Commissions cp neg



Download 413.33 Kb.
Page11/11
Date20.10.2016
Size413.33 Kb.
#5411
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11

NOP Bad – Energy




Loss of offshore development causes destruction of the industry


Whatley 12 - Michael Whatley is the executive vice president of Consumer Energy Alliance in Washington D.C., (Michael Whatley, “Proposed National Ocean Policy is Bad Politics and Worse Policy”, October 01, 2012, http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/121063/Proposed_National_Ocean_Policy_is_Bad_Politics_and_Worse_Policy#sthash.u4GWHdVL.dpuf

While the Administration claims the plan won't block additional offshore development, it is difficult to reach that conclusion when details of the plan are loosely defined. Representatives from the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee have repeatedly requested additional information on the plan. The requests have gone unanswered. No doubt House members are wondering what potential impacts the new plan may have on offshore development in light of prior restrictive actions in the Gulf and other offshore areas.¶ Considering the National Ocean Council last summer proposed to "reduce the impacts of stressors over which we have more direct control," such as "resource extraction," in reference to addressing climate change issues, it would appear the apprehensions of the Committee members are well placed.¶ Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has already reversed previous plans for expanded offshore development, citing the National Ocean Policy Executive Order in part as justification. This means one office of Administration is justifying its actions based on another office that no one knows anything about. This didn't sit well with groups like the Outer Continental Shelf Governors Coalition, which recently sent a letter to the President saying they are "concerned about the lack of communication from the federal government on critical matters that affect our coastal development." Advocates for the policy say they only wish to create a framework for enforcing current offshore regulations. But this is a tough argument to swallow, considering the foundational document for the policy states that the initiative will "require clear and easily understood requirements and regulations, where appropriate, that include enforcement as a critical component." One thing is certain: development of the nation's offshore resources holds great promise for our economy. In spite of these recent roadblocks, offshore oil and gas activities were responsible for contributing roughly $121 billion in economic output last year. Future potential is even greater, with reports estimating that total government revenues derived from offshore production could reach $2.6 trillion.¶ With anemic economic growth in other industries, mulishly high unemployment, and an election looming, Interior and the broader Administration should transparently move to free up the industry and allow expanded production of our offshore resources. Their reluctance to do so speaks volumes about the Administration's feelings towards a proven offshore resource base.¶ We know offshore production can create jobs and economic growth in areas hit by overly cautious government intervention. Studies have shown that just returning to historical production levels in the Gulf of Mexico could provide between 110,000 to 230,000 jobs, with larger offshore development having the potential to create over 1 million jobs. Our offshore resources present the Administration with the ability to practice smart politics and sound economic policy. The National Ocean Policy fails the President, and the American people on both counts.

NOP Bad – Economy




NOP hurts the economy – uncertainty causes loss of investors


Hastings 13 - Chairman, U.S. House Natural Resources Committee (Doc Hastings, “National Ocean Policy Creates More Red Tape, Hurts Economy”, 2013, http://sea-technology.com/features/2013/0113/national_ocean_policy.php
The oceans are an integral part of the U.S. economy, supporting millions of jobs throughout the country. It is important to protect and properly manage the oceans through a balanced, multiuse approach that recognizes the need for both environmental stewardship and responsible use of resources. Unfortunately, President Barack Obama has imposed new regulations that counter this balanced approached to ocean management. The administration’s National Ocean Policy creates a massive new federal bureaucracy with unprecedented control over our oceans, Great Lakes, rivers and watersheds that could negatively impact nearly every sector of the U.S. economy in significant ways. Additional Bureaucracy President Obama enacted the National Ocean Policy by issuing an executive order, meaning this drastic change in ocean management was done without Congressional authorization. To date, no bill has passed the U.S. House of Representatives to implement similar far-reaching ocean policies. The executive order creates a web of bureaucracy that includes dozens of new policies, councils, committees, planning bodies, priority objectives, action plans, national goals and guiding principles. Rather than streamline federal management, the president’s initiative will instead add layers of new red tape and create a top-down approach. For example, federally-controlled regional planning bodies will be tasked with creating zoning plans for each region without input or representation from local stakeholders or affected industries. All relevant federal agencies, states and regulated communities will be bound by the plans, which will be used to make decisions on regional permitting activities. Job and Economic Impacts Although marketed as a common-sense plan to develop and protect our oceans, the National Ocean Policy will inflict economic harm and uncertainty on America’s job creators. Imposing mandatory ocean zoning could place huge portions of our oceans and coasts off-limits, curtailing energy development, commercial fishing and recreational activities. The reach of the policy goes beyond the oceans. It gives the regional planning bodies authority to regulate as far inland as necessary. This could impact all activities occurring on lands adjacent to rivers, tributaries or watersheds that drain into the ocean. A multitude of industries could be affected, including agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, mining, oil and natural gas, and renewable energy. These industries support tens of millions of jobs and contribute trillions of dollars to the U.S. economy. The policy also involves vague and undefined objectives that would create uncertainty for businesses and job creators, and open the floodgates for litigation. According to testimony received by the House Natural Resources Committee, this uncertainty will likely increase costs to private landowners and businesses, cause companies to cut back on investment and job creation, and limit American energy production both on- and offshore. It is also unclear how much this initiative will cost taxpayers, how it is being funded and if it will take money away from existing agency budgets at a time when budgets are already being cut.


NOP hurts the economy – regional fisheries


Hastings 13 - Chairman, U.S. House Natural Resources Committee (Doc Hastings, “Obama's national ocean policy threatens jobs and economic activities onshore and off”, 2013, http://sea-technology.com/features/2013/0113/national_ocean_policy.php
President Obama is using the ocean as his latest regulatory weapon to impose new bureaucratic restrictions on nearly every sector of our economy. While marketed as a common sense plan for the development and protection of our oceans, it is instead being used to create a massive new bureaucracy that would harm our economy.¶ Established through Executive Order, Mr. Obama with a simple stroke of a pen took unilateral action to impose a massive top-down federal bureaucracy with broad regulatory control over our oceans, Great Lakes, rivers, tributaries and watersheds.¶ The Executive Order creates a tangled web of regulatory layers that includes: 10 National Policies; a 27-member National Ocean Council; an 18-member Governance Coordinating Committee; and 9 Regional Planning Bodies. This has led to an additional: 9 National Priority Objectives; 9 Strategic Action Plans; 7 National Goals for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning; and 12 Guiding Principles for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning.¶ Imposing mandatory ocean zoning could place huge portions of our oceans and coasts off-limits, seriously curtailing recreational activities, commercial fishing, and all types of energy development – including renewable energy such as offshore wind farms.¶ What’s even more alarming is that the impact of this Executive Order is not limited to just our oceans. It establishes regional planning bodies with the authority to regulate as far inland as necessary. All rivers eventually drain into the ocean, which gives this policy the justification it needs to reach far inland.¶ For example, the Gulf of Mexico Regional Planning Body will make decisions to regulate activities throughout the entire Mississippi River watershed if those activities have the potential to affect the Gulf of Mexico. This means a policy billed as protecting our oceans will have the ability to regulate inland activities that occur as far north as Minnesota. If farmers and ranchers thought having the EPA in their backyard was bad, wait until the National Ocean Council comes sailing upstream for a visit too.¶ The American Farm Bureau Federation has raised serious concerns, stating that “it could extend to the regulation of every farm and ranch in the United States.”¶ To make matters worse, taxpayers will be stuck with the considerable financial costs of implementing this Executive Order and the vague and undefined objectives will no doubt be used as fuel for costly frivolous lawsuits to stop or delay federally-permitted activities. Adding to these costs is the lost economic activity and stifled job creation that will result from new restrictions and regulatory uncertainly brought on by the policy.¶ Over the past year, the Natural Resources Committee has held multiple oversight hearings to investigate the policy, its implementation and potential impacts. However, the Obama administration has refused to answer important questions. That’s why I recently supported bipartisan efforts in the House to pause funding for this policy until the true job and economic impacts are known. This pause in funding was supported by over 80 organizations, including the US Chamber of Commerce, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Association of Homebuilders, American Forest & Paper Association, and the National Fisheries Institute.¶ Millions of Americans depend on the ocean for their livelihoods and there needs to be a balanced, multi-use policy that recognizes both the importance of environmental stewardship and the responsible use of our oceans. Executive Branch agencies with jurisdiction over our ocean policy can, and should, work in a more coordinated manner, to share information, and reduce duplication of their work. This would save money and could be supported by all. Unfortunately, President Obama’s Executive Order pushes far beyond this common ground and uses the ocean as a regulatory tool to limit job-creating activities on both land and sea.

NOP expands safe zones, which prevents getting resources


IBT 14 – International Business Times, “US Fishing Group Say World's Largest Marine Sanctuary Won't Help Conservation”, July 03, 2014, http://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/us-fishing-group-say-world's-largest-marine-sanctuary-won't-help-conservation-292926

“The NGOs push the president to make these monuments, then the NGOs leave, and the local government and the federal government are held to try to live up to the promises,” Sylvia Spalding, spokeswoman for the council, said. “But without the resources, we can’t.” The extended Pacific Remote Islands Marine Sanctuary would be the world’s largest, covering seven islands across nearly 782,000 square miles of federal waters and prohibiting energy exploration, fishing and other activities. The current sanctuary zone extends 50 miles around each island’s coast, protecting marine life like coral reefs. The extension, which is not specified yet, could cover up to 200 more miles, areas Spalding says contain only open-ocean, highly migratory fish like tuna. “They’re penalizing the U.S. fishermen even after the president recognized that through our management system we have reduced illegal fishing,” she said. Fish caught in the area account for about 3 percent of the yearly U.S. tuna supply from the western and central Pacific, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts. According to the Marine Conservation Institute, which supports the sanctuary’s expansion, tuna fishermen in the area can obtain 95 percent of their catch from regions outside the waters being considered for protection. But the Council also argues that some illegal foreign boats will try to fish in the zone anyway, and banning U.S. fishing vessels in the area will only worsen monitoring. “The U.S. fishing fleet are the eyes and ears for the Coast Guard,” Eric Kingma, National Environmental Policy Act coordinator for the Council, said. “When they see illegal foreign vessels they call the Coast Guard and they let them know. If we close off those areas to fishing, the Coast Guard is losing resources to monitor those waters.” In January 2009, then-president George W. Bush established a national monument cointaining the Marianas Trench, 14 islands near Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CMNI), west of Hawaii and just beyond the eastern limit of the Philippines’ waters. More than five years after the proclamation, the U.S. and CMNI governments are still working on a co-management plan for the monument, and there’s no specific timeline when the deal must be finalized. “They can’t even take care of the monuments they’ve already developed,” Spalding said.


NOP Bad – Alt cause




NOP still can’t solve – obstructionist politics


Chasis 12 – Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “New Report Shows Obstructionist Politics Harming Ocean Management”, 6/07/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/ocean-management-politics_b_1575222.html

This week in our nation’s capital, ocean leaders, advocates and businesses, along with ocean champions in Congress, are taking a closer look at the future of our oceans, as part of Capitol Hill Oceans Week. Thanks to a report released today by the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, identifying some of our oceans’ greatest challenges might be easier than expected for our representatives. To see much of what’s harming the health of our ocean resources, coastal economies, and communities, some leaders in Congress simply need to look in the mirror. Back in 2010, President Obama announced the creation of the National Ocean Policy (NOP), a landmark effort to safeguard our oceans and coasts, and the jobs and communities that depend on them. For the first time ever, the 20 federal agencies that govern our oceans are now working together, rather than in conflict, to manage our marine resources and activities. This common-sense principle has such clear rewards that it was recommended by two separate bipartisan commissions during George W. Bush’s presidency. ¶ The latest report from the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative (JOCI) shows how far we’ve come in just two years under the National Ocean Policy. After decades of uncoordinated ocean management, federal agencies are now communicating more efficiently and effectively under the National Ocean Council. By coordinating more closely with states, tribes, and local governments, federal agencies are working to cut waste while preserving resources important to local economies that depend on fishing, tourism, and clean energy development.¶ And at the regional level, under the National Ocean Policy, multi-state partnerships are facilitating greater engagement among stakeholders, fostering ocean science and research, and using improved tools like regional ocean planning to map out a sustainable future for our oceans. Despite these gains, the National Ocean Policy has a long way to go, especially with obstructionist politics standing in its way. As JOCI’s report card emphasizes, Congressional attacks on the National Ocean Policy threaten to hurt its effectiveness and contribute to the bad grade given for national-level implementation.¶ In the most recent round of partisan attacks on this common-sense policy, Republican leaders in Congress are trying to gut the National Ocean Policy all together. Just last month, House Republicans passed through an amendment to a critical government spending bill, prohibiting any federal funding for National Ocean Policy efforts. With this misguided vote, leaders of the House aimed to stop agencies from working together to address critical problems, like contaminated beachwater, marine debris, loss of valuable coastal habitat, and future oil spills like the 2010 disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. The Joint Ocean Commission rightfully urges Congress to reject such efforts to restrict or prohibit funds from being used to implement the National Ocean Policy.¶

NOP Fails – Funding Blocks




The public blocks the funding


TOT 12 – Trade only today, “Groups ask Congress to block National Ocean Policy funding”, April 16th, 2012, http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/2012/04/groups-ask-congress-to-block-national-ocean-policy-funding/

Eighty-one groups recently submitted a letter to U.S. House Appropriations Committee chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky., as well as the chairman of each House Appropriations subcommittee, asking that language be included in all fiscal 2013 appropriations bills that would prohibit the use of funds to implement the new National Ocean Policy.¶ “The request was made as part of an effort to achieve a pause in policy implementation that would provide more time for oversight and examination of potential impacts,” according to the Recreational Fishing Alliance, which signed on to the letter.¶ The letter’s signatories represent a wide array of commercial and recreational interests and reflect the breadth of concern that citizens and businesses across the United States continue to have about the National Ocean Policy as developed thus far, the fishing group said.

Download 413.33 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
united states
executive director
national oceanic
other members
obama administration
great lakes
executive branch
progress made
primary goals
urgent need
various elements
following section
potential role
full cooperation
brookings institution
following reports
entire nation
base realignment
budget process
best thinking
most important changes
outer continental shelf