AT: You Ignore Current Problems

AT: Constitution

This newfound attention to the relationship between Congress and the Constitution is thrilling and long overdue. Progressives, as Greg Sargent points out, are wrong to scoff at it. This is an opportunity to engage in a reasoned discussion of what the Constitution does and does not do. It's an opportunity to point out that no matter how many times you read the document on the House floor, cite it in your bill, or how many copies you can stuff into your breast pocket without looking fat, the Constitution is always going to raise more questions than it answers and confound more readers than it comforts. And that isn't because any one American is too stupid to understand the Constitution. It's because the Constitution wasn't written to reflect the views of any one American.

The problem with the Tea Party's new Constitution fetish is that it's hopelessly selective. As Robert Parry notes, the folks who will be reading the Constitution aloud this week can't read the parts permitting slavery or prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment using only their inside voices, while shouting their support for the 10th Amendment. They don't get to support Madison and renounce Jefferson, then claim to be restoring the vision of "the Framers." Either the Founders got it right the first time they calibrated the balance of power between the federal government and the states, or they got it so wrong that we need to pass a "Repeal Amendment" to fix it. And unless Tea Party Republicans are willing to stand proud and announce that they adore and revere the whole Constitution as written, except for the First, 14, 16th, and 17th amendments, which totally blow, they should admit right now that they are in the same conundrum as everyone else: This document no more commands the specific policies they espouse than it commands the specific policies their opponents support.

This should all have been good news. The fact that the Constitution is sufficiently open-ended to infuriate all Americans almost equally is part of its enduring genius. The Framers were no more interested in binding future Americans to a set of divinely inspired commandments than any of us would wish to be bound by them. As Justice Stephen Breyer explains in his recent book, Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge's View, Americans cannot be controlled by the "dead hands" of one moment frozen in time. The Constitution created a framework, not a Ouija board, precisely because the Framers understood that the prospect of a nation ruled for centuries by dead prophets would be the very opposite of freedom.

1AR—Won’t Generate Enough Revenue

***B. Can’t sell property rights—violates OST and links to dip cap

Cooper 3 (Lawrence A. Cooper is the Deputy Chief, DIA Forward Element - US Cyber Command at United States Department of Defense, a Space Policy & Requirements Offficer at United States Department of Defense, Sr Principal Analyst, Space & Intelligence Programs at Kepler Research Inc, and Program Management Analyst at ANSER Inc, “Encouraging space exploration through a new application of space property rights”, Space Policy, Issue 19 pgs 111-118, 2003, pg online @ http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/science_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6V5248DXTN421&_cdi=5774&_user=99318&_pii=S026596460300016X&_origin=&_coverDate=05%2F312F2003&_sk=999809997&view=c&wchp=dGLzVzzzSkWB&md5=dd59b237c98333b085f21058852b7a23&ie=/sdarticle.pdf)

The OST was intended to prevent conflict in space and ensure free access to space for all by prohibiting weapons of mass destruction and preventing States from exercising territorial sovereignty. No state may claim any part of space or a celestial body, but no mention is made regarding resources removed from their original place. States are the parties to the treaty and responsible for activities in space. Therefore, people or organizations may only act under the aegis of a State which bears international responsibility and liability for those actions; states maintain jurisdiction over their personnel and objects they launch; and their activities are protected because any exploration as well as use of space is free from interference of other parties. The intent of these broad statements is to prevent competition that could lead to war, but leave more specific provisions to follow-on treaties. The OST did not define what constituted space nor did it define exactly what was meant to by “use of outer space…shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries…” although it has been interpreted to mean “equal access”. Some have argued that OST’s broad definitions allow individual appropriation of space and celestial bodies because it only specifically prohibits appropriation by states; however, States are responsible for the actions of individuals, and property claims must occur through the state’s property laws. Therefore individuals may not claim space or celestial bodies.
Any revenue stream failure means CP doesn’t solve—here’s the math—worldwide support key.

Joseph 10 — Ph.D. – Brain Research Laboratory (Rhawn, “Marketing Mars: Financing the Human Mission to Mars and the Colonization of the Red Planet,” Journal of Cosmology, August, Volume 12, http://journalofcosmology.com/Mars110.html)

The sole mission of The Human Mission to Mars Corporation should be to raise $150 billion to fund a Human Mission to Mars and the colonization of the Red Planet, and this can be accomplished by initiating and following the detailed plans discussed in this article.

It is estimated that $10 billion a year can be raised through clever advertising and marketing and the sale of merchandise. Following a massive advertising campaign which increases public interest, between $30 billion to $90 billion can be raised through corporate sponsorships, and an additional $1 billion a year through individual sponsorships. The sale of naming rights would yield an estimated $30 billion. Television broadcasting rights would bring in an estimated $30 billion. This comes to a total of between $100 billion to $160 billion, and does not include other commercial ventures and the sale of real estate and mineral rights.

NASA can't do it. The United States government can't do it. An International effort can.

Asteroids

SQ solves- current detection and tech sufficient to divert NEOs

Vasile and Colombo 11 (Massimiliano and Camilla, Lecturer Ph.D., Department of Aerospace Engineering; and Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Aerospace Engineering at Glasgow, University, Optimal Impact Strategies for Asteroid Deflection, http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1104/1104.4670.pdf)

The European Space Agency in particular is now assessing the feasibility of the Don Quijote mission1, due to launch in the first half of next decade, which is intended to impact a spacecraft with a high relative velocity onto an asteroid and measure its deflection. Should this mission fly, this would be the first technological demonstration of our capability to deviate an asteroid if needed. Prevention strategies against a potential hazardous object in collision route with the Earth usually consider a change in momentum of the asteroid, with a consequent variation in the semi-major axis which results in an increase of the Minimum Orbit Intersection Distance (MOID), between the Earth and the object. Several different strategies have been considered to achieve this goal; among them the simplest one is the kinetic impact. In fact, as will be shown in this paper, effective kinetic impacts resulting in a variation of the MOID even of thousand of kilometers seem to be already achievable with the current launch technology with a relatively small spacecraft, provided that the time difference between the momentum change and the potential Earth impact is large enough.
NASA has effective asteroid response plan.

Green 7 (James, November 8, Dr. Green received his Ph.D. in Space Physics from the University of Iowa in 1979 and began working in the Magnetospheric Physics Branch at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in 1980. At Marshall, Dr. Green developed and man­aged the Space Physics Analysis Network, which provided many scientists, all over the world, with rapid access to data, other scientists, and specific NASA computer and information resources NEAR-EARTH OBJECTS (NEOS)-STATUS OF THE SURVEY PROGRAM AND REVIEW OF NASA'S 2007 REPORT TO CONGRESS, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_house_hearings&docid=f:38057.pdf)//DT

NASA has an NEO contingency notification plan to be utilized in the very un­likely event an object is detected with significant probability of impacting the Earth. The plan establishes procedures between the detection sites, the Minor Planet Cen­ter, the NASA NEO Program Office at JPL, and NASA Headquarters to first quickly verify and validate the data and orbit on the object of interest, and then up-channel confirmed information in a timely manner to the NASA Administrator. These proce­dures were first exercised with the discovery of the object now known as Apophis, which was found in December 2004 in a hazardous orbit but determined to not have a significant probability of impacting the Earth in the near-term. NASA will con­tinue to refine this internal contingency plan, and begin work with other U.S. Gov­ernment agencies and institutions when directed.
Quarantines Solve

Altman, et. al. 5 [Lawrence, reporter for The New York Times, Jeff Bailey, reporter for the New York Times in Chicago, "CDC Proposes New RUles in Effort to Prevent Disease Outbreak", section A; column 1, National Desk, p. 22 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9802E7DF1631F930A15752C1A9639C8B63]

Federal officials yesterday proposed the first significant changes in quarantine rules in 25 years in an effort to broaden the definition of reportable illnesses, to centralize their reporting to the federal government and to require the airline and shipping industries to keep passenger manifests electronically for 60 days. The proposals would also clarify the appeals process for people subjected to quarantines to allow for administrative due process and give health officials explicit authority to offer vaccination, drugs and other appropriate means of prevention on a voluntary basis to those in quarantine. The proposals could cost the beleaguered airline industry hundreds of millions of dollars, officials of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said. The officials are inviting public comment on the proposals, which are to be published in the Federal Register on Nov. 30, they told reporters in a telephone news conference. The proposals are part of a broader Bush administration plan to improve the response to current and potential communicable disease threats that may arise anywhere in the world. If adopted, the new regulations ''will allow the C.D.C. to move more swiftly'' when it needs to control outbreaks, said Dr. Martin Cetron, who directs the agency's division of global migration and quarantine. The outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 underscored how fast a disease could spread through the world and the need to modernize and strengthen quarantine measures by pointing out gaps in health workers' ability to respond quickly and effectively, Dr. Cetron said. As the C.D.C. joined with cooperative airlines to meet flights and later collect information about passengers who had contact with others who developed SARS, the epidemiologists had to compile and process by hand data collected from flight manifests, customs declarations and other sources. But manifests contained only the name and seat number; customs declarations were illegible, and when readable, the names did not match those on the manifests. 'The time required to track passengers was routinely longer than the incubation period,'' which was two to 10 days for SARS, Dr. Cetron said. ''That was really quite shocking,'' Dr. Cetron said. One proposed change would require airline and ship manifests to be kept electronically for 60 days and made available to the C.D.C. within 12 hours when ill passengers arrive on international and domestic flights. The proposed changes include provisions for maintaining confidentiality and privacy of health information. The outbreak of SARS was stopped in part because of quarantines imposed in some affected countries. Quarantine restricts the movement of a healthy person exposed to someone who has a communicable disease. The quarantine period is determined by the usual length of time that passes from exposure to an infectious agent to the onset of illness. An executive order of the president limits quarantine to nine diseases: cholera, diphtheria, infectious tuberculosis, plague, smallpox, yellow fever, viral hemorrhagic fevers like Ebola, SARS and influenza caused by new strains that could cause a pandemic.

Directory: 2012
2012 -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It?
2012 -> Annual InStructional unit plan
2012 -> University of Hawai‘i Maui College dental assisting program review october 21, 2013
2012 -> Committee on the rights of the child the rights of all children in the context of international migration
2012 -> Background on the Haitian Earthquake
2012 -> The Collected Wisdom of Science Olympiad Coaches
2012 -> Federal Communications Commission fcc 12-81 Before the Federal Communications Commission
2012 -> Aa and na members Dying from Tobacco
2012 -> [Baby Crying] 01: 04 [Ching

Download 470.86 Kb.

Share with your friends: