Team: Firstly, the tournament is on Thursday, we will dismiss around 2:30
The subject is something to the effect of "Resolved: Current economic disparities threaten democratic ideals." The wording could be slightly different.
Here's the Debate Central Analysis of this topic:
http://debate-central.ncpa.org/december-pfd-topic-analysis/
Moreover, practice tomorrow after school. All judges, competitors, and observers are expected to be present. Thanks all. Have a good'un
Monday, December 12, 2011
Monday, December 5, 2011
Fundraiser Meeting Tomorrow
Attention Team: Davida says: Don't forget about the breakfast fundraiser tommorow at lunch in Mrs.Deans room so we can have our fundraiser on Wednesday or Thursday:) thanks:) Please comment and let me know if you can come?
Thank you very much!
Thank you very much!
Sunday, December 4, 2011
CCA Brings Home The Gold!
Attention team: Team Smith/Woodard won about four debates in a row against teams from SLA, and Mastermen. We placed in the top four, bringing CCAs first trophies! Congratulations Damar Jeffery for participating in his first debate tournament!
Friday, December 2, 2011
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Fundraising Update
Attention Team: After a donation of ~$13, today's donut sale before school and the bake sale at lunch our total of money raised is has gotten to $103.78 Great work so far! I'd like to meet up regarding this issue next week.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
http://www.thisnation.com/question/051.html
Why Do We Elect Presidents This Way?
There are two primary reasons the Founders chose to select presidents via the electoral college instead of by direct, popular voting. The first reason was their lack of trust in the judgment of the people. They were fearful that a well-spoken but not well-intentioned individual could flatter the people and win their support. They hoped that a secondary body, such as the Electoral College, would not be susceptible to such attempts at manipulation. This reason for the Electoral College is virtually meaningless with changes that have "bound" electors to cast their votes for the candidate who wins the majority of the popular vote in each state.
The second reason for choosing presidents by electoral votes instead of by popular vote is to give the states a voice in the presidential election. The principle of federalism was and is a critical feature of the American political system. By placing states in this important position in the selection of the country's leader, the Framers sought to maintain the position of states as important entities in the American political system.
Imagine that presidential elections were not decided state-by-state, but rather by a nationwide popular vote. The significance of states and the candidates' competition for support in key, "swing" states would disappear. Candidates would be inclined to simply run nationwide ad campaigns and visit large population centers.
Only use this to bouch ideas for the debate do not use these pionts unless you think there good
Some ideas for the PF debate.
The Pro's and Con's of the Electoral College System
There have, in its 200 year history, been a number of critics and proposed reforms to the Electoral College system - most of them trying to eliminate it. But there are also staunch defenders of the Electoral College who, though perhaps less vocal than its critics, offer very powerful arguments in its favor.Arguments Against the Electoral College
Those who object to the Electoral College system and favor a direct popular election of the president generally do so on four grounds:- the possibility of electing a minority president
- the risk of so-called "faithless" Electors,
- the possible role of the Electoral College in depressing voter turnout, and
- its failure to accurately reflect the national popular will
Arguments for the Electoral College
Proponents of the Electoral College system normally defend it on the philosophical grounds that it:- contributes to the cohesiveness of the country by requiring a distribution of popular support to be elected president
- enhances the status of minority interests,
- contributes to the political stability of the nation by encouraging a two-party system, and
- maintains a federal system of government and representation\
UPENN Competitors/Observers for this weekend:
Two things:
-Dont forget to sign up at the front office as a competitor of observer and
-Stop by the advancement office on the Second floor who's going to be taking pictures of and talking to us for an article on the team to go into the News Letter.
-Dont forget to sign up at the front office as a competitor of observer and
-Stop by the advancement office on the Second floor who's going to be taking pictures of and talking to us for an article on the team to go into the News Letter.
Evidence for the pro
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/answers.php
This is a lobbying group for popular vote. Good for the pro
This is a lobbying group for popular vote. Good for the pro
Smart device users
Attention debators with a smart device please install apps that can help you research: bbc, brookings, nytimes, are all free apps for smartphones and other devices
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Fundraising
Attn. Debators: Please remember to bring in $2-3 tommorrow for the fundraiser on Thursday! Thankyou
Warrants for the Decemeber 3rd PF topic
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa547.pdf: From 1992 to 2002 competitions within Congress has increased by 25 percent
https://www.pfaw.org/media-center/publications/americas-election-snafus-2001-2002/voting-problems-the-2000-02-election-cy( pwaf stands for people for the american way): In 2000 most agencies have not done an efficuint job with processing votes
Update
Greetings team,
Just to give you an update:
There is a tournament this weekend at UPENN for PF only. The topic is Resolved: Direct Popular Vote should Replace Electoral Vote in presidential elections. The tournament is going to be on UPENN's campus on Saturday (Dec. 3). All debators are encouraged to go whether competing or watching. If you plan to please sign up in the front office. If you are competing sign up with your partner. If you have any questions please contact me.
Just to give you an update:
There is a tournament this weekend at UPENN for PF only. The topic is Resolved: Direct Popular Vote should Replace Electoral Vote in presidential elections. The tournament is going to be on UPENN's campus on Saturday (Dec. 3). All debators are encouraged to go whether competing or watching. If you plan to please sign up in the front office. If you are competing sign up with your partner. If you have any questions please contact me.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Villiger group research
Note: Note all research is here. I still need to research two bills, none of Chen's bills are here, they should get to you via email.
1. A Bill To Abloish Plea Bargaining
Pro:
c1: Causes incorrect judgements
w1: According to Christian Sciene Monitor in '10, the late Mayor Dixon of Baltimore plea bargained and recieved no jail time and kept 83k
w2: according to NPR, 90% of cases resolved by plea bargains
w3:According to NPR, plea bargaining forfiets one's trial rights
w4: According to Cato, when it comes down to it, the prosecutor exploits the constitution and the whole system in order to win. It's a getaway for the defendant, a victory for the prosecutor.
Con:
C1: Benefits Society
W1: According to Christian Science monitor, the late mayor Dixon after recieving a plea bargian worked 500 hours of community service over a span of two years anddonated $45,000
C2: Lacking fundamental resources
W2: According to Cato, the system could not afford to run every case for days through court
W2: According to Pbs, quite frankly, there just isn't enough money nor time to do so.
14. Bill to Establish government run voucher program
Pro:
C: Its a smart investable dollar
W1: According to NCES (National Center for Educational Statistics) students in poor-income families have 4 1/2 times the dropout rate compared to middle and upper classes.
W: In a test in Florida state, according to the NYT, priv. school kids did better in reading tests than public schoolers.
C2:No significant harm
W2: According to Brookings, all schoolers, priv, public, homeschooled, etc., on balance perform the same.
Basic Impact2: With no major costs, and promise for no pro chioce complainers, why not.
Con:
C1: No major differences between the two
W:According to The Institute of Educational Services, nstudents did not report feeling safer or being more achieved in priv. schools of choice over public
W1:According to NYT, most public school kids--in local schools or whatever--performed the same and if not better than priv. school kids.
C2: Money is government's but goes to no significant effect
W2: According to Cato, voucher's unlike tax credit or other forms of payment, are from the people's pockets.
I2: taxpayer's have money used fo same result
15. Further the Advancement of Non-Embroyic Stem-cell Research
Pro:
W: According to the NYT, grants and prizes by the state of Cali have prompted 14 companies to research it
A resolution to Close all Non combat zones
Pro points
1. Waste of resources
2. Reflects badly on American image
3. Soldiers can be put to better use
1st warrants
Progressive Policy Institute: In May of 2009, the U.S currently has 289,000 soldiers where overseas. 57,000 of these are in Germany, 33,000 and over 27,000 in South Korea
http://japanfocus.org/-Hayashi-Kiminori/3185( Only read first paragraph use second paragraph for second speech)
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=5415&type=0&sequence=4( read everything up to switching from Individual Rotations to Unit Rotations)
2nd
http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=5993.4356.0.0
http://asiancorrespondent.com/66776/2-us-soldiers-accused-of-raping-teenagers-in-korea/
3rd
General David Petraeus: In his testimony to congress he stated that that insurgent attacks have decreased due to an additional 120,000 men and women being relocated to the War on Terror.
Con points
1. Terrorist activity in the world
2. America stabilizes the world
1st
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2010/0805/
http://www.eurasiareview.com/20022011-spike-in-terrorism-in-north-caucasus/( Look at the bottom for the author and cite it instead of Eurasia)
2nd
http://www.cfr.org/us-strategy-and-politics/americas-destiny-police-world/p5559
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-03-11-us-reaction-tsunami_N.htm
A Resolution to replace welfare with Private Companies
Pro points
1. More efficient system
2. Helps teens in ways government can’t
1st warrants
http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/welfare-reform-failing-poor-single-mothers-24778/
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/us/
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=400
http://www.nps.gov/partnerships/fundraising_individuals_statistics.htm
2nd
http://harborhouse.org/
http://www.covenanthouse.org/youth-homeless-programs/mother-child-teen-pregnancy
http://www.teenshelter.org/donate.html
http://www.teenshelter.org/donate.html
Con points
1. Private charities are unstable( basically with our current economy private charities can’t provide stability)
2. Private charities can’t handle to lowed
3. Government is more efficient
1st warrants
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jun/06/us-economy-decline-recovery-challenges
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2011/08/
2nd
http://www.galvestonogp.org/GHA/SR_67.pdf
On the bill were it says 2.2 billion dollars go to pregnant teens
3rd
http://129.3.20.41/eps/mac/papers/0203/0203001.pdf
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/News/DailyBulletin/1078915/
A Resolution to increase Stability
Pro points
1.take out our enemies
2.help U.S economy
3.help keep peace with the world
1st warrants
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2011/10/mil-111024-afps06.htm
http://iraq.usembassy.gov/aboutus/american-iraqi.html
2nd
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-29/world/
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2010.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1844547,00.html
http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/israel-fta
3rd
http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-true-ally-middle-east/p26382
http://www.economist.com/node/16216247?story_id=16216247
Con points
1. Hurt Foreign relation
2. America already provides enough support to the world
3. Will cost American more than it gains
1st
http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/The-Bay-of-Pigs.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/world/asia/07iht-military.1.16744766.html
2nd
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/54199/morihiro-hosokawa/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/korea-orbat.htm
http://icasualties.org/oef/
3rd
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8780672/China-warns-US-over-Taiwan-arms-sales.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/
Izzy’s Research
A resolution to stop unlawful detentions:
Pro Evidence:
Some Arrests made in ‘Secure Communities’ are illegal:
“The results are disturbing because they point to a system that is funneling people towards deportation without due process. Based on our findings, we recommend that the Department of Homeland Security suspend the program until the government addresses the issues we identify, particularly wrongful U.S. citizen arrests, potential racial profiling, and lack of discretion in detention,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.”
Key findings include: Approximately 3,600 United States citizens have been arrested by ICE through the Secure Communities program even though citizens, by definition, should not be subject to immigration detention; Approximately 88,000 families containing U.S. citizens have been affected by Secure Communities through the immigration arrest of a family member; Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States; Only 52% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities were slated to appear before an immigration judge; Only 24% of the individuals arrested through Secure Communities who did have an immigration hearing were represented by an attorney. By contrast, 40% of all immigration court respondents have counsel; Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge. By contrast, 14% of all immigration court respondents are granted relief; A large majority (83%) of people arrested through Secure Communities is held in ICE detention as compared with an overall DHS immigration detention rate of 62%. ICE does not appear to be exercising discretion when deciding whether or not to detain Secure Communities arrestees
“The wrongful arrest of thousands of U.S. citizens demonstrates that, too often, ICE’s protocol is arrest first, investigate second.”
“The government’s own data has consistently shown that most of the people impacted by this program have no criminal record or are low-level offenders. To lock these people up in detention centers without access to attorneys or an opportunity to see a judge is undemocratic,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)
Many deportations cause more harm than good:
According to Pbs: (October 19, 2011)
+ 1.6 percent of those arrested were actually U.S. citizens+ 39 percent of people arrested through Secure Communities have at least one child or spouse who is a U.S. citizen+ 93 percent of those arrested are Latinos, even though they account for 77 percent of the entire undocumented population
Secure Communities has led to the arrest of almost 227,000 people since its inception in 2008.Prisons are over crowded:
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (November 15, 2011)
As of 2009 over 760,000 people were in jail and over 1.5 million people were in prison.http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm
According to the Immigration Policy Center: (11/4/2010)
Unnecessary or Prolonged Detention. The existence of a Secure Community detainer may limit an individual’s ability to access a lawyer, fight criminal charges, or get out of jail on bail. Profiling and pretextual arrests. While Secure Communities is a technological identification program through which all persons arrested are fingerprinted and checked against the various databases, there is a concern that police officers working in areas that have Secure Communities in their local jails may have an incentive, or at least the ability, to make arrests based on race or ethnicity, or to make pretextual arrests of persons they suspect to be in violation of immigration laws, in order to have them run through immigration databases once they are jailed.Lack of complaint mechanisms. Given the wide range of concerns about Secure Communities, it is essential that there be a complaint or redress procedure for individuals who believe they have been erroneously identified by DHS databases or who believe a DHS detainer has been issued in error. Currently there is no clear complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been victims of an error.
Con Evidence:
Secure Communities help maintain public safety:
According to The U.S. Immigration and Customs Agency:
“One important tool that ICE relies upon to advance this priority is Secure Communities, which facilitates ICE's ability to identify and remove aliens who pose a threat to public safety. Through June 30, 2011, more than 86,600 immigrants convicted of crimes, including more than 31,300 convicted of aggravated felony (level 1) offenses like murder, rape and the sexual abuse of children were removed from the United States after identification through Secure Communities. These removals significantly contributed to a 71 percent increase in the overall percentage of convicted criminals removed by ICE, and a 23 percent reduction in the removal of people without a criminal conviction, from October 2008 until the end of FY 2010.”
Secure Communities do not harm others’ rights: Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE's priorities. It uses an already-existing federal information-sharing partnership between ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify criminal aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals who are booked into jails with the FBI to see if they have a criminal record. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to ICE to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable due to a criminal conviction, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and other factors – as well as those who have repeatedly violated immigration laws.
FACT: Secure Communities was designed to reduce the potential for racial profiling. Under Secure Communities, the fingerprints of every single individual arrested and booked into custody, including U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, are checked against immigration records – reducing the risk of discrimination or racial profiling. ICE and the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) are implementing additional procedures to monitor state and local conduct and protect the program from potential abuses. These safeguards include strengthening protections for victims of abuse or other crimes; a formal complaint process for those who feel they have been the targets of ethnic discrimination; an investigative process involving CRCL with referral to the Department of Justice; and analysis by a statistician to identify any data irregularities that could indicate misconduct in particular jurisdictions so that we can immediately initiate corrective actions.
Secure Communities are wide spread, therefore it wouldn’t be a good idea to take them away: According to the Immigration Policy Center: 11/4/2010)
As of October 2010, Secure Communities is available in 686 jurisdictions in 33 states. ICE plans to have a Secure Communities presence in every state by 2011, and plans to implement Secure Communities in each of the 3,100 state and local jails across the country by 2013
A resolution to address Turkey and Isreal
Pro Evidence:
Turkey and Israel are at a diplomatic impasse:
According to the Guardian: (12 September 2011)
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has declared emphatically that Israel will not tender an apology. While his stance may be dictated by coalition politics, it has created a diplomatic impasse. The Obama administration – worried about the ramifications of a major rift between Israel and Turkey for US strategic interests but afraid of taking on the Netanyahu government for domestic reasons – has not put any pressure on Israel. It thus risks alienating Turkey, a crucial Nato member.
This impasse could turn bad: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
Good relations between these nations ins important for US interests: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/12/turkey-israel-reverberates-washington
Turkey is becoming more powerful:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 3, 2010)
Turkey's recent diplomatic differences with the United States and its sharpened deterioration of relations with Israel come from Turkey's desire to reestablish its role as a major influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, says F. Stephen Larrabee, an expert on Turkey at the RAND Corporation. "Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman Empire," says Larrabee. He says the days when Turkey was a "junior partner" of the United States are over."We're dealing with a new Turkey, one that is more assertive and self confident," says Larrabee. "That doesn't mean our interests don't coincide in some areas, but we have to recognize that when it comes to the Middle East, U.S. and Turkish interests only partially coincide." He says the United States is "in danger of finding itself in a very weak position" unless it issues a stronger criticism of Israel for its attack on the Turkish ship headed to Gaza. And on Iran, he believes the Turks will abstain in the Security Council on new sanctions, which will only further strain relations with the United States and Turkey's European allies.
**Background info**(From the CFR)What has led to the widening split between Turkey and both the United States and Israel?The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli course, but in a broader sense one has to see this in a historical perspective because this represents the adjustment of Turkey to the aftermath of the Cold War. Turkey became less dependent on the United States for its security. The end of the Cold War opened up new opportunities for Turkish policies in areas Turkey historically has had strong political and economical interests, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia. Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman EmpireTurkey's reaction has both internal and external components. Internally, it's been very popular. It has shown everyone that it wants to be a strong leader. Externally, it's been popular with the Arab countries and enhanced its prestige in the Arab world. Turkey eventually wants to be an important regional player in the Middle East. There's a vacuum there, and it's trying to fill that vacuum.I've always thought that the U.S. problems with Turkey really began when the United States asked Turkey to let American troops come into Iraq from Turkey at the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003 and Turkey's parliament narrowly turned it down. That obviously was an important catalyst. The decision of the Turkish parliament not to allow the United States to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq was an important turning point in the relationship with the United States, but then again you have to see it a little bit from Turkey's perspective. Turkey never had any love for Saddam Hussein. They considered him a dictator just like the United States did. But Saddam kept the Kurds, which have a rebellious minority in Turkey, under control and he represented stability. They regarded the American invasion of Iraq as very detrimental to their own security.
Turkey continues to grow more powerful: the report continues to state:
It's part of their general feeling that they want to be a major player in the Middle East. They've shown that by their willingness to act as a mediator in the dispute between Israel and Syria, and they've continued to play a role as a mediator between the United States and Iran. What they did with the nuclear deal was again to become the broker, but it's part of the larger dimension of Turkish policy. This is part of the changes since the end of the Cold War, which opened up new opportunities for Turkey.
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
Con Evidence:
The US cant run relations between Israel and Turkey because the US has a bad relationship with Turkey:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 21, 2006)
—“The growing schism between the West and the Islamic world is one of the primary challenges confronting American foreign and defense policymakers. As a consequence, the relationship between the United States and Turkey—a Western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country—is strategically more important than ever,”
While Turkey has the potential to be an invaluable partner as Washington seeks to improve its standing in the Muslim world, U.S.-Turkey relations have been severely damaged by the war in Iraq. “Turks believe that the Bush administration committed two sins.” Before the war, “Washington dismissed Ankara’s warnings about the consequences of invading Iraq.” And now, “Turks believe the United States has not taken sufficient care to address Turkey’s security concerns” about the emergence of an independent Kurdistan, which could stoke nationalist sentiment among Turkey’s Kurdish minority.
The U.S. should put more pressure on Israel to cooperate:
According to the CFR on June 3, 2010
The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli
According to BBC on Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Turkey has demanded that Israel apologise over what it called the "discourteous" way its ambassador was treated during a diplomatic meeting
According to Reuters on September 13 2011
Because of Isreal’s Naval Blockade of Gaza strip About one-third of Gaza's arable land and 85 percent of its fishing waters are totally or partially inaccessible due to Israeli military measures, said Olivier De Schutter, U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, another of the five.At least two-thirds of Gazan households lack secure access to food, he said. "People are forced to make unacceptable trade-offs, often having to choose between food or medicine or water for their families."
The article also stated that the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8455460.stm
http://www.cfr.org/turkey/us-turkey-relations-seriously-damaged-iraq-war-finds-council-special-report/
A Resolution to abolish the debt Ceiling
Pro:
According to Forbes Magazine on July 26 2011“The truth is that the United States doesn’t need, and shouldn’t have, a debt ceiling. Every other democratic country, with the exception of Denmark, does fine without one. There’s no debt limit in the Constitution. And, if Congress really wants to hold down government debt, it already has a way to do so that doesn’t risk economic chaos—namely, the annual budgeting process. The only reason we need to lift the debt ceiling, after all, is to pay for spending that Congress has already authorized. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, we’ll face an absurd scenario in which Congress will have ordered the President to execute two laws that are flatly at odds with each other. If he obeys the debt ceiling, he cannot spend the money that Congress has told him to spend, which is why most government functions will be shut down. Yet if he spends the money as Congress has authorized him to he’ll end up violating the debt ceiling.”
“the [debt] ceiling is an artifact of a time when it was useful for reining in the president, because before 1974 Congress didn’t pass a comprehensive budget, and the president had much more freedom over spending.”
“Advocates of the ceiling like the way it turns the national debt into front-page news, focusing the minds of voters and politicians; they think it fosters accountability, straight talk, transparency. In reality, debt-ceiling votes merely perpetuate the illusion that balancing the budget is easy. That’s why politicians like the debt ceiling: it allows them to rail against borrowing more money (which voters hate) without having to vote to cut any specific programs or raise taxes (which voters also hate).”
“current events certainly confirm—”by turning dealmaking into a game of chicken, the debt ceiling favors fanaticism.” That is the most painful part of the present mess: that fanaticism appears to be prepared to bring down the national economy.”
A debt Ceiling doesn’t accomplish very much:
According to the LA Times on August 1 2011
For all the drama, the compromise achieves little in the short term and only delays what most see as the country's key financial decision: whether to raise taxes or reduce Medicare
A debt ceiling only gets in the way of borrowing
According to the Congressional Research Service:
Congress has raised the debt limit five timesSince 2001, Deficits each year since 2001 and the persistent increases in debt heldby government accounts repeatedly raised the debt to or near the limit in place at thetime. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 theAdministration asked Congress for another increase.
Con
[The actual reason for the existence of the debt ceiling]
C:Without it the Government will continue to spend irresponsiblyW:According to the Congressional Research Service:
The debt limit can hinder the Treasury’s ability to manage the federal government’s finances, asnoted above. In extreme cases, when the federal debt is very near its statutory limit, the Treasurymust take unusual and extraordinary measures to meet federal obligations.18 While the debt limithas never caused the federal government to default on its obligations, it has at times caused greatinconvenience and has added uncertainty to Treasury operations.The debt limit also provides Congress with the strings to control the federal purse, allowingCongress to assert its constitutional prerogatives to control spending.19 The debt limit alsoimposes a form of fiscal accountability that compels Congress and the President to take visibleaction to allow further federal borrowing when the federal government spends more than itcollects in revenues. In the words of one author, the debt limit “expresses a national devotion tothe idea of thrift and to economical management of the fiscal affairs of the government.”20 On the
I:Without the debt limit Congress is liable to spend the country into oblivion
Izzy’s Research
A resolution to stop unlawful detentions:
Pro Evidence:
Some Arrests made in ‘Secure Communities’ are illegal:
“The results are disturbing because they point to a system that is funneling people towards deportation without due process. Based on our findings, we recommend that the Department of Homeland Security suspend the program until the government addresses the issues we identify, particularly wrongful U.S. citizen arrests, potential racial profiling, and lack of discretion in detention,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.”
Key findings include: Approximately 3,600 United States citizens have been arrested by ICE through the Secure Communities program even though citizens, by definition, should not be subject to immigration detention; Approximately 88,000 families containing U.S. citizens have been affected by Secure Communities through the immigration arrest of a family member; Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States; Only 52% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities were slated to appear before an immigration judge; Only 24% of the individuals arrested through Secure Communities who did have an immigration hearing were represented by an attorney. By contrast, 40% of all immigration court respondents have counsel; Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge. By contrast, 14% of all immigration court respondents are granted relief; A large majority (83%) of people arrested through Secure Communities is held in ICE detention as compared with an overall DHS immigration detention rate of 62%. ICE does not appear to be exercising discretion when deciding whether or not to detain Secure Communities arrestees
“The wrongful arrest of thousands of U.S. citizens demonstrates that, too often, ICE’s protocol is arrest first, investigate second.”
“The government’s own data has consistently shown that most of the people impacted by this program have no criminal record or are low-level offenders. To lock these people up in detention centers without access to attorneys or an opportunity to see a judge is undemocratic,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)
Many deportations cause more harm than good:
According to Pbs: (October 19, 2011)
+ 1.6 percent of those arrested were actually U.S. citizens+ 39 percent of people arrested through Secure Communities have at least one child or spouse who is a U.S. citizen+ 93 percent of those arrested are Latinos, even though they account for 77 percent of the entire undocumented population
Secure Communities has led to the arrest of almost 227,000 people since its inception in 2008.Prisons are over crowded:
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (November 15, 2011)
As of 2009 over 760,000 people were in jail and over 1.5 million people were in prison.http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm
According to the Immigration Policy Center: (11/4/2010)
Unnecessary or Prolonged Detention. The existence of a Secure Community detainer may limit an individual’s ability to access a lawyer, fight criminal charges, or get out of jail on bail. Profiling and pretextual arrests. While Secure Communities is a technological identification program through which all persons arrested are fingerprinted and checked against the various databases, there is a concern that police officers working in areas that have Secure Communities in their local jails may have an incentive, or at least the ability, to make arrests based on race or ethnicity, or to make pretextual arrests of persons they suspect to be in violation of immigration laws, in order to have them run through immigration databases once they are jailed.Lack of complaint mechanisms. Given the wide range of concerns about Secure Communities, it is essential that there be a complaint or redress procedure for individuals who believe they have been erroneously identified by DHS databases or who believe a DHS detainer has been issued in error. Currently there is no clear complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been victims of an error.
Con Evidence:
Secure Communities help maintain public safety:
According to The U.S. Immigration and Customs Agency:
“One important tool that ICE relies upon to advance this priority is Secure Communities, which facilitates ICE's ability to identify and remove aliens who pose a threat to public safety. Through June 30, 2011, more than 86,600 immigrants convicted of crimes, including more than 31,300 convicted of aggravated felony (level 1) offenses like murder, rape and the sexual abuse of children were removed from the United States after identification through Secure Communities. These removals significantly contributed to a 71 percent increase in the overall percentage of convicted criminals removed by ICE, and a 23 percent reduction in the removal of people without a criminal conviction, from October 2008 until the end of FY 2010.”
Secure Communities do not harm others’ rights: Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE's priorities. It uses an already-existing federal information-sharing partnership between ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify criminal aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals who are booked into jails with the FBI to see if they have a criminal record. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to ICE to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable due to a criminal conviction, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and other factors – as well as those who have repeatedly violated immigration laws.
FACT: Secure Communities was designed to reduce the potential for racial profiling. Under Secure Communities, the fingerprints of every single individual arrested and booked into custody, including U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, are checked against immigration records – reducing the risk of discrimination or racial profiling. ICE and the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) are implementing additional procedures to monitor state and local conduct and protect the program from potential abuses. These safeguards include strengthening protections for victims of abuse or other crimes; a formal complaint process for those who feel they have been the targets of ethnic discrimination; an investigative process involving CRCL with referral to the Department of Justice; and analysis by a statistician to identify any data irregularities that could indicate misconduct in particular jurisdictions so that we can immediately initiate corrective actions.
Secure Communities are wide spread, therefore it wouldn’t be a good idea to take them away: According to the Immigration Policy Center: 11/4/2010)
As of October 2010, Secure Communities is available in 686 jurisdictions in 33 states. ICE plans to have a Secure Communities presence in every state by 2011, and plans to implement Secure Communities in each of the 3,100 state and local jails across the country by 2013
A resolution to address Turkey and Isreal
Pro Evidence:
Turkey and Israel are at a diplomatic impasse:
According to the Guardian: (12 September 2011)
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has declared emphatically that Israel will not tender an apology. While his stance may be dictated by coalition politics, it has created a diplomatic impasse. The Obama administration – worried about the ramifications of a major rift between Israel and Turkey for US strategic interests but afraid of taking on the Netanyahu government for domestic reasons – has not put any pressure on Israel. It thus risks alienating Turkey, a crucial Nato member.
This impasse could turn bad: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
Good relations between these nations ins important for US interests: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/12/turkey-israel-reverberates-washington
Turkey is becoming more powerful:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 3, 2010)
Turkey's recent diplomatic differences with the United States and its sharpened deterioration of relations with Israel come from Turkey's desire to reestablish its role as a major influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, says F. Stephen Larrabee, an expert on Turkey at the RAND Corporation. "Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman Empire," says Larrabee. He says the days when Turkey was a "junior partner" of the United States are over."We're dealing with a new Turkey, one that is more assertive and self confident," says Larrabee. "That doesn't mean our interests don't coincide in some areas, but we have to recognize that when it comes to the Middle East, U.S. and Turkish interests only partially coincide." He says the United States is "in danger of finding itself in a very weak position" unless it issues a stronger criticism of Israel for its attack on the Turkish ship headed to Gaza. And on Iran, he believes the Turks will abstain in the Security Council on new sanctions, which will only further strain relations with the United States and Turkey's European allies.
**Background info**(From the CFR)What has led to the widening split between Turkey and both the United States and Israel?The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli course, but in a broader sense one has to see this in a historical perspective because this represents the adjustment of Turkey to the aftermath of the Cold War. Turkey became less dependent on the United States for its security. The end of the Cold War opened up new opportunities for Turkish policies in areas Turkey historically has had strong political and economical interests, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia. Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman EmpireTurkey's reaction has both internal and external components. Internally, it's been very popular. It has shown everyone that it wants to be a strong leader. Externally, it's been popular with the Arab countries and enhanced its prestige in the Arab world. Turkey eventually wants to be an important regional player in the Middle East. There's a vacuum there, and it's trying to fill that vacuum.I've always thought that the U.S. problems with Turkey really began when the United States asked Turkey to let American troops come into Iraq from Turkey at the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003 and Turkey's parliament narrowly turned it down. That obviously was an important catalyst. The decision of the Turkish parliament not to allow the United States to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq was an important turning point in the relationship with the United States, but then again you have to see it a little bit from Turkey's perspective. Turkey never had any love for Saddam Hussein. They considered him a dictator just like the United States did. But Saddam kept the Kurds, which have a rebellious minority in Turkey, under control and he represented stability. They regarded the American invasion of Iraq as very detrimental to their own security.
Turkey continues to grow more powerful: the report continues to state:
It's part of their general feeling that they want to be a major player in the Middle East. They've shown that by their willingness to act as a mediator in the dispute between Israel and Syria, and they've continued to play a role as a mediator between the United States and Iran. What they did with the nuclear deal was again to become the broker, but it's part of the larger dimension of Turkish policy. This is part of the changes since the end of the Cold War, which opened up new opportunities for Turkey.
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
Con Evidence:
The US cant run relations between Israel and Turkey because the US has a bad relationship with Turkey:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 21, 2006)
—“The growing schism between the West and the Islamic world is one of the primary challenges confronting American foreign and defense policymakers. As a consequence, the relationship between the United States and Turkey—a Western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country—is strategically more important than ever,”
While Turkey has the potential to be an invaluable partner as Washington seeks to improve its standing in the Muslim world, U.S.-Turkey relations have been severely damaged by the war in Iraq. “Turks believe that the Bush administration committed two sins.” Before the war, “Washington dismissed Ankara’s warnings about the consequences of invading Iraq.” And now, “Turks believe the United States has not taken sufficient care to address Turkey’s security concerns” about the emergence of an independent Kurdistan, which could stoke nationalist sentiment among Turkey’s Kurdish minority.
The U.S. should put more pressure on Israel to cooperate:
According to the CFR on June 3, 2010
The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli
According to BBC on Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Turkey has demanded that Israel apologise over what it called the "discourteous" way its ambassador was treated during a diplomatic meeting
According to Reuters on September 13 2011
Because of Isreal’s Naval Blockade of Gaza strip About one-third of Gaza's arable land and 85 percent of its fishing waters are totally or partially inaccessible due to Israeli military measures, said Olivier De Schutter, U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, another of the five.At least two-thirds of Gazan households lack secure access to food, he said. "People are forced to make unacceptable trade-offs, often having to choose between food or medicine or water for their families."
The article also stated that the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8455460.stm
http://www.cfr.org/turkey/us-turkey-relations-seriously-damaged-iraq-war-finds-council-special-report/
A Resolution to abolish the debt Ceiling
Pro:
According to Forbes Magazine on July 26 2011“The truth is that the United States doesn’t need, and shouldn’t have, a debt ceiling. Every other democratic country, with the exception of Denmark, does fine without one. There’s no debt limit in the Constitution. And, if Congress really wants to hold down government debt, it already has a way to do so that doesn’t risk economic chaos—namely, the annual budgeting process. The only reason we need to lift the debt ceiling, after all, is to pay for spending that Congress has already authorized. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, we’ll face an absurd scenario in which Congress will have ordered the President to execute two laws that are flatly at odds with each other. If he obeys the debt ceiling, he cannot spend the money that Congress has told him to spend, which is why most government functions will be shut down. Yet if he spends the money as Congress has authorized him to he’ll end up violating the debt ceiling.”
“the [debt] ceiling is an artifact of a time when it was useful for reining in the president, because before 1974 Congress didn’t pass a comprehensive budget, and the president had much more freedom over spending.”
“Advocates of the ceiling like the way it turns the national debt into front-page news, focusing the minds of voters and politicians; they think it fosters accountability, straight talk, transparency. In reality, debt-ceiling votes merely perpetuate the illusion that balancing the budget is easy. That’s why politicians like the debt ceiling: it allows them to rail against borrowing more money (which voters hate) without having to vote to cut any specific programs or raise taxes (which voters also hate).”
“current events certainly confirm—”by turning dealmaking into a game of chicken, the debt ceiling favors fanaticism.” That is the most painful part of the present mess: that fanaticism appears to be prepared to bring down the national economy.”
A debt Ceiling doesn’t accomplish very much:
According to the LA Times on August 1 2011
For all the drama, the compromise achieves little in the short term and only delays what most see as the country's key financial decision: whether to raise taxes or reduce Medicare
A debt ceiling only gets in the way of borrowing
According to the Congressional Research Service:
Congress has raised the debt limit five timesSince 2001, Deficits each year since 2001 and the persistent increases in debt heldby government accounts repeatedly raised the debt to or near the limit in place at thetime. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 theAdministration asked Congress for another increase.
Con
[The actual reason for the existence of the debt ceiling]
C:Without it the Government will continue to spend irresponsiblyW:According to the Congressional Research Service:
The debt limit can hinder the Treasury’s ability to manage the federal government’s finances, asnoted above. In extreme cases, when the federal debt is very near its statutory limit, the Treasurymust take unusual and extraordinary measures to meet federal obligations.18 While the debt limithas never caused the federal government to default on its obligations, it has at times caused greatinconvenience and has added uncertainty to Treasury operations.The debt limit also provides Congress with the strings to control the federal purse, allowingCongress to assert its constitutional prerogatives to control spending.19 The debt limit alsoimposes a form of fiscal accountability that compels Congress and the President to take visibleaction to allow further federal borrowing when the federal government spends more than itcollects in revenues. In the words of one author, the debt limit “expresses a national devotion tothe idea of thrift and to economical management of the fiscal affairs of the government.”20 On the
I:Without the debt limit Congress is liable to spend the country into oblivion
1. A Bill To Abloish Plea Bargaining
Pro:
c1: Causes incorrect judgements
w1: According to Christian Sciene Monitor in '10, the late Mayor Dixon of Baltimore plea bargained and recieved no jail time and kept 83k
w2: according to NPR, 90% of cases resolved by plea bargains
w3:According to NPR, plea bargaining forfiets one's trial rights
w4: According to Cato, when it comes down to it, the prosecutor exploits the constitution and the whole system in order to win. It's a getaway for the defendant, a victory for the prosecutor.
Con:
C1: Benefits Society
W1: According to Christian Science monitor, the late mayor Dixon after recieving a plea bargian worked 500 hours of community service over a span of two years anddonated $45,000
C2: Lacking fundamental resources
W2: According to Cato, the system could not afford to run every case for days through court
W2: According to Pbs, quite frankly, there just isn't enough money nor time to do so.
14. Bill to Establish government run voucher program
Pro:
C: Its a smart investable dollar
W1: According to NCES (National Center for Educational Statistics) students in poor-income families have 4 1/2 times the dropout rate compared to middle and upper classes.
W: In a test in Florida state, according to the NYT, priv. school kids did better in reading tests than public schoolers.
C2:No significant harm
W2: According to Brookings, all schoolers, priv, public, homeschooled, etc., on balance perform the same.
Basic Impact2: With no major costs, and promise for no pro chioce complainers, why not.
Con:
C1: No major differences between the two
W:According to The Institute of Educational Services, nstudents did not report feeling safer or being more achieved in priv. schools of choice over public
W1:According to NYT, most public school kids--in local schools or whatever--performed the same and if not better than priv. school kids.
C2: Money is government's but goes to no significant effect
W2: According to Cato, voucher's unlike tax credit or other forms of payment, are from the people's pockets.
I2: taxpayer's have money used fo same result
15. Further the Advancement of Non-Embroyic Stem-cell Research
Pro:
W: According to the NYT, grants and prizes by the state of Cali have prompted 14 companies to research it
A resolution to Close all Non combat zones
Pro points
1. Waste of resources
2. Reflects badly on American image
3. Soldiers can be put to better use
1st warrants
Progressive Policy Institute: In May of 2009, the U.S currently has 289,000 soldiers where overseas. 57,000 of these are in Germany, 33,000 and over 27,000 in South Korea
http://japanfocus.org/-Hayashi-Kiminori/3185( Only read first paragraph use second paragraph for second speech)
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=5415&type=0&sequence=4( read everything up to switching from Individual Rotations to Unit Rotations)
2nd
http://www.thetrumpet.com/?q=5993.4356.0.0
http://asiancorrespondent.com/66776/2-us-soldiers-accused-of-raping-teenagers-in-korea/
3rd
General David Petraeus: In his testimony to congress he stated that that insurgent attacks have decreased due to an additional 120,000 men and women being relocated to the War on Terror.
Con points
1. Terrorist activity in the world
2. America stabilizes the world
1st
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2010/0805/
http://www.eurasiareview.com/20022011-spike-in-terrorism-in-north-caucasus/( Look at the bottom for the author and cite it instead of Eurasia)
2nd
http://www.cfr.org/us-strategy-and-politics/americas-destiny-police-world/p5559
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-03-11-us-reaction-tsunami_N.htm
A Resolution to replace welfare with Private Companies
Pro points
1. More efficient system
2. Helps teens in ways government can’t
1st warrants
http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/welfare-reform-failing-poor-single-mothers-24778/
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/04/us/
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=400
http://www.nps.gov/partnerships/fundraising_individuals_statistics.htm
2nd
http://harborhouse.org/
http://www.covenanthouse.org/youth-homeless-programs/mother-child-teen-pregnancy
http://www.teenshelter.org/donate.html
http://www.teenshelter.org/donate.html
Con points
1. Private charities are unstable( basically with our current economy private charities can’t provide stability)
2. Private charities can’t handle to lowed
3. Government is more efficient
1st warrants
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jun/06/us-economy-decline-recovery-challenges
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2011/08/
2nd
http://www.galvestonogp.org/GHA/SR_67.pdf
On the bill were it says 2.2 billion dollars go to pregnant teens
3rd
http://129.3.20.41/eps/mac/papers/0203/0203001.pdf
http://www.thirdsector.co.uk/News/DailyBulletin/1078915/
A Resolution to increase Stability
Pro points
1.take out our enemies
2.help U.S economy
3.help keep peace with the world
1st warrants
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2011/10/mil-111024-afps06.htm
http://iraq.usembassy.gov/aboutus/american-iraqi.html
2nd
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-29/world/
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2010.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1844547,00.html
http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/israel-fta
3rd
http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-true-ally-middle-east/p26382
http://www.economist.com/node/16216247?story_id=16216247
Con points
1. Hurt Foreign relation
2. America already provides enough support to the world
3. Will cost American more than it gains
1st
http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/The-Bay-of-Pigs.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/world/asia/07iht-military.1.16744766.html
2nd
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/54199/morihiro-hosokawa/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/korea-orbat.htm
http://icasualties.org/oef/
3rd
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8780672/China-warns-US-over-Taiwan-arms-sales.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/
Izzy’s Research
A resolution to stop unlawful detentions:
Pro Evidence:
Some Arrests made in ‘Secure Communities’ are illegal:
“The results are disturbing because they point to a system that is funneling people towards deportation without due process. Based on our findings, we recommend that the Department of Homeland Security suspend the program until the government addresses the issues we identify, particularly wrongful U.S. citizen arrests, potential racial profiling, and lack of discretion in detention,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.”
Key findings include: Approximately 3,600 United States citizens have been arrested by ICE through the Secure Communities program even though citizens, by definition, should not be subject to immigration detention; Approximately 88,000 families containing U.S. citizens have been affected by Secure Communities through the immigration arrest of a family member; Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States; Only 52% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities were slated to appear before an immigration judge; Only 24% of the individuals arrested through Secure Communities who did have an immigration hearing were represented by an attorney. By contrast, 40% of all immigration court respondents have counsel; Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge. By contrast, 14% of all immigration court respondents are granted relief; A large majority (83%) of people arrested through Secure Communities is held in ICE detention as compared with an overall DHS immigration detention rate of 62%. ICE does not appear to be exercising discretion when deciding whether or not to detain Secure Communities arrestees
“The wrongful arrest of thousands of U.S. citizens demonstrates that, too often, ICE’s protocol is arrest first, investigate second.”
“The government’s own data has consistently shown that most of the people impacted by this program have no criminal record or are low-level offenders. To lock these people up in detention centers without access to attorneys or an opportunity to see a judge is undemocratic,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)
Many deportations cause more harm than good:
According to Pbs: (October 19, 2011)
+ 1.6 percent of those arrested were actually U.S. citizens+ 39 percent of people arrested through Secure Communities have at least one child or spouse who is a U.S. citizen+ 93 percent of those arrested are Latinos, even though they account for 77 percent of the entire undocumented population
Secure Communities has led to the arrest of almost 227,000 people since its inception in 2008.Prisons are over crowded:
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (November 15, 2011)
As of 2009 over 760,000 people were in jail and over 1.5 million people were in prison.http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm
According to the Immigration Policy Center: (11/4/2010)
Unnecessary or Prolonged Detention. The existence of a Secure Community detainer may limit an individual’s ability to access a lawyer, fight criminal charges, or get out of jail on bail. Profiling and pretextual arrests. While Secure Communities is a technological identification program through which all persons arrested are fingerprinted and checked against the various databases, there is a concern that police officers working in areas that have Secure Communities in their local jails may have an incentive, or at least the ability, to make arrests based on race or ethnicity, or to make pretextual arrests of persons they suspect to be in violation of immigration laws, in order to have them run through immigration databases once they are jailed.Lack of complaint mechanisms. Given the wide range of concerns about Secure Communities, it is essential that there be a complaint or redress procedure for individuals who believe they have been erroneously identified by DHS databases or who believe a DHS detainer has been issued in error. Currently there is no clear complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been victims of an error.
Con Evidence:
Secure Communities help maintain public safety:
According to The U.S. Immigration and Customs Agency:
“One important tool that ICE relies upon to advance this priority is Secure Communities, which facilitates ICE's ability to identify and remove aliens who pose a threat to public safety. Through June 30, 2011, more than 86,600 immigrants convicted of crimes, including more than 31,300 convicted of aggravated felony (level 1) offenses like murder, rape and the sexual abuse of children were removed from the United States after identification through Secure Communities. These removals significantly contributed to a 71 percent increase in the overall percentage of convicted criminals removed by ICE, and a 23 percent reduction in the removal of people without a criminal conviction, from October 2008 until the end of FY 2010.”
Secure Communities do not harm others’ rights: Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE's priorities. It uses an already-existing federal information-sharing partnership between ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify criminal aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals who are booked into jails with the FBI to see if they have a criminal record. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to ICE to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable due to a criminal conviction, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and other factors – as well as those who have repeatedly violated immigration laws.
FACT: Secure Communities was designed to reduce the potential for racial profiling. Under Secure Communities, the fingerprints of every single individual arrested and booked into custody, including U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, are checked against immigration records – reducing the risk of discrimination or racial profiling. ICE and the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) are implementing additional procedures to monitor state and local conduct and protect the program from potential abuses. These safeguards include strengthening protections for victims of abuse or other crimes; a formal complaint process for those who feel they have been the targets of ethnic discrimination; an investigative process involving CRCL with referral to the Department of Justice; and analysis by a statistician to identify any data irregularities that could indicate misconduct in particular jurisdictions so that we can immediately initiate corrective actions.
Secure Communities are wide spread, therefore it wouldn’t be a good idea to take them away: According to the Immigration Policy Center: 11/4/2010)
As of October 2010, Secure Communities is available in 686 jurisdictions in 33 states. ICE plans to have a Secure Communities presence in every state by 2011, and plans to implement Secure Communities in each of the 3,100 state and local jails across the country by 2013
A resolution to address Turkey and Isreal
Pro Evidence:
Turkey and Israel are at a diplomatic impasse:
According to the Guardian: (12 September 2011)
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has declared emphatically that Israel will not tender an apology. While his stance may be dictated by coalition politics, it has created a diplomatic impasse. The Obama administration – worried about the ramifications of a major rift between Israel and Turkey for US strategic interests but afraid of taking on the Netanyahu government for domestic reasons – has not put any pressure on Israel. It thus risks alienating Turkey, a crucial Nato member.
This impasse could turn bad: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
Good relations between these nations ins important for US interests: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/12/turkey-israel-reverberates-washington
Turkey is becoming more powerful:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 3, 2010)
Turkey's recent diplomatic differences with the United States and its sharpened deterioration of relations with Israel come from Turkey's desire to reestablish its role as a major influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, says F. Stephen Larrabee, an expert on Turkey at the RAND Corporation. "Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman Empire," says Larrabee. He says the days when Turkey was a "junior partner" of the United States are over."We're dealing with a new Turkey, one that is more assertive and self confident," says Larrabee. "That doesn't mean our interests don't coincide in some areas, but we have to recognize that when it comes to the Middle East, U.S. and Turkish interests only partially coincide." He says the United States is "in danger of finding itself in a very weak position" unless it issues a stronger criticism of Israel for its attack on the Turkish ship headed to Gaza. And on Iran, he believes the Turks will abstain in the Security Council on new sanctions, which will only further strain relations with the United States and Turkey's European allies.
**Background info**(From the CFR)What has led to the widening split between Turkey and both the United States and Israel?The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli course, but in a broader sense one has to see this in a historical perspective because this represents the adjustment of Turkey to the aftermath of the Cold War. Turkey became less dependent on the United States for its security. The end of the Cold War opened up new opportunities for Turkish policies in areas Turkey historically has had strong political and economical interests, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia. Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman EmpireTurkey's reaction has both internal and external components. Internally, it's been very popular. It has shown everyone that it wants to be a strong leader. Externally, it's been popular with the Arab countries and enhanced its prestige in the Arab world. Turkey eventually wants to be an important regional player in the Middle East. There's a vacuum there, and it's trying to fill that vacuum.I've always thought that the U.S. problems with Turkey really began when the United States asked Turkey to let American troops come into Iraq from Turkey at the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003 and Turkey's parliament narrowly turned it down. That obviously was an important catalyst. The decision of the Turkish parliament not to allow the United States to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq was an important turning point in the relationship with the United States, but then again you have to see it a little bit from Turkey's perspective. Turkey never had any love for Saddam Hussein. They considered him a dictator just like the United States did. But Saddam kept the Kurds, which have a rebellious minority in Turkey, under control and he represented stability. They regarded the American invasion of Iraq as very detrimental to their own security.
Turkey continues to grow more powerful: the report continues to state:
It's part of their general feeling that they want to be a major player in the Middle East. They've shown that by their willingness to act as a mediator in the dispute between Israel and Syria, and they've continued to play a role as a mediator between the United States and Iran. What they did with the nuclear deal was again to become the broker, but it's part of the larger dimension of Turkish policy. This is part of the changes since the end of the Cold War, which opened up new opportunities for Turkey.
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
Con Evidence:
The US cant run relations between Israel and Turkey because the US has a bad relationship with Turkey:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 21, 2006)
—“The growing schism between the West and the Islamic world is one of the primary challenges confronting American foreign and defense policymakers. As a consequence, the relationship between the United States and Turkey—a Western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country—is strategically more important than ever,”
While Turkey has the potential to be an invaluable partner as Washington seeks to improve its standing in the Muslim world, U.S.-Turkey relations have been severely damaged by the war in Iraq. “Turks believe that the Bush administration committed two sins.” Before the war, “Washington dismissed Ankara’s warnings about the consequences of invading Iraq.” And now, “Turks believe the United States has not taken sufficient care to address Turkey’s security concerns” about the emergence of an independent Kurdistan, which could stoke nationalist sentiment among Turkey’s Kurdish minority.
The U.S. should put more pressure on Israel to cooperate:
According to the CFR on June 3, 2010
The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli
According to BBC on Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Turkey has demanded that Israel apologise over what it called the "discourteous" way its ambassador was treated during a diplomatic meeting
According to Reuters on September 13 2011
Because of Isreal’s Naval Blockade of Gaza strip About one-third of Gaza's arable land and 85 percent of its fishing waters are totally or partially inaccessible due to Israeli military measures, said Olivier De Schutter, U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, another of the five.At least two-thirds of Gazan households lack secure access to food, he said. "People are forced to make unacceptable trade-offs, often having to choose between food or medicine or water for their families."
The article also stated that the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8455460.stm
http://www.cfr.org/turkey/us-turkey-relations-seriously-damaged-iraq-war-finds-council-special-report/
A Resolution to abolish the debt Ceiling
Pro:
According to Forbes Magazine on July 26 2011“The truth is that the United States doesn’t need, and shouldn’t have, a debt ceiling. Every other democratic country, with the exception of Denmark, does fine without one. There’s no debt limit in the Constitution. And, if Congress really wants to hold down government debt, it already has a way to do so that doesn’t risk economic chaos—namely, the annual budgeting process. The only reason we need to lift the debt ceiling, after all, is to pay for spending that Congress has already authorized. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, we’ll face an absurd scenario in which Congress will have ordered the President to execute two laws that are flatly at odds with each other. If he obeys the debt ceiling, he cannot spend the money that Congress has told him to spend, which is why most government functions will be shut down. Yet if he spends the money as Congress has authorized him to he’ll end up violating the debt ceiling.”
“the [debt] ceiling is an artifact of a time when it was useful for reining in the president, because before 1974 Congress didn’t pass a comprehensive budget, and the president had much more freedom over spending.”
“Advocates of the ceiling like the way it turns the national debt into front-page news, focusing the minds of voters and politicians; they think it fosters accountability, straight talk, transparency. In reality, debt-ceiling votes merely perpetuate the illusion that balancing the budget is easy. That’s why politicians like the debt ceiling: it allows them to rail against borrowing more money (which voters hate) without having to vote to cut any specific programs or raise taxes (which voters also hate).”
“current events certainly confirm—”by turning dealmaking into a game of chicken, the debt ceiling favors fanaticism.” That is the most painful part of the present mess: that fanaticism appears to be prepared to bring down the national economy.”
A debt Ceiling doesn’t accomplish very much:
According to the LA Times on August 1 2011
For all the drama, the compromise achieves little in the short term and only delays what most see as the country's key financial decision: whether to raise taxes or reduce Medicare
A debt ceiling only gets in the way of borrowing
According to the Congressional Research Service:
Congress has raised the debt limit five timesSince 2001, Deficits each year since 2001 and the persistent increases in debt heldby government accounts repeatedly raised the debt to or near the limit in place at thetime. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 theAdministration asked Congress for another increase.
Con
[The actual reason for the existence of the debt ceiling]
C:Without it the Government will continue to spend irresponsiblyW:According to the Congressional Research Service:
The debt limit can hinder the Treasury’s ability to manage the federal government’s finances, asnoted above. In extreme cases, when the federal debt is very near its statutory limit, the Treasurymust take unusual and extraordinary measures to meet federal obligations.18 While the debt limithas never caused the federal government to default on its obligations, it has at times caused greatinconvenience and has added uncertainty to Treasury operations.The debt limit also provides Congress with the strings to control the federal purse, allowingCongress to assert its constitutional prerogatives to control spending.19 The debt limit alsoimposes a form of fiscal accountability that compels Congress and the President to take visibleaction to allow further federal borrowing when the federal government spends more than itcollects in revenues. In the words of one author, the debt limit “expresses a national devotion tothe idea of thrift and to economical management of the fiscal affairs of the government.”20 On the
I:Without the debt limit Congress is liable to spend the country into oblivion
Izzy’s Research
A resolution to stop unlawful detentions:
Pro Evidence:
Some Arrests made in ‘Secure Communities’ are illegal:
“The results are disturbing because they point to a system that is funneling people towards deportation without due process. Based on our findings, we recommend that the Department of Homeland Security suspend the program until the government addresses the issues we identify, particularly wrongful U.S. citizen arrests, potential racial profiling, and lack of discretion in detention,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.”
Key findings include: Approximately 3,600 United States citizens have been arrested by ICE through the Secure Communities program even though citizens, by definition, should not be subject to immigration detention; Approximately 88,000 families containing U.S. citizens have been affected by Secure Communities through the immigration arrest of a family member; Latinos comprise 93% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities though they only comprise 77% of the undocumented population in the United States; Only 52% of individuals arrested through Secure Communities were slated to appear before an immigration judge; Only 24% of the individuals arrested through Secure Communities who did have an immigration hearing were represented by an attorney. By contrast, 40% of all immigration court respondents have counsel; Only 2% of non-citizens arrested through Secure Communities are granted relief from deportation by an immigration judge. By contrast, 14% of all immigration court respondents are granted relief; A large majority (83%) of people arrested through Secure Communities is held in ICE detention as compared with an overall DHS immigration detention rate of 62%. ICE does not appear to be exercising discretion when deciding whether or not to detain Secure Communities arrestees
“The wrongful arrest of thousands of U.S. citizens demonstrates that, too often, ICE’s protocol is arrest first, investigate second.”
“The government’s own data has consistently shown that most of the people impacted by this program have no criminal record or are low-level offenders. To lock these people up in detention centers without access to attorneys or an opportunity to see a judge is undemocratic,” said Aarti Kohli, director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute and lead author of the report.
http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)
Many deportations cause more harm than good:
According to Pbs: (October 19, 2011)
+ 1.6 percent of those arrested were actually U.S. citizens+ 39 percent of people arrested through Secure Communities have at least one child or spouse who is a U.S. citizen+ 93 percent of those arrested are Latinos, even though they account for 77 percent of the entire undocumented population
Secure Communities has led to the arrest of almost 227,000 people since its inception in 2008.Prisons are over crowded:
According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (November 15, 2011)
As of 2009 over 760,000 people were in jail and over 1.5 million people were in prison.http://www.law.berkeley.edu/11876.htm
According to the Immigration Policy Center: (11/4/2010)
Unnecessary or Prolonged Detention. The existence of a Secure Community detainer may limit an individual’s ability to access a lawyer, fight criminal charges, or get out of jail on bail. Profiling and pretextual arrests. While Secure Communities is a technological identification program through which all persons arrested are fingerprinted and checked against the various databases, there is a concern that police officers working in areas that have Secure Communities in their local jails may have an incentive, or at least the ability, to make arrests based on race or ethnicity, or to make pretextual arrests of persons they suspect to be in violation of immigration laws, in order to have them run through immigration databases once they are jailed.Lack of complaint mechanisms. Given the wide range of concerns about Secure Communities, it is essential that there be a complaint or redress procedure for individuals who believe they have been erroneously identified by DHS databases or who believe a DHS detainer has been issued in error. Currently there is no clear complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been victims of an error.
Con Evidence:
Secure Communities help maintain public safety:
According to The U.S. Immigration and Customs Agency:
“One important tool that ICE relies upon to advance this priority is Secure Communities, which facilitates ICE's ability to identify and remove aliens who pose a threat to public safety. Through June 30, 2011, more than 86,600 immigrants convicted of crimes, including more than 31,300 convicted of aggravated felony (level 1) offenses like murder, rape and the sexual abuse of children were removed from the United States after identification through Secure Communities. These removals significantly contributed to a 71 percent increase in the overall percentage of convicted criminals removed by ICE, and a 23 percent reduction in the removal of people without a criminal conviction, from October 2008 until the end of FY 2010.”
Secure Communities do not harm others’ rights: Secure Communities is a simple and common sense way to carry out ICE's priorities. It uses an already-existing federal information-sharing partnership between ICE and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that helps to identify criminal aliens without imposing new or additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. For decades, local jurisdictions have shared the fingerprints of individuals who are booked into jails with the FBI to see if they have a criminal record. Under Secure Communities, the FBI automatically sends the fingerprints to ICE to check against its immigration databases. If these checks reveal that an individual is unlawfully present in the United States or otherwise removable due to a criminal conviction, ICE takes enforcement action – prioritizing the removal of individuals who present the most significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime, their criminal history, and other factors – as well as those who have repeatedly violated immigration laws.
FACT: Secure Communities was designed to reduce the potential for racial profiling. Under Secure Communities, the fingerprints of every single individual arrested and booked into custody, including U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents, are checked against immigration records – reducing the risk of discrimination or racial profiling. ICE and the DHS Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) are implementing additional procedures to monitor state and local conduct and protect the program from potential abuses. These safeguards include strengthening protections for victims of abuse or other crimes; a formal complaint process for those who feel they have been the targets of ethnic discrimination; an investigative process involving CRCL with referral to the Department of Justice; and analysis by a statistician to identify any data irregularities that could indicate misconduct in particular jurisdictions so that we can immediately initiate corrective actions.
Secure Communities are wide spread, therefore it wouldn’t be a good idea to take them away: According to the Immigration Policy Center: 11/4/2010)
As of October 2010, Secure Communities is available in 686 jurisdictions in 33 states. ICE plans to have a Secure Communities presence in every state by 2011, and plans to implement Secure Communities in each of the 3,100 state and local jails across the country by 2013
A resolution to address Turkey and Isreal
Pro Evidence:
Turkey and Israel are at a diplomatic impasse:
According to the Guardian: (12 September 2011)
The Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has declared emphatically that Israel will not tender an apology. While his stance may be dictated by coalition politics, it has created a diplomatic impasse. The Obama administration – worried about the ramifications of a major rift between Israel and Turkey for US strategic interests but afraid of taking on the Netanyahu government for domestic reasons – has not put any pressure on Israel. It thus risks alienating Turkey, a crucial Nato member.
This impasse could turn bad: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
Good relations between these nations ins important for US interests: the article continues to state:
This diplomatic episode has important implications for the future of the Middle East. First, it demonstrates that Israeli dominance of the eastern Mediterranean will no longer go unchallenged. Erdogan has made clear that the Turkish navy will play a more active role in the area, and Turkish sources have indicated that it may even escort flotillas carrying humanitarian aid to Gaza. Any future attempt by Israel to prevent aid from reaching Gaza could spark a military confrontation.Second, it demonstrates that Israel's defiance of international law, especially regarding its treatment of the occupied territories, will face increasing challenges in international forums. A referral to the ICJ will bring to the fore Israel's violation of provisions of the fourth Geneva convention that prohibit the demographic transformation of occupied lands, as well as its responsibility regarding the welfare of the occupied population. The issue of West Bank settlements will again become a topic of heated debate.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/12/turkey-israel-reverberates-washington
Turkey is becoming more powerful:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 3, 2010)
Turkey's recent diplomatic differences with the United States and its sharpened deterioration of relations with Israel come from Turkey's desire to reestablish its role as a major influence in the Middle East and Central Asia, says F. Stephen Larrabee, an expert on Turkey at the RAND Corporation. "Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman Empire," says Larrabee. He says the days when Turkey was a "junior partner" of the United States are over."We're dealing with a new Turkey, one that is more assertive and self confident," says Larrabee. "That doesn't mean our interests don't coincide in some areas, but we have to recognize that when it comes to the Middle East, U.S. and Turkish interests only partially coincide." He says the United States is "in danger of finding itself in a very weak position" unless it issues a stronger criticism of Israel for its attack on the Turkish ship headed to Gaza. And on Iran, he believes the Turks will abstain in the Security Council on new sanctions, which will only further strain relations with the United States and Turkey's European allies.
**Background info**(From the CFR)What has led to the widening split between Turkey and both the United States and Israel?The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli course, but in a broader sense one has to see this in a historical perspective because this represents the adjustment of Turkey to the aftermath of the Cold War. Turkey became less dependent on the United States for its security. The end of the Cold War opened up new opportunities for Turkish policies in areas Turkey historically has had strong political and economical interests, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia. Turkey is returning to a more traditional role, one in which it was closely involved in the Middle East for centuries, going back to the Ottoman EmpireTurkey's reaction has both internal and external components. Internally, it's been very popular. It has shown everyone that it wants to be a strong leader. Externally, it's been popular with the Arab countries and enhanced its prestige in the Arab world. Turkey eventually wants to be an important regional player in the Middle East. There's a vacuum there, and it's trying to fill that vacuum.I've always thought that the U.S. problems with Turkey really began when the United States asked Turkey to let American troops come into Iraq from Turkey at the beginning of the Iraq War in 2003 and Turkey's parliament narrowly turned it down. That obviously was an important catalyst. The decision of the Turkish parliament not to allow the United States to use Turkish territory to invade Iraq was an important turning point in the relationship with the United States, but then again you have to see it a little bit from Turkey's perspective. Turkey never had any love for Saddam Hussein. They considered him a dictator just like the United States did. But Saddam kept the Kurds, which have a rebellious minority in Turkey, under control and he represented stability. They regarded the American invasion of Iraq as very detrimental to their own security.
Turkey continues to grow more powerful: the report continues to state:
It's part of their general feeling that they want to be a major player in the Middle East. They've shown that by their willingness to act as a mediator in the dispute between Israel and Syria, and they've continued to play a role as a mediator between the United States and Iran. What they did with the nuclear deal was again to become the broker, but it's part of the larger dimension of Turkish policy. This is part of the changes since the end of the Cold War, which opened up new opportunities for Turkey.
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
Con Evidence:
The US cant run relations between Israel and Turkey because the US has a bad relationship with Turkey:
According to the Council on Foreign Relations (June 21, 2006)
—“The growing schism between the West and the Islamic world is one of the primary challenges confronting American foreign and defense policymakers. As a consequence, the relationship between the United States and Turkey—a Western-oriented, democratizing Muslim country—is strategically more important than ever,”
While Turkey has the potential to be an invaluable partner as Washington seeks to improve its standing in the Muslim world, U.S.-Turkey relations have been severely damaged by the war in Iraq. “Turks believe that the Bush administration committed two sins.” Before the war, “Washington dismissed Ankara’s warnings about the consequences of invading Iraq.” And now, “Turks believe the United States has not taken sufficient care to address Turkey’s security concerns” about the emergence of an independent Kurdistan, which could stoke nationalist sentiment among Turkey’s Kurdish minority.
The U.S. should put more pressure on Israel to cooperate:
According to the CFR on June 3, 2010
The downward spiral of relations over the last eighteen months goes back to the Israeli Gaza offensive in December 2008, which marked an important turning point. Relations since then have really gone downhill. Turkey appears to be on a strongly anti-Israeli
According to BBC on Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Turkey has demanded that Israel apologise over what it called the "discourteous" way its ambassador was treated during a diplomatic meeting
According to Reuters on September 13 2011
Because of Isreal’s Naval Blockade of Gaza strip About one-third of Gaza's arable land and 85 percent of its fishing waters are totally or partially inaccessible due to Israeli military measures, said Olivier De Schutter, U.N. special rapporteur on the right to food, another of the five.At least two-thirds of Gazan households lack secure access to food, he said. "People are forced to make unacceptable trade-offs, often having to choose between food or medicine or water for their families."
The article also stated that the Israeli raid of May 2010 that killed nine Turkish activists said earlier this month that Israel had used unreasonable force in last year's raid,
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/13/us-un-gaza-rights-idUSTRE78C59R20110913
http://www.cfr.org/israel/managing-more-assertive-turkey/p22302
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8455460.stm
http://www.cfr.org/turkey/us-turkey-relations-seriously-damaged-iraq-war-finds-council-special-report/
A Resolution to abolish the debt Ceiling
Pro:
According to Forbes Magazine on July 26 2011“The truth is that the United States doesn’t need, and shouldn’t have, a debt ceiling. Every other democratic country, with the exception of Denmark, does fine without one. There’s no debt limit in the Constitution. And, if Congress really wants to hold down government debt, it already has a way to do so that doesn’t risk economic chaos—namely, the annual budgeting process. The only reason we need to lift the debt ceiling, after all, is to pay for spending that Congress has already authorized. If the debt ceiling isn’t raised, we’ll face an absurd scenario in which Congress will have ordered the President to execute two laws that are flatly at odds with each other. If he obeys the debt ceiling, he cannot spend the money that Congress has told him to spend, which is why most government functions will be shut down. Yet if he spends the money as Congress has authorized him to he’ll end up violating the debt ceiling.”
“the [debt] ceiling is an artifact of a time when it was useful for reining in the president, because before 1974 Congress didn’t pass a comprehensive budget, and the president had much more freedom over spending.”
“Advocates of the ceiling like the way it turns the national debt into front-page news, focusing the minds of voters and politicians; they think it fosters accountability, straight talk, transparency. In reality, debt-ceiling votes merely perpetuate the illusion that balancing the budget is easy. That’s why politicians like the debt ceiling: it allows them to rail against borrowing more money (which voters hate) without having to vote to cut any specific programs or raise taxes (which voters also hate).”
“current events certainly confirm—”by turning dealmaking into a game of chicken, the debt ceiling favors fanaticism.” That is the most painful part of the present mess: that fanaticism appears to be prepared to bring down the national economy.”
A debt Ceiling doesn’t accomplish very much:
According to the LA Times on August 1 2011
For all the drama, the compromise achieves little in the short term and only delays what most see as the country's key financial decision: whether to raise taxes or reduce Medicare
A debt ceiling only gets in the way of borrowing
According to the Congressional Research Service:
Congress has raised the debt limit five timesSince 2001, Deficits each year since 2001 and the persistent increases in debt heldby government accounts repeatedly raised the debt to or near the limit in place at thetime. Congress raised the limit in June 2002, and by December 2002 theAdministration asked Congress for another increase.
Con
[The actual reason for the existence of the debt ceiling]
C:Without it the Government will continue to spend irresponsiblyW:According to the Congressional Research Service:
The debt limit can hinder the Treasury’s ability to manage the federal government’s finances, asnoted above. In extreme cases, when the federal debt is very near its statutory limit, the Treasurymust take unusual and extraordinary measures to meet federal obligations.18 While the debt limithas never caused the federal government to default on its obligations, it has at times caused greatinconvenience and has added uncertainty to Treasury operations.The debt limit also provides Congress with the strings to control the federal purse, allowingCongress to assert its constitutional prerogatives to control spending.19 The debt limit alsoimposes a form of fiscal accountability that compels Congress and the President to take visibleaction to allow further federal borrowing when the federal government spends more than itcollects in revenues. In the words of one author, the debt limit “expresses a national devotion tothe idea of thrift and to economical management of the fiscal affairs of the government.”20 On the
I:Without the debt limit Congress is liable to spend the country into oblivion
Monday, November 14, 2011
A Resolution to increase sustainability(Jaylen's Research)
A Resolution to increase Stability
Pro points
1.take out our enemies
2.help U.S economy
3.help keep peace with the world
1st warrants
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2011/10/mil-111024-afps06.htm
http://iraq.usembassy.gov/aboutus/american-iraqi.html
2nd
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-29/world/taiwan.arms_1_one-china-taiwan-strait-strong-indignation?_s=PM:WORLD
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2010.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1844547,00.html
http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/israel-fta
3rd
http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-true-ally-middle-east/p26382
http://www.economist.com/node/16216247?story_id=16216247
Con points
1. Hurt Foreign relation
2. America already provides enough support to the world
3. Will cost American more than it gains
1st
http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/The-Bay-of-Pigs.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/world/asia/07iht-military.1.16744766.html
2nd
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/54199/morihiro-hosokawa/are-us-troops-in-japan-needed-reforming-the-alliance
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/korea-orbat.htm
http://icasualties.org/oef/
3rd
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8780672/China-warns-US-over-Taiwan-arms-sales.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/
Pro points
2.help U.S economy
3.help keep peace with the world
1st warrants
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2011/10/mil-111024-afps06.htm
http://iraq.usembassy.gov/aboutus/american-iraqi.html
2nd
http://articles.cnn.com/2010-01-29/world/taiwan.arms_1_one-china-taiwan-strait-strong-indignation?_s=PM:WORLD
http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2010.html
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1844547,00.html
http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/israel-fta
3rd
http://www.cfr.org/israel/israel-true-ally-middle-east/p26382
http://www.economist.com/node/16216247?story_id=16216247
Con points
2. America already provides enough support to the world
3. Will cost American more than it gains
1st
http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/The-Bay-of-Pigs.aspx
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/world/asia/07iht-military.1.16744766.html
2nd
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/54199/morihiro-hosokawa/are-us-troops-in-japan-needed-reforming-the-alliance
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/korea-orbat.htm
http://icasualties.org/oef/
3rd
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8780672/China-warns-US-over-Taiwan-arms-sales.html
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Source: a brookings institute book on fiscal policy
http://www.brookings.edu/es/research/projects/budget/fiscalsanity/full.pdf
This book spans most of the legislation for Villiger...
This book spans most of the legislation for Villiger...
Villiger 2011 Legislation-The Research Worthy Bills(Prelims)
Attention Villiger Competitors: Based on extensive reveiw by Izzy, Jaylen, and Aaron, we've deemed the following bills most likely to make a docket, and we have assigned bills to research. Your name is next to the name of the bills you were assinged to. If you want to change bills or take on additional bills please let me know!
**Basically all the legislation deemed worthy of research by Izzy, Jaylen, and Aaron
-All Bills are assigned! Please Check to see which ones you have been assigned
1. A Bill to Abolish Plea Bargaining(Aaron Henry)
BE IT ENACTED BY THE STUDENT CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
Section 1. The United States justice system will hereby eliminate plea bargaining.
Section 2. Plea bargaining will be defined as negotiation of agreement between a criminal defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant agrees to plead "guilty" or "no contest" to certain crime(s), along with possible conditions, in return for reduction of charges in terms of severity, in return for dismissal of reduction of charges, or in return for some other benefit or condition agreeable to the defendant.
Section 3. The US Department of Justice will oversee implementation and enforcement.
SECTION 4. The Department of Justice will reduce the practice of plea bargaining incrementally for a period of three years, to begin immediately upon passage. By the end of the three-year period, plea bargaining will be entirely abolished.
Section 5. All other laws in conflict with this new policy are hereby declared null and void.
Respectfully submitted by Ariana Bagherian of American Heritage School at Boca Delray
1 BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
2 Section 1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
3 shall no longer be funded by the federal government.
4 Section 2. All subsidiaries and components of NASA shall be sold to
5 private investors and companies.
6 Section 3. Progress on the dismantling and reallocation of NASA’s
7 assets and funding shall be overseen by Senate Subcommittee on
8 Science and Space.
9 Section 4. This law will take effect within two fiscal years of passage.
10 Section 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared
11 null and void.
Introduced by Michael Averell of Cary Academy
1. WHEREAS: The United States currently gives two hundred million dollars in refugee
2. assistance; and
3. WHEREAS: Refugees do not pay taxes to the United States government; and
4. WHEREAS: The United States is also currently fourteen trillion dollars in debt; and
5. WHEREAS: The United States needs to make drastic budget cuts to get its financial
6. house in order; and
7. WHEREAS: Instances in which the United States Government does spend money
8. should go to directly benefit the American tax payer.
9. THEREFORE: Be it resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that: The
10. United States Government abolishes all funding of refugee assistance.
1. Whereas: Hundreds of thousands of classified, confidential cables were released by
2. WikiLeaks last year; and
3. Whereas: Wikileaks is facing one of its worst financial dilemma’s since its startup; and
4. Whereas: An estimated 95% of WikiLeaks’ annual revenue has been retracted; and
5. Whereas: Julian Assange, president of WikiLeaks has pronounced that if he isn’t given
6. essential funds by the turn of the year, WikiLeaks will not continue to publish
7. secret documents.
8. THEREFORE: Be it in resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that: The U.S. and its allies work to facilitate the dismantling of WikiLeaks.
A Resolution To Eliminate the Use of Solitary Confinement(Jaylen Pearson)
2 Whereas: solitary confinement is a widely applied measure of prisoner
3 control in most American prisons, and
4 Whereas: solitary confinement has extreme and painful effects on the
5 human mind that in some cases cannot be cured, and
6 Whereas: prisoners who are at risk to others can still be provided with
7 a modified right to human interactions,
8 Therefore, be it resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that:
9 solitary confinement be prohibited from further use in any prison in
10 the United States.
2 Whereas, recent changes made by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement have
3 not stopped human rights violations from happening; and,
4 Whereas, multiple governors have found fault with Secure Communities,
5 Therefore, let it be resolved by this Congress, that federal funding for Secure
6 Communities will cease; and,
7 Let it be further resolved that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation are
8 hereby declared null and void.
Respectfully Submitted,
Taylor Michael
Convent of the Sacred Heart, CT
WHEREAS, the five-year limit established by President Clinton’s Welfare plan can be avoided in many ways, such as by receiving welfare money from local funds rather than federal funds; and
WHEREAS, approximately 30% of all welfare recipients are products of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and
WHEREAS, illegitimate births cost taxpayers $2.2 billion in welfare and food stamps each year; and
WHEREAS, 60% of all teens who become pregnant are living in poverty; and
WHEREAS, Teen mothers have a 50% chance of becoming dependent on welfare; and
WHEREAS, private charities can individualize their approach to the circumstances of the impoverished in a way that government cannot, by reducing or withholding benefits from recipients who do not change their behavior, or by offering counseling; and
WHEREAS, private charities provide a safety net, rather than a way of life; now, therefore be it
Resolved by the Congress here assembled that the United States government establish a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for contributions to foundations created for the purpose of either aiding the impoverished of the US or for the purpose of decreasing the number of out-of-wedlock pregnancies or teen pregnancies in the US.
1. Whereas: The current relations of Turkey and Israel have been strained because of actions
2. of both parties to each other; and
3. Whereas: The United States relations with the Middle east have been staggered due to
4. recent conflict between Turkey and Israel; and
5. Whereas: If no action is taken place to remedy these relations and our relation to this
6. region, dire consequences will occur.
7. Therefore: Be it resolved by this Congress here assembled: that the United States set up
8. third party talks between Turkey and Israel where we shall be the third party
9. mediators.
Be it enacted by Student Congress assembled that:
Section I. The United States Government should create a voucher program for students
Section II. This program will consist of fifty (50) members who will process the applications
Section III. Each accepted student will receive $12,000 to use to go to a private, religious, or charter school of their choice.
A. Will be adjusted each year to the cost per child in school.
B. Will be provided to the student for the rest of their high school career
Section IV. Each state will be allowed 10,000 applications to be processed at the federal level and 5,000 will be chosen at the federal level.
Section V. Students must meet the qualifications in order for the application to be processed
A. Must make less than or under the poverty guideline
B. Must have a GPA of or over 3.5
C. Must be in or entering the grades ninth, tenth, eleventh, or twelfth.
Section VI. This bill will be enacted January 1 of 2012
Section VII. All other laws dealing with this will be null and void.
WHEREAS: NESCR has the potential to help thousands of people with genetic disorders
WHEREAS: embryonic stem cell research has ethical and moral dilemmas facing it that NESCR does not
WHEREAS: NESCR does not have adequate funding in any capacity,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ESTABLISHED: That NESCR will have a 100 million dollar per year fund by the U.S. Treasury on top of the 300 million dollars per year that was funded in 2010 by private groups and the government
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: this funding will take place up to the next ten (10) years, or as seems fit by the National Institutes of Health.
WHEREAS, The Debt Ceiling causes periods of uncertainty for the United States government and economy,
WHEREAS, Raising the Debt Ceiling wastes time and increases partisan divide,
WHEREAS, the Debt Ceiling is redundant, therefore,
LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the Debt Ceiling shall be abolished and Congress shall be able to borrow money unrestrained, and
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation are declared null and void.
WHEREAS, Palestine has a proper and just claim to sovereignty and statehood,
WHEREAS, the United State’s support of a two-state solution is vital to solving the Israel-Palestinian conflict,
LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the United States shall recognize Palestine as a full and legal state within 30 days of such recognition by the United Nations and United Nations General Assembly, and
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation or that prevent the recognition of Palestinian statehood are declared null and void.
1. Whereas, The United States is often alone in a multi-polar world, and
2. Whereas, this is a harmful to the US’s national interests, and
3. Whereas, Often, the most beneficial allies to the US are of varied government
4. types and views and,
5. Whereas, The United States often faces entrenched opposition from around
6. the world and, therefore,
7. BE IT RESOLVED, that The United States shall aid any group or movement
8. committed to replacing an enemy of the US with a newfound ally, whatever
9. the means necessary to ensure this transition, and
10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the United States shall aid any current
11. leader, willing to ally with the United States, regardless of electoral status.
12. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The Department of Defense in conjunction with
13. the six Joint Chiefs of Staff shall regulate such aid.
A Resolution to Make the United States Electoral System Representational(Courtney Gainey)
Whereas: the United States of America and a handful of other democracies in the world currently operate on a winner take all electoral system
Whereas: the voice of the people and the value of smaller parties are not represented in our current political system.
Whereas: Let the United States abolish the current electoral voting system, and instead install a proportional representation, so that all votes are counted.
Whereas: Let this system apply to all 50 states, instead of a seldom few, as it does now.
Whereas: This system will better represent all Americans and let more candidates offer new ideas in contrast with the current two-party system.
Therefore it should be Resolved: That the United States elect its representatives based on proportional representation rather than a winner-take all state wide electoral system.
Respectfully Submitted,
LaSalle College High School
Section 1. The United States’ government will reallocate $100 million from current USAID funds going towards Egyptian military aid. This $100 million will instead go towards NGOs sponsoring microloans in Niger.
Section 2. NGOs will be defined as non-governmental organizations. Microloans will be defined as loans for less than $10,000.
Section 3. A. This bill will be overseen by USAID.
B. Any NGO found to be abusing funding will have to pay back lost funds.
SECTION 4. This law will take effect within six months of passage.
Section 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared null and void.
Introduced by Loyola School
Whereas: Space-borne activities have grown substantially more important over the last 20 years and
Whereas: The current administration’s policy has made insufficient space in the budget or any long term plans for the agency and
Whereas: The expansion of American interests in the scientific community and
Whereas: private business ventures are not yet capable of shouldering the burden of leading America in the space community.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: by the Student Congress here assembled that
The United States expand the discretionary budget of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Over the next five years, allowing business to mature and ready to share the load of leading America in space
1. WHEREAS, The United States is currently spending
2. unnecessary amounts of money overseas, and
3. WHEREAS, This expenditure has only exacerbated the
4. economic downturn which plagues Americans today; and
5. WHEREAS, American money could be better spent on
6. domestic stimulus; now, therefore,
7. BE IT RESOLVED, By this Student Congress here
8. assembled that all military bases that are not in current
9. war zones be put out of commission for the time being, and
10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that military bases may be
11. reopened only if the Department of Defense recognizes
12. the base’s location as “threatened” or a “war zone”
1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
2. SECTION 1. The US shall allocate 375 million dollars to fund for
3. infrastructure development in the country of Afghanistan.
4. SECTION 2. The money will be sent to sectors including Road, Water, and 5. Electrical, each run by hired Afghan entrepreneurs. The 6. entrepreneurs will be subject to tests run by the US military to 7. make sure they are legitimate and safe.
8. SECTION 3. A. Infrastructure shall be defined as the system of public works 9. of a country, state, or region and also the resources (as
10. personnel, buildings, or equipment) required for an activity
11. B. Entrepreneurs shall be defined as individuals or corporations
12. who organize and manage any enterprise, especially a business,
13. usually with considerable initiative and risk.
14. SECTION 4. This law will take effect within six months of passage.
15. SECTION 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared
16. null and void.
Introduced by Ridge High School.
2. was signed by President John F. Kennedy on March 6, 1961 and,
3. Whereas: Affirmative Action was created in order to combat discrimination
4. here in the United States and,
5. Whereas: Economics has become the true discriminating factor here in the
6. United States and,
7. Whereas: Studies show that people who don’t attain post-secondary
8. education, earn less in a lifetime then people who do and,
9. Whereas: Colleges and Universities currently compete to be the most racially
10. diverse without regard to economic background
11. Be it Resolved: This Congress shall encourage all Colleges and Universities to
12. eliminate their current practice of Affirmative Action and replace it with an
13. Economic Affirmative Action admissions plan.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
Section 1. The United States shall reduce its deficit with both spending cuts and tax increases.
A. The mandatory spending cuts implemented by the Budget Control Act of 2011 shall be eliminated.
B. The Department of Defense (DOD) budget allocations shall be reduced by $75 billion each year for three years, after which funding will continue at $300 billion each year.
C. The top bracket tax rate on personal income shall be increased to 38%.
D. Taxable income shall be redefined to include income from capital gains, and the separate capital gains tax shall be discontinued.
Section 2. A. The top bracket tax rate refers to the tax rate placed on income in the highest tax bracket.
B. Capital gains are profits made from the sale of an investment.
Section 3. This bill shall be carried out by the Department of Defense and the Department of the Treasury.
SECTION 4. A. Section 1A of this bill shall be effective immediately.
B. Section 1B of this bill shall be implemented beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014, and cuts shall continue through FY 2016.
C. Sections 1C and 1D of this bill shall be implemented beginning in FY 2013.
Section 5. All laws or sections of laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared null and void
Introduced by,
Max Liebeskind
Stuyvesant High School
A Resolution to End the War on Terror(Jaylen Pearson)
WHEREAS, In 2001, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) Against Terrorists, which authorized the President to use force “against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001”; and
WHEREAS, The aforementioned AUMF is used as justification for the President’s use of force both in Afghanistan and in “counter-terror” operations elsewhere (except Iraq); and
WHEREAS, If Congress issued a resolution ending such authorization, the President, under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, would have 90 days to end such operations; and
WHEREAS, Military counter-terror operations do more harm than good to the United States; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, By the Congress here assembled that the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists is terminated; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That the President has authorization to maintain troops and use force in Afghanistan, for nation-building and/or counter-insurgency efforts, until he has deemed the country sufficiently stable to withdraw all troops.
Introduced by Jeremy Majerovitz,
Stuyvesant High School
Research Worthy Topics(Prelims)
**Basically all the legislation deemed worthy of research by Izzy, Jaylen, and Aaron
-All Bills are assigned! Please Check to see which ones you have been assigned
1. A Bill to Abolish Plea Bargaining(Aaron Henry)
A Bill to Abolish Plea Bargaining
BE IT ENACTED BY THE STUDENT CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
Section 1. The United States justice system will hereby eliminate plea bargaining.
Section 2. Plea bargaining will be defined as negotiation of agreement between a criminal defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant agrees to plead "guilty" or "no contest" to certain crime(s), along with possible conditions, in return for reduction of charges in terms of severity, in return for dismissal of reduction of charges, or in return for some other benefit or condition agreeable to the defendant.
Section 3. The US Department of Justice will oversee implementation and enforcement.
SECTION 4. The Department of Justice will reduce the practice of plea bargaining incrementally for a period of three years, to begin immediately upon passage. By the end of the three-year period, plea bargaining will be entirely abolished.
Section 5. All other laws in conflict with this new policy are hereby declared null and void.
Respectfully submitted by Ariana Bagherian of American Heritage School at Boca Delray
A Bill to Privatize NASA(Jaylen Pearson)
1 BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
2 Section 1. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
3 shall no longer be funded by the federal government.
4 Section 2. All subsidiaries and components of NASA shall be sold to
5 private investors and companies.
6 Section 3. Progress on the dismantling and reallocation of NASA’s
7 assets and funding shall be overseen by Senate Subcommittee on
8 Science and Space.
9 Section 4. This law will take effect within two fiscal years of passage.
10 Section 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared
11 null and void.
Introduced by Michael Averell of Cary Academy
A Resolution to Abolish Refugee Assistance(Chen Huang/Iskar Smith)
1. WHEREAS: The United States currently gives two hundred million dollars in refugee
2. assistance; and
3. WHEREAS: Refugees do not pay taxes to the United States government; and
4. WHEREAS: The United States is also currently fourteen trillion dollars in debt; and
5. WHEREAS: The United States needs to make drastic budget cuts to get its financial
6. house in order; and
7. WHEREAS: Instances in which the United States Government does spend money
8. should go to directly benefit the American tax payer.
9. THEREFORE: Be it resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that: The
10. United States Government abolishes all funding of refugee assistance.
Respectfully Submitted,
Chen Huang
City Center Academy
A Resolution to Dismantle WikiLeaks(Aaron Henry)
1. Whereas: Hundreds of thousands of classified, confidential cables were released by
2. WikiLeaks last year; and
3. Whereas: Wikileaks is facing one of its worst financial dilemma’s since its startup; and
4. Whereas: An estimated 95% of WikiLeaks’ annual revenue has been retracted; and
5. Whereas: Julian Assange, president of WikiLeaks has pronounced that if he isn’t given
6. essential funds by the turn of the year, WikiLeaks will not continue to publish
7. secret documents.
8. THEREFORE: Be it in resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that: The U.S. and its allies work to facilitate the dismantling of WikiLeaks.
Respectfully submitted,
Aaron Henry
City Center Academy.
City Center Academy.
A Resolution To Eliminate the Use of Solitary Confinement(Jaylen Pearson)
1 Whereas: Solitary confinement is widely recognized as a form of torture; and
2 Whereas: solitary confinement is a widely applied measure of prisoner
3 control in most American prisons, and
4 Whereas: solitary confinement has extreme and painful effects on the
5 human mind that in some cases cannot be cured, and
6 Whereas: prisoners who are at risk to others can still be provided with
7 a modified right to human interactions,
8 Therefore, be it resolved by this Student Congress here assembled that:
9 solitary confinement be prohibited from further use in any prison in
10 the United States.
A Resolution to Stop Unlawful Detentions(Iskar Smith)
1
Whereas, Secure Communities has led to disproportionate deportations of Latinos; and,
2 Whereas, recent changes made by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement have
3 not stopped human rights violations from happening; and,
4 Whereas, multiple governors have found fault with Secure Communities,
5 Therefore, let it be resolved by this Congress, that federal funding for Secure
6 Communities will cease; and,
7 Let it be further resolved that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation are
8 hereby declared null and void.
Respectfully Submitted,
Taylor Michael
Convent of the Sacred Heart, CT
A Resolution to Replace Welfare With Private Charities(Jaylen Pearson)
WHEREAS, the five-year limit established by President Clinton’s Welfare plan can be avoided in many ways, such as by receiving welfare money from local funds rather than federal funds; and
WHEREAS, approximately 30% of all welfare recipients are products of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; and
WHEREAS, illegitimate births cost taxpayers $2.2 billion in welfare and food stamps each year; and
WHEREAS, 60% of all teens who become pregnant are living in poverty; and
WHEREAS, Teen mothers have a 50% chance of becoming dependent on welfare; and
WHEREAS, private charities can individualize their approach to the circumstances of the impoverished in a way that government cannot, by reducing or withholding benefits from recipients who do not change their behavior, or by offering counseling; and
WHEREAS, private charities provide a safety net, rather than a way of life; now, therefore be it
Resolved by the Congress here assembled that the United States government establish a dollar-for-dollar tax credit for contributions to foundations created for the purpose of either aiding the impoverished of the US or for the purpose of decreasing the number of out-of-wedlock pregnancies or teen pregnancies in the US.
A Resolution to address Turkey and Israel(Iskar Smith)
1. Whereas: The current relations of Turkey and Israel have been strained because of actions
2. of both parties to each other; and
3. Whereas: The United States relations with the Middle east have been staggered due to
4. recent conflict between Turkey and Israel; and
5. Whereas: If no action is taken place to remedy these relations and our relation to this
6. region, dire consequences will occur.
7. Therefore: Be it resolved by this Congress here assembled: that the United States set up
8. third party talks between Turkey and Israel where we shall be the third party
9. mediators.
Respectfully Submitted,
Jay Daniel Gusman
Dominion High School
A Bill to Start a Government Run Voucher Program(Aaron Henry)
Be it enacted by Student Congress assembled that:
Section I. The United States Government should create a voucher program for students
Section II. This program will consist of fifty (50) members who will process the applications
Section III. Each accepted student will receive $12,000 to use to go to a private, religious, or charter school of their choice.
A. Will be adjusted each year to the cost per child in school.
B. Will be provided to the student for the rest of their high school career
Section IV. Each state will be allowed 10,000 applications to be processed at the federal level and 5,000 will be chosen at the federal level.
Section V. Students must meet the qualifications in order for the application to be processed
A. Must make less than or under the poverty guideline
B. Must have a GPA of or over 3.5
C. Must be in or entering the grades ninth, tenth, eleventh, or twelfth.
Section VI. This bill will be enacted January 1 of 2012
Section VII. All other laws dealing with this will be null and void.
Respectfully Submitted,
E.L. Meyers High School
A RESOLUTION TO FURTHER THE ADVANCEMENT OF
NON-EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH(Aaron Henry)
WHEREAS: Non-embryonic stem cell research (from here on NESCR) has already made some outstanding findings in the field of genetics research
WHEREAS: NESCR has the potential to help thousands of people with genetic disorders
WHEREAS: embryonic stem cell research has ethical and moral dilemmas facing it that NESCR does not
WHEREAS: NESCR does not have adequate funding in any capacity,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ESTABLISHED: That NESCR will have a 100 million dollar per year fund by the U.S. Treasury on top of the 300 million dollars per year that was funded in 2010 by private groups and the government
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT: this funding will take place up to the next ten (10) years, or as seems fit by the National Institutes of Health.
Respectfully Submitted,
Fordham Preparatory School
A Resolution to Abolish the Debt Ceiling(Iskar Smith)
WHEREAS, The Debt Ceiling causes periods of uncertainty for the United States government and economy,
WHEREAS, Raising the Debt Ceiling wastes time and increases partisan divide,
WHEREAS, the Debt Ceiling is redundant, therefore,
LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the Debt Ceiling shall be abolished and Congress shall be able to borrow money unrestrained, and
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation are declared null and void.
Respectfully Submitted,
Fordham Preparatory School
The Palestinian Sovereignty Act(Aaron Henry)
WHEREAS, Palestine has a proper and just claim to sovereignty and statehood,
WHEREAS, the United State’s support of a two-state solution is vital to solving the Israel-Palestinian conflict,
LET IT BE RESOLVED, that the United States shall recognize Palestine as a full and legal state within 30 days of such recognition by the United Nations and United Nations General Assembly, and
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED, that all laws in conflict with this piece of legislation or that prevent the recognition of Palestinian statehood are declared null and void.
Respectfully Submitted,
A Resolution to Increase Stability(Jaylen Pearson)
1. Whereas, The United States is often alone in a multi-polar world, and
2. Whereas, this is a harmful to the US’s national interests, and
3. Whereas, Often, the most beneficial allies to the US are of varied government
4. types and views and,
5. Whereas, The United States often faces entrenched opposition from around
6. the world and, therefore,
7. BE IT RESOLVED, that The United States shall aid any group or movement
8. committed to replacing an enemy of the US with a newfound ally, whatever
9. the means necessary to ensure this transition, and
10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the United States shall aid any current
11. leader, willing to ally with the United States, regardless of electoral status.
12. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, The Department of Defense in conjunction with
13. the six Joint Chiefs of Staff shall regulate such aid.
A Resolution to Make the United States Electoral System Representational(Courtney Gainey)
Whereas: the United States of America and a handful of other democracies in the world currently operate on a winner take all electoral system
Whereas: the voice of the people and the value of smaller parties are not represented in our current political system.
Whereas: Let the United States abolish the current electoral voting system, and instead install a proportional representation, so that all votes are counted.
Whereas: Let this system apply to all 50 states, instead of a seldom few, as it does now.
Whereas: This system will better represent all Americans and let more candidates offer new ideas in contrast with the current two-party system.
Therefore it should be Resolved: That the United States elect its representatives based on proportional representation rather than a winner-take all state wide electoral system.
Respectfully Submitted,
LaSalle College High School
A Bill to Sponsor Microfinance in West Africa(Chen Huang)
BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
Section 1. The United States’ government will reallocate $100 million from current USAID funds going towards Egyptian military aid. This $100 million will instead go towards NGOs sponsoring microloans in Niger.
Section 2. NGOs will be defined as non-governmental organizations. Microloans will be defined as loans for less than $10,000.
Section 3. A. This bill will be overseen by USAID.
B. Any NGO found to be abusing funding will have to pay back lost funds.
SECTION 4. This law will take effect within six months of passage.
Section 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared null and void.
Introduced by Loyola School
A Resolution to Expand the Discretionary Budget of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)(Jaylen Pearson)
Whereas: The current administration’s policy has made insufficient space in the budget or any long term plans for the agency and
Whereas: The expansion of American interests in the scientific community and
Whereas: private business ventures are not yet capable of shouldering the burden of leading America in the space community.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: by the Student Congress here assembled that
The United States expand the discretionary budget of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Over the next five years, allowing business to mature and ready to share the load of leading America in space
A Resolution to Increase Sanctions on Syria(Iskar Smith)
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Whereas: The current status of Syrian protests has not changed since they began; and Whereas: Syria’s current government continues to repress its people; and Whereas: The demands of the protesters have not been met; and Whereas: Syria has engaged in widespread human rights abuses; and Whereas: An international sanction would have more impact than an unilateral sanction by the United States Therefore be it resolved that: The United States government petition the United Nations Security Council for stronger sanctions upon the country of Syria. Respectfully Submitted, Pennsbury High School |
A Resolution to Close All Military Bases in Non War-Zone Areas(Jaylen Pearson)
1. WHEREAS, The United States is currently spending
2. unnecessary amounts of money overseas, and
3. WHEREAS, This expenditure has only exacerbated the
4. economic downturn which plagues Americans today; and
5. WHEREAS, American money could be better spent on
6. domestic stimulus; now, therefore,
7. BE IT RESOLVED, By this Student Congress here
8. assembled that all military bases that are not in current
9. war zones be put out of commission for the time being, and
10. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that military bases may be
11. reopened only if the Department of Defense recognizes
12. the base’s location as “threatened” or a “war zone”
Afghan Equity Act Of 2012(Aaron Henry)
1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
2. SECTION 1. The US shall allocate 375 million dollars to fund for
3. infrastructure development in the country of Afghanistan.
4. SECTION 2. The money will be sent to sectors including Road, Water, and 5. Electrical, each run by hired Afghan entrepreneurs. The 6. entrepreneurs will be subject to tests run by the US military to 7. make sure they are legitimate and safe.
8. SECTION 3. A. Infrastructure shall be defined as the system of public works 9. of a country, state, or region and also the resources (as
10. personnel, buildings, or equipment) required for an activity
11. B. Entrepreneurs shall be defined as individuals or corporations
12. who organize and manage any enterprise, especially a business,
13. usually with considerable initiative and risk.
14. SECTION 4. This law will take effect within six months of passage.
15. SECTION 5. All laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared
16. null and void.
Introduced by Ridge High School.
A Bill to Repeal Corporate Taxes in America(Courtney Gainey/Chen Huang)
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | BE IT ENACTED BY THIS CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED: Section I: The federal corporate tax system shall be abolished and replaced with a 25% value-added tax applicable to all companies, corporations, conglomerates, and all other business-related entities that operate within the United States for a time period of at least five years. Section II: Value-added tax shall be defined as a consumption tax placed on a product whenever value has been added during manufacturing, production, or distribution. Section III: This law shall be enacted by the Department of the Treasury under the jurisdiction of the Internal Revenue Service in conjunction with the Department of Commerce. Section IV: This law shall take effect on October 1st, 2014, upon the start of the new fiscal year. Section V: All other laws in conflict with this bill will hereby be declared null and void. |
Introduced by Evan Wescott
St. Joseph’s Preparatory School
A Resolution in Support of Economic Affirmative Action(Aaron Henry)
1.
Whereas: Affirmative Action first appeared in Executive Order 10925, which
2. was signed by President John F. Kennedy on March 6, 1961 and,
3. Whereas: Affirmative Action was created in order to combat discrimination
4. here in the United States and,
5. Whereas: Economics has become the true discriminating factor here in the
6. United States and,
7. Whereas: Studies show that people who don’t attain post-secondary
8. education, earn less in a lifetime then people who do and,
9. Whereas: Colleges and Universities currently compete to be the most racially
10. diverse without regard to economic background
11. Be it Resolved: This Congress shall encourage all Colleges and Universities to
12. eliminate their current practice of Affirmative Action and replace it with an
13. Economic Affirmative Action admissions plan.
Respectfully Submitted,
Shrewsbury High School
A Bill to Promote Fiscal Responsibility(Iskar Smith)
BE IT ENACTED BY THE CONGRESS HERE ASSEMBLED THAT:
Section 1. The United States shall reduce its deficit with both spending cuts and tax increases.
A. The mandatory spending cuts implemented by the Budget Control Act of 2011 shall be eliminated.
B. The Department of Defense (DOD) budget allocations shall be reduced by $75 billion each year for three years, after which funding will continue at $300 billion each year.
C. The top bracket tax rate on personal income shall be increased to 38%.
D. Taxable income shall be redefined to include income from capital gains, and the separate capital gains tax shall be discontinued.
Section 2. A. The top bracket tax rate refers to the tax rate placed on income in the highest tax bracket.
B. Capital gains are profits made from the sale of an investment.
Section 3. This bill shall be carried out by the Department of Defense and the Department of the Treasury.
SECTION 4. A. Section 1A of this bill shall be effective immediately.
B. Section 1B of this bill shall be implemented beginning in Fiscal Year (FY) 2014, and cuts shall continue through FY 2016.
C. Sections 1C and 1D of this bill shall be implemented beginning in FY 2013.
Section 5. All laws or sections of laws in conflict with this legislation are hereby declared null and void
Introduced by,
Max Liebeskind
Stuyvesant High School
A Resolution to End the War on Terror(Jaylen Pearson)
WHEREAS, In 2001, Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) Against Terrorists, which authorized the President to use force “against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001”; and
WHEREAS, The aforementioned AUMF is used as justification for the President’s use of force both in Afghanistan and in “counter-terror” operations elsewhere (except Iraq); and
WHEREAS, If Congress issued a resolution ending such authorization, the President, under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, would have 90 days to end such operations; and
WHEREAS, Military counter-terror operations do more harm than good to the United States; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, By the Congress here assembled that the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists is terminated; and, be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, That the President has authorization to maintain troops and use force in Afghanistan, for nation-building and/or counter-insurgency efforts, until he has deemed the country sufficiently stable to withdraw all troops.
Introduced by Jeremy Majerovitz,
Stuyvesant High School
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)