Download the original attachment
Topicality: 1NC- Removing A Barrier
A. Increase is direct growth not removing a barrier
Random House Webster’s College Dictionary 96

Increase: 1)to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment 2)to become greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality 3)to multiply by propagation 4)growth or augmentation in size, strength, quality 5)the act or process of increasing


B. The affirmative team does not increase the amount of social services but removes a restriction legal services
C. Limits- Removing barriers opens the floodgates and overstretches our research burden
Impact - Topic-specific education: under their interpretation of debate, we never learn about the social services and how they affect the poor but only about legal barriers.
D. Plan is at best FX topical-
  1. You can’t be Topical to a certain degree- you’re either T or you aren’t. By being effectually topical you force the judge to arbitrarily decide how topical you are, and that destroys the role of Topicality in debate.
  2. FX T is a voting issue for fairness (which is killed by your lack of predictability) and potential abuse- its not just what you do, its what you justify

E. Evaluate T in a framework of competing interpretations; if we win that our interpretation is best for debate, you vote them down. Reasonability is arbitrary and mandates judge intervention.

1NC States CP
The fifty states and all relevant territories should fully fund legal services for class action lawsuits for people in the United States who cannot afford them.
1. Counterplan competes through net benefits.
2. Statewide systems allow for better access to legal services.
Houseman ‘02, Director of the Center for Law and Social Policy, which is counsel to the National Legal Aid and Defender
(Alan W., “Access to Justice Conference September 11, 2001: Civil Legal Assistance for Low-Income Persons: Looking Back and Looking Forward,” Fordham Urban Law Journal, Lexis, p. 12)

Over the last thirty-five years, civil legal assistance in the United States has developed from a haphazard program with limited private funding into a significant $ 800 million institution. The legal aid program has a long history of effective representation of low-income persons and has achieved a number of significant results in the courts, administrative agencies, and legislative bodies. The federal program has expanded access throughout the country and provided significant relief to millions of needy persons. Without the [*1243] civil legal assistance program, there would be virtually no access to justice for low-income persons residing in the country.
These accomplishments do not suggest that the civil legal assistance system should remain static. On the contrary, considerable change is needed. The civil legal assistance community has begun transforming its structure into a more effective system. Even if Congress had not imposed restrictions and reduced funding in 1996, the legal services community would have needed to create a statewide system of civil legal assistance in each state. This restructuring was necessary to obtain new funding, increase access for low-income people, and improve the effectiveness of legal assistance providers. The reorganization has helped build a broader base of public support for civil legal assistance. The civil legal assistance community needed a new system to ensure that low-income persons were represented in all relevant forums where decisions affecting their lives are made. Advocacy activities had to be effectively coordinated within and among states, and all advocates participating in the system needed to have access to information, training, and assistance to provide effective legal advice.The directions for the future are clear. The civil legal assistance community must develop a stronger base of public support within the general public and among key local leaders. Moreover, it must move forward to create integrated, comprehensive statewide systems. States that have not begun serious efforts to create new systems must do so. The overarching goal has been and will continue to be equal justice for all. While the United States has far to go to reach that goal, it is moving down the path that will someday achieve a civil justice system that guarantees equal justice for all.

Capitalism K 1NC Shell (1/3)
  1. Link – Social services legitimize capitalism – this turns case by recreating the labor force and replacing one social problem with many others.
Hall, prof @ University College London, 89
Peter Hall Prof. Planning and Regeneration at The Bartlett, University College London. 1989. Cities of Tomorrow. Pgs. 335-341

At the same time, a specifically Marxian view of planning emerged in the English-speaking world. To describe it adequately would require a course in Marxist theory. But, in inadequate summary, it states that the structure of the capitalist city itself, including its land-use and activity patterns, is the result of capital in pursuit of profit. Because capitalism is doomed to recurrent crises, which deepen in the current stage of late capitalism, capital calls upon the state, as its agent, to assist it by remedying disorganization in commodity production, and by aiding the reproduction of the labour force. It thus tries to achieve certain necessary objectives: to facilitate continued capital accumulation, by ensuring rational allocation of resources; by assisting the reproduction of the labour force through the provision of social services, thus maintaining a delicate balance between labour and capital and preventing social disintegration; and by guaranteeing and legitimating capitalist social and property relations. As Dear and Scott put it: 'In summary, planning is an historically-specific and socially-necessary response to the self-disorganizing tendencies of privatized capitalist social and property relations as these appear in urban space.'° In particular, it seeks to guarantee collective provision of necessary infrastructure and certain basic urban services, and to reduce negative externalities whereby certain activities of capital cause losses to other parts of the system.59 But, since capitalism also wishes to circumscribe state planning as far as possible, there is an inbuilt contradiction: planning, because of this inherent inadequacy, always solves one problem only by creating another.60 Thus, say the Marxists, nineteenth-century clearances in Paris created a working-class housing problem; American zoning limited the powers of industrialists to locate at the most profitable locations." And planning can never do more than modify some parameters of the land development process; it cannot change its intrinsic logic, and so cannot remove the contradiction between private accumulation and collective action." Further, the *capitalist class is by no means homogenous; different fractions of capital may have divergent, even contradictory interests, and complex alliances may be formed in consequence; thus, latter-day Marxist explanations come close to being pluralist, albeit with a strong structural element.' But in the process, 'the more that the State intervenes in the urban system, the greater is the likelihood that different social groups and fractions will contest the legitimacy of its decisions. Urban life as a whole becomes progressively invaded by political controversies and dilemmas'.


Capitalism K 1NC Shell (2/3)
B. Impact – Capitalism’s drive for material makes crisis and extinction inevitable.

Meszaros, prof Philosophy & Political Theory, 95
Istvan Meszaros, 1995, Professor at University of Sussex, England, “Beyond Capital: Toward a Theory of Transition”


With regard to its innermost determination the capital system is expansion oriented and accumulation-driven. Such a determination constitutes both a formerly unimaginable dynamism and a fateful deficiency. In this sense, as a system of social metabolic control capital is quite irresistible for as long as it can successfully extract and accumulate surplus-labour-whether in directly economic or in primarily political form- in the course of the given society’s expandoed reproduction. Once, however, this dynamic process of expansion and accumulation gets stuck (for whatever reason) the consequences must be quite devastating. For even under the ‘normality’ of relatively limited cyclic disturbances and blockages the destruction that goes with the ensuing socioeconomic and political crises can be enormous, as the annals of the twentieth century reveal it, including two world wars (not to mention numerous smaller conflagrations). It is therefore not too difficult to imagine the implications of a systemic, truly structural crisis; i.e. one that affects the global capital system not simply under one if its aspects-the financial/monetary one, for instance-but in all its fundamental dimensions, questioning its viability altogether as a social reproductive system. Under the conditions of capital's structural crisis its destructive constituents come to the fore with a vengeance, activating the spectre of total uncontrollability in a form that foreshadows self-destruction both for this unique social reproductive system itself and for humanity in general. As we shall see in Chapter 3, capital was near amenable to proper and durable control or rational self-restraint. For it was compatible only with limited adjustments, and even those only for as long as it could continue to pursue in one form or another the dynamics of self-expansion and the process of accumulation. Such adjustments consisted in side-stepping, as it were, the encountered obstacles and resistances when capital was unable to frontally demolish them. This characteristic of uncontrollability was in fact one of the most important factors that secured capitals irresistible advancement and ultimate victory, which it had to accomplish despite the earlier mentioned fact that capital's mode of metabolic control constituted the exception and not the rule in history. After all, capital at first appeared as a strictly subordinate force in the course of historical development. And worse still, on account of necessarily subordinating 'use-value' - that is, production for human need - to the requirements of self-expansion and accumulation, capital in all of its forms had to overcome also the odium of being considered for a long time the most 'unnatural' way of controlling the production of wealth. According to the ideological confrontations of medieval times, capital was fatefully implicated in 'mortal sin' in more ways than one, and therefore had to be outlawed as 'heretic' by the highest religious authorities: the Papacy and its Synods. It could not become the dominant force of the social metabolic process before sweeping out of the way the absolute - and religiously sanctified -prohibition on 'usury' (contested under the category of 'profit upon alienation', which really meant: retaining control over the monetary/financial capital of the age, in the interest of the accumulation process, and at the same time securing profit by lending money) and winning the battle over the 'alienability of land' (again, the subject of absolute and religiously sanctified prohibition under the feudal system) without which the emergence of capitalist agriculture -a vital condition for the triumph of the capital system in general would have been quite inconceivable." Thanks to a very large extent to its uncontrollability, capital succeeded in overcoming all odds - no matter how powerful materially and how absolutized in terms of the prevailing value system of society - against itself, elevating its mode of metabolic control to the power of absolute dominance as a fully extended global system. However, it is one thing to overcome and subdue problematical (even obscurantist) constraints and obstacles, and quite another to institute the positive principles of sustainable social development, guided by the criteria of humanly fulfilling objectives, as opposed to the blind pursuit of capital's self-expansion. Thus the implications of the selfsame power of uncontrollability which in its time secured the victory of the capital system are far from reassuring today when the need for restraints is conceded - at least in the form of the elusive desideratum of 'self-regulation' - even by the system's most uncritical defenders.


Capitalism K 1NC Shell (3/3)
C. The Alternative – Reject the affirmative in order to radically resist capitalism through a process of revolutionary persuasion. The “realistic proposals” of the 1ac cannot provide a systemic alternative to the capitalist political framework inherent in the plan. This debate is the key cite of resistance – our ability to use persuasion and show the “antagonism between capitalism and the environment” is unique to starting a revolution.
Wallis, Professor at UC Berkeley, PhD. at Columbia U., 08
(Victor Wallis, Liberal Arts Professor at UC Berkeley, PhD. at Columbia U, November 2008: The Monthly Review “Capitalist and Socialist Responses to the Ecological Crisis” http://monthlyreview.org/ 081103wallis.php)
  1. Where the private and the civic dimensions would merge would be in developing a full-scale class analysis of responsibility for the current crisis and, with it, a movement which could pose a systemic alternative. The steps so far taken in this direction have been limited. Exposés like Gore’s have called attention, for example, to the role of particular oil companies in sponsoring attacks on scientific findings related to climate change, but the idea that there could be an antagonism between capitalism and the environment as such has not yet made its way into general public debate. Until this happens, the inertial impact of the prevailing ideology will severely limit the scope of any concrete recuperative measures.37 The situation is comparable to that surrounding any prospective revolution: until a certain critical point has been reached, the only demands that appear to have a chance of acceptance are the “moderate” ones. But what makes the situation revolutionary is the very fact that the moderate or “realistic” proposals will not provide a solution. What gives these proposals a veneer of reasonableness is no more than their acceptability to political forces which, while unable to design a response commensurate with the scale of the problem, have not yet been displaced from their positions of power. But this very inability on the part of those forces is also an expression of their weakness. They sit precariously atop a process they do not understand, whose scope they cannot imagine, and over which they can have no control. (Or, if they do sense the gravity of the situation, they view it with a siege mentality, seeking above all to assure their own survival.38) At this point, it is clear that the purchase on “realism” has changed hands. The “moderates,” with their relentless insistence on coaxing an ecological cure out of a system inherently committed to trampling everything in its path, have lost all sense of reality. The question now becomes whether the hitherto misgoverned populace will be prepared to push through the radical measures (by now clearly the only realistic ones) or whether its members will have remained so encased within the capitalist paradigm that the only thing they can do is to try—following the cue of those who plunged us all into this fix—to fend individually for themselves. This is the conjuncture that all our efforts have been building for; it will provide the ultimate test of how well we have done our work. In order for the scope of the needed measures to be grasped by sufficient numbers of people, an intense level of grassroots organizing will already have to be underway. However, the measures themselves, if they are to accomplish their purpose, will have to advance further the very process that put them on the agenda to begin with. A characteristically revolutionary mix of persuasion and coercion will necessarily apply—the balance of these two methods depending partly on the effectiveness of prior consciousness-raising and partly on the window of time available for the required steps. No dimension of life will be untouched. From our present vantage point we can only begin to envisage the specific changes, which will primarily involve a reversal or undoing of the more wasteful and harmful structures bequeathed by prior development. Fortunately, however, it will not be a matter of starting from scratch. Many historical lessons have already been learned, and not all of them are of things to avoid. There are positive models as well.

1NC – Healthcare
A. Healthcare reform will pass now.
Associated Press 8/4
(Associated Press, n __American__ __news agency__. The AP is a __cooperative__ owned by its contributing __newspapers__, __radio__ and __television__ stations in the __United States__, which both contribute stories to the AP and use material written by its staff journalist 8/4/09) __http://www.google.com/ hostednews/ap/article/ ALeqM5hqsLQvKIDJyBRLnfbA0U0KgG fqrAD99S7H700__
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says his party's caucus has "absolute unity" on the need to pass health care reform this year. The Nevadan, joined by other lawmakers, spoke to reporters Tuesday afternoon on a White House driveway after Senate Democrats met over lunch with President Barack Obama. Reid said Democrats wants to produce a bipartisan bill "if there's any way humanly possible." Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus said, "The American people want us to work together." Reid and Baucus, a Montana Democrat, expressed confidence that health care legislation would get done by year's end. Extending health insurance to the uncovered and reining in costs are key Obama priorities.
B. Legal service programs use political capital – spending and controversy
Houseman 05,
(Alan W., Director, Center for Law and Social Policy, “The Future of Civil Legal Aid in the United States,” November 2005,
http://www.clasp.org/ publications/future_legal_aid. pdf)
Supporters of increased federal funding will have to overcome significant political barriers to substantially (as opposed to incrementally) increase federal funding for civil legal assistance. Although LSC leadership has made substantial progress in developing a much stronger bipartisan consensus in favor of funding for LSC, U.S. political leadership remains divided about whether there should be a federally funded program, and, if so, whether it should be through the federal LSC program or via a block grant program administered by the states. In addition, there are substantial efforts to reduce U.S. domestic discretionary spending over the next five years in order to address the substantial federal budget deficit that has resulted primarily from the tax reductions and the increased spending on defense and homeland security. In May, the Congress passed its budget resolution, which would reduce domestic discretionary spending by more than $200 billion over the next five years. The budget directives are playing out now during the appropriations process. These cuts would grow deeper over time and are projected to affect all domestic discretionary spending, including LSC funds and other federal funds available for civil legal aid. The President’s budget proposal for FY 2006 illustrates how the federal budget issues impacts civil legal aid. The Administration has proposed to cut funding for LSC by 5 percent. This would reduce funding available to the national legal aid program to $318.2 million, an amount less than the $321 million LSC received in 1980. This year, FY 2005, LSC lost funding from an appropriate level of $335.3 million in FY 2004 to an appropriate level of $330.8 million in FY 2005. The Board of Directors of LSC has requested $363.8 million for FY 2006. The House adopted an appropriation of $330.8 million. The Senate agreed to a level of $358 million. The conference committee, however, only recommended the House level of $330.8 million. This amount may be reduced even further if across-the-board decreases are imposed on all or most domestic discretionary programs.

1NC - Healthcare
Political capital key to healthcare reform
Chiropractic Economics 7-7-2009
http://www.chiroeco.com/ chiropractic/news/7360/861/ Prioritizing-healthcare- reform-components/
INDIANAPOLIS – Faced with a barrage of pressing issues, the Obama administration has placed health-care reform high on its agenda. The timing bodes well for change, according to Aaron E. Carroll, M.D., director of the Indiana University Center for Health Policy and Professionalism, associate professor of pediatrics at the IU School of Medicine and a pediatrician at Riley Hospital for Children. "If the new administration wants to accomplish significant reform, they will need political capital, which they have now," says Dr. Carroll, who is a health services researcher and a Regenstrief Institute affiliated scientist. "We have a government elected with a mandate for change and health care is an area that requires reform. Moreover, with the economy in its current state, with unemployment on the rise, and with health care costs on the ascent, more and more people will not be able to afford insurance or health care. Therefore, more will be in need of reform." According to Dr. Carroll there are now more than 45 million people in America who have not had health insurance for the entire year; almost twice that number lack coverage for a portion of the year. Over the last few years, most of the newly uninsured are from the middle class. As unemployment rises, along with food, utilities and other prices, a growing number of people will be unable to afford health insurance, especially as it gets increasingly expensive.
The impact is a new Great Depression. Reform is key to signal long term fiscal solvency and prevent spiraling sell-offs of US debt
Boston Globe, 2-23-09
Budget analysts are worried that a continuing economic crisis will make it impossible to raise sufficient funds from foreign markets to finance the nation's debt. In the last four years, about three-quarters of US debt was purchased by foreign interests, most prominently by China. If other nations lose confidence that the United States will pay its debts, however, some economists fear an international financial crisis could escalate and turn into a worldwide depression. In any case, it is widely expected that debt purchasers will soon demand higher interest rates, which would translate into higher costs for US taxpayers. Obama is being urged by some analysts to start moving toward a balanced budget as soon as possible to send a signal to the world that deficit spending will abate. Yet some analysts are offering Obama conflicting advice, warning him not to repeat what they regard as the mistake of President Franklin Roosevelt, who launched the New Deal but eventually heeded calls to curtail deficit spending, only to see a new recession batter his presidency. A key player in the summit will be Senator Judd Gregg, the New Hampshire Republican who backed out of his commitment to be Obama's commerce secretary and then voted against the stimulus bill. Despite the embarrassment caused by Gregg's about-face, the White House believes that he could be one of its most important allies in the overhaul of Social Security, Medicare, and tax policy. That is because Gregg is the co-sponsor of the measure that would create a bipartisan commission to put together far-reaching recommendations for an up-or-down vote by Congress. In an interview, Gregg said that under such a procedure, the measures could be passed within a year, as long as most of the benefit cuts and tax increases were not slated to take effect until well after the recession is over. "We need an up-or-down vote on a package that will be unquestionably bipartisan and fair," Gregg said, a reference to criticism that Obama's stimulus bill was too partisan. Asked about his hopes for the summit, he said, "It can either be very nice public relations or move the ball down the road on what is an impending fiscal tsunami." Some budget specialists are skeptical. Robert Reischauer, former head of the Congressional Budget Office, said Obama should have seized the opportunity to pair the stimulus bill with the overhaul of Social Security, Medicare, and the tax code. "When you are shoveling out the goodies, you have a greater probability of getting people to sign on to some fiscal diet," said Reischauer, who has been invited to the summit. He said he is worried that nothing will happen on the most difficult issues until political leaders "have a gun at our heads. The system tends to respond only in the face of unavoidable crisis." Analysts across the political spectrum agree that the current path is unsustainable. Unless there is a major budgetary change, federal spending will go from being about 20 percent of the nation's economy to 42 percent in 2050, according to the Concord Coalition. The major reason is that entitlement programs for older Americans are running short of funds. Social Security is slated to pay out more money than it receives by 2017. Obama suggested during his campaign that he might support changing the level of income at which Social Security taxes are calculated. Another frequently mentioned option is raising the retirement age. But any measure will be even more controversial than usual because so many Americans have seen their private retirement plans pummeled by the stock market collapse. Medicare, the government-run healthcare program for older Americans, is already running a deficit, which is expected to increase quickly as baby boomers retire. That is why many analysts are urging Obama to link changes in Medicare with an overhaul of the health system.

1NC - Healthcare
Global nuclear war
Mead, 2009 (Walter Russell, the Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, “Only Makes You Stronger”, The New Republic, February 4, 2009)
History may suggest that financial crises actually help capitalist great powers maintain their leads--but it has other, less reassuring messages as well. If financial crises have 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 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.

1NC Econ Shell (1/3)

Econ past rescuing stage, now entering rebuilding.
Wilson and Fletcher, Washington Post Staff Writers, 7-4
Scott Wilson and Michael A. Fletcher, Washington Post Staff Writers, 7-4-2009 “Economic Policy Is Working, Obama Says Administration Says Recovery Effort Has Moved From Rescue Stage to Rebuilding”
Only a few weeks ago, Vice President Biden acknowledged that the administration had "misread" the depth of the recession upon taking office. Quarterly gross domestic product numbers have since been revised to show a more severe economic slide than was known at the time, but an administration that prefers playing offense has been forced to defend the effectiveness of its $787 billion stimulus measure in the face of rising unemployment.
But on Sunday even Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Obama's general-election rival, conceded on CNN that the legislation has brought "short-term improvement in the economy." The most recent GDP figure showed the economy contracting at 1 percent over the most recent quarter, better than most forecasters anticipated.
"The GDP numbers validated our strategy," said Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, sharpening the point made by the administration's top economic policy advisers on weekend talk shows. "If you think about it, the first six months were spent rescuing the economy. Now the president is laying the groundwork for rebuilding the economy."
Obama began making that case Monday when he told an audience of student veterans in Virginia that the tuition aid contained in the new G.I. Bill is "not simply a debt that we are repaying to the remarkable men and women who have served -- it is an investment in our own country."
On Wednesday, the president will travel to Elkhart, Ind., for a repeat visit to the nation's RV manufacturing capital, which he described in his weekly radio address as "hard-hit not only by the economic crisis of recent months, but by the broader economic changes of recent decades."
Emanuel said Obama will highlight the billions of dollars in stimulus grants that will go toward battery cell research for the next generation of electric cars, a sector of the economy he has highlighted for its potential to create jobs.
The stimulus measure contains $21.5 billion for basic research -- the largest one-time spending ever in that area -- and $60 billion for such projects as extending broadband's reach, computerizing health records and creating a smart grid, among other programs the administration has deemed important to developing a new economy.
Biden will be in Detroit on Wednesday to talk about the same subject. And Energy Secretary Steven Chu will travel to North Carolina to promote the research in advanced battery technology.
But with the national unemployment rate still rising, the strategy holds some risk for an administration worried that a recovery in that area may shadow next year's congressional elections.
Some economists predict that the next quarterly report will show growth, ending a recession that officially began in December 2007. But Obama and his senior advisers have been careful to note that the economy will continue to shed jobs, perhaps into next year.

1NC – Econ

Increasing the amount of cases only hurts the economy
Candice Lee, Staff Writer, 4-27
(Staff Writer for NBC4i, Bad Economy Clogs Domestic Relations Court,
http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/ news/local/article/Bad_ economy_clogging_domestic_ relations_court/15192/)

If you want a divorce in Licking County, be prepared to wait. A couple with children could have been granted a divorce in 18 months in the past. Now, it’s going take more than two years. Domestic Relations Court Judge Craig Baldwin says the cases are taking more time to settle because finding assets to pay off debt is becoming increasingly more difficult. He says traditionally, equity in a home has been used, but with home values decreasing, there are fewer dollars available. “Domestic violence for protection orders, and then in child support cases, we see a huge uptake in those cases starting and coming back and then divorce cases,“ Baldwin said. Even more shocking is the number of civil protection orders being sought as more and more families deal with the stresses of job loss. “These hearings must take place within 14 days of filing, and that pushes back divorce cases,“ Baldwin says. Currently, it is taking more than nine months for a divorce case to reach a Baldwin. Also crowding the docket, reactivated cases for child support. Baldwin says paying parents are finding themselves without a job and unable to make payments. This puts stress on the parent who relies on that money. Baldwin says throwing them in jail solves nothing. But when it comes to solving the backlog, there are few options. Baldwin says many of these cases need to be settled in mediation. A hearing before a judge must be a last resort.
1NC - Econ
Investor confidence decline collapses the economy
The Economist 6/11/2009 (__http://www.economist.com/ opinion/displaystory.cfm? story_id=13829461__)
This alarming trajectory puts policymakers in an increasingly tricky bind. In the short term government borrowing is an essential antidote to the slump. Without bank bail-outs the financial crash would have been even more of a catastrophe. Without stimulus the global recession would be deeper and longer—and it is a prolonged downturn that does the greatest damage to public finances. But in the long run today’s fiscal laxity is unsustainable. Governments’ thirst for funds will eventually crowd out private investment and reduce economic growth. More alarming, the scale of the coming indebtedness might ultimately induce governments to default or to cut the real cost of their debt through high inflation. Investors have been fretting on both counts. Worries about default have been focused on weaker countries in the euro area, particularly Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain, where the single currency removes the option of unilateral inflation (see our special report). Ireland’s debt was downgraded for a second time on June 8th. Fears of inflation have concentrated on America, where yields on ten-year Treasuries reached nearly 4% on June 10th; in December the figure was not much above 2%. Much of this rise stems from confidence about economic recovery rather than fiscal alarm. Yet eye-popping deficits and the uncharted nature of today’s monetary policy, with the Federal Reserve (like the Bank of England) printing money to buy government bonds, are prompting concerns that America’s debt might eventually be inflated away. Justified or not, such worries will themselves wreak damage. The economic recovery could be stillborn if interest rates rise too far too fast. And today’s policy remedies could become increasingly ineffective. Printing more money to buy government debt, for instance, might send long-term bond yields higher rather than lower. What should policymakers do? A sudden fit of fiscal austerity would be a mistake. Even when economies stop shrinking, they will stay weak. Japan’s experience in 1997, when a rise in consumption taxes pushed the economy back into recession, is a reminder that a rush to fiscal tightening is counterproductive, especially after a banking bust. Instead of slashing their deficits now, the rich world’s governments need to promise, credibly, that they will do so once their economies are stronger. Lord, make me prudent—but not yet But how? Politicians’ promises are not worth much by themselves. Any commitment to prudence must include clear principles on how deficits will be shrunk; new rules to stiffen politicians’ spines; and quick action on politically difficult measures that would yield future savings without denting demand much today, such as raising the retirement age. Broadly, governments should pledge to clean up their public finances by cutting future spending rather than raising taxes. Most European countries have scant room for higher taxes. In several, the government already hoovers up well over 40% of GDP. Tax reform will be necessary—particularly in places, such as Britain and Ireland, which relied far too much on revenues from frothy financial markets and housing bubbles. Even in the United States, where tax revenues add up to less than 30% of GDP, simply raising tax rates is not the best answer. There too, spending control should take priority, though there is certainly room for efficiency-enhancing tax reforms, such as eliminating the preferential tax treatment of housing and the deductibility of employer-provided health insurance.

C/A Economic collapse causes World War Three
Mead, 9

Environmental Justice 1NC Frontline (1/2)
They have it backwards – the hazardous siting was there first, attracting lower income individuals. This only gives the impression of environmental racism – their studies are flawed.
Glasgow 5 (Joshua, Yale Law School JD candidate, Buffalo Environmental Law Journal, 13 Buff. Envt’l L.J. 69, Fall, ln)
In addition to courtroom difficulties, the environmental justice movement was challenged by a number of studies in the mid-1990s challenging the evidence of discriminatory siting and exposure. [*76] An influential University of Massachusetts study conducted in 1994 examined over five hundred hazardous waste facilities and found no evidence of discriminatory siting. 27 Additionally, scholars challenged the earlier studies' methodologies, including the sample selection, the definition of minority, the geographic scope examined, and the failure to control for other variables. 28 In a series of articles, Vicki Been set forth a particularly powerful critique of environmental justice studies. 29 Been notes that most studies examined the contemporary makeup of a neighborhood impacted by a LULU, not its makeup at the time of siting. 30 This method ignores the possibility that a LULU would lower nearby housing prices, causing affluent residents to move away. These residents would be replaced by lower-income individuals, attracted by the lower housing prices. As a result of these market dynamics, even LULUs located in a wealthy neighborhood could later become surrounded by the poor. 31 This "chicken-or-the-egg" dilemma has plagued the environmental justice literature. 32
Correlation vs. Causation. Even EPA studies conclude that lower property values are the real explanation. Their studies are driven solely by ideology, not facts.
Payne 00 (Henry: writer for New York Times, "Green redlining: how rules against "environmental racism" hurt poor minorities most of all," __http://findarticles.com/p/ articles/mi_m1568/is_n5_v30/ ai_21141903/print?tag=artBody; col1__)
No matter what form the administration's environmental justice policy finally takes, the underlying question is whether environmental racism exists at all. What is perhaps most disturbing about the administration's crusade is that it has for years ignored evidence - much of it from the EPA itself that minorities are not disproportionately affected by industrial waste. As with the issues of secondhand smoke and global warming, the administration's policy is driven not by facts but by ideology. In a comprehensive survey of studies examining the surrounding demographics of plant sites, Washington University's Huebner concluded this year that "the evidence relied on by environmental justice advocates is flawed....In particular, the dynamics of the housing market prove a plausible alternative explanation for the disparities observed in the current location of industrial facilities. Recent evidence indicates that minority and poor populations tend to locate near industrial facilities after the facilities are located, possibly due to lower property values. "Most damning, however, have been studies by the EPA itself. Two such studies were obtained by David Mastio of The Detroit News. The EPA studies were conducted to confirm the link between pollution and race found in the United Church of Christ report and other studies. In both cases, however, the EPA's exhaustive survey of the communities surrounding 1,234 Superfund sites - some of the most polluted land in the country - turned up no evidence of disparate impact on minorities. To the contrary, the studies found that the populations most exposed to these toxic sites were white and middle class. For example, in EPA Region 5, which includes the heavily industrialized Rust Belt, all minorities were underrepresented in areas around Superfund sites. But because the EPA's studies contradicted emerging administration policy on environmental racism, they were never made public. Lacking evidence for their cause, environmental justice activists have used scare tactics to turn residents against proposed plants. In Claiborne Parish, Louisiana, Greenpeace and Earth Justice used a campaign of fear (and exploited Clinton's 1994 executive order) to torpedo a proposed $855 million uranium enrichment plant last April.The foundation of the administration's support of environmental racism claims seems to be a belief that minorities are permanent victims. It is a theme that runs through press coverage of the issue as well. A July National Journal cover story, for example, examined the Shintech case in detail by talking to plant managers and opposition groups. But the reporter did not once consult a black member of the St. James Citizens Coalition, or Janice Dickerson, or a black parish councilman for their opinion of the plant. The articles assumption is that blacks near the plant must be victims because they are black.

3. Injustice is inevitable without strong administrative land reforms
Department for International Development: Government Department responsible for promoting development and the reduction of poverty, November 2002 “Better livelihoods for poor people: The role of Land Policy”
Poor policies, inappropriate legal frameworks and weak administration mean many governments are ill equipped to provide land for the poor in cities. Cumbersome planning and building standards that are blatantly infringed frequently combine with hazardous topography. Many poor people have no choice but to take what land they can through informal or illegal means. Conditions in poor areas of cities are unsafe and unhealthy, services are inadequate and people face the continual threat of eviction. It is vital that work to strengthen land rights in cities is linked to improved urban and regional planning.
Environmental Justice 1NC Frontline (2/2)

4. Alternative causalities – racism, economic, post-materialism, governmental inefficiency
Alka Sapat, Jaap J. Vos, and Khi V. Thai , a School of Public Administration, Florida Atlantic University, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, U.S.A.b Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Florida Atlantic University, Davie, Florida, U.S.A. International Journal of Public Administration, Volume 25, Issue 2 & 3 March 2002 , (pages 143 – 168)

Environmental justice is a major issue today and of interest to citizens, administrators, and scholars of public administration. In this introduction, we review the emergence of the environmental justice movement and discuss the development of the field by presenting an overview of the literature and existent research on environmental justice. This research has focused to a large extent on siting issues and on the causes and explanations of environmental equity. In particular, five causes or explanations of environmental injustice have been emphasized in the literature: (a) race; (b) economic and market factors; (c) political and administrative issues; (d) attitudinal issues; and (e) post-materialism. We review the major pieces of research and evidence in these areas and compare and contrast the explanations of environmental injustice. for the most part we find that there is considerable controversy over the different explanations and causes of environmental injustice. In the third section of the paper, we highlight some of the issues that have not been explored so far and the unfulfilled gaps, in academic research on environmental justice issues. We conclude by presenting a brief synopsis of the articles in this symposium.

5. Status quo solves – shift towards hybrid cars ensures decreasing emissions levels
Cohen 01 [Bonner R., Lexington Institute, “Air Quality’s Benefactors,” For the Record, Summer 2001, www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/ regv24n2/fortherecord.pdf
Matthew E. Kahn’s discussion of the effects of cleaner air in the Los Angeles basin adds an interesting twist to the debate over environmental justice (“The Beneficiaries of Clean Air Regulation,” Regulation, Vol. 24, No. 1). While air pollution levels in predominantly black and Hispanic areas were markedly higher than in white neighborhoods in 1980, Kahn’s analysis shows that the gap has closed considerably over the past two decades. The improvements in air quality in the Los Angeles basin, he notes, are primarily the result of expensive anti-pollution devices on newer cars, purchased mostly by the area’s more affluent residents. Inner city residents, it turns out, are the chief beneficiaries of the increasingly successful efforts to deal with the L.A. basin’s chronic air quality problems. I strongly suspect that Professor Kahn could find similar patterns in other urban areas, as the rising tide of technology-driven air-quality improvements lifts all boats, including those anchored in inner cities. The Environmental Protection Agency, which is still mulling over a set of environmental justice policies designed to “protect” minorities from pollution, would do well to take note of developments in Los Angeles and elsewhere. As is so often the case, the problem it has decided to address appears well on its way to being solved. This is happening without the restrictions on business and industrial activities in minority communities, which are at the heart of EPA’s proposals to bring about environmental justice.


1NC – structural inequality

Violence is too deeply entrenched into our society to end poverty, even Gilligan concedes
Alvarez, Professor in the department of criminal justice at Northern Arizona University and Bachman, Professor and Chair of the Sociology and Criminal Justice Department at the University of Delware 2007
(Alex Alvarez, Professor in the department of criminal justice at Northern Arizona University and Ronet Bachman, Professor and Chair of the Sociology and Criminal Justice Department at the University of Delware, 2007 Violence: the enduring problem Chapter 1 ,Pg. 19-20, http://www.sagepub.com/upm- data/17422_Chapter_1.pdf


We also worry about violence constantly, and change our behavior in response to perceived threats of violence. We avoid certain parts of town, add security features to our homes, and vote for “get tough” laws in order to protect ourselves from violent offenders. At the time this chapter was written, Americans were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and news reports were full of fallen soldiers, car bombings, torture of prisoners, and beheadings of hostages. In short, whether domestically or internationally, violence is part and parcel of American life. In fact, the sociologists Peter Iadicola and Anson Shupe assert that violence is the “overarching problem of our age” and suggest that every social problem is influenced by the problem of violence.47 James Gilligan, a medical doctor who directed the Center for the Study of Violence at Harvard Medical School, put it this way: The more I learn about other people’s lives, the more I realize that I have yet to hear the history of any family in which there has not been at least one family member who has been overtaken by fatal or life threatening violence, as the perpetrator or the victim—whether the violence takes the form of suicide or homicide, death in combat, death from a drunken or reckless driver, or any other of the many nonnatural forms of death.48 So it’s safe to say that violence is not foreign to us, but rather is something with which we rub shoulders constantly.We know violence through our own lived experiences and the experiences of our family, friends, and neighbors, as well as through the media images we view. At a deeper level, this means that our identities as citizens, parents, children, spouses, lovers, friends, teammates, and colleagues are often shaped by violence, at least in part. Who we are as individuals and as human beings is shaped by the culture within which we live.How we define ourselves, the ways in which we relate to others, and our notions of what we stand for and what we believe in, are all determined in large part by the influences and experiences of our lives—or, as the great English Poet Alfred Lord Tennyson once wrote, “I am a part of all that I have met.”49 In a similar vein, although a bit less poetically, the sociologists Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann suggest, “Identity is a phenomenon that emerges from the dialectic between individual and society.”50 In short, our life experiences shape who we are. Therefore, if violence is a part of our reality, then it plays a role in shaping us as human beings and influences how we understand the world around us. To acknowledge this is to understand that violence is part of who we are and central to knowing ourselves and the lives we lead. Because of this prevalence and its impact on our lives, some have suggested that Americans have created and embraced a culture of violence. Culture is a nebulous concept that includes values, beliefs, and rules for behavior. These qualities detail what is expected, what is valued, and what is prohibited.51 Essentially, then, this argument contends that our history and experiences have resulted in a system of values and beliefs that, to a greater extent than in some other cultures, condones, tolerates, and even expects a violent response to various and specific situations.52 Other scholars have further developed this theme by arguing that, instead of a culture of violence in the United States, there are subcultures of violence specific to particular regions or groups. First articulated by the criminologists Wolfgang and Ferracuti, this viewpoint suggests that members of some groups are more likely to rely on violence. As they suggest Quick resort to physical combat as a measure of daring, courage, or defense of status appears to be a cultural expectation . . . When such a cultural response is elicited from an individual engaged in social interplay with others who harbor the same response mechanism, physical assaults, altercations, and violent domestic quarrels that result in homicide are likely to be relatively common.53 This argument has been applied to various subcultural groups such as Southerners, young African American males, and others.54 The South historically has had much higher rates of violence than other regions of the country and many have suggested that it is a consequence of Southern notions of honor that demand a violent response to certain provocations. The argument suggests that Southern culture, in other words, is more violence prone than other regional cultures. Violence, then, is something that appears to be embedded in our values and attitudes, which is why some have suggested that violence is “as American as apple pie.”55

Predatory Lending Frontline (1/3)
1. Predatory Lending Reform is on the way- status quo solves
Harney, Vice president and member of the board of directors of the National Association of Real Estate Editors, April 4
(Ken Harney, graduate from Princeton University, Columnist for Washington Post, April 4, 2009, “Congress Takes A Serious Look At Reforming the Mortgage Market”, Lexis)

Congress is preparing to take up a comprehensive plan that would fundamentally reform the home mortgage market, starting this year. Had the same rules and standards been in place earlier in the decade, congressional supporters say, it could have eliminated much of the funny-money loans, slipshod underwriting and Wall Street abuses that distorted the market from 2002 through 2006. The boom wouldn't have been as big, and the bust might not have happened. The Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2009 (H.R. 1728) was introduced March 26 by co-authors Reps. Barney Frank Enhanced Coverage Linking Barney Frank -Search using: * Biographies Plus News * News, Most Recent 60 Days (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, Brad Miller (D-N.C.) and Melvin Watt (D-N.C.) It is expected to move quickly through the House this month and go to the Senate by May. The odds of passage in some form are high, according to banking and housing industry lobbyists. The bill is a tougher version of one pushed by Miller in 2007 that passed the House but foundered in the Senate. This year, as a result of stronger Democratic majorities in both houses, "the political climate has changed," Miller said. "The foreclosure crisis has wreaked havoc on middle-class families and our economy as a whole. The industry's arguments for watering the bill down are not at all convincing." Here's what the legislation would do: -- Ban all fees paid to loan officers that are tied to the interest rate or type of mortgage. During the headiest years of the boom, Wall Street investment banks paid mortgage brokers higher fees if they originated exotic loans such as short-term subprime adjustables, interest-only, payment-option, and "stated income" no-documentation loans with minimal or no down payments. The lending industry also routinely paid brokers more for originating mortgages that carried rates above prevailing levels. Loan officers frequently steered applicants with marginal credit histories into loans with excessive rates and penalties -- and were paid more by banks and Wall Street for doing so. Studies have documented that minority and first-time borrowers disproportionately were marketed loans with unnecessarily high fees and penalties, based on their credit scores. The new bill would prohibit any compensation -- "direct or indirect" -- that is tied to the rate or terms of the mortgage. "There should be no way you can be compensated for steering anyone to a higher rate," Frank said in an interview. The bill does permit home buyers or refinancers to opt for a slightly higher note rate to finance closing costs. -- Create mandatory minimum national quality standards for all mortgages. The rules would encourage lenders to make fully documented 30-year, fixed-rate loans at prevailing market rates, as opposed to loans with higher-risk features such as adjustable payments and negative amortization. The bill would also impose a new federal "duty of care" standard requiring loan officers to offer applicants only terms and rates that are "appropriate" to their income and ability to repay. Refinancings would have to pass a "net tangible benefit" test demonstrating that the replacement loan is superior to the borrower's current terms. Lenders would have to offer applicants the option to choose any loan without a prepayment penalty attached. Mandatory arbitration clauses in most home mortgages would be banned. -- Allow borrowers who are put into mortgages that violate the new law to seek immediate legal redress through cancellation of the entire loan contract, refund of all payments and fees, plus lender compensation for legal costs.
2. The Georgia 09 evidence only talks about the distinction between good and bad loan but is not conclusive on the fact that predatory lending will cause economic collapse-they have no internal link
Predatory Lending Frontline (3/3)
4. Can’t solve their own advantage- 1ac Henderson and Zirkin evidence does not isolate lack of class action law-suits as the root cause of predatory lending- post plan it could happen to others.

Solvency Frontline (1/2)
1. Class Action Lawsuits fail to compensate litigants
Miller, student @ Brigham Young University, 09
(Chris H. Miller, student @ Brigham Young University, 09, “THE ADAPTIVE AMERICAN JUDICIARY: FROM CLASSICAL ADJUDICATION TO CLASS ACTION LITIGATION”, 72 Alb. L. Rev. 117, Lexis)

Third, Martin Redish identifies the problem of individual justice. n120 Since class action litigation is typically initiated by private attorneys seeking personal economic gain, perverse incentives to settle often emerge, usually at the expense of class members. n121 The contingent fee structure of class action adjudication provides attorneys with a particular percentage of the award, regardless of the amount of effort spent on the case. n122 Consequently, attorneys often elect to settle for less than they could probably acquire in court, in order to avoid the costs of taking a particular case to trial, which results in huge payouts for attorneys in return for small investments of time and substantially smaller rewards for actual litigants. n123 Additionally, Redish argues that an enormous number of class action lawsuits result in coupon settlements, or awards given in discounts for services and merchandise. n124 Coupons resulting from these settlements, however, are frequently unhelpful to individual litigants and cost the defendant virtually nothing, since they can simply offer their goods and services at the discounted production price. n125 Additionally, the completion of complex forms is often required to qualify for the settled coupons, which constructs yet another barrier to relief for litigants. n126 As a result, class action settlements often fail to satisfactorily achieve the primary goals of victim compensation and corporate deterrence. n127
2. 1AC solvency evidence only in context of business regulation- they read no specific evidence on how
3. Class action lawsuits don’t solve their harms- legislative enforcement is necessary
Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy, 03
(Martin H. Redish, Professor of Law and Public Policy @ Northwestern University, 2003 “Class Actions and the Democratic Difficulty: Rethinking the Intersection of Private Litigation and Public Goals”, 2003 U. Chi. Legal F. 71)

Where the government wishes to deter or punish unlawful behavior in a more direct and reliable manner, it has several options available to it. Instead of, or in addition to, the private compensatory remedy, a legislature may utilize any permutation or combination of a variety of conceivable remedial models, including criminal enforcement, civil penalties, and administrative regulation. For purposes of democratic theory, there are several key points to note about the substantive law's choice of remedial model. To be sure, a legislative choice of behavioral proscription may be of enormous political import. Normative issues of social policy often turn on the legislative selection of specific acts to be prohibited or restricted. But also of potentially great social and political significance is the legislative choice of how to implement and enforce those directives--for example, whether a judicially enforceable compensatory remedy will be created, whether relief will be confined to the imposition of criminal penalties, or whether civil fines will also be authorized. Unless a particular substantive law authorizes enforcement through private victim compensation, the entire structure of private rights compensatory adjudication is generally rendered irrelevant. n20 On the other [*77] hand, where a statute provides for enforcement exclusively through victim compensation, enforcement of the statute's behavioral norms by any other method inevitably and profoundly alters the statute's substantive directives

Solvency Frontline (2/2)
4. Other things in the ways
Barnett, President of Legal Services Corporation, 07
(Helaine M. Barnett, President of Legal Services Corporation, June 2007, “Documenting the Justice Gap In America The Current Unmet Civil Legal Needs of Low-Income Americans”, http://www.lsc.gov/justicegap. pdf)
More broadly, the methodology does not capture people with serious legal needs who did not contact any legal aid provider for a variety of possible reasons (data documenting the frequency of these reasons for not seeking legal help appears below, under Methodology #2): People who need legal help frequently do not know about the availability of civil legal assistance or their potential eligibility for legal services. People who need legal help and know that they meet the eligibility requirements for free legal services may not seek help from the program because they believe (often correctly) that the program will not be able to assist them.9 Other barriers, such as geographical distance and isolation, low literacy, physical or mental disability, limited English proficiency, culture and ethnic background, and apprehension about the courts and the legal system, also pose impediments.
5. LSC lacks substantial resources to help the poor-every one out of two people are turned down even if eligible
Nieves, staff writer for Washington Post, 05
(Evelyn Nieves, staff writer for Washington Post, 10-15-2005, “80% of Poor Lack Civil Legal Aid, Study Says”, http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2005/ 10/14/AR2005101401861.html)
At least 80 percent of low-income Americans who need civil legal assistance do not receive any, in part because legal aid offices in this country are so stretched that they routinely turn away qualified prospective clients, a new study shows. Roughly 1 million cases per year are being rejected because legal aid programs lack the resources to handle them, according to the study, "Documenting the Justice Gap in America," by the Legal Services Corp. (LSC), which funds 143 legal aid programs across the country. The 1 million cases do not include the many qualified people who do not ask a legal aid program for help -- because they do not know the programs exist, they do not know they qualify or they assume that the help is not available to them, the study shows. Nor does the figure include people who received some service -- including simple advice -- but not the level of service that they actually need, the study found. Nationally, on average, low-income households experienced approximately one civil legal need per year. These legal needs arise out of the everyday problems of poor people -- matters relating to family law, housing, employment, government benefits or consumer problems, according to the LSC. Left unresolved, these problems can affect and cost society much more than the expense of legal services to address them, LSC President Helaie M. Barnett said. But only 1 in 5 or less of all problems identified is addressed, either with the help of a private (paid or pro bono) or legal aid lawyer, the study found. For every client served by an LSC-funded program, at least one person seeking help will be turned down. Poor people also have few options when it comes to legal help. The study determined that there is one legal aid lawyer per 6,861 low-income clients vs. one lawyer for every 525 persons in the general population. Legal aid programs served slightly fewer than 1 million people in 2004, with family problems representing the largest category of cases (383,484). Family problems -- including domestic violence and abuse, custody issues, and problems involving social service agencies -- also represented the largest number of documented unmet cases (504,312). Housing problems were second, while income issues were third on the list of cases met and fifth on the list of problems that were unmet, after consumer issues and miscellaneous legal problems.