Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 2

Mercury Politics

Politics

Notes

– Aff answers can obviously be found in the sections labeled “Aff”, but you should also consult link and internal link sections for additional answers, as those sections are bidirectional.

– Additional arguments can be found in the Pre-Institute Politics File – that file is a supplement to this one.

– The acronym “SKFTA” stands for South Korea Free Trade Agreement


Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 2

Mercury Politics

Politics 1

1NC Shell – SKFTA Good (1/4) 4

1NC Shell – SKFTA Good (2/4) 5

1NC Shell – SKFTA Good (3/4) 6

1NC Shell – SKFTA Good (4/4) 7

******SKFTA 8

***SKFTA Uniqueness 8

Uniqueness – SKFTA Will Pass Now 9

Uniqueness – SKFTA Will Pass Now – AT – Trade Adjustment Assistance Prevents (1/2) 10

Uniqueness – SKFTA Will Pass Now – AT – Trade Adjustment Assistance Prevents (2/2) 11

***SKFTA Internal Links 12

Internal Link – Obama Political Capital Key to SKFTA 13

Internal Link – Obama Political Capital Key to SKFTA 14

Internal Link – GOP Coop Key to SKFTA 15

Internal Link – Democrats Key to SKFTA 16

***SKFTA Good Impacts 17

Impact Uniqueness – AT – South Korea Won’t Pass (1/2) 18

Impact Uniqueness – AT – South Korea Won’t Pass (2/2) 19

Impact – SKFTA Good – Regional Power Projection 20

Impact – SKFTA Good – Alliance 21

Impact – SKFTA Good – Alliance – Military Doesn’t Solve 22

Impact – Alliance Good – AT – Resiliency (1/2) 23

Impact – Alliance Good – AT – Resiliency (2/2) 24

Impact – SKFTA Good – Alliance – AT – SKFTA Not Key (1/2) 25

Impact – SKFTA Good – Alliance – AT – SKFTA Not Key (1/2) 26

Impact – Alliance Good – Key to Stability 27

Impact – Alliance Good – Warming (1/2) 28

Impact – Alliance Good – Warming (2/2) 29

Brink – Asian Tensions High Now 30

Korea War Impact – Conflict Ensures Escalation 31

Impact – SKFTA Good – Econ & Alliance 32

Impact – SKFTA Good – Econ 33

Impact – SKFTA Good – Econ 34

Impact – SKFTA Good – Econ 35

***AFF - SKFTA Answers 36

Uniqueness – Won’t Pass Now – TAA (1/3) 37

Uniqueness – Won’t Pass Now – TAA (2/3) 38

Uniqueness – Won’t Pass Now – TAA (3/3) 39

Uniqueness – Won’t Pass Now – Political Stalling 40

Uniqueness – Won’t Pass Now – Republican Boycott 41

Impact Uniqueness – South Korea Won’t Pass Now (1/2) 42

Impact Uniqueness – South Korea Won’t Pass Now (2/2) 43

Impact Answer – No Conflict (1/2) 44

Impact Answer – No Conflict (2/2) 45

Impact Answer – AT – SKFTA Key to Econ 46

Impact Answer – AT – SKFTA Key to Alliance 47

SKFTA Bad – Economy (1/2) 48

SKFTA Bad – Economy (2/2) 49

***Links – NASA Generic 50

NASA Policy – Triggers Congressional Debate (1/2) 51

NASA Policy – Triggers Congressional Debate (2/2) 52

NASA Policy – Triggers Debate 53

NASA Policy – Unpopular – Senate – Rockefeller (D-WV) and Hutchinson (R-TX) 54

NASA Funding – Budget Debate (1/2) 55

NASA Funding – Budget Debate (2/2) 56

NASA Funding – Triggers Debate – Public 57

NASA Funding – Unpopular – GOP (1/3) 58

NASA Funding – Unpopular – GOP (2/3) 59

NASA Funding – Unpopular – GOP (3/3) 60

NASA Funding – Unpopular – Congress 61

NASA Funding – Unpopular – House – GOP 62

NASA Funding – Unpopular – Senate – Rockefeller (D-WV) 63

NASA Funding – Unpopular – Tea Party (1/3) 64

NASA Funding – Unpopular – Tea Party (2/3) 65

NASA Funding – Unpopular – Tea Party (3/3) 66

Defense Spending – Unpopular – Tea Party 67

Spending – Unpopular – Tea Party (1/4) 68

Spending – Unpopular – Tea Party (2/4) 69

Spending – Unpopular – Tea Party (3/4) 70

Spending – Unpopular – Tea Party (4/4) 71

NASA Funding – Popular – Congress (1/3) 72

NASA Funding – Popular – Congress (2/3) 73

NASA Funding – Popular – Congress (3/3) 74

NASA Funding – Popular – Senate – Shelby (R-AL) 75

NASA Funding – Popular – House – U.S. Rep. Terri Sewell (D-AL) 76

NASA Funding – Popular – Tea Party 77

NASA – Popular – Public 78

***Links – Space Exploration 79

Space Exploration – Unpopular – Public 80

Space Exploration – Unpopular – Women 81

Space Exploration – Unpopular – Younger Voters 82

Space Exploration – Unpopular – Democrats 83

Space Apathy – Congress & Public (1/2) 84

Space Apathy – Congress & Public (2/2) 85

Space Apathy – Public 86

Space Exploration – Popular – Congress (1/2) 87

Space Exploration – Popular – Congress (2/2) 88

Link – Space Enthusiasm – Public Interested in Space 89

***Links – Privatization 90

Privatization – Unpopular – Conservatives 91

Privatization – Unpopular – Senators (1/2) 92

Privatization – Unpopular – Senators (2/2) 93

Privatization – Public – Divided 94

Government Space Funding – Popular – Public 95

Privatization – Popular – GOP 96

Privatization – Popular – TEA Party 97

Privatization – Popular – Public 98

***Links – Aeronautics 99

Aeronautics – Triggers Debate (1/2) 100

Aeronautics – Triggers Debate (2/2) 101

***Links – Human & Robotic Exploration 102

Human Exploration – Unpopular – No Political Consensus (1/2) 103

Human Exploration – Unpopular – No Political Consensus (2/2) 104

Human Exploration – Unpopular – Women 105

Robotic Exploration – Popular – Public 106

Human Exploration – Popular – Senate – Nelson (D-FL) (1/2) 107

Human Exploration – Popular – Senate – Nelson (D-FL) (2/2) 108

Human Exploration – Popular – Senate – Hutchinson (R-TX) 109

Human Exploration – Popular – Public 110

***Links – Shuttle 111

Shuttle – Extension – Popular – Congress 112

Shuttle Repurposing – Popular – Congress (1/2) 113

Shuttle Repurposing – Popular – Congress (2/2) 114

Shuttle – Popular – Public 115

***Links – Launch Systems 116

Space Launch System – Unpopular - Senators 117

Solving Gap – Popular - Congress 118

Low Earth Orbit Systems – Popular – Congress 119

***Links – Moon 120

Moon Mission – Human – Unpopular – Public 121

Moon Mission – Popular – Congress 122

Moon Mission – Human – Popular – Congress (1/2) 123

Moon Mission – Human – Popular – Congress (2/2) 124

Moon Mission – Commercial Services – Popular – Congress 125

***Links – Mars Mission 126

Mars – One Way Mission – Unpopular 127

Mars Mission – Human – Unpopular – Public 128

Mars Mission – Human – Unpopular – Women 129

Mars Mission – Popular – Political Support 130

Colonization – Popular – TEA Party 131

***Links – Hubble 132

Hubble Telescope – Unpopular – Public 133

Hubble Telescope – Unpopular – Women 134

Hubble – Popular – Senate – Mikulski (D-MD) 135

***Links – Earth Sciences 136

Congress Oversees NASA-NOAA Relationship 137

Earth Sciences – Unpopular – GOP 138

Environmental Programs – Unpopular – GOP (1/2) 139

Environmental Programs – Unpopular – GOP (2/2) 140

Climate Study – Unpopular – GOP 141

Climate Satellites – Unpopular – GOP 142

Tornado Detection – Unpopular – House 143

Tsunami Detection – Unpopular – GOP 144

Earth Sciences – Popular – Congress 145

Weather Satellites – Popular - Senate 146

***Links – EPA Regulation 147

Regulation – Unpopular – GOP (1/2) 148

Regulation – Unpopular – GOP (2/2) 149

***Links – Space Solar Power 150

Solar Sails – Unpopular - Congress 151

Space Solar Power – Political Capital (1/2) 152

Space Solar Power – Political Capital (2/2) 153

Space Solar Power – Unpopular – Lobbies (1/2) 154

Space Solar Power – Unpopular – Lobbies (1/2) 155

Space Solar Power – No Support (1/2) 156

Space Solar Power – No Support (2/2) 157

Green Energy – Unpopular – GOP – House 158

Space Solar Power – Popular 159

***Links – Planetary Defense 160

Planetary Defense – Political Capital (1/3) 161

Planetary Defense – Political Capital (2/3) 162

Planetary Defense – Political Capital (3/3) 163

Asteroid Defense – Popular – Congress 164

***Links – SETI 165

SETI – Unpopular – Politicians & Public 166

SETI – Popular – Public 167

SETI – Contact Aliens – Popular – Public 168

SETI – Belief in Aliens High – Public 169

SETI – Belief in Aliens Low – Republicans 170

SETI – Belief in Aliens – Liberals 171

SETI – Belief in Aliens – Younger Voters 172

SETI – Belief in Aliens – Women 173

***Links – Education 174

Education Popular – Senate – Boozman (R-AR) 175

***Links – Space Treaty 176

Space Treaty – Unpopular 177

***Links – Space Weapons 178

Weapons – Unpopular – Politicians and Public 179

Weapons – Funding - Unpopular 180

Weapons – Funding – Unpopular - Democrats 181

Weapons – Unpopular – Public 182

Weapons – Popular – Congress (1/2) 183

Weapons – Popular – Congress (2/2) 184

***Links – International Space Station 185

Space Station – Unpopular – Politicians 186

Space Station – Unpopular – AT – Space Research Popular 187

Space Station Extension – Popular - Congress 188

***Links – Cooperation 189

Coop – China – Unpopular – House 190

Coop – China – Unpopular – House – GOP 191

Coop – China – Unpopular – House – GOP 192

Coop – China – Unpopular – House – Wolf (R-VA) (1/3) 193

Coop – China – Unpopular – House – Wolf (R-VA) (2/3) 194

Coop – China – Unpopular – House – Wolf (R-VA) (3/3) 195

Internal Link – House – GOP – Wolf Has Clout 196

Coop – Russia – Triggers Congressional Debate 197

Coop – Allies – Popular – Congress 198

***Internal Links & Link Boosters 199

Uniqueness – AT – Obama Political Capital Low Now 200

Uniqueness – AT – Obama Political Capital Low Now (2/3) 201

Uniqueness – AT – Obama Political Capital Low Now (3/3) 202

Internal Link – Political Capital (1/4) 203

Internal Link – Political Capital (2/4) 204

Internal Link – Political Capital (3/4) 205

Internal Link – Political Capital (4/4) 206

Internal Link – AT – Winners Win 207

Internal Link – Public Popularity Key to Agenda 208

Spending Uniqueness – GOP Holding the Line Now 209

Uniqueness – Tea Party – Unity Now 210

Internal Link – Tea Party – Clout 211

Internal Link – Tea Party – Clout – AT - Inexperience 212

Link – Generic – AT – Plan Is Popular/Win (1/2) 213

Link – Generic – AT – Plan Is Popular/Win (2/2) 214

Link Booster – AT – Plan Not Perceived 215

Link Booster – Generic – AT – No Blame 216

Link Booster – Generic – Controversial Policies Spend Political Capital 217

Link Booster – Senate Commerce Committee 218

Link Booster – Senate Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice & Science & Related Agencies 219

Link Booster – House Science Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics 220

Link Turns the Case (1/2) 221

Link Turns the Case (2/2) 222

***Aff 223

Uniqueness Answer – No Obama Political Capital Now 224

Link Answer – Obama Won’t Spend Political Capital on NASA 225

Link Answer – Space Not Key 226

Link Turn – Winners Win (1/3) 227

Link Turn – Winners Win (2/3) 228

Link Turn – Winners Win (3/3) 229

Link Turn – Winners Win – Lobby Version 230

Internal Link Answer – Political Capital and Popularity Not Key to Agenda 231

Internal Link Turn – Political Capital Backfires 232

Uniqueness Answer – Tea Party – Not Unified with GOP – Bashing Boehner 233

Uniqueness Answer – Tea Party – Not Unified with GOP – Bashing McConnell 234

Internal Link Answer – Tea Party – AT – Tea Party Has Clout (1/2) 235

Internal Link Answer – Tea Party – AT – Tea Party Has Clout (2/2) 236


Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 2

Mercury Politics


1NC Shell – SKFTA Good (1/4)

A. Uniqueness and internal link – South Korean Free Trade Agreement will pass now, political capital key

Kim, Joongang Daily Columnist, 7/6/11

(Sukhan, senior partner at the law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP in Washington, D.C., 30 June 2011, “[Viwepoint] Endgame for Korus”, http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2938477, 7.6.11, SWolff)

Four years after striking an initial deal with Korea, and after a number of significant revisions to that deal, President Barack Obama has finally announced a plan for Congressional consideration of the Korea-U.S. FTA (Korus), and he hopes for ratification prior to the Congressional recess in August. Under his plan, the Senate, controlled by Obama’s Democratic Party, will soon begin consideration of the legislation, with subsequent review by the Republican-controlled House. Prospects for the passage of Korus have never been so good, and there are grounds for optimism. Obama’s plan for Korus’ ratification, however, is a high-stakes political gamble in an enormously complicated political environment. After trying for months to forge a bipartisan consensus on the ratification, Obama has changed course and opted to try to push Korus through Congress in tandem with other controversial trade legislation. To succeed in this gamble, Obama must overcome a number of immediate challenges under great time pressure. The principle challenge is the renewal of Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), a program that provides benefits to U.S. industrial workers laid off due to competition from imports. The renewal of the TAA is a must for Democrats, and Obama is attempting to link its renewal with the Korus bill. This linkage will complicate Congressional consideration of Korus, as many Republicans are opposed to the TAA, particularly in the current climate of fiscal austerity. Indeed, Senate Republicans boycotted a hearing organized by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus to discuss an initial draft of the combined TAA-Korus bill. Key Republicans in both chambers, including House Speaker John Boehner, are now seeking any means to separate the TAA renewal from Korus in the hope that they can vote down the former while passing the latter. The White House, however, has declared it will not present Korus legislation to Congress without the TAA renewal. A second challenge is the linkage of Korus to pending FTAs with Colombia and Panama. Under Obama’s plan, and as a concession to the demands of Congressional Republicans, ratification of the three FTAs will move through Congress at the same time. However, many Democrats, including Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Committee on Ways & Means, which oversees trade matters, oppose the Colombia FTA because of concerns about Colombia’s treatment of trade union leaders. Levin’s opposition to the Colombia deal should not derail, but may well complicate, consideration of Korus in the House. Additional challenges relate to the so-called fast-track rules governing the submission of the trade deals to Congress. These rules provide, first, for informal reviews of draft legislation by both houses of Congress and permit members of Congress to propose amendments. While the president does not need to accept the amendments in the final version of the bill presented to Congress for passage, amendments proposed during the informal process signal Congressional concerns. The many amendments proposed for Korus, or at least those made public to date, indicate a high level of controversy and are previews of the heated debates to be expected in Congress about the legislation. They will also be used by opponents of the president’s strategy as drags on the process. Furthermore, Republicans insist that the pairing of the TAA renewal with the Korus legislation is inconsistent with fast-track rules. Timing is also a key concern for the White House. The November 2012 presidential election is coming fast, and the democratic base - already wary of trade deals and disappointed with Obama’s inability to revive the U.S. economy - may hold passage of three trade deals against him. The political cost to Obama of attempting to pass new trade deals will increase rapidly after the summer recess and at some point become unbearable. Hence, the Obama administration is now waging an all-out effort to secure passage under the expedited fast-track process before then. There is little that Korea can do to influence the outcome of the U.S. ratification process at this point. The Obama administration has decided it has obtained the best deal with Korea that it can get, and has launched a high-stakes domestic process to get the deal passed. Obama is personally invested in the success of this process, and we can expect that he will do his utmost to secure passage quickly. Indeed, Obama has repeatedly lauded Korus as a vital part of America’s exports promotion - and job growth from exports - strategy. The weeks ahead will show whether he can succeed in his audacious gamble.