Sbsp affirmative- arl lab- ndi 2011
Download 1.74 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- And, they’re key to the agenda – comparatively outweigh organizations and parties
- 2AC Plan Popular- NASA Transition Team
- It outweighs – government push can overcome structural opposition
Plan popular- PublicPublic loves the plan – polls proveNSSO, ‘7 – National Security Space Office [10/10/07, “Space-Based Solar Power as an Opportunity for Strategic Security: Report to the Director, National Security Space office Interim Assessment Release 0.1,” http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/library/final-sbsp-interim-assessment-release-01.pdf, DS] There is reason to think that this interest may extend to the greater public. The most recent survey indicating public interest in SBSP was conducted in 2005 when respondents were asked where they prefer to see their space tax dollars spent. The most popular response was collecting energy from space, with support from 35% of those polled—twice the support for the second most popular response, planetary defense (17%)—and three times the support for the current space exploration goals of the Moon (4%) / Mars(10%). How does one account for such significant interest? Perhaps it is because SBSP lies “at the intersection of missionary and mercenary”—appealing both to man’s idealism and pragmatism, the United States’ special mission in the world and her citizens’ faith in business and technology. As an ambitious and optimistic project, it excites the imagination with its scale and grandeur, besting America’s previous projects, and opening new frontiers. Such interest goes directly to the concerns of the Aerospace commission, which stated, “The aerospace industry has always been a reflection of the spirit of America. It has been, and continues to be, a sector of pioneers drawn to the challenge of new frontiers in science, air, space, and engineering. For this nation to maintain its present proud heritage and leadership in the global arena, we must remain dedicated to a strong and prosperous aerospace industry. A healthy and vigorous aerospace industry also holds a promise for the future, by kindling a passion within our youth that beckons them to reach for the stars and thereby assure our nation’s destiny.” And, they’re key to the agenda – comparatively outweigh organizations and partiesBurstein, ‘3 - Professor of Political Science at University of Washington [Paul, 2003, Political Research Quarterly, “The Impact of Public Opinion on Public Policy: A Review and an Agenda,” http://prq.sagepub.com/content/56/1/29, DS] This review has shown that: (1) Public opinion affects policy three-quarters of the times its impact is gauged; its effect is of substantial policy importance at least a third of the time, and probably a fair amount more. (2) Salience does affect the impact of public opinion on policy. (3) The impact of opinion on policy remains substantial when the activities of interest organizations, political parties, and elites are taken into account; but the paucity of data on interest organizations and elites mandates great caution when interpreting the results. (4) The hypothesis that government responsiveness to the public has changed over time cannot be definitively rejected, because so little evidence is available; but that evidence does not support the hypothesis. (5) Our ability to generalize about the impact of opinion on policy is severely compromised by the narrow focus of available work, both geographically and in terms of issues. Overall, the findings about responsiveness seem quite robust, not strongly affected by the activities of political organizations or elites, type of issue, or time. Yet it is also surprising how little has been published in major journals, or referred to in major reviews, about critical topics concerning public opinion and public policy. The publications reviewed suggest two agendas for future research, one substantive and one methodological. 2AC Plan Popular- NASA Transition TeamPlan popular – Obama team’s full of space and energy wonksDailyKos, ‘8 – [DailyKos, 12/12/2008, “Space Solar Power: Politically Possible, finally?” http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/12/12/672371/-Space-Solar-Power:-Politically-Possible,-finally, DS] While obviously Obama's and his planned administration have not endorsed the idea, its worth noting the team that Obama is putting together, that would have to address these issues. The NASA transition team is full of people who believe in the potential of space and large scale space development. Secretary of Commerce (to be) is Bill Richardson, who has been a very vocal proponent of Space and Space development, while he was governor of New Mexico. Dr. Steven Chu has been nominated to be Secretary of Energy, and he has been a big supporter of solar power. It outweighs – government push can overcome structural oppositionBoswell, ‘4 – Space writer and contributor to Space Review [David, 8/30/2004, The Space Review, “Whatever happened to solar power satellites?,” http://www.thespacereview.com/article/214/1, DS] There were over 60 launches in 2003, so last year there was enough money spent to put something into orbit about every week on average. Funding was found to launch science satellites to study gravity waves and to explore other planets. There are also dozens of GPS satellites in orbit that help people find out where they are on the ground. Is there enough money available for these purposes, but not enough to launch even one solar power satellite that would help the world develop a new source of energy? In the 2004 budget the Department of Energy has over $260 million allocated for fusion research. Obviously the government has some interest in funding renewable energy research and they realize that private companies would not be able to fund the development of a sustainable fusion industry on their own. From this perspective, the barrier holding back solar power satellites is not purely financial, but rather the problem is that there is not enough political will to make the money available for further development. In the long term, launch costs will need to come down before generating solar power in space makes economic sense. But is the expense of launching enough to explain why so little progress has been made? There is a very interesting discussion on the economics of large space projects that makes the point that “the fundamental problem in opening any contemporary frontier, whether geographic or technological, is not lack of imagination or will, but lack of capital to finance initial construction which makes the subsequent and typically more profitable economic development possible. Solving this fundamental problem involves using one or more forms of direct or indirect government intervention in the capital market. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.74 Mb. Share with your friends:
|