385 ko ddi updates 2

8/14/2019 385 KO DDI Updates 2

1/48

UpdatesDDI 2008 Santa Claus

Updates

Updates........................................................................................................................................................................................................1Econ Low.....................................................................................................................................................................................................2

OCS Wont pass - Pelosi...........................................................................................................................................................................3OCS AT: Pelosi.........................................................................................................................................................................................4OCS AT: Oil...........................................................................................................................................................................................5OCS Pelosi Key........................................................................................................................................................................................6OCS Wont Pass........................................................................................................................................................................................7Global Warming !.........................................................................................................................................................................................8C&T elections link.......................................................................................................................................................................................9Auto Industry Weak...................................................................................................................................................................................10Bioterror Now/Biodefense fails.................................................................................................................................................................11 No Bioterror Research/Biodefense solves..............................................................................................................................................1CA State DA Brink.....................................................................................................................................................................................13(Solar/Wind) Tax Credits GOP hates......................................................................................................................................................142NC OCS Tax Credit Tradeoff Link..........................................................................................................................................................15

AT: Prolif

Deterrence (Middle East)......................................................................................................................................................16Econ = Dead...............................................................................................................................................................................................17Econ Low...................................................................................................................................................................................................18Econ Collapse = Slow................................................................................................................................................................................19Economy = Resilient .................................................................................................................................................................................20Econ Collapse Inevitable...........................................................................................................................................................................21Econ Low/AT: Fed.....................................................................................................................................................................................22Econ Brink.................................................................................................................................................................................................23Econ - Growing..........................................................................................................................................................................................24 New York Economy Low........................................................................................................................................................................2 No Israel Strikes.........................................................................................................................................................................................2 No Strikes Israel and US.........................................................................................................................................................................2US opposes Israeli Strikes.........................................................................................................................................................................28 No Pol Cap.................................................................................................................................................................................................2

1


2/48


Econ Low

Economy declining now unemployment and slowing trade

New York Times 8-1-08, Michael M. Grynbaum and Floyd Norris contributed reporting, More Arrows Seen Pointing to a

Recession, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/business/01econ.htmlThe American economy expanded more slowly than expected from April to June, the government reported Thursday, whilenumbers for the last three months of 2007 were revised downward to show a contraction the first official slidebackward since the last recession in 2001. Economists construed the tepid growth in the second quarter, combined with asurge in claims forunemployment benefits, as a clear indication that the economy remains mired in the weeds of adownturn. Many said the data increased the likelihood that a recession began late last year. The next major piece of datacomes Friday, when the government is to release its monthly snapshot of the job market. Analysts expect the report to show aloss of 75,000 jobs, signifying the seventh straight month of declines. We already knew the economy was weak, and nowyou have both a negative growth number coupled with job losses, said Dean Baker, a director of the liberal Center forEconomic and Policy Research. Theres a lot of real bad times to come. President Bush zeroed in on the positive growth inthe second quarter a 1.9 percent annual rate of expansion, compared with an anticipated 2.3 percent rate. That followsgrowth of 0.9 percent in the first quarter. He claimed success for the $100 billion in tax rebates sent out by the government thisyear in a bid to spur spending, along with $52 billion in tax cuts for businesses. We got some positive news today, the

president said in West Virginia, addressing a coal industry trade association. Its not as good as wed like it to be but I want toremind you a few months ago, there were predictions, and that the economy would shrink this quarter, not grow. But thesnapshot of disappointing economic growth released by the Bureau of Economic Analysis on Thursday morning provided nocomfort to Wall Street, where a broad sell-off commenced. By the end of business, the Dow Jones industrial average was down206 points to close at 11,378, a drop of nearly 2 percent. The rout may have been explained in part by significant changes thegovernment made to historical data on the profitability of American businesses. According to the revised numbers, corporateprofits earned in the United States by American companies rose much more swiftly than previously recorded from 2005through 2007, making the recent decline appear much steeper. That the economy grew at all this spring is a testament to twobright spots increased consumer spending fueled by the tax rebates, and the continuing expansion of American exports.Consumer spending, which amounts to 70 percent of the economy, grew at a 1.5 percent annual rate between April and June,after growing at a meager 0.9 percent clip in the previous quarter. Clearly the tax rebates did give some oomph to theeconomy, said Robert Barbera, chief economist at the research and trading firm ITG. Exports expanded at a 9.2 percent annualpace in the second quarter, up from 5.1 percent in the first three months of the year. Foreign sales have been lubricated by the

weak dollar, which makes American-made goods cheaper on world markets. Adding to the improving trade picture, importsdropped by 6.6 percent, as Americans tightened their spending. Imports are subtracted from economic growth, so the effect waspositive. Over all, trade added 2.42 percentage points to the growth rate from April to June. Without that contribution, theeconomy would have contracted. But many economists are dubious that consumer spending and exports can keep growingrobustly in the face of substantial challenges that are now entrenched in the United States and are gathering force in manyother major economies. Japan and much of Europe appear headed into downturns, damping demand for American-made products. The trade improvement doesnt look sustainable, said Jan Hatzius, an economist atGoldman SachsinNew York. In an environment where the global economy is clearly slowing, youre not being able to get that exportgrowth in future quarters.

2
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/goldman_sachs_group_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/goldman_sachs_group_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/goldman_sachs_group_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/goldman_sachs_group_inc/index.html?inline=nyt-org


3/48


OCS Wont pass - Pelosi

Pelosi will block OCS passage despite overwhelming pressure

Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau, 7-31-08, Despite the pressure, Pelosi stays firm: No vote on offshore oil drilling,

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/31/MNSH122TA3.DTL

For weeks, pressure has been mounting in Congress to approve more domestic oil drilling, but House Speaker NancyPelosi has held the line, using her power to block a vote on offshore drilling. President Bush has made almost daily callsfor Democratic leaders to take action. House GOP leaders, citing a new poll showing that a slim majority of Californiansnow favor offshore drilling, issued a release today saying "even (Pelosi's) own California neighbors oppose her efforts toblock new drilling far off American coasts." GOP lawmakers are so disgruntled they're urging Bush to deny Congress itsAugust break by calling a special session on energy. Even some Democrats are getting antsy, fearing the party's stancecould hurt in the fall elections. But Pelosi, who has opposed offshore drilling throughout her two decades in Congress,

insists opening new areas to drilling won't lower gas prices in the short-term.She believes a vote would only help theGOP blame Democrats for high gas prices. "I will not ... give the administration an excuse for its failure," Pelosi said at anend-of-session roundtable interview today. Republicans have put a bull's eye on the federal moratorium on coastal drilling,which has kept most of the East and West coasts off limits to new oil rigs since 1982. Bush announced earlier this month that

he would lift the presidential moratorium on drilling, and the GOP is now seeking to lift the congressional ban. Pelosi drewderision from her critics for telling Politico this week that she was blocking a vote on offshore drilling because "I'm trying tosave the planet." But she elaborated on that theme today, saying she sees energy independence and fighting global warmingas "my flagship issue." She said she would use her power to resist a policy that could increase the country's oil dependency."I'm not going to be diverted for a political tactic from a course of action that has a big-picture view - a vision about anenergy independent future that reduces our dependence on fossil fuels ... and focuses on those renewables that areprotective of the environment," she said. Republicans are quietly gleeful at Pelosi's tactics, which have only breathed more lifeinto an issue the GOP is clinging to as a lifeline in an otherwise grim year for the party. Some House Republicans said todaythat they will ask Bush to order a special session of Congress in August if lawmakers adjourn this week, as expected, withoutvoting on drilling. While a special session is unlikely, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, made clear that his partyplans to use the issue as a bludgeon against Democrats throughout the five-week August recess. "A solid majority ofAmericans want us to have more drilling for more American-made energy, and they aren't going to take no for an answer,"Boehner said today. "SpeakerPelosi, Senators (Harry) Reid and (Barack) Obama are defying the will of the American

people, and they're doing so at their own risk."

3


4/48


OCS AT: Pelosi

OCS drilling will override Pelosi 2/3 majority

Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau, 7-31-08, Despite the pressure, Pelosi stays firm: No vote on offshore oil drilling,

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/31/MNSH122TA3.DTLSome Democrats have already started to shift their views. Rep. Tim Holden, D-Pa., who voted two years ago againstdrilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and for a federal ban on offshore drilling, told a hometown paper last weekendhe now wants to "drill everywhere." A new CNN/Opinion Research poll released this week found that 69 percent ofAmericans favor more offshore drilling, while 30 percent oppose it. But the poll found the public was split over whethermore coastal drilling would lower gas prices, with 51 percent saying yes and 49 percent saying no. But the poll's moreinteresting finding was about who Americans blame for $4-a-gallon gas prices: About two-thirds said oil companies andforeign countries that produce energy were the major causes. Just over half blamed the Bush administration, the war in Iraq andthe moratorium on offshore drilling. But only about 1 in 3 - 31 percent - blamed Democrats in Congress for high gas prices."Republicans feel like they have an opening because of the gas price issue (to push for) domestic drilling,but we haven'tseen any empirical evidence or tangible evidence that it's hurting Democrats," said Nathan Gonzales, political editor of thenonpartisan Rothenberg Report, which tracks House and Senate races. "Maybe this fall the issue will develop into aRepublican advantage, but I don't see that we're there yet. It's a battle of messages between the two parties more than an anvil

around the necks of Democrats." Pelosi has been holding votes on measures aimed at addressing gas prices, such as legislationto crack down on speculators in energy commodity markets and a measure to force Bush to release oil from the StrategicPetroleum Reserve. But here's the catch: The bills have won majority support, but failed to get the two-thirds backingneeded to pass under special rules Pelosi has used to keep Republicans from offering a drilling measure on the Housefloor. Democratic leaders fear it might draw enough support to pass. The issue is likely to heat up again this fall.Republicans are debating whether to shut down the federal government - by blocking a continuing resolution to keep thegovernment funded beyond Sept. 30 - if Democrats don't allow a vote on offshore drilling.

4


5/48


OCS AT: Oil

Offshore drilling wont affect oil prices soon

CBS, 7-30-08, Reality Check On Offshore Drilling

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/30/eveningnews/main4309471.shtml?source=mostpop_storyAccording to the federal government's own Department ofEnergy, drilling off America's coasts would not have asignificant impact on domestic oil production or prices before 2030. And off-shore leasing wouldn't even begin before2012. Why? Because the leasing process is cumbersome. And currently, there aren't enough rigs or workers or refineriesto handle more oil. Then there's this. Most of the U.S. offshore oil, almost 10 billion barrels, lie off the coast of California.But at the current rate of U.S. consumption - about 20.7 million barrels a day - that would be burned up in 16 months. "Itwould have a pretty modest effect even when it did start flowing," said U.C. Berkeley energy researcher SeverinBorenstein. Borenstein says it might drop pump pricesas much as 25 cents a gallon in 10 years or more, but: "I think it isvery unlikely that we will ever see oil prices that get us back to $2 a gallon or even $3 a gallon." Opponents of the drilling saywhat's off our shores is a drop in the bucket. Supporters say when the bucket is running dry, any little bit helps.

5


6/48


OCS Pelosi Key

OCS will only pass if Pelosi lets it through

Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, 8-3-08, The Not-So-Great Energy Debate,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/the-not-so-great-energy-d_b_116618.htmlThe reason this is so critical is because our only hope of winning this debate may lie in helping people to unconnect the dotsbetween lifting the moratorium and the price of gas. Yes, it's hard to convince folks that drilling today won't lower pricestomorrow. But how about NOT drilling today? Because that's what we're talking about here. The stakes are very high.Sources on Capitol Hill tell me that the only thing holding the line on the bans right now is Pelosi's ability to block thevote. With the R's pressing this as their sole issue, and the majority of the public solidly in the "lift the ban" camp, shemay not be able to control this one, and sources tell me if it comes to a vote, the ban is toast, certainly on the OCS andmaybe ANWR too. If that does occur, our best move may be to go for something like the "gang of 10" compromise.That's a bipartisan group of 10 Senators who propose a limited expansion of OCS leasing with a quid pro quo that both repealsa big tax break from big oil and makes them finally pay royalties they've been avoiding for drilling on public lands.

6
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-energy2-2008aug02,0,6233020.storyhttp://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-energy2-2008aug02,0,6233020.storyhttp://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-energy2-2008aug02,0,6233020.story


7/48


OCS Wont Pass

OCS wont pass Dems see it as a hoax

ABC News, 7-30-08, Bush Signs Housing Bill; Asks for New Focus On Energy,

http://www.kcrg.com/explorepolitics/?feed=bim&id=26115324The president recently repealed the executive branch ban on drilling in the outer continental shelf (OCS) and has called onCongress to follow suit in repealing its own ban. But the Democratic leadership, including presidential candidate Sen. BarackObama, paint the problem as one we cannot drill our way out of, instead focusing their attention on curbing speculationin oil futures markets, potentially opening up a portion of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and immediately moving towardrenewable power sources like wind, solar and geothermal. Additionally, Democrats have criticized the move towarddomestic oil production as an environmental hazard and a solution that would take years and have little real impact at

the pump; Republicans contend that it would reduce dependency on foreign oil imports and provide a bridge toward currentlyless economical renewable technology. The President knows, as his own Administration has stated, that the impact of anynew drilling will be insignificant promising savings of only pennies per gallon many years down the road, said HouseSpeaker Nancy Pelosi Wednesday in response to the presidents comments. The President has failed in his economic policy,and now he wants to say, but for drilling in protected areas offshore, our economy would be thriving and the price of gaswould be lower. That hoax is unworthy of the serious debate we must have to relieve the pain of consumers at the pump and

to promote energy independence, she continued.

Despite bipart, OCS wont pass

LA Times, 8-2-08, Senate Nears Energy Compromise, http://www.courant.com/news/nationworld/hc-energy0802.artaug02,0,6146864.story

However, the proposal's prospects appear a long shot for this year , with time running out on the congressional session.And in a politically charged election year, parties are stepping up attacks to highlight differences on issues such asenergy policy. Although a compromise, a number of the proposals remain controversial. Included are proposals toexpand drilling in the Gulf to within 50 miles of Florida, help revive the nuclear industry, and boost efforts to convert coal intomotor vehicle fuel. Shortly after it was announced, the plan drew criticism from Florida's senators.

7


8/48


Global Warming !

Global warming will destroy us if we dont act now

Paul Krugman, professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University, 8-1-08, Can This Planet Be Saved?, New

York Times, Op-Ed, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/opinion/01krugman.html?hpIn themselves, limits on offshore drilling are only a modest-sized issue. But the skirmish over drilling is the opening stage ofa much bigger fight over environmental policy. Whats at stake in that fight, above all, is the question of whether welltake action against climate change before its utterly too late. Its true that scientists dont know exactly how muchworld temperatures will rise if we persist with business as usual. But that uncertainty is actually what makes action so

urgent. While theres a chance that well act against global warming only to find that the danger was overstated, theres also achance that well fail to act only to find that the results of inaction were catastrophic. Which risk would you rather run?

Martin Weitzman, a Harvard economist who has been driving much of the recent high-level debate, offers some soberingnumbers. Surveying a wide range of climate models, he argues that, over all, they suggest about a 5 percent chance that worldtemperatures will eventually rise by more than 10 degrees Celsius (that is, world temperatures will rise by 18 degreesFahrenheit). As Mr. Weitzman points out, thats enough to effectively destroy planet Earth as we know it.Its sheerirresponsibility not to do whatever we can to eliminate that threat.

8


9/48


C&T elections link

Cap and trade causes McCain to lose the election - McCain loses base, Obama gains environmentalists

Paul Krugman, professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton University, 8-1-08, Can This Planet Be Saved?, New

York Times, Op-Ed, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/01/opinion/01krugman.html?hpNow for the bad news: sheer irresponsibility may be a winning political strategy . Mr. McCains claim that opponents ofoffshore drilling are responsible for high gas prices is ridiculous and to their credit, major news organizations have pointedthis out. Yet Mr. McCains gambit seems nonetheless to be working: public support for ending restrictions on drilling hasrisen sharply, with roughly half of voters saying that increased offshore drilling would reduce gas prices within a year. Hencemy concern: if a completely bogus claim that environmental protection is raising energy prices can get this muchpolitical traction, what are the chances of getting serious action against global warming? After all, a cap-and-tradesystem would in effect be a tax on carbon (though Mr. McCain apparently doesnt know that), and really would raise energyprices. The only way were going to get action, Id suggest, is if those who stand in the way of action come to beperceived as not just wrong but immoral. Incidentally, thats why I was disappointed with Barack Obamas response to Mr.McCains energy posturing that it was the same old politics. Mr. Obama was dismissive when he should have beenoutraged. So as I said, Im very glad to know that Nancy Pelosi is trying to save the planet. I just wish I had more confidencethat shes going to succeed.

9


10/48


Auto Industry Weak

Auto Industry dying

Bill Vlasic, reporter for the Detroit News and a former Business Week correspondent, 8-2-08, G.M. Loses $15.5 Billion in Quarter,

New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/business/02gm.htmlThe General Motors Corporation reported a stunning second-quarter loss of $15.5 billion on Friday because of a dramaticdecline in United States sales and charges for job cuts, plant closings and the falling value of trucks and sport utility

vehicles. G.M., the largest American automaker, saidit lost $6.3 billion on operations in the quarter that ended June 30,and its worldwide revenues fell 18 percent. But the companys overall loss was inflated by $9.1 billion in special charges thatincluded $3.3 billion for buyouts of hourly workers and $2.8 billion related to the bankruptcy filing of its former parts unit, theDelphi Corporation. The dismal earnings reflected the impact of steadily falling vehicles sales in the overall United Statesmarket, and a huge shift by consumers away from the trucks and S.U.V.s that were once G.M.s most profitable vehicles. Theautomakers shares were off sharply on Friday, falling 68 cents, or about 6 percent, to $10.39 shortly before 1 p.m. G.M.schairman,Rick Wagoner, said Friday that the charges to scale down the automakers work force and manufacturing operationswere critical in its restructuring. As our recent product, capacity and liquidity actions clearly demonstrate, we are reactingrapidly to the challenges facing the U.S. economy and auto market, and we continue to take the aggressive steps necessary totransform our U.S. operations, Mr. Wagoner said. Overall vehicle sales in the United States dropped 10 percent in the first

six months. Automakers are scheduled to report their July sales later on Friday. But while weak economic conditions andfalling sales have affected nearly every automaker, Detroits three car companies have borne the brunt of the slowdown.

Last week, the Ford Motor Company reported a loss of $8.7 billion as it took big write-downs on the values of its NorthAmerican truck plants and its inventory of used pickups and S.U.V.s. G.M.s second-quarter results were worse than projectedby analysts, particularly its performance in its core North American market. The company lost $4.4 billion in North America inthe period, and its revenue dropped 33 percent, from $29.7 billion to $19.8 billion. That compared with a profit of $92 millionin the quarter a year ago. While G.M.s vehicle sales in North America fell 20 percent in the quarter, the companysinternational sales grew 10 percent. Last month, as investors speculated openly about the possibility of G.M.s filing forbankruptcy protection, the automaker announced broad plans for further cost cuts, asset sales and debt offerings toimprove its liquidity by $15 billion. In its second-quarter report, G.M. said it had $21 billion in cash reserves and access toanother $5 billion in credit. But the automaker is burning through about $1 billion a month in cash as it tries to keep financingnew product programs amid falling sales and revenue. G.M., like its Detroit rivalsFord and Chrysler, was surprised by theabrupt shift to smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. As gas prices rose above $4 a gallon, sales of G.M.s large pickups and

S.U.V.s declined sharply in a market that was already trending downward. While its overseas operations continued toperform well, G.M.s United States sales dropped, and the companys inventories of unsold trucks forced it to scale backproduction in the United States dramatically. . In June, Mr. Wagoner said the company would close four assembly plantsmaking pickups and S.U.V.s by 2010 and slash 500,000 units of vehicle production. And in a move that symbolized theend of the S.U.V. era, Mr. Wagoner said that G.M. had begun a strategic review toward a likely sale of its Hummer brand.Besides cutting truck and S.U.V. production, G.M. also announced plans to add third shifts at two plants to increase the outputof smaller cars. The automaker stepped up its cutbacks in the United States by offering another round of buyout and earlyretirement programs to its hourly workers. About 19,000 workers or a quarter of its unionized work force accepted theoffers and agreed to leave the company. But even as G.M. kept cutting, speculation grew among investors this summerthat the automaker was running dangerously short on cash reserves.

10
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/delphi-corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/delphi-corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/g_richard_wagoner_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-perhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/g_richard_wagoner_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-perhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/general_motors_corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/delphi-corporation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/w/g_richard_wagoner_jr/index.html?inline=nyt-perhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/ford_motor_company/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.html?inline=nyt-org


11/48


Bioterror Now/Biodefense fails

High risk of bioterror attack now biodefense increases risk, and al-Qaeda is developing it

ERIC LIPTON and SCOTT SHANE, New York Times, 8-3-08, Debate Is Revived Over U.S. Efforts on Bioterrorism,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03anthrax.html?pagewanted=2Today, there are hundreds of such researchers in scores of laboratories at universities and other institutions around the UnitedStates, preparing for the next bioattack. But the revelation that F.B.I. investigators believe that the anthrax attacks werecarried out by Dr. Ivins, an Army biodefense scientist who committed suicide last week after he learned that he was about tobe indicted for murder, has already re-ignited a debate: Has the unprecedented boom in biodefense research made thecountry less secure by multiplying the places and people with access to dangerous germs? We are putting America atmore risk, not less risk, said Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan, chairman of a House panel that hasinvestigated recent safety lapses at biolabs. F.B.I. investigators have long speculated that the motive for the attacks, if carriedout by a biodefense insider like Dr. Ivins, might have been to draw public attention to a dire threat, attracting money andprestige to a once-obscure field. If that was the motive, it succeeded for example, an experimental vaccine Dr. Ivins hadspent years working on moved from the laboratory to a proposed billion-dollar federal contract after the attacks, which killedfive people. Almost $50 billion in federal money has been spent since 2001 to build new laboratories, develop vaccines andstockpile drugs. Patents Dr. Ivins held on the research might have proved personally profitable. An anthrax vaccine he helped

invent was slated to be added to the nations vaccine stockpile through an $877 million contract awarded in 2004. But the dealcollapsed in late 2006 after the contractor, VaxGen of Brisbane, Calif., failed to meet deadlines. VaxGen, in a licensingagreement with the Army to produce the vaccine, had listed two patents held by Dr. Ivins and his colleague, but it made nomention of compensation planned for their work. Despite the insistence of Dr. Ivinss lawyer and some of the scientistscolleagues that he was innocent, officials at the Justice Department and the F.B.I. on Saturday appeared confident that they hadthe right man, though they said they were still weighing how and when to seek an end to the grand jury investigation. Thatsnot a decision were going to make lightly, one Justice Department official said Saturday. There wont be a rush tojudgment. Nearly seven years have passed without another biological attack, which has reduced the sense of urgency aboutthe bioterrorist threat, even among some specialists. I think its an important risk, but frankly Im more concerned aboutbombs and guns, which are easily available and can be very destructive, said Randall S. Murch, a former F.B.I. scientist whohas studied ways to trace a bioterrorist attack to its source. Federal officials say they are convinced that the surge in spendinghas brought real gains. Across the spectrum of biothreats we have expanded our capacity significantly," said CraigVanderwagen, an assistant secretary at Health and Human Services who oversees the biodefense effort. Systems to detect an

attack, investigate it and respond with drugs, vaccines and cleanup are all hugely improved, Mr. Vanderwagen said. "We canget pills in the mouth." Supporters of the spending surge cite studies that project apocalyptic tolls from a large-scalebioattack. One 2003 study led by a Stanford scholar, for instance, found that just two pounds of anthrax spores droppedover an American city could kill more than 100,000 people, even ifantibiotic distribution began quickly. And there isample evidence that Qaeda leaders have shown interest in using biological weapons. Yazid Sufaat, a Malaysian-bornQaeda biochemist who trained in the United States, spent several months in 2001 trying to cultivate anthrax in Kandahar,Afghanistan. But the proliferation of biodefense research laboratories presents real threats, too, Congressionalinvestigators recently warned. More people in more places handling toxic agents create more opportunities for anaccident or intentional misuse by an insider , Keith Rhodes, an investigator with the Government Accountability Office, saidat a Congressional hearing in October. The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the intelligence community were the oneswho were most concerned about it, Mr. Rhodes testified. There also is insufficient federal oversight of biodefense facilitiesto make sure the laboratories follow security rules and report accidents that might threaten lab workers or, in an extremecase, lead to a release that might endanger the public, Mr. Rhodes testified. In effect the government may be providing thetools that a would-be terrorist could use, said Richard H. Ebright, a Rutgers University biochemist and vocal critic of thefederal surge in biodefense spending. One well-placed student, technician or senior scientist no cost, with the salarybeing provided courtesy of the U.S. taxpayer and no risk, no difficulty, Mr. Ebright said. That is all it takes.Heightening the concern has been a string of accidents at certain new or expanded biodefense laboratories, several ofwhich were not properly reported to authorities when they first took place.

11
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/antibiotics/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/antibiotics/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/antibiotics/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/government_accountability_office/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/government_accountability_office/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_bureau_of_investigation/index.html?inline=nyt-orghttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/health/diseasesconditionsandhealthtopics/antibiotics/index.html?inline=nyt-classifierhttp://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/g/government_accountability_office/index.html?inline=nyt-org


12/48


No Bioterror Research/Biodefense solves

Status quo solves bioterrorism research

ERIC LIPTON and SCOTT SHANE, New York Times, 8-3-08, Debate Is Revived Over U.S. Efforts on Bioterrorism,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03anthrax.html?pagewanted=2Proponents say that clustering the laboratories on a military base will encourage safe scientific collaboration and savemoney through sharing of some facilities. The build-up, and the related surge in research, has brought some importantadvances, federal officials argue, such as a promising new experimental vaccines or therapies to treat smallpox or Ebolavirus. The country now also has a greatly expanded stockpile of vaccines and drugs to treat anyone exposed in a futureattack, including enough antibiotics to treat 40 million Americans who might be exposed to anthrax and nearly 5 millionbottles of a special potassium iodide liquid that help protect infants from harm caused by nuclear fallout . MichaelGreenberger, director of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the University of Maryland, said he wasconvinced that the increased spending has left the nation better prepared for a future attack, without creating

significant new vulnerabilities. You can never say that the system is 100 percent secure, he said. But the research ethictoday is one ofmuch greater disciple and focus on security than was true prior to the anthrax attacks .

Status quo can solve bioterrorERIC LIPTON and SCOTT SHANE, New York Times, 8-3-08, Debate Is Revived Over U.S. Efforts on Bioterrorism,http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03anthrax.html?pagewanted=2

Nearly seven years have passed without another biological attack, which has reduced the sense of urgency about thebioterrorist threat, even among some specialists. I think its an important risk, but frankly Im more concerned about bombsand guns, which are easily available and can be very destructive, said Randall S. Murch, a former F.B.I. scientist who hasstudied ways to trace a bioterrorist attack to its source. Federal officials say they are convinced that the surge in spendinghas brought real gains. Across the spectrum of biothreats we have expanded our capacity significantly," said CraigVanderwagen, an assistant secretary at Health and Human Services who oversees the biodefense effort. Systems to detect anattack, investigate it and respond with drugs, vaccines and cleanup are all hugely improved, Mr. Vanderwagen said. "Wecan get pills in the mouth."

12


13/48


CA State DA Brink

Californias economy is on the brink

New York Times, 8-3-08, California Is Among States Struggling With Budgets,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/us/03budget.html?ref=usAmong states struggling with budget deficits brought on by a national economic slowdown and the subprime lending

crisis, California saw its problems brought into sharp relief last week. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ordered atemporary pay cut to the federal minimum wage of $6.55 an hour for roughly 200,000 state workers, if the state controllergoes along with it, and the laying off of 10,000 more. Mr. Schwarzenegger, a Republican, said he would reimburse workersfor their full pay once the Legislature had finished the state budget, now several weeks overdue and about $17 billion in

the red. California is among the worst-hit states in the foreclosure crisis, and a record number of Californiahomeowners met with foreclosures last quarter 121,341 defaults, up 125 percent from the second quarter of 2007,according to DataQuick Information Systems. The state is also one of the few that require a two-thirds legislative majorityto pass a budget, which is particularly challenging with large deficits and unpopular cuts. Further, the state relies onincome taxes rather than property taxes for most of its revenues, a difficult formula in times when jobs are in short supply.And the structure of the states budget, which is heavily leveraged and peppered with numerous mandatory spendingrequirements approved as ballot measures by voters, makes it all the harder to balance. Propositions have money mandates,

said Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles and an expert on the states constitution. Somuch of the state is in hock, anyway. The state has already made a 10 percent cut to its Medicaid reimbursement rateand deferred payments to vendors. Mr. Schwarzenegger has called for 10 percent across-the-board reductions to all generalfund departments, and a sales tax increase may also be in the offing.

13


14/48


(Solar/Wind) Tax Credits GOP hates

Current GOP hates tax credits for solar/wind energy

JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press, 7-30-08, GOP blocks action on tax, renewable energy package,

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5icrolgbXr0mlnZQmLr-1svIyNDpwD9289B8O0

For the fourth time this summerRepublicans stopped the Senate from taking up wide-ranging legislation that extends tax breaksfor teachers, businesses and parents and provides tax credits to an array of renewable energy entrepreneurs. Majorbusinessgroups, usual GOP allies, have implored Congress to act on the tax credits, many which expired at the end of last year or will runout at the end of this year. Butfor many Republicans, it's a matter or principle and politics: many oppose what they say are newtax increases to pay for parts of thepackage and nearly all say the Senate's only business now is acting on an energy bill thatpromotes drilling and other measures to boost domestic oil supply. The White House, citing new taxes and other objections to thebill, threatened a presidential veto. The vote Wednesday was 51-43, nine short of the 60 needed to begin floor debate. "All theRepublicans want to do is not pay for anything and we know the House would not accept that," said Senate Majority Leader HarryReid, D-Nev., anticipating the defeat. But Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said his party sees a "need to dispose of the pending energy billto help bring down the price of gas at the pump before turning to other matters." The bill would extend some $18 billion worth ofrenewable energy tax credits, helping out investors in wind and solar power, clean coal, plug-in electric vehicles and a variety of

others.

14


15/48


2NC OCS Tax Credit Tradeoff Link

Passage of tax credits depletes GOP influence on drilling

The Politico, 7-31-08, Reid: Work On Energy Bill "over Until The Fall"

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/31/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4312030.shtmlRepublicans countered that by insisting on considering a tax extenders bill alongside the speculation bill, Reid was moving thegoalposts to avoid potentially difficult votes on domestic drilling.

GOP is blocking tax credits on alternative energy to get oil drilling plan eliminates it, allowing dems to

block OCS

Jim DiPeso, the policy director for Republicans for Environmental Protection, 8-3-08, Reckless and Feckless, Congress SandbagsRenewables, http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/blogs/republican/renewable-energy-tax-incentives-55080301Both Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress have professed their undying love for renewable energy resources. Theiraffection, however, took a back seat to rock 'em, sock 'em partisan politicswhen the Senate failed to move legislation extendingvarious tax incentivesfor renewable resources. If the game of chicken goes on much longer, the tax incentives will expire at theend of the year, and billions of dollars in wind, solar, and other clean energy investment capital is likely to go elsewhere, where

the politics are less toxic and the financial certainty more solid. Rather than putting money where their energy mouths are, bothparties are playing for political trophies. Reckless and feckless, thats what they are. The reckless Republicans are blockingimportant bills, such as the renewables incentives, as leverage to push for oil drilling floor votes, which polls show may play totheir advantage. The feckless Democrats are maneuvering to dodge oil drilling floor votes, which has the effect of sandbaggingimportant bills, such as the renewables incentives. Theyre trying to run out the clock while they hope that the November election willpaint the whole town blue.

15


16/48


AT: ProlifDeterrence (Middle East)Deterrence doesnt apply for Middle East prolif at best it causes nuclear terrorism

Stephen Peter Rosen, Beton Michael Kaneb Professor of National Security and Military Affairs, Harvard, 2006, After Proliferation,

Foreign Affairs, Academic Search Premier

Assume, for the sake of argument, that within the next decade Iran manages to acquire a few crude nuclear weapons and that thesecan be delivered by ballistic missiles within the Middle East and by clandestine means to the United States and Europe. Assume alsothat Saudi Arabia and Turkey, out of fear or competitive emulation, also develop their own nuclear arsenals. How wouldstrategic interactions in this new world play out? During the Cold War, the small number of nuclear states meant that theidentity of any nuclear attacker would be obvious . Preparations could thus be made for retaliation, and this helped deter firststrikes. In a multipolar nuclear Middle East, however, such logic might not hold. For deterrence to work in such anenvironment, there would have to be detection systems that could unambiguously determine whether a nuclear-armed ballisticmissile was launched from, say, Iran, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia. In earlier decades, the United States spent an enormous amount ofresources on over-the-horizon radars and satellites that could detect the origin of missile launches in the Soviet Union. But thosesystems were optimized to monitor the Soviet Union and may not be as effective at identifying launches conducted from othercountries. It may be technically simple for the United States (or Israel or Saudi Arabia) to deploy such systems, but until they

exist and their effectiveness is demonstrated, deterrence might well be weak; it would be difficult to retaliate against a bomb thathas no clear return address. It gets worse. During the Cold War, most analysts considered it unlikely that nuclear weapons would beused during peacetime; they worried more about the possibility of a nuclear conflict somehow emerging out of a conventional war.That scenario would still be the most likely in a postproliferation future as well, but the frequency of conventional wars in the MiddleEast would make it a less comforting prospect. If a nuclear-armed ballistic missile were launched while conventional fightinginvolving non-nuclear-armed ballistic missiles was going on in the region, how confident would any government be that it couldidentify the party responsible? The difficulty would be greater still if an airplane or a cruise missile were used to deliver the nuclearweapon. One of the greatest fears about Iran's possible acquisition of nuclear weapons, moreover, is that Tehran might givethem to a terrorist group, which would dramatically increase the likelihood of their being used . Some argue that the Iraniangovernment would never condone such a transfer; others that it would. There is no way of knowing for sure.

16


17/48


Econ = Dead

The economy is dead and cant be revived 13 reasons

The Financial Times UK, 8-4-08, Only luck can save America's economy, http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/db4d7196-61bb-11dd-

af94-000077b07658.htmlThe US economy may not be in recession, but this is the nearest thing. In spite of the recent fiscal stimulus, output grew lessthan 2 per cent at an annual rate in the second quarter, slower than expected. That followed growth of 1 per cent in thefirst quarter and a contraction (on revised numbers) of 0.2 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2007. A recession is usuallydefined as two consecutive quarters of shrinking output. It has not happened yet, but it very well might in the next few quarters.Even if it does not, that would be little consolation. Prospects for the second half of the year are poor. Some of the currentboost from the fiscal injection delivered last quarter will keep feeding through, but consumer spending, the hithertounstoppable engine of US growth, is stalling. The prices of food and petrol, togetherwith still-tightening credit conditionsand a housing market that has not yet touched bottom, are weighing it down . Net exportswere the main accelerator inthe second quarter - without that rise, in fact, output would have fallen , fiscal stimulus or no. But they cannot be relied on infuture because growth in Europe and elsewhere is going to be limited by, among other things, policymakers' worries aboutinflation. Most forecasters are expecting a double-dip US slowdown - and the second dip could be a technical recession.Regardless, the labour market is already behaving that way. Unemployment moved up to 5.7 per cent in July, the labour

department reported on Friday. Overtime is falling; involuntary part-time working is on the rise. Unemployment will climbabove 6 per cent next year. While it may be true that the US has seen much worse, this is no mere "mental recession". Whatmore can be done? The short answer is nothing . The policy options have narrowed almost to zero. The Federal Reservehas already cut interest rates sharply - more than some think wise - and is having to assure the markets that it is keepingan eye on inflation. In spite of the slowdown, consumer prices are rising at their fastest for almost 20 years. Crucially, thishas not embedded itself in expectations of permanently higher inflation. If that happens, and prices start pushing wages,interest rates would have to go up. The recent poor numbers for output and jobs led markets not to expect that interest rateswill be cut further, but to hope that they will not be raised again just yet. Some fiscal room for manoeuvre would be goodright now - but precious little remains. The White House just updated its budget forecasts for next year. These pencil in adeficit of nearly $500bn (253bn, 321bn). This excludes roughly $80bn of war costs. It also makes incomplete allowance forthe fiscal component of the various housing-related bail-outs now in train. If Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the housingagencies, are forced to draw on the full support that the Treasury, with the passage of the new housing bill, is empowered toprovide, add tens of billions more. A deficit of 5 per cent of gross domestic product next year is within reach. Looking farther

ahead, both presidential candidates are promising to cut taxes by thousands of billions of dollars over the next 10 years(relative to the Bush administration's bogus baseline). Barack Obama, the Democratic contender, is calling for an additionalfiscal stimulus right now. Budget deficits should indeed rise sharply in recessions. In the US, this requires more forcefulintervention than in most European countries. Automatic fiscal stabilisers are less powerful in the US: the government issmaller, and the tax base (lacking a value-added tax or equivalent) is less cyclically sensitive. States have to comply withsemi-binding balanced budget rules as well, which perversely tighten fiscal policy during recessions. California, in the midstof the current slowdown, has been forced to sack thousands of workers and put state employees on the minimum wage. Evenso, furtheraggressive fiscal easing at the federal level would be risky. If the budget outlook starts to scare the marketsand interrupt the flow of foreign capital to the US, the dollar might fall abruptly - worsening the inflation riskand forcingthe Fed's hand on interest rates. The point at which fiscal easing becomes self-cancelling may not be far away. It is worthremembering where the blame for this neutering of fiscal policy lies: squarely with the Bush administration. At the start of thisdecade, the budget stood in surplus to the tune of 2.4 per cent of GDP. On unchanged policy, this was expected to grow to asurplus of 4.5 per cent of GDP by 2008. This year's actual deficit of 3 per cent of GDP therefore represents a worsening ofmore than 7 per cent of GDP, or roughly $1,000bn. Almost all of this deterioration is due to policy: to tax cuts, spendingincreases, and their associated debt-service costs. That projected surplus was a priceless gift to the White House. It offered theBush administration ample scope for outlays on homeland security and other unforeseen priorities, and moderate tax cuts aswell, all within a budget balanced over the course of the business cycle. Instead, the administration knowingly opted foroutrageous fiscal excess - adding insult to injury with its phoney tax-cut sunset provisions, designed for no other purpose thanto disguise the long-term fiscal implications. Eight years on, this startling record of fiscal irresponsibility has all but takenfiscal policy off the table as an available response to the slowdown. The US economy had better have luck on its side. Luckis about all it has left.

17


18/48


Econ Low

Economy is weak mortgage crisis, auto industry collapse

NYT, 8-4-08, VIKAS BAJAJ, Housing Lenders Fear Bigger Wave of Loan Defaults,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/04lend.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1Homeowners with good credit are falling behind on their payments in growing numbers, even as the problems with mortgagesmade to people with weak, or subprime, credit are showing their first, tentative signs of leveling off after two years of spiralingdefaults. The percentage of mortgages in arrears in the category of loans one rung above subprime, so-called alternative-Amortgages, quadrupled to 12 percent in April from a year earlier. Delinquencies among prime loans, which account for mostof the $12 trillion market, doubled to 2.7 percent in that time . Themortgage troubles have been exacerbated by aneconomy that is still struggling. Reports last weekshowedanother drop in home prices, slower-than-expected economicgrowth and a huge loss at General Motors. On Friday, the Labor Department reported that the unemployment rate inJuly climbed to a four-year high. While it is difficult to draw precise parallels among various segments of the mortgagemarket, the arc of the crisis in subprime loans suggests that the problems in the broader market may not peak for anotheryear or two, analysts said. Defaults are likely to accelerate because many homeowners monthly payments are rising rapidly.The higher bills come as home prices continue to decline and banks tighten their lending standards, making it harder for peopleto refinance loans or sell their homes. Of particular concern are alt-A loans, many of which were made to people with good

credit scores without proof of their income or assets. Subprime was the tip of the iceberg, said Thomas H. Atteberry,president ofFirst Pacific Advisors, a investment firm in Los Angeles that trades mortgage securities. Prime will be farbigger in its impact. In a conference call with analysts last month, James Dimon, the chairman and chief executive ofJPMorgan Chase, said he expected losses on prime loans at his bankto triple in the coming months and described theoutlook for them as terrible.

The economy is weak and wont revive itself soon

Rodrigue Tremblay Online Journal, 8-4-08, The U.S. economy and bad government policies,http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3575.shtml

In the same spirit, some refer to the Feds bailouts of troubled investment banks as a sort of Bernanke put, because of the Fedsaggressive policy of reducing interest rates to fight market falls or to bail out financial companies in trouble. Because of thecurrent economic slowdown, the inflationary consequences of such a policy is not apparent yet, but it could be thefoundations of future inflation down the road. Let us keep in mind that historically-low interest rates, lax lending

standards, and inadequate regulation were behind the U.S. housing bubble . The seeds are now sown for the nextbubble. Third, let us look quickly at fiscal policy. The Bush-Cheney administrationsfiscal policy has been characterizedby budget deficit upon budget deficit, whatever the state of the economy. In its entire eight years in office, in fact, it has neverbalanced the budget. On the contrary, it has even spent the budget surplus that it inherited from the Clinton administration. Andit has announced that it plans to leave the coming administration with a record 2009 deficit ofhalf a trillion dollars.Indeed, the previous Bush-Cheney administrations record was its 2004 $413 billion deficit. Although such deficits at about3.3 percent of the gross national product (GDP) are lower than the 6.0 percent of GDP we saw in the early 1980s, they arecumulative, and they have occurred at a time when U.S. foreign indebtedness is much higher and the U.S. dollar muchweaker. It can be said that they have contributed to weakening the United States and making it more vulnerable to economicand financial shocks.

The US Economy is weak

Mercopress, 8-1-08, US economy picks up but Governors give different picture,

http://www.mercopress.com/vernoticia.do?id=14123&formato=HTMLMr Paulson predicted that the US economy would get stronger next year "and beyond". But the figure was worse than expectedand caused shares to fall. The benchmarkDow Jones index closed more than 200 points, or 1.78% lower at 11,378.02 points.Investors were also concerned that the government had downgraded its estimate of growth in the last three months of2007 from the previous reading of 0.6% to show a negative growth figure of -0.2%. The US dollar fell across the board,including against the Euro and the yen, following the release of the data. At the current growth rate of nearly 2%, the USeconomy is only growing at half the rate it was one year ago.

18


19/48


Econ Collapse = Slow

Economic collapse will be slow current mortgage crisis proves

Rodrigue Tremblay Online Journal, 8-4-08, The U.S. economy and bad government policies,

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3575.shtmlIn economics, bad decisions and bad policies do not always result in immediate negative consequences. It takes timeforthem to work their way through the economy and produce their corrosive effects. Many of the current economic andfinancial problems of today are the result of bad policies of the past.

19


20/48


Economy = Resilient

Even if government policies are hurting the economy, the private sector is resilient


http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3575.shtmlThere have been many policy missteps over the last 20 some years, and this has amounted to a mismanagement of theU.S. economy. The result has been an unhealthy mixture of greed, shortsightedness and market manipulation. And now, all thechickens are coming home to roost and the crisis is deepening. This does not mean that the private side of the U.S. economyis not resilient and strong. It only means that government policies have often been misguided and have damaged theprivate economy and hurt the people economically.

20


21/48


Econ Collapse Inevitable

Econ collapse inevitable


http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3575.shtmlEssentially, at the government level, each new economic crisis seems to have been solved by creating the conditions forthe next one. This is particularly true in regards to regulation policy, monetary policy, and fiscal policy. Each time a policychoice had to be made, it seems that short-term benefits were often privileged at the expense of long-term costs. First,let us consider regulation policy for the crucial financial sector. Over the last 20 years, U. S. deregulation of the financialsector has been based on developing what I would call predatory financial capitalism, that is to say the systematicencouragement ofexcessive risk taking (moral hazard) and ofcorporate greed in general, the development of the pyramidal$2.5 trillion hedge fund industry, the practice of highly-leveraged buyouts (LBOs) of healthy companies with their own high-yield debt, also known as bootstrap investments, and the practice of program trading. Moreover, this was a system that wasnot only risky but also fraught with shady activities. To accomplish this deregulation or non-regulation of the financial sectorand to encourage the over-indebtedness of the U.S. economy, a whole series ofsafeguards that had been wisely establishedto prevent a repeat of the financial and economic disasters of the 1930s were dismantled and cast aside. The last one in linewas the reckless abolition by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the speculative prevention rule called the

downtick-uptick rule (which prohibited short-selling when stock prices were falling), in July 2006. Such safeguards had beenput in place in order to avoid systemic financial instability, to make financial institutions more responsibleto users and to

avoid costly government bailouts when large financial institutions fail. Today, we are back to the 1930s with large financialinstitutions reaping huge profits and paying obscene salaries to their CEOs in good times and with government bailing themout with public money when things turn sour.

21


22/48


Econ Low/AT: Fed

Economy is weak and Fed wont change rates

USA Today, 8-4-08, Barbara Hagenbaugh, Fed unlikely to change rates this week,

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2008-08-03-fed-fmoc-bernanke_N.htmFederal Reserve policymakers are finding their jobs aren't getting any easier as a sluggish economy and stubbornly highinflation put them in an interest-rate bind. Given the competing challenges, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and hiscolleagues are expected to keep their target for short-term interest rates, which influence borrowing costs economywide,at 2% when they meet Tuesday. The rate has been steady since April. The meeting comes a year after U.S. central bankersbegan aggressively pumping money into a faltering financial system. In some ways, the job now has become morecomplicated. While they continue to fight to stabilize financial markets and an economy weakened by the housingmeltdown, Fed policymakers now also have to ward off inflationary pressures that have nearly doubled in the last year inlarge part because of rapidly rising energy and foodprices. The consumer price index was up 5% in June from a year earlier,the highest in 17 years. While the weak economy would suggest the need for lower interest rates, price pressures are forcingthe Fed to sit on the sidelines. The Fed would normally raise rates to combat inflation.

22


23/48


Econ Brink

Economy is growing and stabilizing, but faces difficulties

AFP, 8-1-08, Paulson sees US economy still growing this year, http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE-ObRDGruw_UuQ6i4-

G8TTt_BxwTreasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Thursday he expects "moderate" growth in the US economy this year and somestability returning to the housing market in a matter of months. The top US economic official made his comments afterdata showed a 1.9 percent growth pace in the second quarter lifted by an economic stimulus plan and exports , but withsome analysts still worried about a possible recession. "While our economy faces substantial difficulties that will continue tobe a drag on growth in the short term, it is important to remember that our long-term fundamentals are strong," he said in aWashington speech. "Recognizing the challenges ahead of us, I expect our economy to continue growing this year althoughat a moderate pace. We are making progress although not in a straight line; housing continues to be at the heart of oureconomic challenges and remains our most significant downside risk." Paulson was relatively upbeat on prospects for arecovery in the battered housing market after the worst slump in decades. He said the market will be helped by the recentlyenacted housing rescue package aimed at helping homeowners refinance and adding liquidity to the sector, but suggestedthere appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel.

23


24/48


Econ - Growing

US Economy is growing


http://www.mercopress.com/vernoticia.do?id=14123&formato=HTML"Clearly the stimulus plan has supported the US economy during this difficult period and couldn't have been timelier," saidUS Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Without that extra government spending, which added almost 4% to the economythat quarter, it is feared that growth would have been negative. Analysts are now concerned about what will happen to the USwhen the benefit of the stimulus package, which gave tax rebates to 130 million households, has passed. The US TreasurySecretary Henry Paulson said he expects the economy to continue growing this year and "to return to stronger growthnext year and beyond".

US economy is growing stimulus plan and Fannie/Freddie data proves

WSJ, 7-31-08, Paulson Says Stimulus Worked, But Housing Still Correcting, MAYA JACKSON RANDALL, Wall Street Journal,http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121752429127901443.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Thursday said new economic data prove thatthe economic stimulus plan hassuccessfully propped up the U.S. economy, but said it will take additional months for the housing market -- the biggest

risk to the economy -- to fully recover. That said, his focus going forward will be on the housing and capital markets , hesaid in a speech at the St. Regis Hotel in Washington. "Our first and most urgent priority is working through the housingdownturn and capital market turmoil and that will be our priority until these situations are resolved," said Mr. Paulson. Thefact that the U.S. economy expanded modestly in the second quarter of 2008 is proof that the economic stimulus planbacked by Congress and the Bush Administration "has supported the U.S. economy" amid difficulties in the housing andfinancial markets, the Treasury chief said. Meanwhile, Mr. Paulson said he expects the U.S. economy to continue to grow,although it will take additional time for the troubled housing and credit markets to return to normal. "Recognizing thechallenges ahead of us, I expect our economy to continue growth this year although at a moderate pace," he said. "We aremaking progress although not in a straight line; housing continues to be at the heart of our economic challenges and remainsour most significant downside risk." According to data the Commerce Department released early Thursday, the U.S. economysped up in the spring after shrinking late last year. Still, growth was weaker than expected. The department said grossdomestic product climbed only 1.9% in the second quarter despite the tax rebates provided in the economic stimulus package.Wall Street had expected 2.3% growth in GDP. Addressing ongoing issues in the housing markets, Mr. Paulson said he expects

foreclosures and existing home inventories to remain "substantially elevated" in 2008 and 2009. "And home prices are likelyto decline further on a national basis," he said. Still, he argued that the markets could move through the bulk of the housingmarket correction "in months rather than years." Mr. Paulson reiterated that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's continuedactivity is central to the speed at which the U.S. economy revives.

24


25/48


New York Economy Low

New Yorks economy is weak


http://www.mercopress.com/vernoticia.do?id=14123&formato=HTMLNew York governor David Paterson earlier this weekadmitted the state economy was in recession and announcedspending cuts to face a steep budget deficit due to declining tax revenues.

25


26/48


No Israel Strikes

Israel wont strike rhetoric is all psychological

Eli Hoffmann, Seeking Alpha Editor, 8-3-08, Don't Bet on an Iran War - Barron's, http://seekingalpha.com/article/88776-don-t-bet-

on-an-iran-war-barron-sDespite Israel's saber-rattling, Barron's says the threat of an Israel or U.S. attack on Iran is negligible. George Friedman,founder and head of highly-respected (and prescient) Stratfor global-intelligence company notes: The Iran-attack storygained widespread credence after the New York Times reported June 20 that more than 100 Israeli aircraft had participatedseveral weeks earlierin a military exercise over the eastern Mediterranean, near Greece. The distance from Israel was roughly900 miles, the same as that separating Israel from Iran, and the exercise was viewed as a trial run for a strike against Iran'snuclear facilities. Just a day later, the Times of London quoted Israeli military sources who confirmed the "dress rehearsal"nature of the exercise, while a story in the Jerusalem Post alluded to previous statements made by Israeli intelligence officialswho said Iran would cross an unspecified nuclear threshold in 2008, not 2009, as expected. The saber-rattling by unnamedofficials smacks of psychological warfare to Friedman, however -- not preparations for the real thing. "Why would Israeltelegraph its punch like that?" he asks. "Recall that when Israel took out Iraq's Osirak reactor backin 1981, it wassuccessful precisely because it gave no hint at all of an impending attack." An attack on Iran would essentially close theStrait of Hormuz until the area was de-mined, which could easily drive crude prices "to more than $300 a barrel, which even

over a short period would be cataclysmic to the global economy and stock markets." Ahmadinejad has recently toned downhis anti-Western rhetoric, while the U.S. has softened its stance . Besides which, Friedman says, Iran is decades away fromdeveloping credible nuclear weaponry - and by all measures may never get there. Lacking Western know-how, the best it canhope for down the road would be a controlled explosion of a crude device. Barron's says cooler heads will prevail, and theend game is closer than most imagine.

Israel wants diplomacy strikes are unlikely

Reuters, 7-31-08, U.S., Israel discuss diplomatic push on Iran,http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN3137356320080731?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0

U.S. and Israeli officials discussed diplomatic efforts and financial sanctions to keep Iran from developing nuclear

weapons, the State Department said on Thursday. The West accuses Iran of seeking to develop nuclear weapons under coverof a civilian program; Iran denies it. There has been speculation that either the United States orIsrael could attack Iran'snuclear facilities, though both have said force should be a last resort. The brief statement, issued after talks between senior

officials from the United States and Israel in Washington, said nothing about the possibility of using force against Iran. "TheUnited States and Israel share deep concern about Iran's nuclear program, and the two delegations discussed steps to strengthendiplomatic efforts and financial measures to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapons capability," the statement said. Itgave no details of the measures discussed. "We also reaffirmed our strong mutual determination to counter Iran's support forterrorism," said the statement, which the State Department said was being issued by both the United States and Israel. Westernpowers gave Iran two weeks from July 19 to respond to their offer to hold off on imposing more U.N. sanctions on Iran ifTehran would freeze any expansion of its nuclear work. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on WednesdayIran would press ahead with its nuclear path. Israel is believed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, though it hasnever confirmed having nuclear weapons. Israel officially maintains that it will not be the first nation to introduce nuclearweapons in the region. The U.S.-Israeli talks were part of regular consultations between the two countries known as the"strategic dialogue." The delegations were led by U.S. Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Bill Burns, and Israeli DeputyPrime Minister Shaul Mofaz. Mofaz is considered a possible successor to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who plans toquit after his party chooses a new leader in September. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in New York this weekthat

tough sanctions should be used to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons , but added that no options should beexcluded.

26


27/48


No Strikes Israel and US

US and Israel wont strike Iran

David Ignatius, an associate editor and columnist for the Washington Post. He also co-hosts PostGlobal, an online discussion of

international issues, 8-3-2008; Washington Post, Page B07, 'Bomb Bomb Iran'? Not Likely. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080102872.html

Analysts speculate about the danger ofa U.S. or Israeli military attack on Iran before the Bush administration departsoffice next January. But if you read the tea leaves carefully, the evidence is actually pointing in the opposite direction .One sign that the diplomatic track is dominant for now is that the administration plans to announce late this month thatit will open an interest section in Tehran, a senior official disclosed Thursday. This will be an important symbol, as it willbe the first American diplomatic mission in Iran since the U.S. Embassy there was seized in 1979. The official described itas an effort to "reach out to the Iranian people." The Iranian government has long had an interest section in Washington. Theadministration's wariness of military options is also clear from recent efforts to dissuade Israel from attacking Iranian

nuclear facilities. Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, traveled to Israel in early June; he was followed inlate June by Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Both officials explained to their Israelicounterpartswhy the United States believes an attack isn't necessary now, because the Iranians can't yet build a nuclearweapon, and why an attack would damage U.S. national interests . McConnell and Mullen also informed the Israelis

that the United States would oppose overflights of Iraqi airspace to attack Iran, an administration official said. The UnitedStates has reassured the Iraqi government that it would not approve Israeli overflights, after the Iraqis strongly protested anypotential violation of their sovereignty. "We have made our position abundantly clear to the Israelis and indeed to the world,not just in our public statements but in our private conversations, as well," said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.Though the administration has often been portrayed as divided over military options against Iran, an official denied there arenow any sharp rifts. "There is uniformity across the U.S. government about the way to proceed with Iran," the official said."Everyone from this White House, including the vice president's office, is in agreement that the military option is not thebest option at this point, and we should pursue diplomatic and economic pressures ."

27


28/48


US opposes Israeli Strikes

US opposes Israeli strikes on Iran

David Ignatius, an associate editor and columnist for the Washington Post. He also co-hosts PostGlobal, an online discussion of

international issues, 8-3-2008; Washington Post, Page B07, 'Bomb Bomb Iran'? Not Likely. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080102872.html

U.S. opposition to an Israeli military strike now is based on four factors, the official said. First, a strike would retard theIranian nuclear program without destroying it. (One intelligence estimate is that an attack would delay the Iranians by justtwo months to two years.) Second, a strike would rally support for the unpopular government of President MahmoudAhmadinejad when he faces growing economic difficulty. Third, an attack would undermine U.S. policy in Iraq, when theUnited States appears to be making some progress, and in Afghanistan. And, finally, a strike against Iran, as with anymilitary action, would have unpredictable consequences. In evaluating the Iranian nuclear threat, the United States andIsrael are using different intelligence. U.S. analysts believe Iran can't produce a bomb before the end of 2009 and probablynot until the 2010--2015 time frame, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official.

28


29/48


No Pol Cap

Bushs capital is dead 7 reasons

DAVID LIGHTMAN McClatchy News Service staff writer, 7-20-08, Bush's clout is in a downward spiral, Miami Herald,http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation/story/610912.html

TheWhite House wants the American public to think it's on the rebound, scoring important triumphs in Iraq andNorthKorea andon domestic spyingwhile taking tough stands on oil drilling and relief for homeowners. The WhiteHouse, the experts and the polls say, however, is wrong. President Bush hasn't begun a comeback. ''All this is prettymuch a lot of noise. He's going out with a whimper,'' said Erwin Hargrove, presidential scholar at Vanderbilt University and the authorof The Effective President. Adam Warber, professor of political science at Clemson University, had similar thoughts. ''It's very

difficult for him now. His public approval is so poor, he doesn't really have a lot of political capital,'' Warber said.Congress is run by Democrats reluctant to give Bush any domestic victories, and his approval ratings have remained at ornear a dismal 30 percent for about a year. Bush is the nation's fifth lame ducksince the 22nd Amendment limited presidents totwo terms, beginning with Harry Truman's successor in 1952. One was Richard Nixon, who resigned because of Watergate-related

scandals 19 months into his second term. The others left office with strong approval ratings. Bill Clinton's was 59 percent ina July 2000 Gallup poll. Ronald Reagan's number when he left office was 64 percent. Dwight D. Eisenhower hit 59 percent approvaljust before stepping down. Bush's achievements, which are fueling the White House PR machine, flow from his recent tendency tocompromise more on national security issues. In recent weeks Bush: Discussed with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki what theWhite House called ''a general time horizon'' for cutting the number of American troops in Iraq. Bush said he wasn't endorsingtimetables, which he has long opposed. Took North Korea, which he once labeled part of an ''axis of evil,'' off the list of terrorismsponsors and loosened trade sanctions after it agreed to provide details of its nuclear program. Won congressional approval of $162billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, though only after including new college aid for military veterans that he'd opposed. Wonhis bid to renew the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, including the controversial provision that could allow immunity fortelecommunications firms that participated in warrantless wiretaps. Ended the executive ban on drilling off most U.S. coastlines. Tried to reassure the public, in his first news conference since April, that he understood their economic pain and was working to easeit. Bush was upbeat recently as he recalled his recent string of accomplishments. 'People say, Àw, man, you're running out of time.Nothing's going to happen,' '' he said. He rattled off his list and looked ahead. ''What can we get done?'' he asked. ``We can get good

housing legislation done. We can get good energy legislation done. We can get trade bills done. And there's plenty of time to get actionwith the United States Congress.'' But outside the White House, few were as optimistic. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reiddismissed Bush's energy policies, saying, ''Really, the president's done nothing.'' His call for more drilling, Reidsaid, `ùnderlines and underscores that the main organization he's trying to help are the oil companies.'' Congressneeds to approve any end to the drilling ban, and with Democratic leaders opposed, that's unlikely. There are more ominous signs for

Bush that his power remains diluted. This week, Congress overrode his veto of Medicare legislation, and in the Houseof Representatives, Republicans, who fear a rout in November's elections,put some polite distance betweenthemselves and the White House. ''You want the president involved, but in the context of the election, he's not on the ballot,''said Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the House chief deputy Republican whip. `Òur candidates are on the ballot.'' Next week, Congress isexpected to consider help for faltering housing markets, including a rescue plan for mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.Some conservative Republicans are wary, saying the bill could become costly to taxpayers. Passage is expected, but it won't come

easily. Analysts say that unless the president's approval rating jumps -- unlikely as long as the economy wobblesand the Iraq and Afghanistan wars continue -- his clout is likely to remain diminished. ''It's not clear he's turnedanything around, so the current view of him will probably endure for a while,'' said Bruce Buchanan, professor ofgovernment at the University of Texas.

29


30/48


Nuclear Waste costs PC

Waste storage makes expanding nuclear power unpopular

Marianne Means, past chairman of the National Press Foundation, a founding member of the International Women's Media, April 12

2001, Bush, Cheney Will Face Wall of Opposition If They Try To Resurrect Nuclear Power, Hearst Newspapers,http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0412-05.htm

Vice President Dick Cheney, head of the presidential task force studying our energy needs, favors building new nuclear power plants -

and he's oddly casual about it. The industry has been moribund in this country since the partial meltdown at Three MileIsland more than two decades ago set off fierce emotional resistance to an unreliable technology capable ofaccidentally spreading deadly radiation.No new plants have been ordered since then. Only 20 percent of ourelectricity is generated by nuclear power. But President Bush has instructed Cheney to look into the prospect of resurrecting anddeveloping nuclear power as a major part of a broad new energy policy. Cheney argues that modern, improved reactors operate safely,

economically and efficiently. "It's one of the safest industries around," he says unequivocally. There remains, however, a littleproblem of how to dispose of the plants' radioactive waste. Cheney concedes that issue is still unsolved. "If we'regoing to go forward with nuclear power, we need to find a way to resolve it," he said Sunday in an NBC "Meet The Press" interview.

No state wants to be the repository of the more than 40,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste currentlyaccumulating at 103 commercial reactor sites around the country. This spent fuel is so deadly it can remain a potential threat topublic health and safety for thousands of years. A leak could silently contaminate many miles of groundwater that millions of people

depend on. In 1987, Congress designated Nevada's Yucca Mountain, 90 miles from Las Vegas, as the most likelysite to bury the dangerous stuff. But furious Nevada officials, using all their political clout, have thus farmanaged to fend off final federal approval. Recently they sharply challenged the scientific integrity of a feasibility study thatfound the location suitable for long-term storage. Former Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, D-La., is the author ofwhat the state'scongressional delegation calls the "screw Nevada"bill recommending Yucca Mountain. Last DecemberBush, looking for afriendly Democrat to include in his Cabinet, considered selecting Johnston, now a nuclear industry lobbyist, as secretary ofenergy. But Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., publicly warned that he would rally environmental groups and other nuclearopponents for a classic nomination fight. Reid bluntly said he would "do everything I can" to keep Johnston from the energy

post. Johnston wisely withdrew his name from contention. Former Sen. Spencer Abraham, who got the job instead, has been lessidentified with Nevada's fate but is believed to back its selection for storage as an essential step toward future nuclear power

development. An alternate waste site was suggested in Utah on the Skull Valley Goshute Indian Reservation. It waspromoted as a temporary location for the waste casks for several years until the Y

385 ko ddi updates 2

Documents