Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 1 of 20

Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific|

Zack Voell
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 2 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Really Quick…
…the reason that the Link/Brink has the backslash is because it would be a link for the
‘spending’ version of the DA but a brink for the generic econ hurt version of the DA.
Same thing for the ‘spending brink’…its only a brink for the spending version of the DA
and not for the generic econ version…
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 3 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

1NC Frontline
1. Uniqueness: US Economy is Recovering

Times Online 08 - There are signs the economy is turning around

Gerard Baker, American View, April 22, 2008, Times Online, Accessed April 23, 2008,
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/columnists/article3792028.ece
“First, the economy has shown some mildly encouraging indications of resilience.
Industrial production bounced back last month after a plunge in February, led by signs of
stabilisation in manufacturing output. The latest indications from the various regional
purchasing managers' surveys suggest that production might actually be edging back up.
At the same time, inflation pressures continue largely unabated, with the surge in global food prices strengthening the voices of those
within the Fed who have been arguing the central bank should hold off from further rate cuts for fear of adding fuel to the flames.”

2. Internal Link: Fiscal Discipline Key to Economy

Brookings 04 – The governments inability to control our budget will have a million
trillion bad effects
Robert E. Rubin, [Office of the Chairman, Citigroup], Peter R. Orszag, [is Joseph A. Pechman Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution],
and Allen Sinai, [Chief Global Economist, Decision Economics, Inc.], “Sustained Budget Deficits: Longer-Run U.S. Economic
Performance and the Risk of Financial and Fiscal Disarray”, Brookings Institute, January 5, 2004,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2004/0105budgetdeficit_orszag/20040105.pdf, (ZV)
“The inability of the federal government to control the budget deficit could be interpreted
as a broader failure of the nation to address its economic problems, and thus prompt a
loss of business and consumer confidence, which would undermine capital spending and
real economic activity. A potentially sharp downward movement in the exchange rate could cause unexpected shifts in
input costs and export opportunities across different sectors, which could cause short-term economic dislocations.”

3. Link/Brink

A. PRO Café Stds

CBO 02 - Increasing costs of fuel would decrease economic activity

“Reducing Gasoline Consumption: Three Policy Options”, Congressional Budget Office, November 2002, <accessed December 19,
2009>, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/39xx/doc3991/11-21-GasolineStudy.pdf, (ZV)
“Raising the gasoline tax, tightening CAFE standards, or enacting a cap-and-trade program would also affect
federal revenue in other, less direct ways. By imposing costs on producers and consumers, all of those
policies would tend to discourage economic activity. That decrease in economic activity
would lead to lower tax receipts in multiple ways—for example, collections of corporate
income taxes would decline if the profits of automakers or gasoline companies fell. The
size of those indirect effects on tax collections would vary with the economic cost of the
policy adopted. That cost in turn would depend on the targeted reduction in gasoline
consumption (bigger reductions would be more costly than smaller ones) and the comprehensiveness of the
policy. As discussed in Chapter 2, policies that encourage all gasoline-saving activities will produce a given gasoline reduction at a
lower cost than policies that focus on a limited number of activities.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 4 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

B. Co2 Emission Cuts

Margo Thorning 00 - reducing U.S. carbon dioxide emissions would reduce U.S.
GDP and slow wage growth significantly, worsen the distribution of income, and
reduce growth in living standards
Margo Thorning, [Ph.D., ACCF Senior Vice President and Chief Economist], “The Impact of the Kyoto Protocol On Economic
Growth: Tax Policies to Promote Technology and Sequestration”, AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CAPITAL FORMATION, March 30,
2000, <accessed December 19, 2009>, http://www.accf.org/pdf/ThorningTestimony.pdf, (ZV)
“A wide range of economic models predict that reducing U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions to either 1990 levels or to the Kyoto target (7 percent below 1990 levels) would reduce U.S. GDP and
slow wage growth significantly, worsen the distribution of income, and reduce growth in
living standards. If the United States is not able to take advantage of “where” flexibility
(reducing emissions wherever it is cheapest globally) through international emissions trading to meet the
Kyoto target, the cost in terms of lost output will range from about 1 percent to over 4
percent of GDP. In addition, near-term emissions reductions would reduce U.S.
competitiveness in energy-intensive manufacturing industries as well as in agriculture.”

C. RPS

Competitive Enterprise Institute 02 – a 10-percent RPS will add "only" $3.1 billion
to the nation's electricity bill in 2020
Marlo Lewis, Jr., “Deviant Standard”, Competitive Enterprise Institute, September 23, 2002, <accessed December 21, 2009>,
http://cei.org/gencon/019,03215.cfm, (ZV)
“According to a July 2000 study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, more
than one-third of U.S. consumers now have the option to purchase "green power" (electricity
made wholly or partly from renewables) if they are willing to pay premiums ranging from 0.4 cents to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour.
However, the study notes, less than one percent of utility customers choose "green power"
when given the chance. Presumably, "green power" premiums would be higher - and customer participation even more
dismal - if taxpayers and ratepayers were not already subsidizing renewable-based power. Should the U.S. Government
force companies to sell what consumers do not want to buy? Citing a recent EIA study,
proponents claim a 10-percent RPS will add "only" $3.1 billion to the nation's electricity
bill in 2020. By this pork-barrel logic, one can justify any consumer or taxpayer rip-off. That is the nature of corporate welfare
entitlements - they filch relatively small sums from millions of households to enrich a greedy few. But EIA's estimate is really beside
the point, because the Senate bill's RPS is the camel's nose under the tent – a floor, not a ceiling. Once enacted, the RPS will
strengthen the renewable lobby and grow like other entitlements.”

D. Hydrogen Fuel Cells

Joseph Romm 04 - At the end of the day, hydrogen and other alternative fuels will
be three to four times as expensive as oil-based products
Joseph J. Romm, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress, “Hype about Hydrogen : Fact and Fiction in the Race to Save
the Climate”, Published by Island Press, 2004, pg. 115-116, ISBN: 1-55963-703-X, <accessed via GoogleBooks>, (ZV)
“On the fueling side, we also have a long way to go. Don Huberts, former chief executive officer of Shell Hydrogen and former chair
of the California Fuel Cell Partnership, bluntly told the Fuel Cell Industry Report in January 2003, “At the end of the day,
hydrogen and other alternative fuels will be three to four times as expensive as oil-based
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 5 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
products, and if no one wants to pay for that, we can’t make those fuels.”3 This is
especially true for hydrogen from zero-carbon sources, such as renewable energy.”

E. Ethanol

CATO 07 - ethanol is said to be the magical elixir that will solve virtually every
economic, environmental, and foreign policy problem on the horizon. In reality, it's
enormously expensive and wasteful
Jerry Taylor, [senior fellow @ CATO], and Peter Van Doren, [senior fellow @ CATO, also editor of Regulation magazine], “Ethanol
Makes Gasoline Costlier, Dirtier”, CATO Institute, January 27, 2007, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=7308, (ZV)
“In his State of the Union address, President Bush spoke a lot about energy independence and
alternative energy sources such as ethanol. According to the president, ethanol is the
magical elixir that will solve virtually every economic, environmental, and foreign policy
problem on the horizon. In reality, it's enormously expensive and wasteful. Untruths and
misconceptions about ethanol include: Ethanol will lead to energy independence. If all the corn produced in America last year were
dedicated to ethanol production (14.3 percent of it was), U.S. gasoline consumption would drop by 12 percent. For corn ethanol to
completely displace gasoline consumption in this country, we would need to appropriate all U.S. cropland, turn it completely over to
corn-ethanol production, and then find 20 percent more land for cultivation on top of that. The U.S. Energy Information
Administration believes that the practical limit for domestic ethanol production is about 700,000 barrels per day, a figure they don't
think is realistic until 2030. That translates to about 6 percent of the U.S. transportation fuels market in 2030. Ethanol is economically
competitive now. According to a 2005 report issued by the Agriculture Department, corn
ethanol costs an average of $2.53 to produce, or several times what it costs to produce a
gallon of gasoline. Without the subsidies, costs would be higher still. A study last fall from the
International Institute for Sustainable Development found that ethanol subsidies amount to $1.05-$1.38 per
gallon, or 42 percent to 55 percent of ethanol's wholesale market price.”

F. Solar Power

USA Today 07 - Solar power has long been the Mercedes-Benz or renewables, and
like a Mercedes, its EXPENSIVE
Paul Davidson, “Forecast for solar power: Sunny”, USA Today, October 28, 2007,
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2007-08-26-solar_N.htm, (ZV)
“Solar power has long been the Mercedes-Benz of the renewable energy industry: sleek,
quiet, low-maintenance. Yet like a Mercedes, solar energy is universally adored but
prohibitively expensive for most people. A 4-kilowatt solar photovoltaic system costs
about $34,000 without government rebates or tax breaks. As a result, solar power
accounts for well under 1% of U.S. electricity generation. Other alternative energy sources, such as wind,
biomass and geothermal, are far more widely deployed.”

G. Nuclear

WSJ 09 – No one know how much a plant will cost until they get one
MICHAEL TOTTY, [a news editor for The Journal Report in San Francisco], “The Case For and Against Nuclear Power”, The Wall
Street Journal, June 30, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121432182593500119.html, (ZV)
“While no one knows what a new reactor will cost until one gets built, estimates for new
construction continue to rise. Building a new plant could cost as much as $6,000 a
kilowatt of generating capacity, up from estimates of about $4,000 a kilowatt just a year
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 6 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
ago. FPL Group, of Juno Beach, Fla., estimates that two new reactors planned for southeast Florida would cost between $6 billion
and $9 billion each.”

H. Energy Efficiency

The Energy Journal 04 - Developing energy efficient technologies consumes

research and development funds
Robert K. Kaufmann, “The mechanisms for autonomous energy efficiency increases: a cointegration analysis of the US energy/GDP
ratio”, The Energy Journal, January 2004, http://216.39.100.211/tradejournals/article/print/112986774.html, (ZV)
“If present, demand-pull innovations that reduce energy intensity may not be free. Developing energy efficient
technologies consumes research and development funds, and using these funds to
increase energy efficiency during periods of higher prices may crowd out investments
that would otherwise speed economic growth. Goulder and Schneider (1999) evaluate these potential costs
with a parameterized model. Their results indicate that using a limited supply of R&D funds to increase
energy efficiency diverts funds from investments that spur economic growth and therefore,
increases the gross costs of a carbon tax.”

4. Spending Brink: Gov’t Spending Hurts Econ

Brookings 04 - The negative consequences of sustained large deficits may be larger

and occur more suddenly than traditional analysis suggests
“The US budget deficit; On an unsustainable path”, Brookings Institute, 2004, <accessed December 20, 2009>,
http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20041201orszaggale.pdf, (ZV)
“As a result, compared to a balanced budget, the assets owned by Americans will be lessened by roughly 20 to 30 per cent of GDP by
2014. If capital earns a net return of six per cent, those missing assets will reduce national income by one to two per cent in 2015 – or
about $1,500 to $3,000 per household, on average. The unified budget deficits will also raise interest rates by 80 to 120 basis points –
The negative consequences of sustained large
or about $1,000 per year on a 30-year, $150,000 mortgage.
deficits may be larger and occur more suddenly than this type of traditional analysis suggests,
however. Chronic, substantial deficits can cause a fundamental shift in market expectations
and a related loss of confidence both at home and abroad. The scale of the long-term
fiscal gap is so large that, if left uncorrected, the nation faces a real risk of a fiscal crisis.”

5. Impact 1: Global Tensions

Michael Dobkowski and Isidor Wallimann 98 – economic decline causes

international wars
Michael N. Dobkowski, [professor of religious studies at Hobart and William Smith Colleges], and Isidor Wallimann, [senior lecturer
in sociology at the School of Social Work, Basel, Switzerland and a lecturer at the University of Fribourg] “THE COMING AGE OF
SCARCITY”, 1998, pg. 56, <accessed via GoogleBooks>, ISBN: 0-8156-2744-0, (ZV)
“Most critics would argue, probably correctly, that instead of allowing underdeveloped countries to
withdraw from the global economy and undermine the economies of the developed
world, the United States, Europe, Japan, and others will fight neocolonial wars to force
these countries to remain within this collapsing global economy. These neocolonial wars
will result in mass death, suffering, and even regional nuclear wars. If First World countries choose
military confrontation and political repression to maintain the global economy, then we may see mass death and
genocide on a global scale that will make the deaths of World War II pale in comparison.
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 7 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
However, these neocolonial wars, fought to maintain the developed nations' economic and
political hegemony, will cause the final collapse of our global industrial civilization. These
wars will so damage the complex economic and trading networks and squander material, biological, and energy
resources that they will undermine the global economy and its ability to support the
earth's 6 to 8 billion people. This would be the worst-case scenario for the collapse of
global civilization.”

6. Impact 2: Global Economy

Bloomberg 07 - The ability of other countries to emerge from the U.S. economy's
long shadow may reflect more wishful thinking than logic
Michael R. Sesit, [a Bloomberg News columnist], “Europe, Asia Won't Weather a U.S. Slowdown: Michael R. Sesit”, Bloomberg
News, March 15, 2007, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_sesit&sid=alXkzT5rSN30, (ZV)
“The ability of other countries to emerge from the U.S. economy's long shadow may
reflect more wishful thinking than logic. No doubt, it will eventually happen, especially as some of the bigger
emerging countries mature. Right now, the world still needs the U.S. consumer. The global
economy is too dependent on exports to the U.S., whose trade deficit was $765.3 billion
in 2006, while Asia and Europe lack sufficient domestic demand to offset reduced U.S.
spending on overseas goods, says Stephen Roach, chief economist at Morgan Stanley in New York.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 8 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Extension Evidence
1. Uniqueness

WSJ 09 – the recession is ending and our nation is recovering but it will take a while
to fully recover
Phil Izzo, “Economists Foresee Protracted Recovery”, Wall Street Journal, May 14, 2009, <accessed December 21, 2009>,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124223735808916011.html, (ZV)
“Economists in the latest Wall Street Journal survey see an end to the recession by autumn, but say it
will take years for the economy to fully recover. On average, the 52 economists who participated in the survey
project that the recession will end in August. They expect gross domestic product to contract 1.4% at a
seasonally adjusted annualized pace in the current quarter, compared with the 6.1% drop
recorded in the first quarter. Slow growth is expected to return by the third quarter, with
the economy expanding more than 2% in the first half of 2010. The survey was conducted before the
Commerce Department's report this week that retail sales fell 0.4% in April from the previous month, which left some economists
questioning whether consumer spending is ready to rebound.”

Fox Business 08 - If we’re in a recession, it’s extremely limited

Ken Sweet, [Fox News journalist], “Weak Economy? How Companies are Beating the Street”, April 23, 2008, Fox News,
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/industries/finance/article/weak-economy-companies-beating-street_574049_9.html, (ZV)
“Of the companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Index that have already reported earnings for the first three months of 2008, it’s the
ones with the biggest exposure to international markets that met or exceeded Wall Street expectations. Companies whose business is
primarily in the U.S., or that have too much exposure to the housing market -- like the banks -- have mostly floundered. “It’s clear
that international economies have not weakened as much as the U.S. economy,” said John Silvia, chief U.S. economist at Wachovia.
“The bottom line for business and investors is that U.S. recession -- if we’re in one -- is
related to only a few sectors. If you’re not in those sectors, like housing or finance, then
you’re fine.”

WSJ 08 – The Economy is showing signs of strength and recovery

Greg Ip, [WSJ Staffwriter], “Fed Weighs Pause After Next Rate Cut”, Wall Street Journal, April 24, 2008,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120899756185139975.html?mod=googlenews_wsj, (ZV)
“Still, the economy is showing some positive points. Some borrowing rates, held high by
lender risk aversion, have begun to ease, such as on 30-year mortgages that are insured by Fannie Mae or Freddie
Mac and for companies with strong credit quality. Stock prices, while gyrating, have risen 7% since the
Fed's meeting last month as investors conclude all the bad news about loan losses for
financial companies has been factored into prices. The Dow Jones Industrial Average
rose 42.99 points to 12763.22 Wednesday.”

2. Internal Link

Brookings 04 - The most attractive policy combination to spurring demand in a

weak economy is fiscal discipline with short-term fiscal stimulus
Robert E. Rubin, [Office of the Chairman, Citigroup], Peter R. Orszag, [is Joseph A. Pechman Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution],
and Allen Sinai, [Chief Global Economist, Decision Economics, Inc.], “Sustained Budget Deficits: Longer-Run U.S. Economic
Performance and the Risk of Financial and Fiscal Disarray”, Brookings Institute, January 5, 2004,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2004/0105budgetdeficit_orszag/20040105.pdf, (ZV)
“The forward-looking nature of financial markets means that credible future fiscal discipline can boost investment and interest-
sensitive consumption before the fiscal policy changes actually take effect. In particular, credible reductions in future budget deficits
can put downward pressure on long-term interest rates and raise the value of stock prices, thereby boosting investment, the interest-
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 9 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
sensitive components of consumption, and consumption more broadly (because of increased household wealth) even before the deficit
reduction itself has taken effect.28 The
most attractive policy combination to spurring demand in a
weak economy with excess capacity of capital and labor would thus combine long-term
fiscal discipline with short-term fiscal stimulus. The short-term fiscal stimulus provides a
direct spur to aggregate demand, while the long-term fiscal discipline provides an indirect
one through forward-looking financial markets. The problem is how to combine the two in a credible manner
—too much fiscal stimulus extended over too long a period raises questions about whether long-term fiscal discipline will occur,
thereby undermining the efficacy of such a joint package.”

Brookings 09 - Fiscal discipline delayed too long could also harm the economy
William G. Gale, [Senior Fellow, Economic Studies], and Alan J. Auerbach, [University of California, Berkeley], “An Update on the
Economic and Fiscal Crises: 2009 and Beyond”, Brookings Institute, September 2009,
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/06_fiscal_crisis_gale.aspx, (ZV)
“Over the next several years, as the recession ends and the economy recovers, policy makers will face a delicate balancing act
between encouraging economic recovery and establishing fiscal sustainability. Fiscal discipline imposed too soon could weaken the
recovery or push the economy back into recession. Fiscaldiscipline delayed too long could also harm the
economy, either gradually, as higher interest rates reduce economic activity and deficits
sap national saving, or suddenly, if investor fears trigger a sharp and adverse market
response. The balancing act will be made more difficult by a host of factors, including: the fiscal difficulties faced by the states
and European countries; the fact that both political parties have announced opposition to broad-based tax increases; the reality that the
vast bulk of spending occurs in programs that will be difficult to cut in the short term, including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid,
defense, and net interest; and the potential populist backlash that could inhibit effective policy making if financial markets, which tend
to lead the economy, recover robustly but labor markets take a long time to regain full employment and wage growth. Nevertheless,
the United States will soon be compelled to confront its fiscal future. Although huge deficits are not
desirable in the short term, they are nonetheless understandable. Once the economy recovers, though, the need to impose
fiscal discipline – which used to be considered a “long-term” problem – will be a short-
term and urgent problem that will require difficult choices that policy makers have so far refused to
make. Worse still, if the economy recovers only very slowly or not at all, those decisions will still need to be faced, but in the context
of a weaker economic situation.”

Brookings 04 – as the Congressional Budget Office notes, unsustainable fiscal policy

could become extremely costly
Robert E. Rubin, [Office of the Chairman, Citigroup], Peter R. Orszag, [is Joseph A. Pechman Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution],
and Allen Sinai, [Chief Global Economist, Decision Economics, Inc.], “Sustained Budget Deficits: Longer-Run U.S. Economic
Performance and the Risk of Financial and Fiscal Disarray”, Brookings Institute, January 5, 2004,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2004/0105budgetdeficit_orszag/20040105.pdf, (ZV)
“As CBO (2003b) notes, these various effects of an unsustainable fiscal policy could become
extremely costly: “Taken to the extreme, such a path could result in an economic crisis. Foreign
investors could stop investing in U.S. securities, the exchange value of the dollar could
plunge, interest rates could climb, consumer prices could shoot up, or the economy could
contract sharply. Amid the anticipation of declining profits and rising inflation and
interest rates, stock markets could collapse and consumers might suddenly reduce their
consumption. Moreover, economic problems in the United States could spill over to the
rest of the world and seriously weaken the economies of U.S. trading partners. A policy of
higher inflation could reduce the real value of the government’s debt, but inflation is not a feasible long-term strategy for dealing with
persistent budget deficits….If the government continued to print money to finance the deficit, the
situation would eventually lead to hyperinflation (as happened in Germany in the 1920s, Hungary in the
1940s, Argentina in the 1980s, and Yugoslavia in the 1990s)...Once a government has lost its credibility in
financial markets, regaining it can be difficult.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 10 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
Brookings 04 – economic decline will set of a chain of devastating events
Robert E. Rubin, [Office of the Chairman, Citigroup], Peter R. Orszag, [is Joseph A. Pechman Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution],
and Allen Sinai, [Chief Global Economist, Decision Economics, Inc.], “Sustained Budget Deficits: Longer-Run U.S. Economic
Performance and the Risk of Financial and Fiscal Disarray”, Brookings Institute, January 5, 2004,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2004/0105budgetdeficit_orszag/20040105.pdf, (ZV)
“The disruptions to financial markets could impede the intermediation between lenders and
borrowers; uncertainty about the possibility of substantial inflation could cause creditors
to eschew the long end of the credit market except at extremely high real interest rates.
The effect of the decline in asset prices on bank and other financial intermediaries’
balance sheets could exacerbate the disintermediation. The drop in asset prices and increase in interest
rates could also spark a wave of bankruptcies, which could further restrain real economic activity. These various effects
can feed on each other to create a dangerous cycle; for example, increased interest rates
and diminished economic activity may further worsen the fiscal imbalance, which can
then cause a further loss of confidence and potentially spark another round of negative
feedback effects.”

3. Link/Brink

A. PRO Café Stds

CBO 02 - Increased Efficiency would decrease revenue from the gas tax/CAFÉ
Standards/et cetera
“Reducing Gasoline Consumption: Three Policy Options”, Congressional Budget Office, November 2002, <accessed December 19,
2009>, http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/39xx/doc3991/11-21-GasolineStudy.pdf, (ZV)
“An increase in CAFE standards would have an indirect effect on revenue collected for
the Highway Trust Fund. Improvements in the fuel economy of new vehicles would
reduce their gasoline consumption per mile traveled and thus bring in fewer gasoline-tax
receipts. That decline in receipts would be partly offset as lower driving costs led to more
vehicle miles traveled. (Research indicates that increases in VMTs due to lower driving costs could offset the gasoline
savings from CAFE-induced changes in fuel economy by roughly 20 percent.) The decline in gasoline tax revenue
because of higher CAFE standards would increase over time as older vehicles were
replaced by new vehicles that met the more-stringent standards.”

CATO 02 - cafe standards are much larger on U.S. automakers than foreign firms
ANDREW N. KLEIT, “CAFE Changes, By the Numbers”, CATO Institute, September 2002,
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv25n3/v25n3-8.pdf, (ZV)
“Foreign automakers view the fine as a tax. Thus, BMW and Mercedes-Benz, for
example, have routinely paid cafe fines. In contrast, American firms view the standards
as binding because their lawyers have advised them that, if they violate cafe, they would
be liable for civil damages in stockholder suits. The fear of civil suit is so strong that even
Chrysler, which is owned by the German firm Daimler-Benz, will not violate the limits.
Because the “shadow tax” of the cafe constraint (the cost of complying with the standards rather than paying
the fine) can be much more than $55 per car/mpg, the effects of cafe standards are much
larger on U.S. automakers than foreign firms.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 11 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
Heritage 02 - If CAFE standards change too quickly and are too high, we will have
to scrap that investment where we'll lose more money
Dr. Robert W. Crandall, Barry Felrice, Sam Kazman, and Dr. W. David Montgomery, “Fuel Economy Standards: Do they Work? Do
they Kill?”, Heritage Foundation, March 8, 2002, http://www.heritage.org/Research/EnergyandEnvironment/WM85.cfm, (ZV)
“Industry needs sufficient lead time if CAFE standards are to change to get a return on
our investment in technology. We spent $3 billion on the new 2002 Dodge Rams which included a new assembly plant,
a new engine, and a new drive train. We probably will need six to eight years of production to make that money back and get some
If CAFE standards change too quickly and are too high, we will have to
decent return on it.
scrap that investment where we'll lose more money, which is hard to imagine for some of
us these days. We can't get to these new levels through technology. When that happens
we start cutting back on the least fuel-efficient vehicles which lessens our revenue flow
so then we have less revenue to invest in new technology. It's a vicious cycle.”

B. Co2 Emission Cuts

Margo Thorning 00 - requiring the United States to reduce CO2 emissions would
reduce GDP growth in the range of 1 to 4 percent per year
Margo Thorning, [Ph.D., ACCF Senior Vice President and Chief Economist], “The Impact of the Kyoto Protocol On Economic
Growth: Tax Policies to Promote Technology and Sequestration”, AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CAPITAL FORMATION, March 30,
2000, <accessed December 19, 2009>, http://www.accf.org/pdf/ThorningTestimony.pdf, (ZV)
“In light of the current debate about how to use the projected federal budget surpluses,
policymakers need to consider the potentially large negative impact on GDP growth and
federal budget receipts of proposals that address the possible threat of global warming by
requiring sharp, near-term cutbacks in CO2 emissions. As described above, estimates provided
by various academic, private-sector, and EIA modelers show that requiring the United States to
reduce CO2 emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2008–2012 (the EIA projects U.S. CO2
emissions will be about 40 percent above this target by 2010) would reduce GDP growth in the range of 1 to 4
percent per year. Using a simple calculation based on the relationship of increases in
GDP to federal tax receipts, if growth falls by 3 percent per year, the projected on-budget
surplus in 2010 would decline from $195 billion to $57 billion (see Figure 3). Therefore,
implementation of the Kyoto Protocol would make it much more difficult to sustain tax cuts, “save” Social Security, or promote the
retirement security of the baby boom generation, and could require sharp changes in fiscal policy in order to avoid deficit spending.
These budgetary impacts should be considered as policymakers shape the U.S. response to the potential threat of climate change.”

C. RPS

Center for Resource Solutions 03 - There are costs to government in implementing

and administering a renewable portfolio standard
Meredith Wingate, “A Survey of the Administrative Costs to Government of Implementing a RPS, Feed-in Law, Competitive Tender,
and Public Benefits Fund”, Center for Resource Solutions, June 2003, http://www.resource-solutions.org/lib/librarypdfs/IntPolicy-
Administrative.Costs.of.4.Policies.pdf, (ZV)
“There are two primary costs to government in implementing and administering a renewable
portfolio standard (RPS). The first is the design of the policy, and the second comes from monitoring and verifying
compliance with the policy. In the international experience, the RPS is often a part of a larger electricity law and the design of the
policy is left to the administrative or rulemaking arm of government (e.g., the public utilities commission). This process can range in
time from four months to nearly two years, and usually occurs after the law is promulgated. The
two primary cost
centers for this work from the government’s perspective are staff time and consultant’
fees.1 The range in these costs varies greatly depending on the complexity of the law,
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 12 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
size of the market, number of companies impacted, degree of public input, and other
factors. Because of the huge variation, we do not attempt to estimate costs with precision
here. However, we note that government staffing needs for these activities in U.S. states
rarely exceeds 2 full-time equivalent (staff). If a 6-month process for developing the RPS
is used, and additional legal and consulting fees are included, this might equate to
$100,000 – $300,000 for the implementation of a state RPS. A national RPS, on the other
hand, might expect far greater policy development costs. The other primary cost to
government in administering an RPS is monitoring and verifying compliance with the
policy. Most US states and countries that have passed an RPS have used one of two primary methods of verifying compliance with
the law. The first is a contract path accounting method, and the second is a certificate-based accounting method.”

D. Hydrogen Fuel Cells

Alice Friedemann 04 – Hydrogen Fuel cells are expensive. Period.

Alice Friedemann, [a freelance journalist who specializes in energy], “The Hydrogen Economy – Energy and Economic Black Hole”,
Culture Change, September 2004, http://www.culturechange.org/alt_energy.htm, (ZV)
“Fuel cells are also heavy: "A metal hydride storage system that can hold 5 kg of hydrogen, including the alloy, container, and heat
exchangers, would weigh approximately 300 kg (661 lbs), which would lower the fuel efficiency of the vehicle," according to Rosa
Young, a physicist and vice president of advanced materials development at Energy Conversion Devices in Troy, Michigan (12).
Fuel cells are expensive. In 2003, they cost $1 million or more. At this stage, they have
low reliability, need a much less expensive catalyst than platinum, can clog and lose
power if there are impurities in the hydrogen, don’t last more than 1000 hours, have yet
to achieve a driving range of more than 100 miles, and can’t compete with electric
hybrids like the Toyota Prius, which is already more energy efficient and low in CO2
generation than projected fuel cells.”

European Fuel Cell Forum 06 - hydrogen energy will cost around $5.60 when
produced from natural gas, $10.30 from coal, and $20.10 from electrolysis of water
while gasoline costs $3.00
Ulf Bossel, “Does a Hydrogen Economy Make Sense?”, European Fuel Cell Forum, October 2006,
http://www.efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf, (ZV)
“The energy needed to produce, compress, liquefy, transport, transfer, and store hydrogen
and the energy lost for its conversion back to electricity with fuel cells can never be
recovered [3]. The heat of formation or HHV has been used throughout to base the analysis on true energy contents in agreement
with the law of energy conservation. In contrast, the lower heating value (LHV), a mancreated accounting convention, is appropriate
only when energetic processes are compared for identical fuels. In many Bwell-to-wheel[ studies [8], [9], hydrogen solutions are
embellished by 10% as a result of an LHV accounting. When hydrogen is made by whatever process at least the heat of formation
HHV of the synthetic energy carrier has to be invested in form of electricity, heat, or HHV energy content of precursor materials. For
a correct accounting the output of a fuel cell should also be related to the HHV, not the LHV energy content of the hydrogen gas.
Also, LHV accounting may turn conventional energy equipment into perpetual motion machines with efficiencies exceeding 100%.
The use of the higher heating value HHV is appropriate for all serious energy analyses
[10]. Although cost of energy is an important issue, this study is only concerned with
energy balances. Energy is needed for solving the energy problem and energy waste has
to be minimized. However, a quick visit to the market is helpful. According to [11], every GJ of
hydrogen energy will cost around $5.60 when produced from natural gas, $10.30 from
coal, and $20.10 from electrolysis of water. Before taxes, gasoline costs about $3.00 per
GJ.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 13 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

E. Ethanol

Online Insider 08 - At first glance, it looked like an idea fairly oozing with potential.
heh not.
Jack Lyne, [Executive Editor at Site Selection, Executive Editor at Conway Data, Inc], “Ethanol and Incentives: Fueling a Boon or a
Boondoggle?”, Online Insider, July 2008, http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/incentive/ti0708.htm, (ZV)
“At first glance, it looked like an idea fairly oozing with potential: Pump corn-based
ethanol into the tanks of American autos, and voila! In one fell swoop, the U.S. could
slash its toxic emissions and foreign oil dependence, in the bargain boosting the nation's
long-suffering farmers. Corn-based ethanol seemed like it would yield a bumper crop of
winners all around. Or will it? A number of observers are beginning to question just how good an idea that fuel really
is. Unquestionably, it's a very expensive idea. U.S. federal and state subsidies for ethanol
in 2006 totaled more than US$5 billion. Total incentives for American-made ethanol –
almost all of it corn-based – equal about $1 a gallon.”

Online Insider 08 - We are already subsidizing corn ethanol in the US with more
money than we spend on high-mileage cars or on quality mass transit
Jack Lyne, [Executive Editor at Site Selection, Executive Editor at Conway Data, Inc], “Ethanol and Incentives: Fueling a Boon or a
Boondoggle?”, Online Insider, July 2008, http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/incentive/ti0708.htm, (ZV)
“We are already subsidizing corn ethanol [in the U.S.] with more money than we spend
on high-mileage cars or on quality mass transit," says Michael Dworkin, director of the
Vermont Law School Institute for Energy and the Environment. "As long as we spend
more on subsidizing energy suppliers than we do on investments in energy efficiency, we
are on a path to pain." But more spending on ethanol subsidies is apparently looming. When it returns from its month-long
recess, the U.S. Congress will likely enact a stiff increase in taxpayers' yearly tab. A compromise committee will
review separate Senate and House proposals that could jack up mandated ethanol
incentives to somewhere between $131 billion and $205 billion over the next 15 years.”

Online Insider 08 - Cellulosic ethanol is even less economically competitive with

gasoline than corn ethanol
Jack Lyne, [Executive Editor at Site Selection, Executive Editor at Conway Data, Inc], “Ethanol and Incentives: Fueling a Boon or a
Boondoggle?”, Online Insider, July 2008, http://www.siteselection.com/ssinsider/incentive/ti0708.htm, (ZV)
“But cellulosic ethanol technology isn't ready to fill that gap. No commercial plants using cellulosic ethanol have been built. High
costs are one of the big reasons. "Cellulosic ethanol is even less economically competitive with
gasoline than corn ethanol," says Taylor. "[Energy Information Administration Administrator] Guy Caruso noted in a
speech last November that the capital costs associated with cellulosic ethanol production were five
times greater than those associated with conventional corn ethanol production. "The
USDA estimates that the capital costs associated with corn ethanol production work out
to about $1.50 per gallon," he continues. "That suggests that cellulosic ethanol would cost
about $7.50 per gallon – before we even consider the price of the feedstock.”

F. Solar Power

WSJ 08 – Solar Power sounds so simple but despite federal subsidies it is still super
pricey
YULIYA CHERNOVA, “Shedding Light on Solar”, Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2008,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121432258309100153.html, (ZV)
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 14 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
“The idea of solar power sounds so simple. And it seems like it should be cheap
compared to other sources of energy. After all, the sun is there, and it's free. But despite federal and
some state government subsidies that have helped push up demand, solar power still
accounts for less than 1% of power generation in the U.S. That's because even with
subsidies, solar power remains expensive compared with energy based on traditional
fuels like coal and natural gas.”

WSJ 08 – [Specific Stats on how expensive Solar Power is…]

YULIYA CHERNOVA, “Shedding Light on Solar”, Wall Street Journal, June 30, 2008,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121432258309100153.html, (ZV)
“The average cost of a rooftop solar system, also known as a photovoltaic, or PV, system,
is roughly $8.25 per watt installed, based on companies' listed selling prices and
conversations with industry executives and analysts. What does that mean in English?
Well, depending on the size of the system, the price before government subsidies and
reimbursements might range anywhere from $8,250 for a one-kilowatt system to more
than $40,000 for a five-kilowatt one.”

G. Nuclear

WSJ 09 - nuclear is more expensive, and getting more expensive all the time
MICHAEL TOTTY, [a news editor for The Journal Report in San Francisco], “The Case For and Against Nuclear Power”, The Wall
Street Journal, June 30, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121432182593500119.html, (ZV)
“More important, though, there are less-costly ways of weaning ourselves off these
carbon-emitting energy sources. Even if a high price of carbon makes nuclear economic,
the costs of renewable energy such as wind and solar power are cheaper, and getting
cheaper all the time. By contrast, nuclear is more expensive, and getting more expensive
all the time. And yes, it's true that wind and solar suffer from the problem of not being
available 24 hours a day. But new technology is already beginning to solve that problem.
And we'd be better off -- from both an economic and safety standpoint -- if we used
natural gas to fill in the gaps, rather than nuclear.

WSJ 09 – The cost issue alone will mean that fewer nuclear power stations will be
built
MICHAEL TOTTY, [a news editor for The Journal Report in San Francisco], “The Case For and Against Nuclear Power”, The Wall
Street Journal, June 30, 2008, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121432182593500119.html, (ZV)
“The cost issue alone will mean that few if any new nuclear power stations will get built
in the next few years, at least in the U.S., and any that do will require expensive taxpayer
subsidies. Instead of subsidizing the development of new plants that have all these other problems, the U.S. would be better off
investing in other ways to meet growing energy demands and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions.”

H. Energy Efficiency

Chicago Sun-Times 04 -
Jay Lehr and Joseph L. Bast, “Chicago Sun-Times Features Heartland Commentary on Climate Stewardship Act”, Chicago Sun-
Times, June 28, 2004,
http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/15278/Chicago_SunTimes_Features_Heartland_Commentary_on_Climate_Stewardship_
Act.html, (ZV)
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 15 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
“The bill would cap major sources of greenhouse gas emissions at 2000 levels beginning in 2010. The principal
nonagricultural source of greenhouse gases is the burning of fossil fuels. For households
and industries to reduce their consumption of fossil fuels, prices must rise. As energy
prices rise, industries substitute less energy-intensive production methods or use more
expensive non-fossil sources of energy. Both forms of substitution require more capital
investment, which leads to a lower level of consumption in the near-term and a reduced
rate of return on investment, thereby reducing consumption in the future as well. Because
industries no longer would be as productive, their revenues would fall, leading to lower
wages. Because of lower wages, labor supply would be reduced, further trimming
economic output and personal income. Individuals would face a reduced ability to
consume as a result of this policy.”

4. Spending Brink

Brookings 04 - budget deficits matter because they reduce national saving and thus
reduce future national income
“The US budget deficit; On an unsustainable path”, Brookings Institute, 2004, <accessed December 20, 2009>,
http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20041201orszaggale.pdf, (ZV)
“In sum, budget deficits matter because they reduce national saving and thus reduce
future national income. That reduction in future income can occur either because interest
rates rise and domestic investment falls, or because we borrow more from foreigners and
therefore owe more to them in the future. Or it could occur through some combination of these two effects. Even
if we include only the deficits projected for the next decade, these adverse effects are significant. Under our adjusted baseline in
Figure 2, the
unified budget deficit over the next ten years is projected to average about 3.5
per cent of GDP. Empirical results from a forthcoming paper of ours in the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity
suggest that these deficits will reduce annual national saving by two to three per cent of
GDP.”

Brookings [no original date] - that deficits gradually weaken the ability of workers
to produce goods and services, thereby constraining wage increases and the growth
of family incomes
Alice Rivlin and Isabel Sawhill, “Growing Deficits and Why They Matter”, Brookings Institute, <accessed December 20, 2009>,
http://www.brookings.edu/es/research/projects/budget/fiscalsanity/chapter1.pdf, (ZV)
“Effects on Long-term Growth. Our colleague Charles Schultze once likened deficits not to the wolf at the door, but to termites in the
woodwork. By this he meant that deficits gradually weaken the ability of workers to produce goods
and services, thereby constraining wage increases and the growth of family incomes.
Wage increases depend on how fast worker productivity grows. A major key to
productivity growth, in turn, is investment in expanded business facilities and know-how
—everything from robotics on the factory floor to a computer on every desk.7 But when
governments run deficits, they must compete with businesses for scarce financial capital, driving up its cost or reducing its availability
to the private sector.8 Just how much damage currently projected deficits will do depends on several assumptions, such as how much
money we are able to borrow from abroad. But a conservative estimate is that a $5.3 trillion accumulation of additional debt over the
next ten years would reduce national income by $212 billion annually at the end of the period. This translates into about $1,800 less
annual income for the average household than they otherwise would have earned.”

Brookings [no original date] - Current deficits in the US will continue in the near
future because the spending is greater than the revenue
Alice Rivlin and Isabel Sawhill, “Growing Deficits and Why They Matter”, Brookings Institute, <accessed December 20, 2009>,
http://www.brookings.edu/es/research/projects/budget/fiscalsanity/chapter1.pdf, (ZV)
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 16 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
“For countries, as for families, borrowing to meet emergencies is different from borrowing on a sustained basis to live beyond one’s
means. As President Bush has noted, deficits during wartime or recession may be entirely appropriate. For this reason, current
deficits are beneficial in the short run because they are stimulating the economy and putting people back to work. Very little of the
rising debt burden projected over the next decade, however, is related to temporary economic stimulus or short-run emergencies such
as the war in Iraq. These deficits will
persist for the foreseeable future, because spending is
projected to grow faster than revenue.”

Melanie Colburn 06 – deficits most certainly hamper future economic growth

Melanie Colburn, [economics commentator], “Why Deficits Matter”, Mother Jones, June 4, 2006, <accessed December 20, 2009>,
http://motherjones.com/politics/2006/06/why-deficits-matter, (ZV)
“In general, deficits can hamper future economic growth by ensuring that a bulk of future
wealth will be dedicated to paying back loans. Sustained deficits can also drive up
interest rates and divert funds away from private investment. In theory, Americans care about the
national deficit, but most consumers are seeing benefits from all this borrowing now, and they won't see the downsides until long in
the future. Asian governments continue to borrow billions of dollars from the federal government in order to keep the dollar
artificially high, flooding the United States with cheap imports that benefit consumers. That buying spree has also kept interest rates
artificially low, helping to fuel the current economic boom. At present, the people who benefit from this system have very little
incentive to change it, and every reason to push the associated problems onto future generations. At
some point the debt
will become unsustainable, but it's tough to pin down exactly where that point of no return is. If foreign central
banks started worrying about the United States' ability to repay its obligations, and began to
sell or even buy fewer dollar-denominated assets, it could lead to a run on the dollar, which would force
up interest rates and potentially put the U.S. economy into a recession. Among economists, a
debate continues to rage over how painful the correction to the current account deficit may be, but a rare consensus is emerging that
the fiscal and current account deficits are unsettling and demand some sort of response.”

5. Impact 1

Mead 09 - If we can't get the world economy back on track, we may have wars on
our hands
Walter Russel Mead, [the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and the
author of God and Gold: Britain, America and the Making of the Modern World], “Only Makes You Stronger”, January 4, 2009
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...e83915f5f8&p=2, (ZV)
“So far, such half-hearted experiments not only have failed to work; they have left the societies that have tried them in a progressively
worse position, farther behind the front-runners as time goes by. Argentina has lost ground to Chile; Russian development has fallen
farther behind that of the Baltic states and Central Europe. Frequently, the crisis has weakened the power of the merchants,
Crisis can
industrialists, financiers, and professionals who want to develop a liberal capitalist society integrated into the world.
also strengthen the hand of religious extremists, populist radicals, or authoritarian
traditionalists who are determined to resist liberal capitalist society for a variety of reasons. Meanwhile, the companies and
banks based in these societies are often less established and more vulnerable to the consequences of a financial crisis than more
established firms in wealthier societies. As a result, developing countries and countries where capitalism has relatively recent and
shallow roots tend to suffer greater economic and political damage when crisis strikes--as, inevitably, it does. And, consequently,
financial crises often reinforce rather than challenge the global distribution of power and wealth. This may be happening yet again.
None of which means that we can just sit back and enjoy the recession. History may suggest that financial crises actually help
If financial crises have
capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less reassuring messages as well.
been a normal part of life during the 300-year rise of the liberal capitalist system under
the Anglophone powers, so has war. The wars of the League of Augsburg and the
Spanish Succession; the Seven Years War; the American Revolution; the Napoleonic
Wars; the two World Wars; the cold war: The list of wars is almost as long as the list of
financial crises. Bad economic times can breed wars. Europe was a pretty peaceful place
in 1928, but the Depression poisoned German public opinion and helped bring Adolf
Hitler to power. If the current crisis turns into a depression, what rough beasts might start
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 17 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
slouching toward Moscow, Karachi, Beijing, or New Delhi to be born? The United States
may not, yet, decline, but, if we can't get the world economy back on track, we may still
have to fight.”

T.E. Bearden 00 - Prior to the final economic collapse, the stress on nations will have
increased the intensity and number of their conflicts weapons of mass destruction
are almost certain to be released
T. E. Bearden, [LTC, U.S. Army (Retired) CEO, CTEC Inc. Director, Association of Distinguished American Scientists (ADAS)
Fellow Emeritus, Alpha Foundation's Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS)], “The Unnecessary Energy Crisis: How to Solve It
Quickly”, June 12, 2000, http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CAkQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F
%2Fwww.cheniere.org%2Ftechpapers%2FUnnecessary%2520Energy
%2520Crisis.doc&ei=mPQvS8PLAtGSlAeLtY2hBw&usg=AFQjCNEBJoIoaSyXu2Ov9JMI3FRwy_n08Q&sig2=64QB1a-
4SAwFUT0LaV7GKw, (ZV)
“History bears out that desperate nations take desperate actions. Prior to the final economic collapse, the
stress on nations will have increased the intensity and number of their conflicts, to the point
where the arsenals of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) now possessed by some 25 nations, are almost
certain to be released. As an example, suppose a starving North Korea { } launches
nuclear weapons upon Japan and South Korea, including U.S. forces there, in a
spasmodic suicidal response. Or suppose a desperate China — whose long range nuclear
missiles can reach the United States — attacks Taiwan. In addition to immediate responses, the mutual
treaties involved in such scenarios will quickly draw other nations into the conflict, escalating it significantly. Strategic nuclear studies
once a few nukes are launched, adversaries
have shown for decades that, under such extreme stress conditions,
and potential adversaries are then compelled to launch on perception of preparations by
one's adversary. The real legacy of the MAD concept is this side of the MAD coin that is almost never discussed.
Without effective defense, the only chance a nation has to survive at all, is to launch
immediate full-bore pre-emptive strikes and try to take out its perceived foes as rapidly
and massively as possible. As the studies showed, rapid escalation to full WMD exchange
occurs, with a great percent of the WMD arsenals being unleashed . The resulting great
Armageddon will destroy civilization as we know it, and perhaps most of the biosphere,
at least for many decades.”

CNS News 08 – economic collapse has geopolitical consequences

Kevin Mooney, [Staff Writer], and Josiah Ryan, [Staff Writer], “Steve Forbes Predicts Six Months of Recession”, CNS News, October
29, 2008, http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=38291, (ZV)
“Steve Forbes: “Well, this is a critical thing: the geopolitical fallout. It’s not just our own economy. It’s not just facing the
prospect of more unemployment and people losing their businesses, as shattering though that is. It
has geopolitical consequences. It gave windfall revenues, weakening the dollar. But higher oil prices gave hundreds of
billons to some of the worst characters in the world - the lunatic running Venezuela, the murderous mullahs running Iran. Russia
And, at the same time, it weakened the
began to act very belligerent in foreign policy. So it had fall out from that.
United States’ economy, which is not a good thing for the world. “And you can look at
the past. Look at what happened in the 1930s, went through the Great Depression and the
hideous things that resulted from that. The Nazis never would have come to power in
Germany if it hadn’t been for the Depression, which led to a second World War. In the
1970s, when we had this wild inflation, America looked weak, and we withdrew from the
world, and Communists took over in Nicaragua. The mullahs took over in Iran, and so
you can see the same pattern is starting again. “Thankfully, in 1981, Ronald Reagan took
office and made abrupt, enormous changes both on the economy, massive tax cuts and
other measures – rebuilding our shattered military. And guess what we became once
again? The most vibrant economy in the world, and we won the Cold War. That’s what we have to look to, a
Reaganesque approach. How do we get out of this and go to new levels of strength.”
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 18 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector

Michael Klare 09 - The global economic meltdown has already caused bank failures,
bankruptcies, plant closings, and foreclosures and will even potentially cause war
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
“The global economic meltdown has already caused bank failures, bankruptcies, plant
closings, and foreclosures and will, in the coming year, leave many tens of millions
unemployed across the planet. But another perilous consequence of the crash of 2008 has
only recently made its appearance: increased civil unrest and ethnic strife. Someday,
perhaps, war may follow. As people lose confidence in the ability of markets and
governments to solve the global crisis, they are likely to erupt into violent protests or to
assault others they deem responsible for their plight, including government officials,
plant managers, landlords, immigrants, and ethnic minorities.”

Michael Klare 09 - Damaged Econ causes unrest and riots and tensions, Cameroon,
Egypt, Ethiopia, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, and Senegal prove
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
“The riots that erupted in the spring of 2008 in response to rising food prices suggested
the speed with which economically-related violence can spread. It is unlikely that
Western news sources captured all such incidents, but among those recorded in the New
York Times and the Wall Street Journal were riots in Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Haiti,
India, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, and Senegal.”

Michael Klare 09 - Damaged Econ causes unrest and riots and tensions, Haiti,
Pakistan, and Thailand prove
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
“The riots that erupted in the spring of 2008 in response to rising food prices suggested
the speed with which economically-related violence can spread. It is unlikely that Western news
sources captured all such incidents, but among those recorded in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal were riots in
Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, and Senegal. In
Haiti, for example, thousands of
protesters stormed the presidential palace in Port-au-Prince and demanded food handouts,
only to be repelled by government troops and UN peacekeepers. Other countries,
including Pakistan and Thailand, quickly sought to deter such assaults by deploying
troops at farms and warehouses throughout the country.

Michael Klare 09 - Damaged Econ causes unrest and riots and tensions, India
proves
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 19 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
“Food riots were but one form of economic violence that made its bloody appearance in
2008. As economic conditions worsened, protests against rising unemployment,
government ineptitude, and the unaddressed needs of the poor erupted as well. In India,
for example, violent protests threatened stability in many key areas. Although usually
described as ethnic, religious, or caste disputes, these outbursts were typically driven by
economic anxiety and a pervasive feeling that someone else’s group was faring better
than yours — and at your expense.”

Michael Klare 09 - Damaged Econ causes unrest and riots and tensions, China
proves
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
“Economically-driven clashes also erupted across much of eastern China in 2008. Such
events, labeled “mass incidents” by Chinese authorities, usually involve protests by
workers over sudden plant shutdowns, lost pay, or illegal land seizures. More often than
not, protestors demanded compensation from company managers or government
authorities, only to be greeted by club-wielding police. Needless to say, the leaders of China’s Communist
Party have been reluctant to acknowledge such incidents. This January, however, the magazine Liaowang (Outlook Weekly) reported
that layoffs and wage disputes had triggered a sharp increase in such “mass incidents,” particularly along the country’s eastern
seaboard, where much of its manufacturing capacity is located.”

Michael Klare 09 - Damaged Econ causes unrest and riots and tensions, Russia
proves
Michael T. Klare, [a Five Colleges professor of Peace and World Security Studies, whose department is located at Hampshire
College, defense correspondent of The Nation magazine, and author of Resource Wars and Blood and Oil: The Dangers and
Consequences of America's Growing Petroleum Dependency (Metropolitan). Klare also teaches at Amherst College, Smith College,
Mount Holyoke College, and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.], “Economic Crash Will Fuel Social Unrest”, The Pines Hills
News, February 25, 2009, http://thepinehillsnews.com/wp/2009/02/25/economic-crash-will-fuel-social-unrest/, (ZV)
“Russia also experienced a spate of violent protests in December, triggered by the
imposition of high tariffs on imported automobiles. Instituted by Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin to protect an endangered domestic auto industry (whose sales were expected to shrink by up to 50%
in 2009), the tariffs were a blow to merchants in the Far Eastern port of Vladivostok who
benefited from a nationwide commerce in used Japanese vehicles. When local police
refused to crack down on anti-tariff protests, the authorities were evidently worried
enough to fly in units of special forces from Moscow, 3,700 miles away. In January, incidents of
this sort seemed to be spreading through Eastern Europe. Between January 13th and 16th, anti-government protests involving violent
clashes with the police erupted in the Latvian capital of Riga, the Bulgarian capital of Sofia, and the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius. It is
already essentially impossible to keep track of all such episodes, suggesting that we are on the verge of a global pandemic of
economically driven violence.”

6. Impact 2

Bloomberg 07 – the US’ spending amount makes it vital to the global econ
Michael R. Sesit, [a Bloomberg News columnist], “Europe, Asia Won't Weather a U.S. Slowdown: Michael R. Sesit”, Bloomberg
News, March 15, 2007, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_sesit&sid=alXkzT5rSN30, (ZV)
“From 2001 through 2006, the U.S. and China combined contributed an average of 43
percent to global growth, measured on the basis of purchasing-power parity, according to
Roach. And there may be more fallout from a U.S. decline. “Allowing for trade linkages,
Econ/Spending DA |Enviro Specific| Page 20 of 20
Zack Voell Arx Axiom/Vector
the total effects could be larger than 60 percent,'' he says. “Globalization makes decoupling
from such a concentrated growth dynamic especially difficult.'' As the U.S. economy faltered in early
2001, many Wall Street gurus predicted that Europe would outpace the U.S.”

Bloomberg 07 – US is key2 global econ, Europe proves

Michael R. Sesit, [a Bloomberg News columnist], “Europe, Asia Won't Weather a U.S. Slowdown: Michael R. Sesit”, Bloomberg
News, March 15, 2007, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_sesit&sid=alXkzT5rSN30, (ZV)
“As the U.S. economy faltered in early 2001, many Wall Street gurus predicted that
Europe would outpace the U.S. European Vulnerability “It didn't happen -- a lesson investors
should bear in mind today,'' says Joseph Quinlan, chief market strategist at Bank of America Capital Management in
New York. Even though only about 8 percent of European exports go to the U.S., Europe is
vulnerable to a U.S. slowdown through its businesses abroad. The earnings of European
companies' U.S. units plunged 64 percent in 2001, according to Quinlan. Those declines in the
biggest and most-profitable market for many German, U.K., French and Dutch
enterprises resulted in reduced orders, lower profit, slower job growth and weak business
confidence. After expanding 3.9 percent in 2000, euro-area growth shrank to 1.9 percent in 2001, 0.9 percent in 2002 and 0.8
percent in 2003.”

Richard Fisher 06 - Every year, we create the economic equivalent of a Sweden—or

two Irelands or three Argentinas
Richard W. Fisher, [president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas], “The United States: Still the Growth Engine for the
World Economy?”, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, February 6, 2006,
http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2006/fs060206.html, (ZV)
“That is a big number. What we add in new economic activity in a given year exceeds the entire
output of all but 15 other countries. Every year, we create the economic equivalent of a
Sweden—or two Irelands or three Argentinas. In dollar terms, a growth rate of 3.5
percent in the U.S. is equivalent to surges of 16 percent in Germany, 20 percent in the
U.K., 26 percent in China and 70 percent in India. Of course, our growth is driven by
consumption, a significant portion of which is fed by imports, which totaled $2 trillion
last year. Again, do the math: Our annual import volume—what we buy in a single year from abroad—
exceeds the GDP of all but four other countries—Japan, Germany, Britain and France.
So, yes, the United States is the growth engine for the world economy. And it is important that it
remain so because no other country appears poised to pick up the torch if the U.S. economy stumbles or tires.”