54 percent say theyare "very enthusiastic." Seventy-three percent of such McCain supporters say they are "enthusiastic" abouthis candidacy, but only 17 percent say they are "very enthusiastic." A USA Today/Gallup poll reportedsimilar findings last week. That survey shows that while 67 percent of Barack Obama's supporters are "moreexcited than usual about voting" for their candidate, only 31 percent of John McCain's supporters can say thesame thing. More troubling for the McCain campaign is that more than half of those who identifiedthemselves as McCain backers--54 percent--say they are "less excited than usual" about their candidate. It isnot surprising that conservatives are not warming to a candidate who likes to talk about climate change andgovernment subsidies for displaced workers. But this coldness is increasingly alarming to some McCainbackers. They believe that all ofMcCain's efforts to win over Democrats and independents can only payoff if he is able to get conservatives to turn out to vote for him in November.

( ) Enthusiasm gap is large


Obama voters are far more enthusiastic about their candidate: Half of his supporters described

themselves as "enthusiastic" about Obama as nominee, while just 16 percent of McCain voters said the

same. Sixty-eight percent of McCain voters describe themselves as "satisfied" with the presumptive GOPnominee, while 14 percent say they are "dissatisfied." Only six percent of Obama voters say they are"dissatisfied" with the Democratic candidate. But there are some lingering reservations among formersupporters of Obama's toughest rival for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton. About one in five ofthose who say they voted for Clinton in the primaries now plan to support McCain in November. And just 29percent of former Clinton supporters who plan to vote for Obama feel "enthusiastic" about the candidate.


11/38


Links Nuclear Power

( ) Nuclear power popular


McCain has proposed that the U.S. build more nuclear power plants to generate electricity, and 57percent of Americans say they support doing so - up 12 points from April of last year and the highestpercentage since 1977.


12/38


Links Alternative Energy

( ) Alternative energy is popular

Suemedha Sood, 6-24-2008, In and Out With Offshore Drilling, The Washington Independent,http://www.washingtonindependent.com/view/getting-in-and-out

Yet even as the public seems more accepting of drilling, public opinion data also shows that Americansare more likely to seek other options before supporting drilling in off-limits coastal areas. In a NBCNews/Wall Street Journal poll taken earlier this month, Americans ranked a list of energy alternatives toaddress rising gas prices. The most popular option was to encourage the expansion of wind and solar

power. The offshore drilling option was the fourth on the list, only considered viable after looking into windand solar power, Alaska exploration and energy conservation.

( ) Alternative Energy good for republicans/popular

Anne C. Mulkern, staff writer, 6-23-2008, Political parties drill for blame in energy fight, The Denver Post,nexis

In a Zogby International poll this month asking what government actions people favored to lower fuel costs,60 percent backed encouraging domestic drilling. Almost as many, 59 percent, supported cutting demand byboosting fuel-efficiency standards, and 54 percent endorsed the use of alternative fuels such as ethanol

and biodiesel. The survey did not ask people to pick one option over another. Political advisers arecoaching Republicans to talkabout more drilling and renewable energy. Democratic strategists suggestgiving solutions that include cracking down on oil speculators and pushing gas alternatives. They also adviseblaming President Bush.

( ) Alternative energy is bipartisan

Alex Kaplun, E&ENews PM reporter, 3-10-2008, ENERGY POLICY: Poll shows voters united on alternatives,split on nuclear, oil industry incentives, E&E News, nexis

Voters from both parties continue to strongly favor increased federal support for policies such as

increased vehicle fuel efficiency, alternative energy development and greater use of mass transit but aremore divided on policies such as nuclear power and tax breaks for oil exploration, according to a new poll. Apoll released late last week by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press showed that 90 percentof voters -- regardless of party affiliation -- support government efforts to boost vehicle efficiency and

more than 80 percent support increased federal funding for alternative energy.


13/38


Links Alternative Energy

( ) Alt energy popular seen as economic stimulus

Ben Alder, 7-14-2008, Poll: Deep economic insecurity, politico.com, nexisAmericans are deeply worried about their economic prospects and they want government to invest in

expanding economic opportunity and assisting those in need, according to a new poll released today. The RockefellerFoundation/Time magazine poll of 2,008 Americans, conducted June 19-29, found significant increases in economic anxiety, especiallyamong young people and minorities, and dissatisfaction with the federal government's response. The percentage of Americansconcerned with their own economic situation, at 47 percent, has nearly doubled from 24 percent in January 2007, when the RockefellerFoundation conducted a similar study. The percentages of Americans who fear losing their job and have failed to pay a bill in the pastyear also rose since last January. Seventy-eight percent of respondents said they are facing greater financial risk than in the past and 55

percent say that Congress is hindering them from achieving economic security. Generation Y, defined as 18- to 29-year-olds in thissurvey, was the most pessimistic age cohort, with the bleakest view of the future. Forty-nine percent say America was a better place tolive in in the 1990s and will continue to decline, compared to 40 percent or less for every other age cohort. "There was really surprisingdata on how many young people feel so badly about their financial future," said Teresa Wells, chief media strategist for the RockefellerFoundation. "Half [of young people] think America's best days are behind us," said Margot Brandenburg, associate director offoundation initiatives at Rockefeller. "They have good reason to." She noted that half reported having gone without health insurance inthe last year. Sixty-two percent said that they have failed to pay a bill on time because they could not afford to. They are more likely thanolder people to have not gone to a doctor because of cost, to worry that they are not saving enough for retirement and to have borrowedmoney from a friend. And young Americans seem readier than older Americans to turn to government for the solution. Eighty-six

percent say more government programs should help those struggling under the current economic conditions. African-Americans andLatinos feel especially hard hit by recent economic turmoil, according to the survey. Ninety-six percent of African-Americans and 88

percent of Latinos believe the economy is on the wrong track. Congress is not the only political institution that gets a share of the blame:Almost 80 percent of African-Americans say the president is hindering their pursuit of economic security. "What we see is things areworse for everyone but more so for black and Latino workers," said Brandenburg. "They are more likely to be uninsured, to think thatthey aren't saving enough for retirement and lack the savings to handle an emergency. And they are more vocal in calling for governmentto play a role." For example, 93 percent of African-Americans and 87 percent of Latinos favor public works projects that would create

jobs. One notable trend is the emerging popularity of environmental regulation as an economic

imperative. Stricter pollution limits and tax credits for alternative energy development were supported

by 84 percent of all respondents, the highest of any proposal. Increasing the minimum wage, expandingpublic works projects were nearly as popular, with 83 percent and 82 percent approval respectively.Increases in unemployment benefits, government-funded childcare and government programs to provide healthinsurance were also supported by more than two-thirds of respondents as well. "If you look at what Americans are trying

to say to their government leaders," said Wells, "they are very interested in environmental solutions that

can help the economy."


14/38


Links Ethanol

( ) Ethanol is popular

Alex Kaplun, E&ENews PM reporter, 3-10-2008, ENERGY POLICY: Poll shows voters united on alternatives,split on nuclear, oil industry incentives, E&E News, nexis

A majority of voters -- 57 percent -- also supported increased funding for ethanol research , but thatfigure has dropped over the last couple of years from a high of67 percent in early 2006. The decline wasespecially pronounced among Republican voters, with 59 percent favoring the additional funding thisyear compared to 72 percent two years ago.


15/38


Links PHEVs

( ) Support for PHEVs is popular and key in Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania

Lorraine Wollert and JeffGreen, staff writers, 7-18-2008, GMs Volt Becomes Centerpiece in PresidentialDebate on Energy, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aVV3eMUSiMgQ&refer=politics

July 18 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp.'s plug-in electric car, the Chevrolet Volt, is becoming a must-have prop for the U.S. presidential candidates as they try to appeal to workers in contested states suchas Michigan and Ohio and show their commitment to weaning the country off of imported oil.Stopping at a technical center run by the largest U.S. automaker in Warren, Michigan, Republican JohnMcCain today called the Volt an illustration of how the U.S. can cope with rising crude oil prices and thedecline of manufacturingjobs. ``The eyes of the world are now on the Volt,'' McCain said at a meeting withautoworkers after sitting in the vehicle and getting a briefing on the car's technology from GM ChiefExecutive Officer Rick Wagoner and Vice Chairman Bob Lutz. Ìt's the future of America and the world.''The Arizona senatorand his Democratic rival, Senator BarackObama of Illinois, are holding up GM --beset by a collapse of its U.S. sales and three years of losses -- as a model of American ingenuity. McCainsaid the Volt, which GM aims to roll off assembly lines by 2010, demonstrates how U.S. automakers canmove smartly and quickly away from fossil fuels without shedding manufacturing jobs. `Ì've said the oldautomotive jobs aren't coming back,'' McCain said yesterday. ``But I also said in the same sentence that theBig Three would lead in green technologies and innovation and the new technologies that would restore the

life and vitality of the automotive industry in America. And General Motors is doing exactly that bydeveloping the Volt.'' Alternatives While the candidates' differences over whether to allow more oil drillingoff the U.S. coast has dominated the debate, on the stump they both are giving prominence to their plans toboost alternative energy development and foster technology to cut emissions. McCain, 71, and Obama, 46,come at the issue from different directions. McCain wants to boost innovation by offering purchasers of zerocarbon-emission cars a $5,000 tax credit. A graduated tax credit would apply to purchases of lower emissioncars such as the Volt. He would establish a $300 million prize for development of new battery technology forvehicles. He also wants to encourage construction of 100 new nuclear plants and invest government money indevelopment of clean-burning coal. Obama has pledged $150 billion in federal spending to create 5 million``green collar'' jobs to cut pollution and energy use, in part by promoting the use of renewable fuels andretooling factories. Oil Dependency McCain adviser Jim Woolsey said both proposals share the same goal,`àn end-run around oil dependency.'' The plans have another common target: protecting Americanmanufacturing jobs. Touting clean and green technology is a way for candidates to resonate in

competitive states such as Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, where factory workers are a substantialvoting bloc.


16/38


Links Colorado

( ) Alternative energy is popular in Colorado and key to the election

Alex Kaplun, E&E Daily Reporter, 6-3-2008, Campaign 2008: Colo. Senate candidates seek upper hand inrenewable energy debate, Environment and Energy Daily, nexis

Energy policy -- and in particular the development of renewable energy -- has been a major campaigntopic inColorado for several campaign cycles. And while it figures to be in play once again this timearound, Democrats and their allies in particular see an opening to score major electoral points byhighlighting what they describe as the Republican candidate's oil-friendly record in an era when such

an image can prove to be highly damaging to a campaign. Shortly after becoming the nominee lastmonth, Udall launched a 16-city tour in which he highlighted his renewable energy policy at stop after stop.Udall's first campaign ad of the season also focused on renewable energy. "Standing on your own. That's justthe Colorado way," Udall says in the 30-second spot. "We need energy solutions, green jobs and a cleanerfuture for Colorado." Thus far, Udall's message has been largely positive, focusing primarily on his owntrack record and vowing to expand the availability of renewable fuels if he gets to the Senate. AttackingSchaffer In the meantime, environmental groups -- which view the Colorado Senate race as one of their toppriorities in this cycle -- have gone on the air with ads attacking Schaffer for accepting campaigncontributions from oil and gas companies as well as voting in favor of tax breaks for the industry. "As apolitician and corporate oil executive, Bob Schaffer has had all of his fingers in big oil," the ad states.

"Colorado deserves cleaner representation in the Senate." Udall has long been a favorite of theenvironmental community, most notably for his efforts to push through a federal renewable electricitymandate. At the same time, environmental groups pledged to target Schaffer because of what they describe asan industry-friendly voting record and his background as an executive at the oil company Aspect Energy. ButSchaffer's allies have moved quickly to blunt what is expected to be a barrage of attacks from environmentalgroups by running their own ads that tout the former congressman's support for renewables. The same weekthat the League of Conservation Voters-led ads went on the air, the group Coloradans for Economic Grownlaunched its own ad campaign praising Schaffer for being an advocate for renewable energy -- highlightinghis vote for a 2001 energy bill that contained incentives for solar power, hybrid vehicles and alternative fuels."As a businessman, Bob led efforts to increase wind power sources," states the ad. "As our congressman, BobSchaffer voted to fund research for renewable energy projects." On the campaign trail, Schaffer has likewisediscussed the need for renewable energy but has also said the country needs to establish energy independencein part by increasing domestic energy production. Critics, however, say Schaffer's effort to embrace

renewable energy is an attempt to change his oil-friendly perception that will fall flat with voters."Obviously it's an attempt to mitigate the Oil Slick Bob image, but his record doesn't stand up" said RickRidder, a Colorado-based Democratic strategist. "It's difficult to become Mahatma Gandhi when you've beenGenghis Khan all your life." Colorado trend The back-and-forth on energy policy has become a staple ofrecent statewide political campaigns, as voters view the development of renewable energy as a

potentially major economic engine for Colorado and as voters in some corners of the state have

expressed concern about the impact of drilling on the environment. Pundits say that with votersworried about high gas prices in general and the economy as a whole, the candidates' ability to win the

energy debate could prove to be particularly critical this time around. "As a candidate, you've got tohave an economic policy and something about Iraq, but a very good way to frame it, whether you'retalking about foreign and domestic issues, is through energy policy and in particular a renewable energypolicy," said Republican Colorado pollster Floyd Ciruli. "It's become a very popular sort of framework fordiscussing everything else." Experts say that while swing voters will likely never view the former

Republican congressman as being particularly strong on the environment, the campaign could findsuccess if it can simply eliminate from the voters' minds that he is an "Big Oil" candidate.

( ) Renewable are ridiculously popular in Colorado

Craig Cox, staff writer, 6-30-2008, Tax policies must catch up to renewable revolution, The Denver Post, nexisRenewable energy is popular with voters and policymakers: Colorado's voters passed a renewable

energy standard in 2004, requiring increasing percentages of electricity to be generated from

renewable sources of energy. This standard was so popular - and feasible - that it was doubled to 20percent last year with leadership from Gov. Bill Ritter and bipartisan legislative support.


17/38


Links Colorado

( ) Alternative energy massively popular in Colorado democrats control the issue now

John Ingold, staff writer, 3-31-2008, Renewable energy draws most legislators' support Democrats are morelikely than Republicans to want Colorado to push the issue, The Denver Post, nexis

Over the past several years, renewable energy has become the great unifier in Colorado politics, an issueso popular and so multifaceted that just about every lawmaker can find something there to like.

Environmentalists love its eco-friendliness. National security hawks love its potential to make the

country more energy-independent. Economy wonks love the promise of new jobs that come with theburgeoning industry. Support in some form or another for renewable energy bridges party andgeographic lines. So far this year, at least 17 bills boosting renewable energy have been introduced in thestate legislature - 11 from Democrats, five from Republicans and one with bipartisan prime sponsorship. Ofthose, two have been signed into law, including one last week that standardizes how people with solar panelson their homes or businesses get paid for the extra power they produce. The bill drew rafts of supporters inboth parties who said it allows Colorado residents to take advantage of the state's abundant sunshine. "It's aperfect setup for Colorado to be a leader in this arena," said Rep. Judith Solano, a Brighton Democrat whowas the bill's chief sponsor. Where there are differences between the parties in the legislature, it is not somuch about the value of renewable energy as it is about how best to promote and foster its development.Republicans say they want to provide incentives for renewable energy but not to push it on the state. "I'm a

huge fan of renewable energy," said Sen. Greg Brophy, a Republican from Wray who drives a Toyota Prius."I seek to promote the use of renewable energy but not force it regardless of cost." Democrats, though, say afirm hand is needed to foster renewable-energy development. Sen. Ron Tupa, a Boulder Democrat, saidRepublicans have come around to supporting renewable energy bills only now that the issue is popular withvoters. "It's just plain good politics," he said of supporting renewable energy. "And I think the generalpublic is recognizing that, of the two parties, the Democratic Party is the one that has really taken this

policy and run with it. So I guess the Republicans will oppose these bills at their own political peril ."


18/38


Link/Internals Energy Key

( ) Plan is popular and energy is key to the election

Reuters, 7-24-2008, LCV and NRDC Outline the Future of Global Warming Legislation and Steps to AddressHigh Gas Prices, http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS214817+24-Jun-2008+PRN20080624

"Tied into both the economy and the environment, energy will be the defining issue of this election," LCVPresident Gene Karpinski said. "The American people demand a new energy policy that breaks ouraddiction to oil and dirty coal. Members of Congress who fight for a clean, renewable energy future willbe back to fight next year, but those who stand in the way will have to answer to the voters in

November. A Gallup poll released today indicates that energy is the top issue priority for 51% Americanvoters. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/108331/Obama-Has-Edge-Key-Election-Issues.aspx). "Americans arefeeling pain at the pump and many experts say high gas prices are here to stay," NRDC's Energy AdvocateJim Presswood said. "With prices set in the global marketplace and only 2 percent of the world's oil reserveshere at home, there is simply nothing we can do to impact prices by drilling. The real solution is clear: wemust take bold action to break our addiction to oil and transition to a clean energy future. A future where newcars like plug-in hybrids go farther on a gallon of gas, enhanced public transit systems give Americans moretransportation options, and renewable sources of energy power our communities.


19/38


Internals West/Colorado Key

( ) Mountain west key energy issues are especially important for Coloradan voters

The Denver Post, Editorial Staff, 5-27-2008, West might be where its won,http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_9395389

The mountain West has become a key political battleground for the 2008 presidential election. Strategistsare talking about how winning Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico could pave the way to an ElectoralCollege win. Republican presidential candidate John McCain came to Denver Tuesday, and today DemocratBarack Obama pays a visit. It's a heady moment for a part of the country that has flown under the radar inrecent presidential campaigns. But it's also an opportunity to engage in the issues and challenge thecandidates. As Coloradans, we have some particular regional concerns, such as water, public lands andenergy development. But candidates can no longer stroll in, put on a cowboy hat and boots as part of some"Western strategy" and expect to hit it off with Coloradans. We're a more diverse lot than that. We also havedeep concerns about the war in Iraq, foreign affairs, the economy and immigration. And like the rest of thecountry, we want better schools and an affordable health care system that works. But a Western strategy towin the White House is an opportunity for residents here to have their voices heard, a chance to influence thepolitical discourse something along the lines of the way Iowa does by having the first political caucus. Wehope Coloradans take advantage of the opportunity by reading up on the issues that move them and formingopinions. As the presidential campaign moves into its final six months, the mountain West can play a key

role in defining the candidates and tightening up the race. Polls done by Rasmussen Reports show Obamawith a modest lead over McCain in Colorado, 48 to 42 percent. In New Mexico, the numbers are 50 to 41for Obama. In Nevada, McCain was leading Obama 46 to 40 percent.


20/38


Internals Bush Popularity Key

( ) Bushs unpopularity hurts the GOP candidate

Stuart Rothenberg, Editor and Publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report, 11-12-2007, The Bush Factor inthe Upcoming Presidential Election, The Rothenberg Political Report,http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/2007/11/bush-factor-in-upcoming-presidential.html

This cycle, many Republicans are making the argument that in the 2008 election, George W. Bush willbe irrelevant. Voters will have turned the page on h im and will be looking toward the future rather thanthe past, they insist. Some Republican strategists assert confidently that voters will be evaluating the partyspresidential nominee, not Bush, and that the partys image will be repaired once Bush is perceived as part ofthe past, not the future. Democrats counter that while Bush will not be on the ballot, his war will still begoing on and Republicans will not be able to run from his record or from their support for him during

his presidency. They insist that the election will allow voters to choose between change and continuity,and that the Republicans will represent continuity and Democrats will represent change. Who is more likelyto be correct? In midterms, many Americans vote retrospectively. That is, they base their decisions on pastperformance. In presidential elections, they tend to look forward, to evaluate the nominees on the basis ofhow they will perform in office. But is it reasonable to believe that voters completely disregard pastperformance a partys past performance when an unpopular president leaves office? Probably

not. After all, Democrats have plenty of tape of Bush making promises that were not kept and asserting

truths that turned out not to be true. And theyll be running against a party that has been defined forthe past few years by its leader, the president of the United States. That means the Republican nomineefor president will inevitably be the candidate of continuity rather than dramatic change, no matter howpassionately he delivers a message of change. Its also true, however, that once the GOP has apresidential nominee, he will start to redefine the publics image of the Republican Party. George W.Bush will seem less relevant, less important. But he will never disappear. That doesnt doom theRepublican nominee, but it puts him in a hole even before the race has begun.

( ) Economy ensures GOP tied to Bush

Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post Staff Writer, 2-2-2008, Decline in U.S. Jobs Could Prove Costly to GOPNominee, The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/01/AR2008020103262_pf.html

For Republicans already facing an economic headwind, the jobs numbers could prove punishing .

Traditionally, the party holding the White House is blamed for bad economic times -- and credited forbooms -- and economists said yesterday that this year should be no different, even if GOP candidatescontinue to distance themselves from President Bush.


21/38



( ) Bush popularity is key to 2008 election chances

Tony Harnden, Washington Correspondent, 5-7-2007, Will Bush seal 2008 Republican defeat?, Telegraph,http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/tobyharnden/may07/republicansdefeat.htm

FrankLuntz, a Republican pollster with a penchant for delivering hard truths, told me today that theRepublicans could be heading for a disaster on the scale of the Conservative party in 1997 - whichconsigned them to the wilderness for a decade. Paradoxically, the only way to prevent this happening is torecognise that it is a distinct possibility. It's not just Iraq and it's not just Bush - the poll rating reflects a deepand widespread dissatisfaction with Republicans and all they stand for. Rich Galen argues here that there arelessons for Republicans in Nicolas Sarkozy's victory in France. I heard Newt Gingrich - whom Galen used towork for - advance the same thesis on Fox news today, basically that you can come from the governing partybut still win as a maverick advocate for change. That's certainly possible. It seems to be John McCain'sdeveloping strategy, though his close identification with Bush's surge policy will make this a difficult thing topull off. But if the ruling party - personified by the president - is as unpopular as the Newsweekpollsuggests then all bets are off. No matter how superb a candidate the Republicans fields he (and there areonly men on offer - there was a good Democrat line this week about the California debate being "AmericanIdol" for old white guys) will lose. Of course, Harold Wilson once said that a week is a long time in politics.And that was well before blogging, YouTube and all the rest of it. The surge could work and the situation in

Iraq could improve. The Democrats could overreach or lose their lustre during amid bitter internecine battleover Iraq strategy. Statements like Senator Harry Reid's "the war is lost" could leave voters feeling thatDemocrats are the party of defeat. At the moment, however, none of the above looks like transformingRepublican fortunes dramatically. Bush's poll ratings have been in the doldrums for well over a year,

despite Republicans believing at almost every juncture that the corner is about to be turned.

( ) Bushs low popularity is key to democratic chances in 2008

Charles Babington, Washington Post Staff Writer, 7-29-2007, Can Republican nominee distance from Iraqwar?, Associated Press, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20070729/ai_n19437571/print

As ardent Democrats count the days until George W. Bush leaves office, many Republicans in Congresseagerly await the time when their 2008 nominee eclipses the president and, they hope, improves their re-election prospects. In blunt terms, even Bush's most loyal allies say their fate next year may come to this:Will voters largely forget the president and focus on a nominee who can distance himself from the Iraq

war, a beleaguered attorney general and other problems that have sapped Bush's popularity. Perhapsas early as February, a likely nominee will emerge and Republicans will "not have the Bush monkey on ourback," said Rep. Tom Feeney, R-Fla. "We're already in a post-Bush political era." Feeney is hardly a Bush-basher, having played a key role in the president's 2000 Florida vote recount effort. He also was Jeb Bush'srunning mate in 1994, when the president's younger brother lost his first race for governor in Florida. Thenthere is GOP Rep. Roscoe Bartlett, whose western Maryland district went heavily for Bush in 2000 and 2004."I think Bush will not be politically relevant once we have a nominee. ... He will be a nonentity," Bartlettsaid. Democrats dismiss such comments as wishful thinking. They won control of the House and Senate in2006 largely because of voters' unhappiness with Bush and the war. They are banking on Bush's even lowerpopularity now to help them to further victories next year. The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll showedBush's approval rating at 33 percent, a level that usually means serious trouble for the incumbent'sparty. Congress' approval rating was even worse, 24 percent. But Democrats believe unhappy voters willfocus their ire on the president and his party. Top congressional Republicans acknowledge that Bush's

unpopularity is hurting them. "Our image is largely made by the president," Senate Minority LeaderMitch McConnell of Kentucky toldreporters last week. "And the president does enjoy -- suffer from,shall I say -- poor standing. ... However, compared to the Democratic Congress, he looks pretty good."


22/38



A win for Bush is a win for McCain he lives and dies with Bush policies.

Juan Cole, Writer for Salon. 3-12-08. Salon.com, John McCain Runs for George Bushs Third Term.http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/03/12/mccain/

The most important thing about the endorsements proffered to John McCain by George W. Bush andevangelist John Hagee last week was McCain's reaction to them. The freshly minted Republican nomineefor president, who has had harsh words in the past for both Bush's policies and evangelical "agents ofintolerance," meekly accepted their support. He knows he cannot win in November if the evangelicals andpro-war conservatives stay home. How far will McCain go in presenting himself as Son of Bush in orderto energize his party's base? To date, based on his willingness to embrace the Bush agenda and to associatewith religious extremists, the answer seems to be pretty far indeed. When John McCain went to theWhite House last week, President Bush seemed to be offering him an out. Bush "welcomed" McCain as"the Republican nominee" in his official statement, but didn't initially use the word "endorse." It was McCainwho leapt for the e-word. "Well, I'm very honored and humbled," said McCain, "to have the opportunity toreceive the endorsement of the President of the United States, a man who I have great admiration, respect andaffection [for]." McCain's strategists, meanwhile, are said to be privately plotting how best to deploythe deeply unpopular Bush, perhaps by quietly sending him to host fundraisers deep inside red states wherehe would not risk alienating the general population from McCain. But McCain is hewing so faithfully

to Bush's legacy he may need no help from the man himself in alienating the population.


23/38


Internals Bush Popularity Key (Ohio)

( ) Ohio is key Bushs low popularity is necessary to give democrats an edge

Stephen Koff, Plain Dealer Bureau Chief, 11-12-2007, Ohio a likely bellwether in 2008 presidential election,The Plain Dealer,http://www.cleveland.com/world/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1194860223146820.xml&coll=2

Washington -- The road to the White House "goes through Ohio," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton saidFriday, using an adage deeply ingrained in national politics. It's why she sought Gov. Ted Strickland'sendorsement, and he gave it. It's why President Bush and his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, stopped inOhio so often in 2004 -- bringing crowd-drawing stars such as Bruce Springsteen (with Kerry) and ArnoldSchwarzenegger (with Bush) -- that the state's press corps didn't have to travel the country to cover thecampaign. The campaign came to Ohio, and Ohio decided the narrow outcome. Ohio is likely to be abellwether for the nation again next November, when for the first time since 1952, there will be noincumbent president or vice president on the ballot. Among the variables: the Democratic Party's sweepof Ohio in 2006, Strickland's high ratings, Bush's low popularity and the war in Iraq -- factors that giveDemocrats an edge. Playing to the GOP's strength is the possibility of a Democratic candidate whom OhioRepublicans are sure they can vilify, and a slate of Republican-primary candidates filled with fresh faces,though Ohioans don't yet seem to know them well.


24/38


Internals GOP Base Key

( ) GOP base key to McCain win

Stephen F. Hayes, senior writer, 7-21-2008, The Enthusiasm Gap Part II, The Weekly Standard,http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/320jlvio.asp?pg=2

It is not surprising that conservatives are not warming to a candidate who likes to talk about climate changeand government subsidies for displaced workers. But this coldness is increasingly alarming to some McCainbackers. They believe that all of McCain's efforts to win over Democrats and independents can only pay offif he is able to get conservatives to turn out to vote for him in November. It is not surprising thatconservatives are not warming to a candidate who likes to talk about climate change and governmentsubsidies for displaced workers. But this coldness is increasingly alarming to some McCain backers. Theybelieve that all ofMcCain's efforts to win over Democrats and independents can only pay off if he isable to get conservatives to turn out to vote for him in November.


25/38


Internals Energy Key

( ) Gas prices increase the significance of energy in the election

Craig Gilbert, staff writer, 7-10-2008, Dueling ads from McCain, Obama in Wisconsin reveal top issues,Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=771208

That the two candidates have plenty ofsharp differences to hash out on economic policy in general andenergypolicy in particular. The GOP ads identify some ofthem. McCain has proposed a summertimegas-tax holiday; Obama opposes it. McCain wants to expand offshore drilling; Obama is opposed. McCainsupports a major expansion of nuclear power; Obama has not said no to nuclear, as the RNC ad asserts, buthe hasn't said yes, either. The centerpiece of Obama's energy agenda is a $150 billion spending plan onenergy technology. That thanks to high gas prices, energy should play a bigger role in the campaigndebate this year than it did in 2004.


26/38


Internals-Uniqueness Obama leads Energy

( ) Obama holds large lead on energy

FrankNewport, Editor of the Gallup Poll, 6-24-2008, Obama has edge on key election issues,http://www.gallup.com/poll/108331/Obama-Has-Edge-Key-Election-Issues.aspx

Two issues top the list, based on the percentage rating each as extremely important in choosing betweencandidates: energy/gas prices and the economy. (Energy has spiked in its importance to voters in recentmonths as gas prices have risen to the $4-per-gallon level.) Obama has a clear advantage over McCain

on both of these top two issues. Americans give Obama a 19-point edge over McCain as best able to

deal with energy, with 47% choosing Obama and 28% McCain. On the economy, Obama has a 16-pointmargin over McCain, 48% to 32


27/38


Obama Solves Alt Energy

( ) Dems lead to Apollo energy

Stanley Greenberg, Former Advisor to Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Tony Blair, Nelson Mandela, and others, 2004,The Two Americas, 306

While the Republicans press relentlessly for increased production ofcoal, gas, and oil in the United Statesand for opening up new fields around the world, the Democrats offer a radically different approach in thespirit ofJFK and the effort to land a man on the moon. The Democrats will commit the country todevelop Americas vast energy resources in a way that strengthens America, fuels investment in energytechnology and renewables, and drastically reduces U.S. dependence on Middle East oil. It also putsAmerica in the lead in reducing the emission of heat-trapping gases that produce global warming. In allthese areas, Democrats are the party of technology and the future. The hope is to inspire Americans with thepossibilities and opportunity to take on the biggest long-term challenges.


28/38


Obama Solves Warming

( ) Only a Democratic president will solve warming McCains plan doesnt cut it.

David Roberts, Writer for Grist. 2/15/08. Grist Environmental News and Commentary, John McCain andClimate Change. http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/2/15/10152/5591

Relative to what's offered by other Senate cap-and-trade bills (and the plans of his Democratic rivals),the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act -- even in its 2007 incarnation -- is weak. Unlike othersuch bills, McCain's specifically sets aside massive and unnecessary subsidies for the nuclear industry.Its emissions targets are exceeded even by the lowest-common-denominator bill now heading to theSenate floor, the Lieberman-Warner America's Climate Security Act. This is to say nothing of the Sanders-Boxer bill, the strongest extant climate legislation, which now boasts both Clinton and Obama as co-

sponsors and includes even more aggressive targets. Beyond that, we have the plans offered by the

leading Democratic campaigns, which offer bold targets, 100 percent auctioning of pollution permits, anddetailed plans for how to allocate the auction revenue to boost the green economy. McCain has neverupdated his position on cap-and-trade legislation, despite the steady advance in public opinion andclimate science since he introduced his bill in 2003. He has not discussed, much less matched, theambitious targets of his Dem rivals. He has not signed onto the Sanders legislation, or even Lieberman'snew bill. He has not said whether he'll vote for it, and has hinted ($ub. rqd) that he'll vote Nay unlessbig buckets of nuclear pork are added. In short, McCain's take on cap-and-trade legislation is now

anachronistic, lagging well behind what's current, what's possible, and what's needed.


29/38


Obama Solves Ethanol

( ) Only Dems institute cellulosic ethanol not corn-based ethanol.

Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Former Chief Economist at the US Department of Labor. 2/27/08. The New York Sun,The Ethanol Catch-22. http://www.nysun.com/article/71930?page_no=1

Mr. Obama proposes to fund research so that America can use 2 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol ethanol

from plant matter instead of corn by 2013. In addition, he would require 60 billion gallons of advanced

biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030.


30/38


Obama Solves Competitiveness

( ) Apollo energy would save the economy.

Moises Velasquez-Manoff, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor, 1-25-2007, Unions see greenbacksin green future, Christian Science Monitor, academic

With alarmgrowingover global warming andtheeconomic vulnerabilitycreated by Americandependence on foreign oil, it's increasingly obvious to many thatthe only viable future is a green one. Thepursuit of this future has made unlikely bedfellows of many groups historically at odds with each other.Evangelicals have joined forces with tree huggers. Creationists have aligned themselves with scientists. Andnow, organized labor is working with environmentalists. Union leaders are betting that a green economy willnot only address the issue of climate change, it will also provide a bonanza of well-paying manufacturingjobs - the kinds of jobs that have largely vanished from the United States in recent decades. A proliferation ofwind turbines and solar panels means more factories, while ever more stringent efficiency standards implythe need for inspectors and experts in sealing and insulating. "From labor unions' point of view, these are thekinds of jobs their unions are most prepared for," says Jeff Rickert, vice president of the Apollo Alliance, acoalition of the major environmental and labor organizations. Having worked in steel mills and paper plants,many in the workforce already possess the appropriate skill set, say labor leaders. All that's needed areincentives at the federal level, and America will be well on its way toward what some call a "third industrialrevolution." "This is like the transition from an agricultural economy to an industrial economy," says

Robert Borosage, president of the Institute for America's Future, a progressive think tank. "It has thepotential for massive growth." According to studies by theApolloAlliance, which has outlined a 10-pointplan for energyindependence and jumpstarting the renewables sector, dollars invested in clean energycreate more jobs than those invested in traditional energy sources. Renewable energy is simply more

labor intensive. An investment of $30 billion per yearfor 10 yearswould create 3.3 million jobs andboost the gross domestic product by $1.4 trillion, according to its analysis. The federal governmentwould recoup the initial investment in increased tax revenues within the same 10-year period.

( ) McCain would hurt US science competitiveness.

Michael Feldman, Editor for HPCwire. 2/1/08. HPCwire, Looking for a Tech-Savvy President.http://www.hpcwire.com/hpc/2089255.html

Romney andMcCain strike me as science and technology lightweights, especially in the realm of federalfunding forbasicresearch and science/math education. Since the Republican mantra for government is

"less is more," I'm not sure what else we should expect. That said, I assume both candidates wouldsupport bipartisan COMPETES-type initiatives in the future, but commitment to funding is the real issue here(see below). On the other hand, Romney and McCain are both tech business-friendly, not just in their supportfor more H-1B visas, but also in other areas, such as reducing corporate tax rates and making the R&D taxcredit permanent. While neither candidate has shown any interest in politicizing science, as has been done inthe current administration, overall Romney andMcCain have demonstrated little enthusiasm for scienceand technology issues. If I had to pick one, I'd go with McCain for his Senate support for NASA and theCOMPETES Act. Buthis penchant for low taxes, high military spending and fiscal conservatismsuggests he's going to leave a lot of U.S. science and technology up to the private sector. While the

Republicans may think this approach is favorable to businesses, tech companies are unlikely to be

enthusiastic . In a recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle, Intel Chairman Craig Barrett expresses hisfrustration about the bipartisan failure of Congress to fund the science research and education agenda set outin the COMPETES Act. Writes Barrett: "The funding decisions on the America COMPETES Act took place

a few days after Congress passed a $250 billion farm bill. In the eyes of our political leaders, apparently, cornsubsidies to Iowa farmers are more important for our competitiveness in the next century than investing a fewbillion in our major research universities."


31/38


Impacts NMD Bad

( ) A McCain victory would lead to NMD

John Isaacs, Executive Director of the Council for a Livable World. 2/29/08. Veterans for Common Sense, AnEarly Look Ahead: McCain, Clinton and Obama on National Security Issues.http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/articleid/9459

McCain has declared that he "strongly supports the development and deployment oftheater andnational missile defenses." 29His votes in the Senate back up that claim: he opposed all threeamendments to cut the program in 2004. 30 In a 2001 speech to the Munich Conference on SecurityPolicy, he advocated abandoning the ABM Treaty. 31 Obama has been critical ofthe Bush missile defenseplans: "The Bush Administration has in the past exaggerated missile defense capabilities and rusheddeployments for political purposes." 32 Clinton's position has been more ambiguous. Of three key votes in2004, she voted in effect for missile defense once and against it twice. However, she criticized PresidentBush's decision in 2001 to withdraw from the ABM Treaty and both she and Obama voted for anamendment offered by Sen. Carl Levin in 2005 (the last major vote on missile defense) while McCain missedthe vote. 33 She also has criticized the Bush administration of "focusing obsessively on expensive andunproven missile defense technology." 34 Neither Clinton nor Obama has indicated plans for missiledefense upon assuming the presidency.

( ) That would cause a big nuclear war with Russia and China.Matthew Yglesias, Writer for The Atlantic. 2/21/08. The Atlantic, McCain and the Missiles.http://matthewyglesias.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/02/mccain_and_the_missiles.php

John McCain strongly supports the development and deployment oftheater and national missile defenses.Effective missile defenses are critical to protect America from rogue regimes like North Korea thatpossess the capability to target America with intercontinental ballistic missiles, from outlaw states like Iranthat threaten American forces and American allies with ballistic missiles, and to hedge against potentialthreats from possible strategic competitors like Russia and China. Effective missile defenses are alsonecessary to allow American military forces to operate overseas without being deterred by the threat ofmissile attack from a regional adversary. For starters, north Korea doesn't possess ICBM capabilities .Second, it's hard to see how national missile defense will protect our forces from Iranian missile attackswhen our forces are right next door in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, it's unclear why we'd be particularlyworried about any sort of ballistic missile attack given the close quarters situation at hand. But while this is a

bit dishonest and ignorant, the business about hedging against "potential threats from possible strategiccompetitors like Russia and China." Simply put, a scenario in which the United States possesses aneffective ability to shoot down a Russian or Chinese ICBM threat would be completely intolerable in

Moscow or Beijing. It would, in effect, give the United States a viable a threat of a nuclear first strike.Neither Russia nor China is going to let that happen. Instead, they'll spend money on building up their

nuclear arsenals in order to maintain their deterrent capacity. Thus, at great cost to the Unites States, toRussia, and to China we'll be back at the status quo. But beyond the monetary cost, the large buildup inChinese nuclear capabilities that would result from this situation would force India to engage in a

nuclear build-up of its own. And that, in turn, would force Pakistan to follow suit. This large increasein the global stock of nuclear weapons would, of course, imply an increase in the odds of a nuclearaccident or the loss ortheft of nuclear material. At the same time, a nuclear buildup of this sort mightcreate incentives for Iran to reinitiate its nuclear weapons research program. And even if it didn't,revitalizing the Non-Proliferation Treaty desperately requires the status quo nuclear powers to be working

together on nuclear issues, and fulfilling our treat obligations to move toward reduced arsenals. In short,what McCain has on tap here is a recipe for disaster -- a breakdown in great power relations, new armsraces, massive nuclear proliferation, etc. And why? I suspect the last bit is the real reason. He wants "toallow American military forces to operate overseas without being deterred." Basically, we need to spend hugesums of money and encourage an enormous amount of nuclear proliferation because that would facilitate thelaunching of new aggressive wars. Probably the proliferation McCain's policies helped induce would becomethe rationale for a new round of warfighting.


32/38


Impacts Leadership

( ) Obamas background would restore American soft power

PeterCanellos, Boston Globe Washington Bureau Chief, 12-25-2007, Clinton, Obama offer chance to fix USimage, Boston Globe, academic

There is little doubt that Obama's background gives him a unique stature - and that having him as the

symbol of America could alter perceptions of the United States in Africa, Asia, and South America.Emphasizing the multiracial aspect of the United States to a multiracial world could give the AmericanDream new currency: It would prove that American values are applicable to everyone . Such apossibility is obviously thrilling to the Democrats who've flooded Obama's campaign events.

( ) Key to solve nuclear war

Zalmay Khalilzad, RAND, The Washington Quarterly, Spring 1995Under the third option, the United States would seek to retain global leadership and to preclude the rise of aglobal rival or a return to multipolarity for the indefinite future. On balance, this is the best long-term guidingprinciple and vision. Such a vision is desirable not as an end in itself, but because a world in which theUnitedStates exercises leadership wouldhave tremendous advantages. First, the global environment wouldbe more open and more receptive to American values -- democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Second,such a world would have a better chance of dealingcooperativelywith the world's major problems, such asnuclear proliferation, threats of regional hegemony byrenegade states, and low-level conflicts. Finally, U.S.

leadership wouldhelppreclude the rise of anotherhostileglobalrival, enabling the United States and theworld to avoid another global cold or hot warandall the attendant dangers, including a global nuclearexchange. U.S. leadership would therefore be more conducive to global stability than a bipolar or amultipolar balance of power system.


33/38


Impacts Tax Cuts

( ) Obama would raise taxes; McCain would cut them

Charles Babington, chief political correspondent for washingtonpost.com, 7-16-2008, As economy dominates,Obama, McCain seek answers, AP,http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jN61C761wfQ3fDl9Klkep98pB8zgD91V791O0

The two candidates offer fundamentally different approaches to the economy. McCain wants to cuttaxes at virtually all income levels, although high-earners would reap the biggest benefits. Obama

would raise taxes on the wealthy and pour more spending into subsidies of education, health care andotherprograms.

( ) Tax cuts lead to total economic crisis this leads to a massive economic collapse

Isabel V. Sawhill, Senior Fellow and Vice President, Economic Studies. USA Today, The Danger of Deficits.

August 16, 2005. http://www.brookings.edu/views/op-ed/sawhill/20050816.htmPsychiatrists have clinical terms to describe how most elected officials are responding to the deficit

denial, repression, magical thinking. In short, they're doing next to nothing. There is a deafening silence from the halls ofCongress and corporate boardrooms to the living rooms and voting booths where Americans make decisions about their own and theirchildren's futures. In fact, there is some good news on the deficit front. The Congressional Budget Office outlook for 2005 has improved

markedly since its March projection. But no one should be lulled into thinking that this good news will last. The problem will get

much worse if nothing is done. Deficits will become unsustainable when baby boomers begin to retire

in 2008 and are poised to balloon out of control a generation hence, wreaking havoc on today's younger Americans.

Solutions are all painful. We need to reform the three major entitlement programs (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid), curb

soaring health care costs, raise federal revenue (yes, that means taxes), cut low-priority spending and impose budgetingrules. President Bush deserves praise for putting Social Security reform on the table, but his proposed private accounts would add $5trillion in deficits over two decades. He talks about halving the deficit in five years, but the most recent congressional budget blueprintactually increases deficits by $168 billion over that period. The prescription drug law will add a half-trillion dollars or more over thecoming decade. The Bigger Picture Social Security is a surprisingly small part of the problem. Medicare and Medicaid costs will

increase four times faster than Social Security. Ifthe big three entitlement programs 42% of federal spending grow at

present rates, either everything else that government does will be crowded out, ora 33% tax increase will be needed by

2030. If taxes stay at current levels, no money will be left for national parks, highways, extra police, better-trained

teachers, veterans' health care, and the environment. Without deficit reduction, just interest on the debt will absorb one out

of every three personal income tax dollars collected by 2015. But why should anyone care? One danger is that Asian and other

central banks, which hold a huge and growing chunk of American debt, could stop financing our deficits.

Interest rates would rise, stocks and bonds would plunge, and recession would follow. Another possibility is

that increasing federal debt combined with America's dwindling private savings would mean much less money

available to invest in new infrastructure and equipment, new technologies and new businesses. And a cardinal

rule of economics is: Less investment means less economic growth and a slower increase in living standards. The

failure to address deficits reflects wishful thinking, irresponsible political rhetoric and myopia. We'd need indefiniteeconomic growth of more than 4% per year, something the U.S. economy did not do even during the go-go late 1990s, when growthaveraged 3.3%. Selective cuts alone wouldn't work either because only 19% of the budget is not for mandated entitlement programs,defense, or debt interest. Finally, it's myopic to believe that budget deficits just don't matter. You would be hard-pressed to find aneconomist who concurs. So, what's to be done? We need to reform Social Security and Medicare eligibility and benefit formulas: Wecould raise the eligibility age as life expectancy rises, and reduce benefits for the well-off, but protect lower-wage workers. We couldtransform Medicare from an open-ended, fee-for-service system to one protecting all Americans from catastrophic expenses. Those withlimited means would be given enough to buy a basic health plan, but no one would be guaranteed unlimited care at public expense.Plenty of federal programs are ineffective, obsolete, or cater to politically powerful elites and could be cut. The big hitch is politics.The U.S. tax system cries out for overhaul. It must be simpler, fairer and more conducive to growth and efficiency. We could introduce amodest consumption or value-added tax, and eliminate $200 billion in tax subsidies. What might be most troubling is the lack of

presidential leadership and bipartisan congressional action to restore fiscal sanity. What will it take? Another Ross Perot? A stockmarket crash? Rallies in Washington? The Chinese moving their money into euros?


34/38


Impacts Health Care

( ) Obama will pass universal health care

Perry Pacon, Washington Post Campaign Blogger, 7-8-2008, Democrats Gear Up New Push for UniversalHealth Care, The Washington Post, http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/07/08/democrats_gear_up_new_push_for.html

Democrats are launching an aggressive push for universal health care, fourteen years after a failedattempt on the issue resulted in political disaster. A coalition of liberal groups that includes major laborunions such as the Service Employees International Union and the activist group MoveOn.org announcedtoday it will spend $40 million to make health insurance a major issue in the campaign, with ElizabethEdwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, as the one of the group's mainspokespersons. The group, which has dubbed itself "Health Care for America Now!" plans to spend itsmoney running ads in battleground states, canvassing 45 states to get people to sign petitions supporting theinitiative and trying to get every member of Congress to sign a pledge to expand health insurance to allAmericans. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Democratic staffers are trying to set up a structure for getting a billthrough Congress next year. The staffs of Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the chairman of the Senate FinanceCommittee and Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), who heads the Senate's Health, Education Pensions and LaborCommittee, are already meeting with key health care experts, including some from Massachusetts, whichpassed a landmark health care law two years ago. In a series of meetings over the next month, Senate aides

plan to meet with doctors' groups, insurance companies, business associations and other key players inreforming health care. Their goal is to have the outlines of a health care proposal by the end of this yearthat can be introduced in the opening days of the next president's administration. "We want to create amandate," said Richard Kirsch, one of the leaders of the health care organization of the liberal groups, manyof whom worked together to oppose President Bush's 2005 Social Security plan. BarackObama hasalready pledged to make passing health care reform a centerpiece of his first term, and his campaign

has recently added a group of advisers who specialize in the subject , including Elizabeth Edwards, SarahBianchi, a former Clinton White House aide and Neera Tanden, Hillary Clinton's policy director during theprimaries. Tanden is working as a domestic policy adviser, while Bianchi and Edwards are participating incampaign conference calls on health care with other experts.

( ) Large uninsured population causes infectious disease spread

Joshua Lederberg, Professor Emeritus of Molecular Genetics and Informatics at The Rockefeller University,

2000, Public Health Systems and

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	affnegcom
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

DA Neg Elections 32

Documents