Not final until 8:30 but this is likely the 1NC



HC Politics DA
Coercion DA
Econ DA

Chinese nationalism turn on rights Adv
Mexican Drug Trade turn on Mexico Adv

Politics Link

Social Services for immigration are politically divisive
Irish Times 06
(“Republicans split on immigration reform,” 8 April 2006, Lexis)

America Denis Staunton Yesterday's unravelling of a Senate deal to overhaul America's immigration system highlights the political delicacy of an issue that has brought hundreds of thousands on to the streets in recent weeks and seen schools ban national symbols in an attempt to defuse tensions. The Senate compromise collapsed after conservative Republicans sought to introduce amendments that Democrats feared would undermine an attempt to give millions of illegal immigrants a chance to become US citizens. Republicans are deeply divided. Economic liberals view immigrant labour as essential to many US businesses while cultural conservatives, who see America's porous borders as a security threat, want to deport all illegal immigrants and build a security fence along the border with Mexico. President Bush has sought to embrace both wings of the party, calling for stronger borders but backing a temporary worker programme that would allow millions of immigrants in the US to legalise their status. Conservative Republicans facing elections in November are tempted to take a tough line on immigration, not least because they would prefer to talk about immigration than about Iraq or the domestic record of this unpopular administration. More than 90 per cent of Americans regard immigration as an important issue and many, particularly in southern states, complain that illegal immigrants are clogging hospital emergency rooms and filling schools with children who cannot speak English. However, Mr Bush and his political advisors fear that too harsh an approach to immigration could alienate the Hispanic community, which accounted for nearly 14 per cent of the US population in 2004, a proportion that is expected to double by 2050. Hispanics are already the largest minority in America, overtaking African-Americans in 2000 and in California, they account for one in three of the population. Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist warned that if Republicans don't back a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, the party could lose the Hispanic vote, just as it lost the Catholic vote for almost a century. Last month's massive pro-immigrant demonstrations took Washington by surprise, alerting both parties to the political potential of the protests. Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for the Human Rights of Immigrants, declared that the marches marked the dawning of a new era of political influence. The demonstrators, students, religious leaders, and trade unions as well as immigrants, were provoked into action by an immigration Bill approved by the House of Representatives earlier this year that would make felons of illegal immigrants and those who offer them help, including shelter or advice. Some Democrats believe their party could benefit in November if the Senate fails to introduce a Bill before then and the House Bill is perceived as the Republican party's position on immigration. Many analysts draw parallels with California's Proposition 187 in 1994, which established new rules on the registration of illegal immigrants, and denied them public education and other social services. The Republican-backed measure was approved in a popular ballot by 59 per cent to 41 per cent, but it has often been blamed for the subsequent decline in Republican fortunes in California. In fact, first-generation immigrants supported the initiative by 54 per cent to 46 per cent and three out of five third-generation immigrants supported it. However, Hispanic support for California Republicans fell sharply, and Mr Bush and his chief political strategist Karl Rove believe the risk of losing such support on a national scale is enormous. A national day of action in support of immigrants next Monday is expected to attract millions on to the streets of more than 60 American cities. But as senators and congressmen return to their constituencies for a two-week Easter break, they will hear other voices calling for a crackdown on illegal immigrants and on the businesses that employ them. The president's role in brokering a deal between the two wings of the Republican party could be crucial, but many fear that Mr Bush may have exhausted his political capital to the point where few legislators are prepared to listen to him.

China Turn
  1. Turn: Chinese movement towards democracy leads to nationalist backlash.
“Nationalism in Northeast Asia.” Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. April 30. __ Conference/CR_ES/020430- 020502CR.htm__ [Mardjuki]

As the trend towards democracy gathers pace in contemporary China, it is clear that an examination is necessary of the complex relationship that exists between nationalism, national identity, the state, the direction of this trend and the democracy's subsequent prospects. Popular Chinese nationalism attempts to exclude the role of the Party-state in defining national identity and, most importantly, has the potential to push for democratization in China. Chinese nationalism, whether official or popular, comes into conflict with democracy when it confronts the national/boundary problem. The Chinese nationalist solution to the national identity problem is logically and inherently opposed to the contemporary trend towards democracy.

  1. Nationalism increases risk of war.
“Nationalism in Northeast Asia.” Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. April 30. __ Conference/CR_ES/020430- 020502CR.htm__ [Mardjuki]

Chinese nationalism was the most disputed issue of the conference. Some participants insisted that Chinese nationalism shows dangerous “malignant” qualities that could easily become uncontrollable. Adherents to this school of thought believe that Chinese nationalism is essentially a mixture of state-inculcated nationalism and populist reactive nationalism, with the causal factor being China’s humiliation after years of colonization. Some of the qualities of this “malignant” nationalism are: national humiliation and wounded pride, hyper-sensitivity to criticism, a grandiose false sense of self, demonization of others, a preoccupation with power, political authoritarianism, and irredentism.

Mexico Turn

Turn- Mexicn drug trade good- uproot ensures Mexican and U.S. collapse
DWC, 01 (DWC, Drug War Chronicle has provided comprehensive coverage of the War on Drugs since 1997
, 6/29/01, __ chronicle-old/192/shoetodrop. shtml__)
The Ciudad Juárez newspaper El Diario reported this week that, according to Mexican journalist Carlos Loret de Mola, author of a forthcoming book about the drug trade, Mexico's drug economy is almost twice as large as that country's largest legitimate economic sector, the oil exports. The annual income of the four "cartels" that dominate the traffic in Mexico would, if divided equally among them, amount to more than 17 times the annual income of Carlos Slim, Mexico's wealthiest man, for each cartel, writes Loret. Similarly, Loret concluded that profits from the cartels are three times greater than those of Mexico's 500 largest companies combined.
According to El Diario, Loret's figures on the drug trade are derived from official and unofficial sources, as well as secret data compiled by the Mexican police agency CISEN and obtained by Loret. According to one CISEN document obtained by Loret, if the drug trade were to suddenly disappear in Mexico a hemispheric economic crisis would quickly ensue, with the US economy contracting by as much as a fifth and the Mexican economy reduced by more than half.
The drug traffickers "have the ball in their court," Loret told El Diario, warning that to deal with the narco-economy could create political costs that no one wants to confront. Again citing secret CISEN documents, Loret warned that "such is the weight of the narcotics traffic in the Mexican economy that to uproot it would provoke an economic collapse."


  1. Poverty defined by Federal Poverty Line
OCPP, Oregon Center for Public Policy, 09
OCPP, Oregon Center for Public Policy, “Federal Government Issues New Poverty Line for 2009,” January 23, 2009, __ display.cgi?page= nr20090123Povert__ [Tom]

The 2009 Federal Poverty Income Guidelines, published in today’s Federal Register, set the definition of poverty that Oregon uses to determine eligibility for programs such as child care subsidies, Head Start, food stamps, school lunches, energy assistance and some health care programs. The poverty guidelines vary by family size. This year, for example, a family of three with an annual income of $18,310 or under qualifies as poor, up from $17,600 in 2008. A four-person family would be poor if their annual income is $22,050 or less.

  1. Aff offers legal counsel to persons in detention centers above federal poverty line – Abadia proves.
AP 8.
“Reputed Drug Lord Clustrophobic.” __ drug.lord.2.815791.html__ [Mardjuki]

The lawyer for a reputed Colombian drug lord facing trial in New York has requested that his client be moved to a different jail cell because he is claustrophobic. An attorney for Juan Carlos Ramirez Abadia asked a federal court judge in Brooklyn to move his client from maximum security to the Metropolitan Detention Center, where he would be with the general population. Attorney Paul Navel says that his client has suffered from claustrophobia since he was a child. U.S. prosecutors allege that Ramirez Abadia was a leader of a Colombian cartel that shipped cocaine worth $10 billion into the United States between 1990 and 2003.

  1. Prefer
Limits – failure to limit eligibility for social services to persons in poverty explodes the topic – every government policy affects persons in poverty.
XT: we can’t predict what other groups of people they’ll offer their social service to – makes it impossible to prepare

  1. Voter for fairness and education.


  1. Plan guarantees detainess “FULL” to legal counsel. Full doesn’t modify anything.

B) Vote Neg
1. Presumption: no solvency – you can’t guarantee full to free legal counsel means they can’t access any their advantages.
2. No 2ac plan clarifactions – we predicated our strategy off the 1ac plan flaw and new changes are infinitely regressive, justify specifying funding to spike out of econ links.

1NC States

Text: The 50 states and all relevant territories should guarantee that detainees at immigrant detention centers in the United States have full rights to free legal counsel.


  1. Any increased ICE spending trades off internally in the DHS
Mickey McCarter, Homeland Security Today, eNewsletter Editor/Senior Washington Correspondent, journalist with more than a decade of experience in reporting on military affairs and information technology, 6/30/09, view/9162/128/
The Homeland Security Appropriations bill (HR 2892) for fiscal 2010 passed by the House of Representatives, 389-37, last week spurned several proposals by the Obama administration to cut or freeze spending at some programs but left the White House's overall spending target for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) roughly the same. The bill, passed on June 24, would fund DHS with $42.6 billion in discretionary spending, $205 million less than administration's proposals but $462 more than the level enacted in fiscal 2009 (with the addition of emergency spending). With total mandatory funding for the department at $44 billion, the bill represents a 7 percent increase over the fiscal 2009 DHS budget. While the overall budget increased within expected limits, the House tweaked some proposals in response to concerns of its members. Legislators augmented funding to some programs by shifting money perceived as boosting bureaucratic management to operational programs. For instance, the House endorsed, 234-193, removing $50 million from the Management Directorate's budget and placing the funds under the E-Verify employment verification program at US Citizenship and Immigration Services. Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) sponsored an amendment to fund 200 additional Border Patrol agents in 2010, which passed 375-55. The White House had requested funding for only 44 more agents, and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) argued that a pause in additional agents would provide the agency with time to acclimate the thousands that it has hired in recent years. To fund the increase in Border Patrol agents, Lewis proposed reducing the administration's proposed increase in spending on front-office staff. The White House sought about 30 percent more in additional spending for management at DHS, but the House bill would reduce that request to 15 percent.
  1. Legal representation costly.
Kerwin 7.
Donald, American Bar Association. __ winter01/kerwin.html__

Most detained asylum seekers cannot obtain legal representation, although this can make all the difference in the outcome of their cases. In 1999, for example, 506 of 2,072 (almost 25 percent) represented detainees who applied were granted asylum. In contrast, only 40 of 1,172 (3.4 percent) unrepresented detainees received asylum.

Immigrants in removal proceedings enjoy a statutory privilege of legal counsel, but it must be "at no expense to the government." (INA § 292, 8 U.S.C. § 1362.) Because representing detainees is time consuming and costly, private lawyers often charge more than their normal rates, and nonprofit agencies cannot accept significant numbers of these cases. As a result, large numbers of detainees go to court unrepresented.


  1. Border Patrol key to State Budgets
Jim Kouri, 6/26/09 fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police and staff writer for the New Media Alliance, 2684-Law-Enforcement-Examiner~ y2009m6d26-Obama-advocates- Immigration-Reform-at-expense- of-crime-victims
Evidence, however, exists that refutes those claims. For instance, there is an abundance of anecdotal evidence that suggests a large number of illegal aliens are paid "off-the-books" therefore those wages are not taxed. The National Research Council has estimated that the net fiscal cost of immigration ranges from $11 billion to $22 billion per year, with most government expenditures on immigrants coming from state and local coffers, while most taxes paid by immigrants who actually do pay taxes go to the federal treasury. The net deficit is caused by a low level of tax payments by immigrants, because they are disproportionately low-skilled and thus earn low wages, and a higher rate of consumption of government services, both because of their relative poverty and their higher fertility. This is especially true of illegal immigration. Even though illegal aliens make little use of welfare, from which they are generally barred, the costs of illegal immigration in terms of government expenditures for education, criminal justice, and emergency medical care are significant. And those who managed to steal the identities of American citizens do in fact apply for welfare including food stamps. Californian officials have estimated that the net cost to taxpayers in order to provide government services to illegal immigrants approached $3 billion during a single fiscal year. And even that figure is suspected of being low-balled for political purposes. The fact that states must bear the cost of federal failure turns illegal immigration, in effect, into one of the largest unfunded federal mandates existing today. In addition, according to the Center for Immigration Studies, even with free trade, the United States continues to enjoy a higher real wage than other nations, due to the superiority of US technology. If taken to an extreme and the US removed all barriers to migration, most foreign workers would move to the United States, lured by the higher wages available here; Foreign labor would essentially cease to exist. However, with all labor now in the United States, the prices of goods would return to their level of self-sufficiency, prior to the opening of trade. That is, perfectly free migration entirely eliminates the gains from trade that US natives had enjoyed. World income rose with the migration, but the natives of foreign countries in this case received more than all of this rise, since the income of US natives declined. With the world's majority of low-wage workers in the US, there would be tremendous damage to free trade and its benefits, with US middle and upper-middle class workers suffering the brunt of declining wages. The urge for a utopian state of existence and a desire to make all things equal by the American Left has given way to a desire simply to make all things equal sans utopia. In their passion for a neo-Marxist level for the masses, they've decided consciously or subconsciously that if they could not bring the World's population up to the American level of prosperity and wealth, then they will bring US citizens down to the World's level of poverty and misery. For this is a result of seeing free trade as a zero-sum entity, and self-alienation of the American Left from their own country, the USA. The problem isn't about the need for new laws; the problem is about the lack of enforcement of existing laws. The US Constitution provides the executive branch with a number of inherent powers such as the enforcement of immigration laws. The Constitution also mandates that the President protect American sovereignty and the American people. That is the number one priority for our government -- of it should be. And congress is mandated to provide domestic tranquility for Americans. Criminal alien gangbangers do not add to our domestic tranquility. Why is it suddenly necessary for congress to pass laws on illegal immigration when we haven't been enforcing the laws that already exist. The executive branch has the power to add border agents, equipment and other resources. The President has the power to use the military if necessary to enhance border protection. Passing laws is an easy, painless process. The trick is to enforce those laws. The University of Texas at El Paso recently conducted a study that found the following: Treating illegal immigrants in hospitals accounts for nearly one quarter of the uncompensated costs at border county hospitals in Cochise County. That county in Arizona spends tens of thousands of dollars just picking up trash left at campsites by these illegals. Prosecuting and jailing illegals costs this county an additional $5 million a year. And 25 percent of Cochise County's budget is paid for health care for the uninsured, the majority of whom are illegally in the country.


  1. Increased state deficits exacerbate the recession.
Mattoon, senior economist and economic advisor @ Chicago Federal Reserve. August 2009.
Richard. “Should the Federal Government Bail Out the States? Lessons from Past Recessions.” Chicago Federal Reserve Bank Essay Number 265. __ publications/fedletter/ cflaugust2009_265.pdf__ [Mardjuki]

Like the economy in general, individual state economies are struggling in this recession. State governments face significant constraints in raising additional revenues. Most states are required to balance their budgets regardless of the economic environment. This article considers the role of the federal government in helping the states to manage their finances. State government budget woes have been much in the news. Recently, California projected a $21 billion deficit after failing to get voter approval for a series of budget balancing fiscal measures.1 In January of this year, five prominent Democratic governors suggested that the federal government should commit $1 trillion in aid to the states over the next two years.2 The rationale for such financial support is that states (which are generally prohibited from running deficits) need the money to maintain key programs, such as Medicaid, unemployment insurance, and work force training, for which demand rises during a recession. Also, this aid might help states avoid enacting spending cuts or tax increases that could deepen or prolong the economic downturn.

C/A Mead.