2014 ndi – Pre Camp Natural Gas Negative
Download 1.07 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Most real world
- AT: Should = Conditions
AT: Perm Do CpMutually exclusive---Decision to open land for production can either be conditioned on environmental factors or notInstitute for Policy Integrity Report 11 NYU Law http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/42011_The_BP_Gulf_Coast_Oil_Spill_Option_Value_and_the_Offshore_Drilling_Debate_1.pdf The Department of the Interior bears the responsibility to examine the costs and benei ts of drilling. In the past, the agency met this requirement by carrying out a traditional cost-benei t analysis. While cost-benei t analysis itself is a useful framework for informing these kinds of decisions, the agency’s analysis is flawed because it treats oil drilling as a now-or-never decision. Once the decision to drill has been made, it cannot easily be unmade. But that does not mean the only choices are either to drill now or never: waiting to decide is also an option. Because safer drilling techniques and more effective cleanup technologies continue to be developed, the costs associated with drilling should decline over time—perhaps in fits and starts, but following a generally downward trend Most real worldMason 11 Ruth, Visiting Associate Professor of Law, Yale Law School, “Federalism and the Taxing Power”, 11/10, http://www.californialawreview.org/assets/pdfs/99-4/02_Mason.pdf In dicta, the Dole Court suggested some limits on conditional spending. For example, the Court stated that conditions attached to federal grants must be related to the federal purpose for the expenditure, not prohibited under other provisions of the Constitution (such as the Bill of Rights), and not coercive. 27 In other decisions, the Court has emphasized that to bind the states, federal spending conditions must be unambiguous. 28 Moreover, conditional spending, like all taxing and spending, must be for defense, to repay federal debts, or it must otherwise advance the “general welfare.” But there exist few other formal limits on congressional spending. 29 Congress often uses its spending power to make conditional grants to the states, even when it could regulate directly using the Commerce Clause or another enumerated power. 30 Congress may employ grants even when it possesses direct regulatory authority because it believes the states will be more effective regulators than the federal government would, or because the federal government lacks the administrative expertise or apparatus to effectuate federal policy cheaply. But in areas that Congress otherwise could not reach with direct regulation, grant-making allows Congress to enlarge its policy sphere by enticing the states into adopting federally prescribed policies in exchange for federal funds. For example, in Dole the Supreme Court held that it was not unconstitutional for Congress to condition a portion of federal highway grants to the states upon the requirement that the states enact a minimum drinking age of twenty-one. 31 Using highway funds, the federal government achieved through state cooperation a regulatory goal that it lacked constitutional authority to achieve directly, namely, imposition of a minimum drinking age. 32 AT: Should = ConditionsThis clearly doesn’t apply---“should” only allows conditions when used in that context---i.e., “If the USFG had known, it should have acted differently”---the plan and topic use the word in a different sense---mandating unconditional obligationAHD 9 (American Heritage Dictionary, “should”, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/should) Usage Note: Like the rules governing the use of shall and will on which they are based, the traditional rules governing the use of should and would are largely ignored in modern American practice. Either should or would can now be used in the first person to express conditional futurity: If I had known that, I would (or somewhat more formally, should) have answered differently. But in the second and third persons only would is used: If he had known that, he would (not should) have answered differently. Would cannot always be substituted for should, however. Should is used in all three persons in a conditional clause: if I (or you or he) should decide to go. Should is also used in all three persons to express duty or obligation (the equivalent of ought to): I (or you or he) should go. On the other hand, would is used to express volition or promise: I agreed that I would do it. Either would or should is possible as an auxiliary with like, be inclined, be glad, prefer, and related verbs: I would (or should) like to call your attention to an oversight. Here would was acceptable on all levels to a large majority of the Usage Panel in an earlier survey and is more common in American usage than should. · Should have is sometimes incorrectly written should of by writers who have mistaken the source of the spoken contraction should've. See Usage Notes at if, rather, shall. Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2014 2014 -> For want of a nail 2014 -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 2014 -> Ihbb asian Championships 2014 middle school bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> Ihbb european Championships 2014 Bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> International History Bee and Bowl 2013-14 Asian Division Question Set Bowl Round Six 2014 -> United states patent and trademark office 2014 -> Coffs harbour eisteddfod vocal syllabus 2014 -> Listen News Programs Schedule pledge now 2014 -> Slow club announce third album complete surrender Download 1.07 Mb. Share with your friends:
|