Chicago Debate League 2013/14 Core Files
AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [3/6] 323
Download 3.16 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 2AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [4/6] 324
- 2AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [5/6] 325
2AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [3/6] 3232) Voting Negative entrenches immigration debates as something for White America to decide. Our Affirmative brings a Latina/o voice into the political debate, which changes the framework that their argument depends on and initiates a process of authentic democratization. MORAN, 97 [Rachel; Professor of Law, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California, Berkeley; “What If Latinos Really Mattered in the Public Policy Debate?" California Law Review, Vol. 85, No. 5] At the border, at the workplace, and in higher education, Latinos are forcing America to revisit conventional wisdom about immigration and civil rights by reconsidering popular assumptions about citizenship and identity as well as processes of assimilation and pluralism. In each of these areas, Latinos have sparked identity crises for American institutions. Because of the ambiguities surrounding Latinos, they are at times treated as an opportunity, and at other times as a threat. In immigration debates, Latinos are portrayed alternatively as victims and victimizers. Either the Latino is fleeing economic hardship or political persecution to seek refuge in the United States, or the Latino is an intruder who is stealing work from native-born Americans and jeopardizing American identity. At work, bilingual Latinos are characterized as assets and as liabilities. The Latino can make a unique contribution by translating for customers and monolingual co-workers, but the Latino can disrupt the workplace by using Spanish to exclude monolingual English speakers from the conversation. In higher education, Latino students are finds and frauds. They can bring a unique and previously unrepresented perspective to the learning process, yet they are unfairly capitalizing on affirmative action without suffering a history of discrimination comparable to that of Blacks. These articles begin to show that the ambiguities that appear to reside in the category "Latino" in fact reflect longstanding contradictions in institutional philosophies. Because of their complex make-up, Latinos remind us that the normative criteria underlying immigration and civil rights policy are contestable. The uncertainties surrounding Latino identity reside as much in uneasy policy compromises as in the history and circumstances of Latinos themselves. If Latinos successfully emerge from the shadows of the policy process, their participation could help to clarify pressing questions of access and opportunity that the United States faces as a liberal democracy with diverse constituents in a global economy. Then, perhaps, Latinos will really matter in the public policy debate. 2AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [4/6] 3243) Non-Unique: Obama won’t dedicate political capital to the new rules, and he doesn’t have enough time to make them strong before they are reversed. GUARDIAN, 13 [Richard Schiffman; “President Obama is talking big on climate change, but will he act?” 6/25, http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/25/obama-climate-change-speech-more-promises] Obama gave what might turn out to be his most substantive, not to mention controversial, address on climate change since he took office over four years ago. I say might turn out to be, because the devil, as they say, is in the details, and the details are not yet in. It's not clear, for example, how much of his diminishing stock of "political capital" Obama will be willing to spend on aggressively pushing for the climate relief package that he outlined today. It is also not clear whether the three years plus that remain in his soon-to-be lame duck presidency will be enough time to accomplish his ambitious goals, still less insure that they won't be reversed by the next resident of the White House. 4) No Link: Obama’s new rules do not go through Congress, so there is no risk of a fight over our advocacy having any spillover effect. Even if immigration reform causes massive controversy, there is no vote over climate regulations for Congress to backlash on. Either the regulations are inevitable, or they will fail for reasons the plan has nothing to do with. 2AC Frontline [Critical Immigration]: Politics Disadvantage [5/6] 3255) No impact: Obama’s new rules do not change the status quo on climate change, and he will not invest enough political capital to push for more strict regulations on other industries. WARA, 13 [Michael, law professor at Stanford University; “Seeking More Presidential Action, Less Rhetoric, on Warming”, 6/26, http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/seeking-more-obam-action-less-rhetoric-on-warming/] At this point, five years in, Obama should also be judged by his actions (tightened car emission standards; delayed power plant rules) rather than his words on climate change. This is not necessarily to criticize him, only to recognize that words are cheap and the president has limited political capital to spend on a variety of important priorities. Sixty percent of U.S. emissions come from two sectors — transportation and the power sector. I’ll focus on these. On transportation, the president rightly claims credit for accepting the California proposals on carbon pollution standards for cars, making them nationwide and expanding them. But these moves occurred when the businesses likely to be most strongly opposed were partly owned by the American taxpayer. But his new plan mostly talks about biofuels – about which don’t get me started (see here, here and here). Regarding the transport sector, the most hopeful new technologies we have involve electrification, not biofuels. The president doesn’t talk about that, perhaps for good reason but perhaps not. The truth is that if electric cars take off, a vehicle pollution problem just turns into a power plant pollution problem. So on to power plants, where because of a series of court decisions, and the text of the Clean Air Act, the president has the possibility of making big changes. Here, the plan says nothing concrete beyond setting some deadlines. * This is sort of like busy students coming into my office, having blown a deadline for an assignment, saying that this time is different and they’ll be sure to get it to me next week. In fact, the situation is exactly like that. The Obama Administration, is under a court imposed settlement to issue these standards, which they have violated; they have issued and then withdrawn draft rules for new power plants after strong pushback from the power sector; and EPA is about to get sued by environmental groups for violating the settlement. I had hoped for some real sense of substantive policy direction from the president — how he intends to use the Clean Air Act to deal with power plant carbon pollution. I hoped that Obama would lay down a clear marker. Instead, his relative lack of direction allows industry to rest easy with the current situation instead of being part of a push for congressional action on this important problem. Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2011 2011 -> Voices of the Old Sea Norman Lewis 2011 -> Malevil Robert Merle 2011 -> The Elephant Keeper’s Children Peter Hoeg 2011 -> Jv packet •Mars Colonization Affirmative •Mars Colonization Negative 2011 -> Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) omb no. 1024-0018 2011 -> All America Looks Up to Virginia;” Virginia and the Declaration of Independence 2011 -> Rao bulletin 2011 -> Christopher Columbus was born between 25 August and 31 October 1451 in 2011 -> The Battle of Frenchtown (1855), Washington Territory: the Political and Demographic Context rev 9/4/11 2011 -> Seti aff •seti neg •Asteroids Aff Download 3.16 Mb. Share with your friends:
|