Things to add for future Impacts for addons Bio-d / Amazon rainforest impact 1ac Plan
Download 0.97 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Spending is inevitable --- doing it now is better to prevent much greater spending and economic decline in the future
- The plan creates immediate employment and allows the U.S. to double exports over the next five years
1ac SolvencyContention _____ is SolvencyBoosting investment through higher fuel taxes will generate revenue for waterway infrastructure modernization and improvementScott, 12 (May 2012, Doug, “Short Take from May 2012; ASCE Tells Congress More Must Be Invested in Inland Waterways,” http://www.asce.org/ascenews/shorttakes.aspx?id=25769808619, JMP) Testifying on April 18 before the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, James A. Rossberg, P.E., M.ASCE, the Society’s managing director of engineering programs, said that efforts by the administration and Congress to address the growing investment deficit in waterways infrastructure have largely been ineffectual because of political considerations that give precedence to deficit reduction and tax cuts over the badly needed restoration of critical infrastructure. “We can sum up the present situation concisely,” Rossberg said before the subcommittee chair, Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), and the ranking minority member, Tim Bishop (D–New York). “These policy failures at the White House and in Congress threaten the nation’s economic competitiveness in a global economy. “ASCE’s 2009 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure gave the nation’s inland waterways a grade of D–, an indication that the system is near failure. Neither [the] president nor Congress has done anything in the years since to improve upon that extremely dismal assessment by adopting a long-term, systematic approach to improve the performance and condition of our national waterways.” The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment deals with water resources development, water pollution control, water infrastructure, conservation and management, and hazardous waste cleanup. It held the April 18 hearing to receive expert testimony on how the reliability of inland waterways systems will affect the country’s economic competitiveness. Rossberg began by citing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Great Lakes and Ohio River Navigation Systems Commerce Report, 2008 in telling the subcommittee that the United States has more than 25,000 mi of inland, intracoastal, and coastal waterways. The federal government improves and maintains almost 11,000 mi, or about 45 percent, of the total channel length. This includes dredging and the installation and maintenance of such navigation structures as locks, dams, dikes, revetments, and groins. The federal and state governments, along with port authorities and carriers, he said, share responsibility for the nation’s waterway transportation system. The inland waterway transportation industry, he explained, is characterized by extensive cooperation and coordination on the part of the public and private sectors, and the waterway navigation projects that facilitate safe passage for vessels are maintained by the Corps of Engineers. “Because of their ability to move large amounts of cargo, the nation’s inland waterways are a strategic economic and military resource,” stressed Rossberg. “An analysis by the U.S. Army War College concluded that ‘the strategic contributions of these inland waterways are not well understood. The lack of adequate understanding impacts decisions contributing to efficient management, adequate funding, and effective integration with other modes of transportation at the national level. Recommendations demonstrate that leveraging the strategic value of U.S. inland waterways will contribute to building an effective and reliable national transportation network for the 21st century.’” The administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year (FY) 2013 for the Corps of Engineers would provide $4.7 billion, a decrease of more than 5 percent from the $5 billion approved for the current fiscal year. Rossberg said that ASCE believes this level of spending is insufficient to meet the country’s national security, economic, and environmental needs in the 21st century. “The president’s budget for FY 2013 is inadequate to meet the needs of an aging waterways infrastructure and must be increased,” said Rossberg. “Congress must increase funding for the Corps in the coming fiscal year in order to protect an essential economic asset and ensure American competitiveness in the 21st century. “The administration’s proposal for FY 2013 would reduce construction funding from $1.694 billion to $1.471 billion, a reduction of 13 percent. Operations and maintenance funding would be down slightly, from $2.412 billion to $2.398 billion. The Mississippi River and tributaries account would decline from $252 million to $234 million, or seven percent. Investigations—the money used to complete project feasibility studies—would go from $125 million to $102 million, a decline of 18 percent. In all, the [Corps of Engineers] civil works program budget for FY 2013 would be cut from $5.002 billion in FY 2012 to $4.731 billion in FY 2013, an overall reduction of 5.4 percent.”
“Forty-seven percent of all locks maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers were classified as functionally obsolete in 2006,” he told the subcommittee. “Assuming that no new locks are built within the next 20 years, by 2020 another 93 existing locks will be obsolete, rendering more than 8 out of every 10 locks now in service outdated. Most locks now are anywhere from 50 to 70 years old. “The current system of inland waterways lacks resilience. Waterway usage is increasing, but facilities are aging and many are well past their design life of 50 years. Recovery from any event of significance would be negatively impacted by the age and deteriorating condition of the system, posing a direct threat to the American economy.” To obtain the funds for greater investment, Rossberg mentioned a proposal made in April 2010 by the Inland Waterways Users Board, a consortium established by Congress. That plan called for increasing the diesel fuel tax from 20 cents to as much as 29 cents per gallon. It also recommended that the practice of equal sharing of costs for projects costing more that $100 million by federal and local authorities continue but suggested that the federal government cover the full cost of projects costing less than $100 million. The Inland Waterways Users Board estimated that its plan would provide $7.6 billion in new revenues over 20 years. “Doing more with less is not a solution,” concluded Rossberg. “It is a political slogan that ignores the consequences of continuing to underinvest in essential infrastructure, and it contains the seeds of future disasters. It is obvious that recent drastic budget cuts or the complete elimination of funding means that little or nothing will be done to maintain these vital programs. America cannot compete in the world marketplace with 100-year-old locks, too-shallow harbors, impoverished investments in key infrastructure systems, and a seeming blindness on the part of policy makers to the economic peril we face. Enabling the eventual failure of the nation’s essential public infrastructure through arbitrary budget cutting is deeply troubling. Placing abstract notions of budget deficits above the primary duty of the federal government to protect human life and promote economic growth is a dubious policy choice, a choice whose lethal consequences were amply demonstrated in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the failure of that city’s inadequately budgeted and constructed levee system. Congress must never be able to escape the knowledge that it was complicit in the failure. Congress and the president can never say, ‘We weren’t told.’” A federal investment strategy is key to effectively expand inland waterways --- imposes obligations on government planners and decision makers[--- a user pays model can ensure sufficient financing] Bray, 11 --- Center for Transportation Research, University of Tennessee, Knoxville (9/21/2011, Larry G., Congressional Documents and Publications, House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Hearing - "The Economic Importance and Financial Challenges of Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways Transportation System,” Factiva, JMP) Does Economic Theory Support a Federal Role in the Creation of Renewed Inland Navigation Capacity and, If So, What is the Proper Course? Even after decades of mergers, it is still common to find two or more competing railroads running side-by-side. Moreover, even when one rail route is not visible from the tracks of another, there is generally railroad competition. Literally hundreds of thousands of US city pairs are linked by two, three, four, or five different rail carriers or rail carrier combinations. If there is any lack of competition at all it is generally over the last few miles over which railroad customers connect to the greater railroad network. This is not true of the inland navigation system. With only few exceptions there are not duplicate waterway network links. In most cases, there is only one waterway route between any origin-destination pair and little or no opportunity to create competing routes. Within economics, this outcome is referred to as a natural monopoly. n21 Unimpeded, any single firm that controlled the waterway network (or any of its component parts) could impose monopoly prices. Again, competition, through the development of a competing navigation network is impossible. Thus, the federal government is faced with only two choices, it could lease control of the inland navigation system to one or more franchise holders and carefully regulate their activities (pricing, network access, service levels, etc.) or it must retain control of the system and operate it equitably to the benefit of all waterway users. We have very wisely chosen the latter course. The efficient federal control of the inland waterway network imposes obligations on government planners and decision makers that are relatively easy to describe. They must design a network sufficient in extent and capacity to ensure that any further expansion would impose incremental costs that are greater than corresponding additional benefits. The cost of actually constructing, operating, and maintaining the resulting system must then be recovered through fees charged to those who benefit from the waterway's use. Fees faced by each group of users should (at least) reflect any costs that are directly incremental to that group's use. n22 I've chosen these words very carefully so that they conform to my discipline's practice. However, simpler language can convey similar notions without a catastrophic loss of precision. The inland navigation system need not be the biggest, most extensive system possible. Instead, it should be built out to the point where further investment seems silly. If our children don't understand this concept, our parents surely did. Building, operating, and maintaining such a system requires money. Thus, those who benefit must be made to "contribute" toward this end. Differences in who pays which share of the bill depend on whether or not it's possible to assign specific costs to distinct subsets of users - if you cause us to buy it and we can demonstrate that connection, then you pay for it. The implications of this common sense (or if you prefer, theoretically sound) prescription for renewed investment in inland waterway capacity are simple. If, as some maintain, the only groups to benefit from the required investment are waterborne carriers and their customers, then the full burden of new investment should rest with them. Alternatively, if you conclude as I have, that a much broader set of Americans will benefit from this assured navigation capacity, then the burden must be spread equitably across this broader array of beneficiaries. Increasing funding for infrastructure investments will prevent catastrophic failures in the system --- further delay risks economic crisesBoselovic, 12 (3/25/12, Len, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, “LEGISLATION PROPOSED TO FUND DETERIORATING LOCKS AND DAMS,” Factiva, JMP) WASHINGTON -- Legislation that would more than double the money available each year to fix the nation's crumbling locks and dams could be introduced as early as this week. It also would raise for the first time in 17 years the tax that barge operators pay to support the river infrastructure projects, a tax increase the industry is supporting. The measure would not impose tolls on barges moving through locks, an idea the barge industry has successfully fought for more than 70 years, and would make taxpayers bear more of the cost burden for projects. The legislation, to be introduced by U.S. Rep. Ed Whitfield, R- Ky., would implement recommendations that a task force composed of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers personnel and industry officials made in 2010 to clean up an $8 billion backlog of projects. The backlog, caused in part by piecemeal funding from Congress that is limited to about $170 million a year, has increased the costs and delayed completion of projects nationwide.
Nearly 60 percent of the more than 200 locks on the nation's rivers are more than 50 years old, which is how long they were built to last. Several of them are in Western Pennsylvania, including the locks and dam on the Monongahela River at Elizabeth that were completed in 1907. To speed the replacement of at-risk facilities, the legislation would provide $380 million in funding for 20 years. Most of the new money would be provided by taxpayers. The measure also would increase the diesel fuel tax that barge operators pay to support those projects to 26 cents. It has been 20 cents per gallon since 1995. The gas tax generates about $85 million each year for lock and dam projects, money that is matched by taxpayers. "We're willing to pay more. Our customers are willing to pay more," said Michael Toohey, president of the Waterways Council, an Arlington, Va., group that represents barge operators, shippers and related groups.
Congress bears the prime responsibility. The buck has literally stopped on Capitol Hill. While $8 billion has been authorized for locks and dams, Congress has failed to fund projects up front, setting up the cycle that is beggaring the system. The funding system needs an overhaul, but it already generates $170 million a year -- half from a 20-cents-a-gallon fee that barge operators pay on diesel fuel they use, which is then matched by the federal government. At that rate it will take 22 years just to complete seven major projects under way; the others will have to wait. The first thing Congress must do is take the threat seriously and view barge traffic with as much consideration as it does road and rail transportation. Yes, the federal deficit is a problem and spending must be limited. But if ever there was a penny-wise and pound-foolish approach, it has been on the nation's waterways infrastructure. When it fails, a large part of the economy fails with it. * There's still time. A 2010 report produced by the industry and corps suggested raising the diesel fuel tax to between 26 and 29 cents and to use the trust fund exclusively for lock construction and repair projects costing $100 million or more, with other projects picked up by the federal government. Soon legislation will be introduced in Congress to increase funding to $380 million a year -- and that should be taken up as a matter of urgency. The Post-Gazette has often editorialized about the problems of aging locks and dams and the need to do something, but never before has an in-depth series laid out the stakes so starkly and comprehensively. Will anyone listen? Or must a disaster happen in order to get the nation's attention? No one wants to write an editorial that begins, "We told you so." Federal action is key to ensure increased use of inland waterways for freight transportation --- private action will failDOT 2011 (United States Department of Transportation, April 2011, “America’s Marine Highway Report to Congress”, http://www.marad.dot.gov/documents/MARAD_AMH_Report_to_Congress.pdf”) Despite significant progress in short sea container transportation in Europe and recent successful service startups here in the United States, America's Marine Highway must still overcome barriers before it can reach its potential. Disincentives to increased use of the Marine Highway include the unfamiliarity of shippers with this domestic transportation alternative, the lack of an established network of frequent service for container and trailer cargoes, the need for coordinated investment in port infrastructure and vessels, tax issues, and the fact that public benefits attributable to the use of Marine Highway services do not factor into many private sector transportation decisions. The private sector will ultimately be the key to the success of America’s Marine Highway through innovation, outreach, and investment. Private operators must demonstrate to shippers and the public that they can provide highly reliable and cost-effective transportation services by sound management and implementation of the most appropriate technologies for the safe and efficient delivery of cargoes and passengers. They must make efforts to provide greater schedule frequencies and lower the overall cost of service. They must reach out to potential customers, addressing their specific needs and concerns. Without strong leadership from the Federal government, however, the nation's rivers and coastal waterways will continue to be underutilized for domestic container and trailer freight transportation. It is difficult for private operators to support the scale of investment needed to initiate large scale operations. Private operators are particularly disadvantaged by the fact that many of the important public benefits of water transportation, including congestion reduction, environmental sustainability, and system resiliency, cannot be captured in the form of higher revenues or lower costs to company profits. Government action is required to help overcome these challenges and assist the expansion of Marine Highway services in a significant manner. The plan creates immediate employment and allows the U.S. to double exports over the next five yearsToohey, 11 --- President and CEO of Waterways Council, Inc. (9/21/2011, Mike, Congressional Documents and Publications, House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Hearing - "The Economic Importance and Financial Challenges of Recapitalizing the Nation's Inland Waterways Transportation System," Factiva, JMP) Mr. Chairman, we face a critical time in the history of the waterways in America. It is imperative that we modernize the vital infrastructure supporting commerce on our inland waterways. There are numerous projects that are fully authorized and ready for construction to commence or continue. In this sluggish economy where the unemployment rate is over 20% for construction workers, these projects can put thousands of people to work right away. And, these projects, once completed, will provide billions of dollars of activity for the American economy. The President has called for the doubling of exports from the United States in the next five years. If we do not properly invest in the waterways of this country, it will be impossible to achieve that worthy goal. It is gratifying to see that the President included investments in waterways infrastructure in his American Jobs Act that he recently sent to Congress. We look forward to working with the Administration and this Subcommittee to take the necessary steps to recapitalize our Nation's inland waterways system. 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 0.97 Mb. Share with your friends:
|