|
The privatization counterplan asks the question “is the government the best actor to solve the problem the affirmative identifies?” Privatization refers to the process of a private company taking over a function that the government has traditionally provided. A relevant example to this topic is the airline industry. When airplanes were first invented, they were largely owned by the government, and were developed in order to fit the government’s needs and preferences. However, in the decades that followed World War II, the government began to let airline companies govern themselves much more independently, which led to the creation of the airline system that we have today.
Some people believe that the same process can happen with space. The counterplan would create a tax incentive for private companies to solve the problems of the affirmative plan. Maybe a private company would develop a spaceship that could explore the Moon like Constellation, while another might seek to create a colony on Mars. A tax incentive is an opportunity for a company to pay less in taxes if it completes a specific task.
The privatization counterplan does not link to the NASA tradeoff disadvantage because it does not interfere with NASA’s budget. Because the action would be taken by a company, it does not require any of NASA’s current funds, and would not trade off with global warming observation
Glossary
Tax incentive – An opportunity to pay fewer taxes to the government if a specific action is undertaken. If the government taxes companies that use renewable energy than companies that do not, the government has created a tax incentive to use renewable energy.
Bureaucracy – A bureaucracy is a system of government where policy decisions are made by appointed experts in the area instead of elected officials. Many people use bureaucracy as a negative term because they believe it is inefficient because bureaucracies lack a profit motive. Profit motive refers to the fact that companies have an incentive to take actions as efficiently as possible because in doing so they can make more money. Governments are not organized to make a profit, so they have far less of an incentive to act in the most efficient manner possible
Private enterprise / commercial enterprise/ free enterprise – refers to the private sector’s capability for innovation and solving problems with ingenuity.
Privatization – The process of taking an activity that was one
Public sector – Refers to the government and government agencies. NASA is in the public sector.
GDP – Gross Domestic Product, a measure of the size of a country’s economy.
Solar Power Satellites – a proposed system of satellites that would circle the Earth with large solar panels to collect energy, which would then be beamed down to Earth as a means of providing electricity.
Private sector – the private sector collectively refers to companies that are owned by individuals, as opposed to the government. In the context of space exploration, NASA would be a “public” organization since it is a part of the government, whereas someone like Boeing or Lockheed Martin would be considered a part of the private sector.
SpaceX – a private company attempting space exploration. It created the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets and the Dragon spacecraft. In 2010, SpaceX became the first privately funded company to successfully launch, orbit, and recover a spacecraft.
Low earth orbit – the area from 100 miles to 1240 miles above the Earth’s surface. With the exception of the Apollo missions, every spacecraft has been launched into low earth orbit.
Ansari X Prize - A Competition launched by private donors and supported by NASA that awarded 10 million dollars to the first company that could send a reusable manned rocket into space twice within two weeks. The object of the prize was to promote commercial development of space.
Entrepreneur - A person who organizes and operates a business or businesses, taking on financial risk to do so
Investor - someone who lends money to a company on the promise of repayment with interest later on.
Privatization Counterplan 1NC [1/1]
My partner and I offer the following counterplan:
The United States federal government should establish tax incentives for private companies pursuing the goals of space exploration of the affirmative’s plan.
Observation 1: The counterplan is competitive: The plan and the counterplan take different action. The plan has the government and NASA act directly, while we advocate that the U.S. rely on private companies to take action.
Observation 2: Net benefits
-
Allowing businesses to take over tasks in space – known as privatization – will result in them being run more efficiently and encouraging more innovation.
Joseph N. Pelton, Research Professor with the Institute for Applied Space Research -- George Washington University, chairs a NASA and the National Science Foundation Panel of Experts that is conducting a global review of satellite telecommunications, 05/2010 “A new space vision for NASA - And for space entrepreneurs too?,” Space Policy 26 (2010) p. 78-80
NASA - now past 50 - is well into middle age and seemingly experiencing a mid-life crisis. Any honest assessment of its performance over the past two decades leads to the inexorable conclusion that it is time for some serious review and even more serious reform. National U.S. Space Study Commissions have been recommending major reform for some years and finally someone has listened. President Obama has had the political and programmatic courage to make some serious shifts in how NASA does its business. It is no longer sufficient to move some boxes around and declare this is the new and improved NASA. One of the key messages from the 2004 Aldridge Commission report, which was quickly buried by NASA, was words to this effect: “Let enterprising space entrepreneurs do what they can do better than NASA and leave a more focused NASA do what it does best namely space science and truly long range innovation” [1]. If one goes back almost 25 years to the Rogers Commission [2] and the Paine Commission [3] one can find deep dissatisfaction with NASA productivity, with its handling of its various space transportation systems, and with its ability to adapt to current circumstances as well as its ability to embark on truly visionary space goals for the future. Anyone who rereads the Paine Commission report today almost aches for the vision set forth as a roadmap to the future in this amazing document. True there have been outstanding scientific success stories, such as the Hubble Telescope, but these have been the exception and not the rule. The first step, of course, would be to retool and restructure NASA from top to bottom and not just tweak it a little around the edges. The first step would be to explore what space activities can truly be commercialized and see where NASA could be most effective by stimulating innovation in the private sector rather than undertaking the full mission itself. XPrize Founder Peter Diamandis has noted that we don't have governments operating taxi companies, building computers, or running airlines - and this is for a very good reason. Commercial organizations are, on balance, better managed, more agile, more innovative, and more market responsive than government agencies. People as diverse as movie maker James Cameron and Peter Diamand is feel that the best way forward is to let space entrepreneurs play a greater role in space development and innovation. Cameron strongly endorsed a greater role for commercial creativity in U.S. space programs in a February 2010 Washington Post article and explained why he felt this was the best way forward in humanity's greatest adventure: “I applaud President Obama's bold decision for NASA to focus on building a space exploration program that can drive innovation and provide inspiration to the world. This is the path that can make our dreams in space a reality.”
-
Counterplan doesn’t link to the disadvantages because ___________________________
Share with your friends: |
