Unnamed: 0
int64 0
241k
| Full-Document
stringlengths 96
265k
| Citation
stringlengths 1
50k
| Extract
stringlengths 34
30.6k
| Abstract
stringlengths 8
8.56k
| #CharsDocument
int64 96
265k
| #CharsAbstract
int64 8
8.56k
| #CharsExtract
int64 34
30.6k
| #WordsDocument
int64 20
41.6k
| #WordsAbstract
int64 4
1.34k
| #WordsExtract
int64 11
4.68k
| AbsCompressionRatio
float64 0
0.99
| ExtCompressionRatio
float64 0
1
| OriginalDebateFileName
stringlengths 19
104
| DebateCamp
stringclasses 30
values | Tag
stringclasses 15
values | Year
stringclasses 11
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3,700 |
The global financial crisis of 2008 was a chance for China to become an increasingly important player in Latin American. As Europe and the United States were caught in a financial quagmire, China, with nearly $3 trillion of foreign exchange reserves as backing, embarked on "funds-for-assets" transactions with Latin American countries.¶ So what does China want exactly in entering Latin American? Is it to obtain a stable supply of energy and resources, and thus inadvertently acquire political influence? Or the other way round?¶ Presumably most U.S. foreign policy-makers are well aware of the answer.¶ China's involvement in the Latin American continent doesn’t constitute a threat to the United States, but brings benefits. It is precisely because China has reached "loans-for-oil" swap agreements with Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador and other countries that it brings much-needed funds to these oil-producing countries in South America. Not only have these funds been used in the field of oil production, but they have also safeguarded the energy supply of the United States, as well as stabilized these countries' livelihood -- and to a certain extent reduced the impact of illegal immigration and the drug trade on the U.S.¶ For South America, China and the United States, this is not a zero-sum game, but a multiple choice of mutual benefits and synergies. Even if China has become the Latin American economy’s new upstart, it is still not in a position to challenge the strong and diverse influence that the United States has accumulated over two centuries in the region.
|
Wang Xiaoxia; 5-6 (Wang Xiaoxia is at the Department of Economics at Tsinghua University; World Crunch, “In America's Backyard: China's Rising Influence In Latin America” http://www.worldcrunch.com/china-2.0/in-america-039-s-backyard-china-039-s-rising-influence-in-latin-america/foreign-policy-trade-economy-investments-energy/c9s11647/)
|
The financial crisis of 2008 was a chance for China to become an increasingly important player in Latin America . China's involvement in the Latin American continent doesn’t constitute a threat to the United States, but brings benefits. It is precisely because China has reached "loans-for-oil" swap agreements that it brings much-needed funds to these oil-producing countries in South America. these funds have also safeguarded the energy supply of the U S stabilized these countries' livelihood reduced the impact of illegal immigration and the drug trade this is not a zero-sum game, China is not in a position to challenge the influence that the U S accumulated
|
Influence in Latin America is not zero-sum – it benefits China and the US
| 1,577 | 73 | 665 | 252 | 14 | 107 | 0.055556 | 0.424603 |
Cuba Embargo Affirmative Updates - Berkeley 2013.html5
|
Berkeley (CNDI)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,701 |
However, there is also a case against this optimistic view. China is an order of magnitude bigger even than Japan. Its opportunities, particularly in the world economy, must be relatively smaller. Furthermore, as former premier Wen Jiabao often stated, growth has been “unbalanced, unco-ordinated and unsustainable”. This is true, on a number of dimensions. But the most significant is the dependence on investment, not just as a source of extra capacity, but as a source of demand. Consistently rising investment rates are not sustainable, since the returns ultimately depend on additional consumption.¶ This is where a far more pessimistic view emerges. As the experience of Japan has shown, managing a shift from a high-investment, high-growth economy to a lower-investment, lower-growth economy is very tricky. I can envisage at least three risks.¶ First, if expected growth falls from over 10 to, say, 6 per cent, the needed rate of investment in productive capital will collapse: under a constant incremental capital output ratio the fall would be from 50 per cent to, say, 30 per cent of GDP. If swift, such a decline would cause a depression, all on its own.¶ Second, a big jump in credit has gone together with reliance on real estate and other investments with falling marginal returns. Partly for this reason, the decline in growth is likely to mean a rise in bad debts, not least on the investments made on the assumption that past growth would continue. The fragility of the financial system could increase very sharply, not least in the rapidly expanding “shadow banking” sector.¶ Third, since there is little reason to expect a decline in the household savings rate, sustaining the envisaged rise in consumption, relative to investment, demands a matching shift in incomes towards households and away from corporations, including state enterprises. This can happen: the growing labour shortage and a move towards higher interest rates might deliver it smoothly. But, even so, there is also a clear risk that the resulting decline in profits would accelerate a collapse in investment.
|
Wolf 13 (Martin Wolf, columnist, Financial Times. Why China’s economy might topple. April 2, 2013. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e854f8a8-9aed-11e2-97ad-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2YTedWXd6)
|
growth has been “unbalanced, unco-ordinated and unsustainable”. Consistently rising investment rates are not sustainable anaging a shift from a high-investment, high-growth economy to a lower-investment, lower-growth economy is very tricky. First, if expected growth falls decline would cause a depression, all on its own the decline in growth is likely to mean a rise in bad debts fragility of the financial system could increase very sharpl there is also a clear risk that the resulting decline in profits would accelerate a collapse in investment.
|
China’s economy is on road to collapse
| 2,098 | 38 | 550 | 338 | 7 | 84 | 0.02071 | 0.248521 |
Cuba Embargo Affirmative Updates - Berkeley 2013.html5
|
Berkeley (CNDI)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,702 |
The real power does not rest in the Politburo of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC), as per the Constitution. It rests in a small group of Generals, some of whom are not even in the Politburo. They compose a military junta invisible to the international community and to a majority of the Cuban people, as they operate behind the scenes and are not mentioned by the media. [The new Vice-President of the Council of State] Miguel Diaz-Canel does not belong to the “creme de la creme” that controls the country and that has 14 members.
|
Quniones, 13-Roberto Álvarez Quiñones is a Cuban journalist, economist and historian formerly employed as an economic columnist and a chronicler with the daily Granma and with Cuban TV as a world economy commentator (Roberto, “Meet Cuba’s 14-Member Military Junta”, InterAmerican Security Watch, 3/25/13, http://interamericansecuritywatch.com/meet-cubas-14-member-military-junta/)//TL
|
The real power does not rest in the Politburo of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC It rests in a small group of Generals, some of whom are not even in the Politburo. They compose a military junta invisible to the international community and to a majority of the Cuban people, as they operate behind the scenes and are not mentioned by the media Miguel Diaz-Canel does not belong to the “creme de la creme” that controls the country and that has 14 members.
|
Diaz-Canel will not have any real power- the military controls everything behind the scenes-their ev ignores them
| 530 | 113 | 453 | 95 | 17 | 83 | 0.178947 | 0.873684 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,703 |
But more importantly, the continued ostracism of Cuba's people -- for they, not the Havana government, are the biggest losers -- is unfair, unkind and unnecessary. If the U.S. wants full democracy in Cuba, then it should open up fully to ordinary Cubans. Tear down the artificial walls that separate the people of the two countries and, as Mao Zedong once said, let a hundred flowers bloom.
|
Paul, 3/19 – (Sundeep, “Chavez and the oil curse”, The Indian Express, Mar 09 2013, http://www.indianexpress.com/news/chavez-and-the-oil-curse/1085285/) //SP
|
Tear down the artificial walls that separate the people of the two countries and, as Mao Zedong once said, let a hundred flowers bloom.
|
“Pink tide” is already dead
| 390 | 27 | 135 | 67 | 5 | 24 | 0.074627 | 0.358209 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,704 |
The embargo survives largely because of Florida’s political importance. Every presidential candidate wants to win the Sunshine State’s electoral votes, and the Cuban American community is a significant voting bloc. But the political environment is changing. A younger, more liberal generation of Cuban Americans with no memory of life in Cuba is coming to the fore. Said Wayne Smith, a diplomat who served in Havana: “for the first time in years, maybe there is some chance for a change in policy.” And there are now many more new young Cuban Americans who support a more sensible approach to Cuba. Support for the Republican Party also is falling. According to some exit polls Barack Obama narrowly carried the Cuban American community in November, after receiving little more than a third of the vote four years ago. He received 60 percent of the votes of Cuban Americans born in the United States. Barack Obama increased his votes among Cuban Americans after liberalizing contacts with the island. He also would have won the presidency without Florida, demonstrating that the state may not be essential politically. Today even the GOP is no longer reliable. For instance, though Republican vice-presidential nominee Paul Ryan has defended the embargo in recent years, that appears to reflect ambition rather than conviction. Over the years he voted at least three times to lift the embargo, explaining: “The embargo doesnt work. It is a failed policy. It was probably justified when the Soviet Union existed and posed a threat through Cuba. I think its become more of a crutch for Castro to use to repress his people. All the problems he has, he blames the American embargo.” There is essentially no international support for continuing the embargo. For instance, the European Union plans to explore improving relations with Havana. Spain’s Deputy Foreign Minister Gonzalo de Benito explained that the EU saw a positive evolution in Cuba. The hope, then, is to move forward in the relationship between the European Union and Cuba. The administration should move now, before congressmen are focused on the next election. President Obama should propose legislation to drop (or at least significantly loosen) the embargo. He also could use his authority to relax sanctions by, for instance, granting more licenses to visit the island. Ending the embargo would have obvious economic benefits for both Cubans and Americans. The U.S. International Trade Commission estimates American losses alone from the embargo as much as $1.2 billion annually.
|
Bandow 12, Senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to former US president Ronald Reagan (Doug, “Time to End the Cuba Embargo”, CATO institute, December 11, 2012, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/time-end-cuba-embargo)
|
The embargo survives largely because of Florida’s political importance. Every presidential candidate wants to win the Sunshine State’s electoral votes, and the Cuban American community is a significant voting bloc. But the political environment is changing more liberal generation of Cuban Americans with no memory of life in Cuba is coming to the fore for the first time in years, maybe there is some chance for a change in policy Support for the Republican Party also is falling. According to some exit polls Barack Obama narrowly carried the Cuban American community in November He received 60 percent of the votes of Cuban Americans born in the United States. Barack Obama increased his votes among Cuban Americans after liberalizing contacts He also would have won the presidency without Florida, demonstrating that the state may not be essential politically. Today even the GOP is no longer reliable For instance, though Republican vice-presidential nominee Paul Ryan has defended the embargo in recent years, that appears to reflect ambition rather than conviction. The embargo doesnt work. It is a failed policy. It was probably justified when the Soviet Union existed and posed a threat through Cuba. Castro to use to repress his people. All the problems he has, he blames the American embargo.” There is essentially no international support for continuing the embargo. For instance, the European Union plans to explore improving The administration should move now, before congressmen are focused President Obama should propose legislation to drop the embargo He also could use his authority to relax sanctions by, for instance, granting more licenses to visit the island. Ending the embargo would have obvious economic benefits
|
Plan wont drain capital – opposition is low
| 2,544 | 43 | 1,737 | 409 | 8 | 273 | 0.01956 | 0.667482 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,705 |
With Cuba cautiously introducing free-market changes that have legalized hundreds of thousands of small private businesses over the past two years, new economic bonds between Cuba and the United States have formed, creating new challenges, new possibilities — and a more complicated debate over the embargo. The longstanding logic has been that broad sanctions are necessary to suffocate the totalitarian government of Fidel and Raúl Castro. Now, especially for many Cubans who had previously stayed on the sidelines in the battle over Cuba policy, a new argument against the embargo is gaining currency — that the tentative move toward capitalism by the Cuban government could be sped up with more assistance from Americans. Even as defenders of the embargo warn against providing the Cuban government with “economic lifelines,” some Cubans and exiles are advocating a fresh approach. The Obama administration already showed an openness to engagement with Cuba in 2009 by removing restrictions on travel and remittances for Cuban Americans. But with Fidel Castro, 86, retired and President Raúl Castro, 81, leading a bureaucracy that is divided on the pace and scope of change, many have begun urging President Obama to go further and update American policy by putting a priority on assistance for Cubans seeking more economic independence from the government. “Maintaining this embargo, maintaining this hostility, all it does is strengthen and embolden the hard-liners,” said Carlos Saladrigas, a Cuban exile and co-chairman of the Cuba Study Group in Washington, which advocates engagement with Cuba. “What we should be doing is helping the reformers.”
|
New York Times 12 (DAMIEN CAVE, foreign correspondent for The New York Time, “Easing of Restraints in Cuba Renews Debate on U.S. Embargo”, Nov 19, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/world/americas/changes-in-cuba-create-support-for-easing-embargo.html?pagewanted=all)
|
With Cuba cautiously introducing free-market changes that have legalized hundreds of thousands of small private businesses over the past two years economic bonds between Cuba and the United States have formed, creating new challenges, new possibilitie he longstanding logic has been that broad sanctions are necessary to suffocate the totalitarian government Now, especially for many Cubans who had previously stayed on the sidelines in the battle over Cuba policy, a new argument against the embargo is gaining currency Even as defenders of the embargo warn against providing the Cuban government “economic lifelines Cubans and exiles are advocating a fresh approach Obama administration already showed an openness to engagement with Cuba in 2009 by removing restrictions many have begun urging President Obama to go further and update American policy by putting a priority on assistance Maintaining this embargo, maintaining this hostility, all it does is strengthen and embolden the hard-liners
|
Momentum to remove the embargo now
| 1,656 | 34 | 997 | 256 | 6 | 149 | 0.023438 | 0.582031 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,706 |
Some of the most pointed criticism of the embargo has come not from Democrats but from conservative businessmen who resent the fact that American business has been kept out of Cuba while most of the world is engaged there. In the words of Tom Donohue, CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: “All you have to do is go over to Cuba and watch how the Spanish, the French, the Latin Americans and everybody else on the globe are building resorts or trying to invest, and we are sitting here with a 50-year-old policy that doesn’t work.” The prime beneficiaries from an end to the embargo would be American agricultural exporters. “But just about every industry could benefit,” according to Donohue, “for the simple reason that there is such pent-up demand. Look at the cars they are running — Jack Kennedy was in office when half of them were sent down there.”
|
Reuters 08 (Bernd Debusmann, a Reuters columnist, “After Obama win, goodbye to Cuban embargo?”,NOVEMBER 5, 2008, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2008/11/05/after-obama-win-goodbye-to-cuban-embargo/)
|
Some of the most pointed criticism of the embargo has come not from Democrats but from conservative businessmen who resent the fact that American business has been kept out of Cuba In the words of Tom Donohue, CEO of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: “All you have to do is go over to Cuba and watch how the Spanish, the French, the Latin Americans and everybody else on the globe are building resorts or trying to invest, and we are sitting here with a 50-year-old policy that doesn’t work.”
|
Plan is popular with Business lobbies
| 854 | 38 | 488 | 152 | 6 | 89 | 0.039474 | 0.585526 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,707 |
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – If votes in the United Nations serve as a gauge of global opinion, 98.9 percent of the world opposes the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba, a measure imposed 46 years ago to isolate the communist-ruled island and bring down its leaders. It failed on both counts. As far as international opinion is concerned, the country that is isolated is the United States, not Cuba. In the latest of 17 successive U.N. General Assembly resolutions on lifting the embargo, Washington mustered only two allies — Israel and Palau, a Pacific island nation difficult to find on a map. It has a population of 21,000.cubans The Marshall Islands (pop. 63,000), which had voted with the United States from 2000 to 2007, unexpectedly and without public explanation broke ranks this year and abstained in the vote, a non-binding resolution taken a week before the U.S. presidential election. The count — 185 countries in favor of lifting the embargo, three against — speaks volumes about a bankrupt policy stuck in the Cold War era.
|
Reuters 08 (Bernd Debusmann, a Reuters columnist, “After Obama win, goodbye to Cuban embargo?”,NOVEMBER 5, 2008, http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2008/11/05/after-obama-win-goodbye-to-cuban-embargo/)
|
.9 percent of the world opposes the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba, a measure It failed on both counts. As far as international opinion is concerned, the country that is isolated is the United States, not Cuba. In the latest of 17 successive U.N. General Assembly resolutions on lifting the embargo, The Marshall Islands (pop. 63,000), which had voted with the United States from 2000 to 2007, unexpectedly and without public explanation broke ranks this year and abstained in the vote, The count — 185 countries in favor of lifting the embargo, three against
|
Lifting the Embargo is a diplomatic win
| 1,024 | 39 | 555 | 173 | 7 | 94 | 0.040462 | 0.543353 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,708 |
President Barack Obama should break free of the embargo on Cuba and assert his authority to promote a free-market overhaul taking place on the communist island.
|
Bloomberg 13 (Joshua Goodman, “Obama Can Bend Cuba Embargo to Help Open Economy, Groups Say”, Feb 20 2013, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-20/obama-should-bend-cuba-embargo-to-buoy-free-markets-reports-say.html)
|
President Barack Obama should break free of the embargo to promote a free-market overhaul
|
No link – Obama doesn’t have to push it through congress
| 160 | 56 | 89 | 26 | 11 | 14 | 0.423077 | 0.538462 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,709 |
But we have not seen anything close to the kinds of scenarios outlined by Yoran, Ergma, Toffler, and others. Terrorists did not use cyberattack against the World Trade Center; they used hijacked aircraft. And the attack of 9/11 did not lead to the long-term collapse of the U.S. economy; we would have to wait for the impacts of years of bad mortgages for a financial meltdown. Nor did the cyberattacks on Estonia approximate what happened on 9/11 as Yoran has claimed, and certainly not nuclear warfare as Ergma has claimed. In fact, a scientist at the NATO Co-operative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, which was established in Tallinn, Estonia in response to the 2007 cyberattacks, has written that the immediate impacts of those attacks were “minimal” or “nonexistent,” and that the “no critical services were permanently affected” (Ottis, 2010: 72).
|
Lawson, 11– Ph. D in Science and Technology Studies, Department of Communication at the University of Utah, Associate National Security Analyst with DynCorp (Sean, “Work Paper Beyond Cyber-Doom: Cyberattack Scenarios and the Evidence of History”)
|
we have not seen anything close to the kinds of scenarios outlined by Yoran, Ergma, Toffler, and others. Terrorists did not use cyberattack against the World Trade Center And the attack of 9/11 did not lead to the long-term collapse of the U.S. economy Nor did the cyberattacks on Estonia approximate what happened on 9/11 as Yoran has claimed, and certainly not nuclear warfare as Ergma has claimed a scientist at NATO in response to the 2007 cyberattacks, has written that the immediate impacts of those attacks were “minimal” or “nonexistent,” and that the “no critical services were permanently affected”
|
Cyber terror attacks don’t escalate- Lawson concludes aff
| 857 | 57 | 608 | 140 | 8 | 100 | 0.057143 | 0.714286 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,710 |
The end of Cold War political constraints and the rapid growth of India’s economy has allowed New Delhi to more energetically engage global diplomacy. Expanded engagement is evident through the huge increase in the number of bilateral defense arrangements the Indian government has made in the past decade, more than tripling from 7 in 2000 to at least 26 today. During the latter half of 2010, every major world leader paid a visit to India, including those from all five permanent U.N. Security Council members. Much of the international attention on India is due to the country’s vast market potential—the retail sector alone is worth an estimated $450 billion. Some observers argue that the New Delhi government acts too timidly on the global stage, and that the country’s regional and domestic difficulties continue to hinder its ability to exert influence in geopolitics. As a rising power, India has appeared unwilling to take the kinds of policy stances expected of major global players, in particular those who sit on the U.N. Security Council, as India has been in 2011. 38 From vague positions on Middle East uprisings to the appearance of fence-sitting on issues such as U.S.-led efforts to isolate Iran and Burma, New Delhi‘s leaders may be finding it increasingly difficult to avoid taking on the responsibilities many in Washington and elsewhere are looking for. One example is New Delhi’s largely handsoff response to uprisings in the Arab world, with External Affairs Minister Krishna saying India would not “jump into the fray” unless invited and would maintain a “very cautious” approach to the Libyan conflict. 39 In March 2011, India officially opposed NATO’s military action in Libya and notably abstained—along with Brazil, China, Russia, and Germany—from voting on U.N. Resolution 1973, which approved of such action. 40 More recently, Secretary of State Clinton has sought greater Indian assistance in pressuring the faltering Syrian regime. Human rights activists have joined foreign governments in prodding India to be more proactive on key foreign policy issues, even those in India’s own neighborhood such as in Burma and Sri Lanka. One such observer has criticized New Delhi for issuing “bland propositions” that “can convey indifference to the plight of subjugated people.” She challenges India’s leaders to “stand with people or with dictators.” 41 Many analysts view India’s foreign policy establishment—its foreign service, think-tanks, public universities, and relevant media—as being too small and/or too poorly developed for India to achieve true great power status in the foreseeable future. By one substantive account, without a major modernizing and revamping of this establishment, “India’s worldview will be parochial, reactive, and increasingly dominated by business rather than by strategic or political concerns.” 42 Thus, even as India’s rising stature commands greater attention in many world capitals, the country’s diplomatic influence remains limited—especially in comparison to that of China—and the central government continues to concentrate mainly on domestic development and poverty alleviation. Indeed, India’s domestic and social indices continue to rank it as a developing country, or what one former senior Indian diplomat called a “premature power.” 43
|
Kronstadt, 11– Specialist in South Asian Affairs, Congressional Research Service (K. Alan, “India: Domestic Issues, Strategic Dynamics, and U.S. Relations,” http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33529.pdf)//NG
|
the New Delhi government acts too timidly on the global stage, and that the country’s regional and domestic difficulties continue to hinder its ability to exert influence in geopolitics , India has appeared unwilling to take the kinds of policy stances expected of major global players, in particular those who sit on the U.N. Security Council, as India has been in 2011 One such observer has criticized New Delhi for issuing “bland propositions” that “can convey indifference to the plight of subjugated people. Many analysts view India’s foreign policy establishment—its foreign service, think-tanks, public universities, and relevant media—as being too small and/or too poorly developed for India to achieve true great power status in the foreseeable future. even as India’s rising stature commands greater attention in many world capitals, the country’s diplomatic influence remains limited especially in comparison to that of China—and the central government continues to concentrate mainly on domestic development and poverty alleviation
|
India relations fail- they’re focused on domestic affairs and won’t help out the US
| 3,312 | 84 | 1,043 | 509 | 14 | 155 | 0.027505 | 0.304519 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,711 |
Our review and analysis of the best available evidence indicates that the supply of STEM-potential and STEM-educated students has remained strong and appears to be quite responsive to standard economic signals of wage levels and unemployment rates. In the meantime, the flow of guestworkers has been substantial and targeted to one specific segment of the overall STEM labor market, namely IT occupations and industries. There are multiple routes into the IT labor force provided by high-skill immigration policy, from work permits to student visas to a range of nonimmigrant work visas, but these multiple routes of entry for high-skill guestworkers are not adequately tracked in immigration or labor force statistics. Moreover, policy analyses do not account for the wide range of visa and work permits, and thus do not account for the extent of available supply of guestworkers for the STEM workforce.
|
Lowell, 13– Director of Policy Studies at the Institute for the Study of International Migration, Georgetown University, written over 150 articles and reports on immigration policy, labor force, economic development, Mexico-U.S. migration, education, and the global mobility of the highly skilled, Ph. D (B. Lindsay, “Guestworkers in the high-skill U.S. labor market: An analysis of supply, employment, and wage trends”, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp359-guestworkers-high-skill-labor-market-analysis/)//NG
|
the supply of STEM-potential and STEM-educated students has remained strong and appears to be quite responsive to standard economic signals of wage levels and unemployment rates the flow of guestworkers has been substantial and targeted to one specific segment of the overall STEM labor market, namely IT occupations and industries. There are multiple routes into the IT labor force provided by high-skill immigration policy, from work permits to student visas to a range of nonimmigrant work visas, policy analyses do not account for the wide range of visa and work permits, and thus do not account for the extent of available supply of guestworkers for the STEM workforce.
|
High-tech visas not key-current immigration policies and trends solve
| 904 | 69 | 674 | 142 | 9 | 108 | 0.06338 | 0.760563 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,712 |
The technology industry, in lobbying Congress for expansion of programs to attract skilled foreign workers, has long claimed that foreign students graduating from U.S. universities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics are typically “the best and the brightest,” i.e., exceptionally talented innovators in their fields. However, the industry and its supporters have offered little or no evidence to back up their assertion. The claim is investigated in this report, with a focus on former foreign students now working in the United States, the group viewed by the industry as key to innovation.
|
Matloff, 13– Professor of computer science at the University of California, Davis, Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of California, Los Angeles. (Norman, “Are foreign students the ‘best and brightest’? Data and implications for immigration policy”, http://www.epi.org/publication/bp356-foreign-students-best-brightest-immigration-policy/)//NG
|
the industry and its supporters have offered little or no evidence to back up their assertion
|
Immigration policies promote worse workers, turning their internal link
| 609 | 71 | 93 | 92 | 9 | 16 | 0.097826 | 0.173913 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,713 |
Across the world, urban agriculture has become an increasingly common feature of cities, responding to social, environmental and economic concerns. The vast majority of urban farmers produce fruit and vegetables within the city centre using organic principles. There is also an international upsurge of interest in water-based aquaponic systems combining traditional fish farming with contemporary hydroponics; significant prototypes are appearing in many cities and as far a field as Brisbane and Milwaukee. Commercially viable schemes are not the only type of urban agriculture; in Europe we are very familiar with the allotment type of small, personalised plots. Each type has distinct characteristics and benefits. Broadly speaking, commercial-scale production will be necessary if urban agriculture is to have a quantifiable impact on food supply, while personalised production is very significant from a social and behaviour change perspective. It is generally acknowledged that urban agriculture will not meet all of a city’s food needs, and any systematic review of urban food systems needs to consider relationships between a city, its local region and beyond. Is urban agriculture a response to scarcity? To an extent it is: in modernising/developing societies in the global South it has often been seen as a response to crisis as evidenced by Cuba’s introduction of urban agriculture after the collapse of its economy. However, more recently it is also being recognised as a way of preventing scarcity, by introducing closed-loop no-waste cultivation systems into cities while reducing food miles and providing heat island mitigation, visual amenity, public health and educational benefi ts – an array of motives supporting sustainable urban development. In our 2005 book Continuous Productive Urban Landscapes (CPULs)1 we argued that urban agriculture should be integrated into city-wide networks of open space, providing a coherent and designed multifunctional landscape with benefits that are significant enough to consider CPULs as essential sustainable urban infrastructure. At the time, this proposition was seen as interesting though utopian, but the situation has since changed dramatically to the extent that commentators have now defi ned the Dutch city of Almere’s future plans for Almere Oosterwold as a CPUL.2 Context, Scale, Frugality and Scarcity Absolute scarcity does not leave much room for design or indeed pleasure in the material world. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s and due to the US trade blockade, Cuba experienced scarcity of almost all commodities including food. This was an extreme situation, and with no access to goods, material action is severely restrained to the point where the trivial matters: a broken kitchen tile remains broken and you see it every day. It is necessary to differentiate between acting frugally in a society that is resource rich, and surviving in a situation of genuine scarcity. The general hope is that, when pending scarcity is recognised, the remaining resources can be used to construct robust infrastructures necessary to make the transition to a more sustainable future. Agriculture is one of the small number of activities where with few resources, such as harvested seeds, soil, rain, shared knowledge and labour, abundance can be created. It is also one of the most fundamental necessities for a settled community.
|
Viljoen and Bohn 12 (André , an architect and principal lecturer in architecture at the University of Brighton, and Katrin, an architect and joined the faculty in September 2001 where she teaches architecture at the University of Brighton “Scarcity and Abundance: Urban Agriculture in Cuba and the US”, 7 JUL 2012, Wiley)
|
Across the world, urban agriculture has become an increasingly common feature of cities commercial-scale production will be necessary if urban agriculture is to have a quantifiable impact on food while personalised production is very significant from a social and behaviour change perspective. It is generally acknowledged that urban agriculture will not meet all of a city’s food needs review of urban food systems needs to consider relationships between a city, its local region and beyond. Is urban agriculture a response to scarcity? To an extent it is: in modernising/developing societies in the global South it has often been seen as a response to crisis as evidenced by Cuba’s introduction of urban agriculture after the collapse more recently it is also being recognised as a way of preventing scarcity, by introducing closed-loop no-waste cultivation systems into cities while reducing food miles and providing heat island mitigati – an array of motives supporting sustainable urban development. we argued that urban agriculture should be integrated into city-wide networks of open space providing a coherent and designed multifunctional landscape Absolute scarcity does not leave much room After the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s and due to the US trade blockade, Cuba experienced scarcity of almost all commodities including food. an extreme situation, and with no access to goods, material action is severely restrained to the point where the trivial matters: a broken kitchen tile remains broken and you see it every day. The general hope is that, when pending scarcity is recognised, the remaining resources can be used to construct robust infrastructures necessary to make the transition to a more sustainable future. Agriculture is one of the small number of activities where with few resources abundance can be created
|
Urban ag is sustainable – easiest way to survive with few resources
| 3,408 | 68 | 1,851 | 523 | 12 | 289 | 0.022945 | 0.552581 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,714 |
JENN SHARP: It definitely confirmed a lot of what I already suspected. Jennifer Cockrall-King backs up her book with meticulously documented research and references back to the source information throughout. I really loved the chapter about Cuba's urban agriculture projects. She begins by asking what would happen if a sudden food shock hit an industrial, fossil fuel dependent, globally interconnected food system. She references an article from Harper's magazine (apparently one of the few mainstream media outlets to acknowledge Cuba's multiyear food crisis) in 2005, which talks about Cuba's success with just such a situation. It all began after decades of selling sugar to the Soviet Union above world costs. As Cuba became more industrialized and more reliant on mechanized farming, more and more people moved to the cities. Cuba lost 85 per cent of its foreign trade after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, meaning they lost about 80 per cent of their food supply, fuel and farming equipment. Cockrall-King writes: "As any Cuban over the age of 30 will tell you, it's like someone turned off the lights, shut off the gas, and emptied the fridge." Factories shut down, expensive farm machinery was abandoned, crops rotted and livestock starved. So what did Cuba, a nation with few allies, do? They developed what has become known as the Cuban Model in food-security circles, a decentralized, deindustrialized food system. Urban farms are now as common in Cuban cities as 7-Elevens are in Canada. There are few grocery stores; Cubans buy their food from these farms or farmers' markets. This means their diet is mainly organic, seasonal and emphasizes fresh produce over meat and processed carbohydrates. Food is still scarce though and food rationing is a hard reality. Did anything in the book make you think differently about our food system or inspire you to change anything in your life?
|
Sharp and Martin 12 ( Jenn, Assistant editor for Bridges, Saskatoon's urban weekly pub at The StarPhoenix, and Ashley, “An enthralling look at urban food growth”, Lexis Nexis, November 29, 2012)
|
It definitely confirmed a lot of what I already suspected Cuba's urban agriculture projects. She begins by asking what would happen if a sudden food shock hit an industrial, fossil fuel dependent, globally interconnected food system As Cuba became more industrialized and more reliant on mechanized farming Cuba lost 85 per cent of its foreign trade after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, meaning they lost about 80 per cent of their food supply As any Cuban will tell you, it's like someone turned off the lights, shut off the gas, and emptied the fridge." Factories shut down, expensive farm machinery was abandoned, crops rotted and livestock starved. So what did Cuba, a nation with few allies, do? They developed what has become known as the Cuban Model in food-security circles Urban farms are now as common in Cuban cities as 7-Elevens are in Canada There are few grocery stores; Cubans buy their food from these farms or farmers' markets
|
Cuban urban ag is strong now – they already gave up all of the industrial equipment and are using a decentralized model
| 1,901 | 119 | 948 | 309 | 22 | 160 | 0.071197 | 0.517799 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,715 |
In Cuba this is far from the case. The density of the city, the scarcity of suitable land, and the gravity of the food crisis demanded a formalization of urban agriculture that is unparalleled in other countries. The system of land tenure is designed to ensure maximum production of the land available. Producers have to make a case for the expansion of their farm by demonstrating successful yields and plans for the land. Urban farmers typically undergo inspections of their properties by Ministry of Agriculture specialists who observe what farmers are growing, verify that they are selling at appropriate prices and identify challenges. The extensive infrastructure surrounding urban agriculture demonstrates the high socialvalue placed on food securimmmmty following the crisis. With this formalization of urban agriculture, one can see a relative decrease in the percentage of women versus men. Urban agriculture is one of the few areas where private enterprise - and subsequent increased income opportunities is available to ordinary people. Men appear more willing to take advantage of this than women. Although women represent 49.9% of the Cuban workforce, they only represent 20% of the workforce in the agricultural sector. It is difficult to obtain statistics on the number of women engaged specifically in urban agriculture, but their participation has been estimated to be as low as 15% of producers. In Havana, 55% of the employees in urban agriculture are women. Countrywide, they represent 70% of the technical force in grassroots government bodies of the Ministry of Agriculture, working as inspectors, extension agents, coordinators and educators. This means that women are the primary promoters and educators for urban agriculture.
|
Killoran-McKibbin o6, Faculty of environmental studies at (Sonja. “Cuba's Urban Agriculture: Food Security and Urban Sustainability”, Women & Environments International Magazine, 2006 (spring)
|
In Cuba this is far from the case. The density of the city, the scarcity of suitable land, and the gravity of the food crisis demanded a formalization of urban agriculture The system of land tenure is designed to ensure maximum production of the land available. Producers have to make a case for the expansion of their farm by demonstrating successful yields and plans for the land Urban farmers typically undergo inspections of their properties by Ministry of Agriculture specialists who observe what farmers are growing, verify that they are selling at appropriate prices The extensive infrastructure surrounding urban agriculture demonstrates the high socialvalue placed on food securimmmmty following the crisis. With this formalization of urban agriculture, one can see a relative decrease in the percentage of women versus men. Urban agriculture is one of the few areas where private enterprise - and subsequent increased income opportunities Although women represent 49.9% of the Cuban workforce, they only represent 20% of the workforce in the agricultural sector. In Havana, 55% of the employees in urban agriculture are women. Countrywide, they represent 70% of the technical force in grassroots government bodies of the Ministry of Agriculture, working as inspectors, extension agents, coordinators and educators. This means that women are the primary promoters and educators for urban agriculture
|
Current Cuban ag is sustainable – backed by ministry of ag
| 1,751 | 59 | 1,408 | 270 | 11 | 215 | 0.040741 | 0.796296 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,716 |
The extraordinary degree to which Communist Cuba has failed to provide for the citizens’ economic well-being is well documented by an avalanche of statistics and data that have defined the country’s stagnation and regression since the 1959 revolution. A most disturbing illustration of this economic condition is Cubans’ purchasing power compared to that of other countries. A study by the University of Miami’s Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies shows, for example, that to purchase fourteen ounces of powdered milk, the average Cuban worker has to work 57.5 hours. To make the same purchase, the average worker in Costa Rica has to work only 1.7 hours. Comparable disparities hold for the other items analyzed in the study’s consumer basket.
|
Azel, 7/16-Senior Scholar at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies (ICCAS) at the University of Miami (José, “The Illusion of Cuban Reform: Castro Strikes Out”, World Affairs, 7/16/13, http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/illusion-cuban-reform-castro-strikes-out)//TL
|
The extraordinary degree to which Communist Cuba has failed to provide for the citizens’ economic well-being is well documented
|
Cuba’s reforms are minimal-no real incentive to change
| 755 | 54 | 127 | 119 | 8 | 19 | 0.067227 | 0.159664 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,717 |
HAVANA (AP) — Cuba seems to be betting that its decision to allow most of its citizens to travel abroad freely will be as good for its economy as it is for its public relations.
|
Rodriguez et. al. 12- Andrea Rodriguez, Tran Van Minh, and Nataliya Vasilyeva are Associated Press journalists (Andra, “Cuban economy to undergo changes after travel reform”, USA Today, 10/21/12, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/10/21/raul-castro-cuba-travel-reforms/1647311/)//TL
|
that its decision to allow most of its citizens to travel abroad freely will be as good for its economy as it is for its public relations.
|
New travel reform will stabilize Cuba’s economy-empirics prove
| 177 | 62 | 138 | 35 | 8 | 27 | 0.228571 | 0.771429 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,718 |
Cuba’s economic problems are severe. Addressing them will likely require much more than the limited reforms announced thus far. Yet it is in the interest of Cuba, the United States and the international community that the Cuban government succeed in its proposals to grow its economy through private enterprise. For this reason, it is crucial that U.S. policymakers consider the implications of U.S. restrictions on the economic reform process. Through its own comprehensive sanctions, and by denying Cuba access to multilateral institutions, U.S. policies make it even more difficult for Cuban leaders to enact the type of economic reforms that the U.S. has urged for decades.
|
CSG, 13 – SUPPORTING SMALL BUSINESS IN CUBA (RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SECTOR LEADERS, 4—11, p. 6.) //SP
|
Addressing them will likely require much more than the limited reforms announced thus far. Yet it is in the interest of Cuba, it is crucial that U.S. policymakers consider the implications of U.S. restrictions on the economic reform process. Through its own comprehensive sanctions, and by denying Cuba access to multilateral institutions, U.S. policies make it even more difficult for Cuban leaders to enact the type of economic reforms that the U.S. has urged for decades.
|
Sanctions limit the ability of the Cuban government to make needed economic reforms
| 677 | 83 | 474 | 106 | 13 | 76 | 0.122642 | 0.716981 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,719 |
Deepwater oil drilling off the coast of Cuba is expected to start in September 2011, which is raising some questions about the continuation of the US-Cuba trade embargo. About a half-dozen foreign oil companies have contracted with Cuba to explore for deepwater crude oil. Spanish-owned Repsol will be the first to begin offshore drilling. Zarubezhneft, a Russian state-owned oil company, is also expected to start drilling in 2011. Cuba’s waters may contain large amounts of lighter, sweet crude oil (the country’s onshore drilling produces mainly heavy crude which is more expensive to refine). Cuba has said that its untapped offshore oil fields may contain about 20 billion barrels of oil. The US Geological Survey has estimated about 5 billion barrels. However vast the reserves, the US will not be participating in exploration. Or will it? Just how big do the oil reserves have to be before the US lifts its embargo with Cuba? Some Americans say the US should not lift the embargo until Cuba has enacted democratic reforms, oil or no oil. Two Florida Senators have even crafted legislation to punish any US companies that participate in Cuba’s oil development. Florida politicians say that ending the embargo would alienate voters; many older Cuban-Americans still have anti-Castro sentiments. However, younger generations of Americans and Cuban-Americans increasingly support weakening the embargo. Personally, it’s hard for me to believe the US would miss out on an opportunity to explore for oil so close to home. I’m not a gung ho oil company supporter or a “drill, baby, drill” advocate, but I guess the anti-communism view is a bit lost on me when it comes to international trade. (China, one of the US’ biggest trading partners, is a communist state after all.) Then again, I am not a Cuban-American, nor was I born when the trade embargo was enacted in the 1960s. Time (and oil discoveries) will tell if the US will finally end the Cuban trade embargo. If large reserves are discovered, I’m sure oil and gas industry lobbyists will ramp up efforts to eliminate the embargo. Environmental groups will also weigh in. Vast Cuban oil reserves could force politicians to take a side on the embargo issues, but I doubt there will be any changes to the US’ trade policies with Cuba until after 2012 elections.
|
Mallet, 11 – Senior Lecturer in Disability Studies at Sheffield Hallam University (Rebecca, “Cuban Oil May be Key to Ending US Embargo”, Bizmology, June 16, 2011 http://bizmology.hoovers.com/2011/06/16/cuban-oil-may-be-key-to-ending-us-embargo/) //SP
|
Deepwater oil drilling off the coast of Cuba is expected to start in September 2011, which is raising some questions about the continuation of the US-Cuba trade embargo. The US Geological Survey has estimated about 5 billion barrels. However vast the reserves, the US will not be participating in exploration. Or will it? Florida politicians say that ending the embargo would alienate voters; many older Cuban-Americans still have anti-Castro sentiments younger generations of Americans and Cuban-Americans increasingly support weakening the embargo , I am not a Cuban-American, nor was I born when the trade embargo was enacted in the 1960s. Time (and oil discoveries) will tell if the US will finally end the Cuban trade embargo I’m sure oil and gas industry lobbyists will ramp up efforts to eliminate the embargo. Environmental groups will also weigh in. Vast Cuban oil reserves could force politicians to take a side on the embargo issues, but I doubt there will be any changes to the US’ trade policies with Cuba until after 2012 elections.
|
Lifting the embargo is key to Cuba’s future oil exploration efforts
| 2,316 | 67 | 1,046 | 385 | 11 | 171 | 0.028571 | 0.444156 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,720 |
President Obama's Middle East policy has been an ever-worsening train wreck because it lacks credibility and strategy, as Egypt, Libya, and particularly Syria, have shown. And the region is about to get much worse, unless Obama exercises resolute leadership on the most important global security issue of this generation: Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons.
|
Noah Beck, 13- Covers current geopolitical issues in the Middle East for American Thinker, 7/16/13 (Apocalyptic Threats Cannot be Hoped Away: Iranian Nukes Must Be Stopped, www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/apocalyptic_threats_cannot_be_hoped_away_iranian_nukes_must_be_stopped.html)//TL
|
President Obama's Middle East policy has been an ever-worsening train wreck because it lacks credibility and strategy, as Egypt, Libya, and particularly Syria, have shown the region is about to get much worse, unless Obama exercises resolute leadership on the most important global security issue of this generation: Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons
|
Iran nukes cause extinction-SQUO Iran policies fail
| 356 | 51 | 350 | 54 | 7 | 53 | 0.12963 | 0.981481 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,721 |
The consequences of failing to address the proliferation threat posed by the North Korea developments, and related political and economic issues, are serious, not only for the Northeast Asian region but for the whole international community.
|
Hayes and Hamel-Green, 10– Professor of International Relations, RMIT University AND Professor of Arts, Education, and Human Development at Victoria University (Peter AND Michael, “"The Path Not Taken, The Way Still Open: Denuclearizing The Korean Peninsula And Northeast Asia,", http://www.japanfocus.org/-Michael-Hamel_Green/3267#sthash.AkKdViI5.dpuf)//NG
|
The consequences of failing to address the proliferation threat , are serious, not only for the Northeast Asian region but for the whole international community
|
North Korean war causes extinction
| 241 | 34 | 160 | 36 | 5 | 25 | 0.138889 | 0.694444 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,722 |
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Sunday that Iran was moving closer to developing nuclear weapons capable of striking the U.S., and urged the Obama administration to take a harder line.
|
Goad, 13- Reporter for the Hill (Ben, “Netanyahu: Iran closer to nuclear weapons that can strike US”, The Hill, 7/14/13, http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/310875-netanyahu-iran-developing-nukes-to-reach-american-shores)//TL
|
Netanyahu warned Sunday that Iran was moving closer to developing nuclear weapons capable of striking the U.S., and urged the Obama administration to take a harder line.
|
Iran could strike the US and only the US can negotiate with Iran
| 201 | 64 | 169 | 31 | 13 | 27 | 0.419355 | 0.870968 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,723 |
In a little-noticed exchange Tuesday at the Senate Armed Services Committee, a top US general said he had no doubt Israel would attack Iran if the Islamic Republic reached a critical point in its nuclear weapons drive. Furthermore, said General James Mattis, Israel could so without the assistance of the United States.
|
Kalman, 13- Breaking news editor at The Times of Israel (Aaron, “‘If Iran reaches critical point in nuke drive, Israel will attack’”, The Times of Israel, 3/6/13, http://www.timesofisrael.com/if-iran-reaches-critical-point-in-nuke-drive-israel-will-attack/)//TL
|
, a top US general said he had no doubt Israel would attack Iran if the Islamic Republic reached a critical point in its nuclear weapons drive. Furthermore, said General James Mattis, Israel could so without the assistance of the United States.
|
Iran prolif causes Israel strike and regional prolif- effective engagement strategies are key to solve
| 319 | 102 | 244 | 52 | 15 | 42 | 0.288462 | 0.807692 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,724 |
Iran’s response to what would initially start as a sustained stand-off bombardment (Desert Fox Heavy) could take a number of different forms that might lead to escalation by the United States and Israel, surrounding states, and non-state actors. Once the strikes commenced, it is difficult to imagine Iran remaining in a Saddam-like quiescent mode and hunkering down to wait out the attacks. Iranian leaders have unequivocally stated that any attack on its nuclear sites will result in a wider war81 – a war that could involve regional states on both sides as well as non-state actors like Hamas and Hezbollah. While a wider regional war need not lead to escalation and nuclear use by either Israel or the United States, wartime circumstances and domestic political pressures could combine to shape decision-making in ways that present nuclear use as an option to achieve military and political objectives. For both the United States and Israel, Iranian or proxy use of chemical, biological or radiological weapons represent the most serious potential escalation triggers. For Israel, a sustained conventional bombardment of its urban centers by Hezbollah rockets in Southern Lebanon could also trigger an escalation spiral. Assessing relative probability of these scenarios is very difficult and beyond the scope of this article. Some scenarios for Iranian responses that could lead to escalation by the United States and Israel are: Terrorist-type asymmetric attacks on either the U.S. or Israeli homelands by Iran or its proxies using either conventional or unconventional (chemical, biological, or radiological) weapons. Escalation is more likely in response to the use of unconventional weapons in populated urban centers. The potential for use of nuclear retaliation against terrorist type attacks is problematic, unless of course the sponsoring country takes official responsibility for them, which seems highly unlikely. Asymmetric attacks by Iran or its proxies using unconventional weapons against U.S. military facilities in Iraq and the Gulf States (Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar); • Long-range missile strikes by Iran attacking Israel and/or U.S. facilities in Iraq and the Gulf States: • Conventional missile strikes in and around the Israeli reactor at Dimona • Airbursts of chemical or radiological agents in Israeli urban areas; • Missile strikes using non-conventional weapons against US Gulf facilities such as Al Udeid in Qatar, Al Dhafra Air Base in the UAE, and the 5th Fleet Headquarters in Manama, Bahrain. Under all scenarios involving chemical/biological attacks on its forces, the United States has historically retained the right to respond with all means at its disposal even if the attacks come from a non-nuclear weapons state.82 • The involvement of non-state actors as part of ongoing hostilities between Iran, the United States, and Israel in which Hezbollah and/or Hamas became engaged presents an added dimension for conflict escalation. While tactically allied with Iran and each other, these groups have divergent interests and objectives that could affect their involvement (or non-involvement in a wider regional war) – particularly in ways that might prompt escalation by Israel and the United States. Hezbollah is widely believed to have stored thousands of short range Iranian-supplied rockets in southern Lebanon. Attacking Israel in successive fusillades of missiles over time could lead to domestic political demands on the Israeli military to immediately stop these external attacks – a mission that might require a wide area-denial capability provided by nuclear weapons and their associated PSI overpressures, particularly if its conventional ground operations in Gaza prove in the mid- to longterms as indecisive or strategic ambiguous as its 2006 operations in Lebanon. • Another source of uncertainty is the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) – referred to here as “quasi-state” actor. The IRGC manages the regime’s nuclear, chemical and missile programs and is responsible for “extraterritorial” operations outside Iran. The IRGC is considered as instrument of the state and reports directly to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. So far, the IRGC has apparently refrained from providing unconventional weapons to its surrogates. The IRGC also, however arms and funds various Shiite paramilitary groups in Iraq and Lebanon that have interests and objectives that may or may not directly reflect those of the Iranian supreme leader. Actions of these groups in a wartime environment are another source of strategic uncertainty that could shape crisis decision-making in unhelpful ways. • The most likely regional state to be drawn into a conflict on Iran’s side in a wider regional war is Syria, which is widely reported to have well developed missile and chemical warfare programs. Direct Syrian military involvement in an Israeli-U.S./Iranian war taking the form of missile strikes or chemical attacks on Israel could serve as another escalation trigger in a nuclear-use scenario, in particular if chemical or bio-chem weapons are used by the Syrians, technically crossing the WMD-chasm and triggering a retaliatory strike using any category of WMD including nuclear weapons. • The last – and perhaps most disturbing – of these near-term scenarios is the possible use by Iran of nuclear weapons in the event of conventional strikes by the United States and Israel. This scenario is built on the assumption of a U.S. and/or Israeli intelligence failure to detect Iranian possession of a nuclear device that had either been covertly built or acquired from another source. It is possible to foresee an Iranian “demonstration” use of a nuclear weapon in such a scenario in an attempt to stop an Israeli/U.S. conventional bombardment. A darker scenario would be a direct nuclear attack by Iran on Israel, also precipitated by conventional strikes, inducing a “use them or lose them” response. In turn, such a nuclear strike would almost certainly prompt an Israeli and U.S. massive response – a potential “Armageddon” scenario.
|
Russell, 09 (James A. Russell, managing editor of Strategic Insights, the quarterly ejournal published by the Center for Contemporary Conflict at the Naval Postgraduate School, Spring 2009, Strategic Stability Reconsidered: Prospects for Escalation and Nuclear War in the Middle East, Security Studies Center)
|
Iran’s response to what would initially start as a sustained stand-off bombardment (Desert Fox Heavy) could take a number of different forms that might lead to escalation by the United States and Israel, surrounding states, and non-state actors. Once the strikes commenced, it is difficult to imagine Iran remaining in a Saddam-like quiescent mode and hunkering down to wait out the attacks. Iranian leaders have unequivocally stated that any attack on its nuclear sites will result in a wider war81 While a wider regional war need not lead to escalation and nuclear use by either Israel or the United States, wartime circumstances and domestic political pressures could combine to shape decision-making in ways that present nuclear use as an option to achieve military and political objectives. use of chemical, biological or radiological weapons represent the most serious potential escalation triggers. For Israel, a sustained conventional bombardment of its urban centers by Hezbollah rockets in Southern Lebanon could also trigger an escalation spiral. A Under all scenarios involving chemical/biological attacks on its forces, the United States has historically retained the right to respond with all means at its disposal even if the attacks come from a non-nuclear weapons state. The involvement of non-state actors as part of ongoing hostilities between Iran, the United States, and Israel in which Hezbollah and/or Hamas became engaged presents an added dimension for conflict escalation. While tactically allied with Iran and each other, these groups have divergent interests and objectives that could affect their involvement in ways that might prompt escalation by Israel and the United States The last – and perhaps most disturbing – of these near-term scenarios is the possible use by Iran of nuclear weapons in the event of conventional strikes by the United States and Israel. This scenario is built on the assumption of a U.S. and/or Israeli intelligence failure to detect Iranian possession of a nuclear device that had either been covertly built or acquired from another source. It is possible to foresee an Iranian “demonstration” use of a nuclear weapon in such a scenario in an attempt to stop an Israeli/U.S. conventional bombardment. A darker scenario would be a direct nuclear attack by Iran on Israel, also precipitated by conventional strikes, inducing a “use them or lose them” response. In turn, such a nuclear strike would almost certainly prompt an Israeli and U.S. massive response – a potential “Armageddon” scenario.
|
Strike causes nuke war and terrorism
| 6,075 | 36 | 2,551 | 938 | 6 | 400 | 0.006397 | 0.426439 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,725 |
North Korea has been issuing near-daily threats against the United States and South Korea, and sometimes at United States forces in the Pacific. In one of the boldest warnings, the North said it could carry out pre-emptive nuclear strikes against the United States. Many analysts are extremely doubtful that the North could hit the United States mainland with a missile, whether nuclear-tipped or not. Some of its missiles could, however, hit South Korea or Japan and American forces there, analysts said.
|
New York Times, 13- (“In Focus: North Korea’s Nuclear Threats”, New York Times, 4/16/13, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/04/12/world/asia/north-korea-questions.html)//TL
|
North Korea has been issuing near-daily threats against the United States and South Korea In one of the boldest warnings, the North said it could carry out pre-emptive nuclear strikes against the United States . Some of its missiles could, however, hit South Korea or Japan and American forces there, analysts said.
|
North Korea will attack- most recent threats
| 505 | 44 | 315 | 81 | 7 | 52 | 0.08642 | 0.641975 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,726 |
Nature has provided the goods and services needed to sustain human life for so long that most people take them for granted. But growing evidence suggests that Earth’s natural capital, and the biological diversity that underpins these goods and services, are being eroded. Some even claim that Earth is in the midst of a 6th mass extinction. Though this claim is a bit misleading—over the past 400 years, we’ve lost 1-13 percent of known species, compared with 75 percent or more lost during the five prior mass extinctions—the concern is not about the total number of species that have already gone extinct. Rather, the concern is how quickly species are being lost—and we are losing species faster than ever. In the fossil record, we normally see one species per thousand go extinct every millennia. Rates of extinction in the past century have increased to 100 to 1,000 times faster than normal. Add to this the abnormally high number of threatened and endangered species, and projections suggest we could truly reach the point of a mass extinction in 240-540 years.
|
Cardinale, 13 – Associate Professor, School of Natural Resources & Environment, University of Michigan (Bradley J., “Opinion: Biodiversity Impacts Humanity,” The Scientist, 2/20, http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/34448/title/Opinion--Biodiversity-Impacts-Humanity/)//SY
|
Nature has provided the goods and services needed to sustain human life for so long that most people take them for granted. growing evidence suggests that Earth’s natural capital, and the biological diversity that underpins these goods and services, are being eroded. over the past 400 years, we’ve lost 1-13 percent of known species, the concern is how quickly species are being lost—and we are losing species faster than ever. Rates of extinction in the past century have increased to 100 to 1,000 times faster than normal. Add to this the abnormally high number of threatened and endangered species, and projections suggest we could truly reach the point of mass extinction in 240-540 years.
|
Biodiversity key to ecosystem stability and sustaining the human population
| 1,068 | 75 | 694 | 179 | 10 | 114 | 0.055866 | 0.636872 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,727 |
On a worldwide basis, biodiversity tends to be concentrated in the southern countries, while the institutions and resources for studying it tend to be located in the northern countries … Cuba provides an extreme case. With respect to biodiversity, it is the single most important country in the Caribbean islands, and this is true to an overwhelming degree.288
|
Houck, 2000- Professer of Law, former General Counsel and Vice-President of the National Wildlife Federation, and consultant in the development of environmental law in Cuba and other Latin American countries (Oliver, “Environmental Law in Cuba”, Florida State University Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law, Fall 2000, http://www.law.fsu.edu/journals/landuse/vol161/houck.pdf)//TL
|
Cuba is the single most important country in the Caribbean islands, and this is true to an overwhelming degree.288
|
Cuba is the single most important biodiversity hotspot in the region
| 360 | 68 | 114 | 58 | 11 | 19 | 0.189655 | 0.327586 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,728 |
The ecological costs of the Cuban totalitarian model have yet to be assessed; however, future generations will inevitably have to pay a high price to repair the damage. Among the Cuban archipelago’s most serious environmental problems are, in order of importance, soil degradation, deforestation, water pollution and contamination, deterioration of urban environments, and loss of biodiversity.
|
Cepero, 4-Environmental assessment coordinator at the Hemispheric Center for Environmental Technology at Florida International University (Eudel, “Environmental Concerns for a Cuba In Transition”, Cuba Transition Project, 2004, http://ctp.iccas.miami.edu/Research_Studies/ECepero.pdf)//TL
|
The ecological costs of the Cuban totalitarian model have yet to be assessed; however, future generations will inevitably have to pay a high price to repair the damage. Among the Cuban archipelago’s most serious environmental problems are, soil degradation, deforestation, water pollution and contamination, deterioration of urban environments, and loss of biodiversity.
|
We control uniqueness – Cuba’s environment will collapse absent a transition to democracy
| 394 | 89 | 370 | 56 | 13 | 52 | 0.232143 | 0.928571 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,729 |
The second question is whether the BRAC model can succeed in other policy areas, where Congress has been similarly unable to act. The success of the BRAC process has spurred many efforts to replicate it on other controversial issues. In 1999, I argued that independent commissions have a poor record; there have been very few instances where they have actually resolved legislative impasses (Mayer 1999).5 The problem is that legislators are usually reluctant to delegate substantial policy authority, at least without strong procedural safeguards and ongoing monitoring. The conditions that made BRAC successful were the consensus on the goals, agreement about what precise policy steps were necessary, and the narrow range (at least initially) of the policy making authority. These conditions are rarely present, and clearly do not apply to, say, efforts to create BRAC-like commissions on entitlement reform, where there is intense controversy over both goals and specific policies.
|
Mayer, 07 – Professor of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (Kenneth R., December 2007, “The Base Realignment and Closure Process: Is it Possible to Make Rational Policy?,” online: http://users.polisci.wisc.edu/kmayer/Professional/Base%20Realignment%20and%20Closure%20Process.pdf)//SP
|
The second question is whether the BRAC model can succeed in other policy areas, where Congress has been similarly unable to act. The success of the BRAC process has spurred many efforts to replicate it on other controversial issues independent commissions have a poor record; there have been very few instances where they have actually resolved legislative impasses The problem is that legislators are usually reluctant to delegate substantial policy authority The conditions that made BRAC successful were the consensus on the goals, agreement about what precise policy steps were necessary, and the narrow range of the policy making authority
|
Congress says no --- recommendations won’t get adopted
| 985 | 55 | 645 | 150 | 8 | 100 | 0.053333 | 0.666667 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,730 |
The lobby is now led politically by the Cuban American and other members of Congress and the Cuban American National Foundation (CANF). Prominent individuals include Representatives Lincoln Dı´azBalart (R-FL), Robert Mene´ndez (D-NJ), and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (RFL) and legislators from Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, and Indiana. The lobby demonstrated its clout between October 1998 and January 1999, when it got the Clinton administration to reject the proposed bipartisan commission.6 The three Cuban American legislators wrote President Clinton in October 1998 calling the proposal for a commission “a blatant attempt by some elitist business interests to do what they have been unable to do in Congress: circumvent the will of the American people. The idea is clearly a subterfuge intended to create pressure to lift the embargo without securing freedom and democracy for the Cuban people.”7 But, if embargo supporters really believe their case will stand up to careful scrutiny, they did their cause a disservice by blocking the commission. In fact, the shrill public statements and arm-twisting typical of the embargo’s loudest spokespersons are alienating more and more people, including former anti-Castro allies. What is more, the most ardent advocates are not bothered by facts. For example, they say “the will of the American people” is to maintain the embargo, but a recent Gallup poll shows that only 42 percent of those polled support the embargo while 51 percent oppose it.8 Still for now the bottom line in Washington is that, on a policy of marginal interest to most Americans, a highly focused pressure group can wield political and economic clout few politicians have the political courage to contend with in the electoral marketplace.
|
Ratliff 2k – their author (William, research fellow and former curator of the Americas Collection at the Hoover Institution. He is also a research fellow of the Independent Institute. An expert on Latin America, China, and US foreign policy, he has written extensively on how traditional cultures and institutions influence current conditions and on prospects for economic and political development in East/Southeast Asia and Latin America “A Strategic Flip-Flop in the Caribbean: Lift the Embargo on Cuba”, February 2000, http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/epp_100b.pdf
|
The lobby is now led politically by the Cuban American and other members of Congress The lobby demonstrated its clout between October 1998 and January 1999, when it got the Clinton administration to reject the proposed bipartisan commission.6 The three Cuban American legislators wrote calling the proposal for a commission “a blatant attempt by some elitist business interests to do what they have been unable to do in Congress: if embargo supporters really believe their case will stand up to careful scrutiny, they did their cause a disservice by blocking the commission. the shrill public statements and arm-twisting typical of the embargo’s loudest spokespersons are alienating more and more people, including former anti-Castro allies the will of the American people” is to maintain the embargo, Still for now the bottom line in Washington is that, on a policy of marginal interest to most Americans, a highly focused pressure group can wield political and economic clout few politicians have the political courage to contend with in the electoral marketplace.
|
No solvency and Links to politics – Cuban Lobby will block the commission – empirics
| 1,758 | 85 | 1,066 | 273 | 15 | 168 | 0.054945 | 0.615385 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,731 |
There's nothing magic about a commission. Like a congressional committee, it puts together legislation that Congress later votes to accept, reject or delay. And as of now, there's simply no reason to believe that the votes exist for any serious compromise. Republican leaders, for instance, are arguing that the commission simply shouldn't consider tax increases, which makes a deal impossible. That was their rationale for filibustering the very formation of a commission, which is why Obama had to do this through an executive order.
|
Klein, 10 – Writer for the Washington Post (Ezra, “Sins of commission”, February 19, 2010, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/sins_of_commission.html)//SP
|
it puts together legislation that Congress later votes to accept, reject or delay. And as of now, there's simply no reason to believe that the votes exist for any serious compromise That was their rationale for filibustering the very formation of a commission, which is why Obama had to do this through an executive order.
|
Commissions links to politics
| 535 | 29 | 322 | 84 | 4 | 55 | 0.047619 | 0.654762 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,732 |
Despite the worldwide criticism of the embargo, on January 5, 1999, President Clinton declined the recommendation of twenty-four United States senators requesting that he establish a National Bipartisan Commission to review United States policy toward Cuba. At the same time, to review United States policy toward Cuba. At the same time, the president announced five major changes in the embargo: broadening cash remittances, expanding direct passenger charter flights from New York and Los Angeles to Cuba, reestablishing direct mail service to Cuba, authorizing the sale of food and agricultural inputs to independent entities in Cuba, and expanding exchanges among academics, athletes, and scientists.
|
Hudson, 02 – (Rex A. “Cuba: A Country Study”, P. 61) //SP
|
Despite the worldwide criticism of the embargo Clinton declined the recommendation of twenty-four United States senators requesting that he establish a National Bipartisan Commission to review United States policy toward Cuba the president announced five major changes in the embargo: broadening cash remittances, expanding direct passenger charter flights from New York and Los Angeles to Cuba, reestablishing direct mail service to Cuba, authorizing the sale of food and agricultural inputs to independent entities in Cuba, and expanding exchanges among academics, athletes, and scientists.
|
A commission for the plan will get declined --- Clinton proves
| 704 | 62 | 592 | 103 | 11 | 83 | 0.106796 | 0.805825 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,733 |
When a small but wealthy and militant lobby in Washington, Florida, and New Jersey can make such headway against the U.S. intelligence community in its area of expertise—military and strategic threats to the United States—the pressures of that group on a compromising executive and legislature become potentially dangerous. Nor should one be encouraged by the lobby’s success in crushing the commission proposal supported by such a distinguished group of former secretaries of state and others. The bottom line, however, is that since the lobby has every right to promote its own perceived interests, however mistaken it may be, the responsibility finally falls directly on the U.S. government officials who so easily cave in. From the president and vice president to the secretary of defense and members of Congress, broad national interests of the United States (and Cuba, for that matter) are set aside in favor of narrow domestic political expediency.
|
Ratliff 2k – their author (William, research fellow and former curator of the Americas Collection at the Hoover Institution. He is also a research fellow of the Independent Institute. An expert on Latin America, China, and US foreign policy, he has written extensively on how traditional cultures and institutions influence current conditions and on prospects for economic and political development in East/Southeast Asia and Latin America “A Strategic Flip-Flop in the Caribbean: Lift the Embargo on Cuba”, February 2000, http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/epp_100b.pdf
|
When a small but wealthy and militant lobby in Washington, Florida, and New Jersey can make such headway against the U.S. intelligence community in its area of expertise—military and strategic threats to the United States—the pressures of that group on a compromising executive and legislature become potentially dangerous. lobby’s success in crushing the commission proposal supported by such a distinguished group of former secretaries of state and others. The bottom line, however, is that since the lobby has every right to promote its own perceived interests, however mistaken it may be, the responsibility finally falls directly on the U.S. government officials who so easily cave in. From the president and vice president to the secretary of defense and members of Congress, broad national interests of the United States (and Cuba, for that matter) are set aside in favor of narrow domestic political expediency.
|
The lobby will block the commission
| 953 | 36 | 917 | 150 | 6 | 143 | 0.04 | 0.953333 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,734 |
MEXICO CITY — The United States should not expect Cuba to make a unilateral humanitarian gesture to release an imprisoned American government contractor, a senior Cuban official said Sunday.
|
Rodriguez, 11– staff writer, cites senior Cuban officials (Olga, “AP Interview: Cuba won't unilaterally free Gross”, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20111009/lt-mexico-cuba-alarcon/)//NG
|
The United States should not expect Cuba to make a unilateral humanitarian gesture to release an imprisoned American government contractor
|
Cuba says no- they want to exchange for the Wasp Network
| 190 | 56 | 138 | 29 | 11 | 20 | 0.37931 | 0.689655 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,735 |
But the real concern ought to be safeguarding Gross' well-being by finding an expeditious path to win his freedom. At present, the administration has put itself in a Catch-22: It won't take any further initiatives to improve relations while Gross remains in jail, but the poor state of relations with Cuba is the main obstacle to his release. Based on the lessons of previous prisoner releases and successful negotiations with Cuba, the administration needs to take a more proactive approach.
|
Leogrande, 11– Dean of the School of Public Affairs at American University (William, 12-6-11, “A Cuban Conundrum”, LA Times, http://articles.latimes.com/2011/dec/06/opinion/la-oe-leogrande-alangross-20111206/2)//NG
|
the real concern ought to be safeguarding Gross' well-being by finding an expeditious path to win his freedom. the administration has put itself in a Catch-22: It won't take any further initiatives to improve relations while Gross remains in jail, but the poor state of relations with Cuba is the main obstacle to his release. the administration needs to take a more proactive approach.
|
The perm solves- cuba says no without efforts to improve relations
| 492 | 66 | 386 | 80 | 11 | 64 | 0.1375 | 0.8 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,736 |
There are many channels through which economic sanctions operate in an attempt to bring about economic destruction for the target nation. The sanctions may operate by limiting a state's import and export markets, ending or cutting back on financial aid or imposing additional financial constraints. There are many different degrees and combinations of economic sanctions; depending on the situation at hand.8o the different varieties of economic sanctions will be analyzed separately in an attempt to determine their possible effect on the environment. Loss of financial aid and limitation on import and export markets will certainly have profound effects on the nation's economy that might translate to additional environmental impacts. Furthermore, each of these measures will have indirect effects that might have further effects. Through an independent analysis of these economic constraints, it will be possible to ascertain what direct or indirect effects they might have on the environment of the target state.
|
Carucci, 2K – Environmental Studies Program @ Colby College (Amanda, “Environmental effects of economic sanctions: the Cuban experience”, Honor Thesis, 2000 http://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1048&context=honorstheses)//SP
|
There are many channels through which economic sanctions operate in an attempt to bring about economic destruction for the target nation. The sanctions may operate by limiting a state's import and export markets, ending or cutting back on financial aid or imposing additional financial constraints Loss of financial aid and limitation on import and export markets will certainly have profound effects on the nation's economy that might translate to additional environmental impacts
|
Turn --- the embargo hurts the environment and the economy
| 1,017 | 58 | 481 | 152 | 10 | 72 | 0.065789 | 0.473684 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,737 |
CAYO COCO, Cuba — After Cuban scientists studied the effects of climate change on this island's 3,500 miles of coastline, their discoveries were so alarming that officials didn't share the results with the public to avoid causing panic. The scientists projected that rising sea levels would seriously damage 122 Cuban towns or even wipe them off the map. Beaches would be submerged, they found, while freshwater sources would be tainted and croplands rendered infertile. In all, seawater would penetrate up to 1.2 miles inland in low-lying areas, as oceans rose nearly three feet by 2100. Climate change may be a matter of political debate on Capitol Hill, but for low-lying Cuba, those frightening calculations have spurred systemic action. Cuba's government has changed course on decades of haphazard coastal development, which threatens sand dunes and mangrove swamps that provide the best natural protection against rising seas. In recent months, inspectors and demolition crews have begun fanning out across the island with plans to raze thousands of houses, restaurants, hotels and improvised docks in a race to restore much of the coast to something approaching its natural state. "The government ... realized that for an island like Cuba, long and thin, protecting the coasts is a matter of national security," said Jorge Alvarez, director of Cuba's government-run Center for Environmental Control and Inspection. At the same time, Cuba has had to take into account the needs soft families living in endangered homes and a $2.5 billion-a-year tourism industry that is its No. 1 source of foreign income. It's a predicament challenging the entire Caribbean, where resorts and private homes often have popped up in many places without any forethought. Enforcement of planning and environmental laws is also often spotty. With its coastal towns and cities, the Caribbean is one of the regions most at risk from a changing climate. Hundreds of villages are threatened by rising seas, and more frequent and stronger hurricanes have devastated agriculture in Haiti and elsewhere. In Cuba, the report predicted sea levels would rise nearly three feet by century's end. "Different countries are vulnerable depending on a number of factors, the coastline and what coastal development looks like," said Dan Whittle, Cuba program director for the New York-based nonprofit Environmental Defense Fund. He said the Cuban study's numbers seem consistent with other scientists' forecasts for the region. The Associated Press was given exclusive access to the report, but not permitted to keep a copy. Cuba's preparations were on clear display on a recent morning tour of Guanabo, a popular getaway for Havana residents known for its soft sand and gentle waves 15 miles (25 kilometers) east of the capital. Where a military barracks had been demolished, a reintroduced sand-stabilizing creeper vine known as beach morning glory is reasserting itself on the dunes, one lavender blossom at a time. The demolition nearby of a former swimming school was halted due to the lack of planning, with the building's rubble left as it lay. Now inspectors have to figure out how to fix the mess without doing further environmental damage. Alvarez said the government has learned from such early mistakes and is proceeding more cautiously. Officials also are also considering engineering solutions, and even determining whether it would be better to simply leave some buildings alone. For three decades Guanabo resident Felix Rodriguez has lived the dream of any traveler to the Caribbean: waking up with waves softly lapping at the sand just steps away, a salty breeze blowing through the window and seagulls cawing as they glide through the crisp blue sky. Now that paradise may be no more. "The sea has been creeping ever closer," said Rodriguez, a 63-year-old retiree, pointing to the water line steps from his apartment building. "Thirty years ago it was 30 meters (33 yards) farther out." "We'd all like to live next to the sea, but it's dangerous ... very dangerous," Rodriguez said. "When a hurricane comes, everyone here will just disappear." Cuban officials agree, and have notified him and 11 other families in the building that they will be relocated, though no date has been set. Rodriguez and several other residents said they didn't mind, given the danger. Since 2000, Cuba has had a coastal protection law on the books that prohibits construction on top of sand and mandates a 130-foot-wide (40-meter) buffer zone from dunes. Structures that predate the measure have been granted a stay of execution, but are not to be maintained and ultimately will be torn down once they're uninhabitable. Serious enforcement only began in earnest in recent months, as officials came armed with the risk assessment.
|
Rodriguez, 13– meteorologist for the Weather Channel, PhD. (Andrea, “Cuba Girds for Climate Change by Reclaiming Coasts,” http://www.weather.com/news/science/environment/cuba-girds-climate-change-reclaiming-coasts-20130612)//NG
|
that rising sea levels would seriously damage 122 Cuban towns or even wipe them off the map. . Climate change may be a matter of political debate on Capitol Hill, but for low-lying Cuba, those frightening calculations have spurred systemic action. Cuba's government has changed course on decades of haphazard coastal development, which threatens sand dunes and mangrove swamps that provide the best natural protection against rising seas inspectors and demolition crews have begun fanning out across the island with plans to raze thousands of houses, restaurants, hotels and improvised docks in a race to restore much of the coast to something approaching its natural state Alvarez said the government has learned from such early mistakes and is proceeding more cautiously. Officials also are also considering engineering solutions, and even determining whether it would be better to simply leave some buildings alone Cuba has had a coastal protection law on the books that prohibits construction on top of sand and mandates a 130-foot-wide (40-meter) buffer zone from dunes.
|
Climate change makes the impact inevitable, and Cuba is already taking action
| 4,794 | 77 | 1,075 | 769 | 12 | 168 | 0.015605 | 0.218466 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,738 |
As the experience with US policy on biodiversity and climate change suggests, US presidential leadership abroad is easily trumped by Congressional opposition at home. The split between the executive and legislative branches of government became all too apparent in the 1990s. Because the Clinton administration lacked Congressional support for its international environmental ambitions, it had to backtrack from its support of the CBD and the Kyoto Protocol, and it was unable to live up to its earlier promises to take the country back into the multilateral policymaking arena. These two examples suggest that a critical condition for environmental leadership is, therefore, the building of domestic coalitions in support of an active foreign policy (Paarlberg 1997:137). Although the success of domestic coalition building will be influenced by the political landscape of the day, there are structural reasons to suggest that stable and broad-based coalitions are likely to be the exception rather than the norm, and that domestic fragmentation will remain a pervasive aspect of foreign environmental policy in the United States. One important reason for this fragmentation lies in the nature of the American political system. With its decentralized decision-making process and power separation between the executive, legislative, and judiciary, US environmental politics proceeds in an often erratic fashion and can lead to considerable deadlock between competing institutional interests (Kraft 2004:chap. 3). Presidential leadership can easily be blocked through concerted efforts on Capital Hill, where lobbyists are likely to find a receptive audience, especially in the runup to Congressional elections. And although the executive has greater room for initiative in foreign policy, the need for Congressional approval of international agreements and domestic programs acts as a dampener on international leadership efforts that are not backed by a broader coalition of interests at home. Congress's powerful position in US foreign environmental policy is based on its constitutional role in the policymaking process in three particularly sensitive areas: its authority to ratify international treaties; its budgetary and fiscal powers that affect proposals for environmental taxation, international environmental aid, and other environmental spending programs; and its general legislative role in establishing and reviewing environmental regulations. All three of these areas are critical to foreign environmental policy. They affect the ability of the United States to accede to agreements it has negotiated and signed; they determine the extent to which US environmental leadership is backed up by promises of international environmental aid; and they influence the ability of the United States to provide a model for policy innovation through effective domestic regulation. Decentralization and the separation of powers in the American political system make it more difficult for the government to sustain support for international environmental institutions. The example of global biodiversity policy shows how limited the powers of the White House can be when faced with determined opposition in Congress. Despite achieving major concessions at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, the United States refused to sign the CBD, mainly over concerns for intellectual property protection and in response to intense industry lobbying. The Clinton administration sought to reverse the image of the United States as a global environmental laggard and negotiated with leading biotechnology firms a solution that would allow the country to sign the Convention. This was to be done through an interpretation to be submitted with the US signature, which would prevent the convention from infringing on patent rights or commercial opportunities for research and innovation. In the end, however, it was Congress that refused to ratify the Convention, despite a broad consensus between industry, environmental groups, and the White House. Until today, Republican opposition to this particular Convention has prevented full participation by the United States in this area of international environmental regulation (Falkner 2001:169–171).
|
Falkner, ’05 – Department of International Relations at London School of Economics (Robert, “American Hegemony and the Global Environment,” International Studies Review, pg. 585-599)//NG
|
US presidential leadership abroad is easily trumped by Congressional opposition at home. Because the Clinton administration lacked Congressional support for its international environmental ambitions, it had to backtrack from its support of the CBD and the Kyoto Protocol, and it was unable to live up to its earlier promises to take the country back into the multilateral policymaking arena a critical condition for environmental leadership is the building of domestic coalitions in support of an active foreign policy One important reason for this fragmentation lies in the nature of the American political system. US environmental politics proceeds in an often erratic fashion and can lead to considerable deadlock between competing institutional interests Presidential leadership can easily be blocked through concerted efforts on Capital Hill, where lobbyists are likely to find a receptive audience the need for Congressional approval of international agreements and domestic programs acts as a dampener on international leadership efforts that are not backed by a broader coalition of interests at home They affect the ability of the United States to accede to agreements it has negotiated and signed they determine the extent to which US environmental leadership is backed up by promises of international environmental aid; and they influence the ability of the United States to provide a model for policy innovation through effective domestic regulation. The example of global biodiversity policy shows how limited the powers of the White House can be when faced with determined opposition in Congress it was Congress that refused to ratify the Convention Republican opposition to this particular Convention has prevented full participation by the United States in this area of international environmental regulation
|
Congressional opposition means there’s no internal link to environmental leadership
| 4,226 | 83 | 1,824 | 615 | 10 | 273 | 0.01626 | 0.443902 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,739 |
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez continues to pursue a course of regional provocation aimed at inflaming relations between the U.S. and Venezuela.
|
Walser, 12 – Senior Policy Analyst at The Heritage Foundation (Ray, “Chávez, Venezuela, and Russia: A New Cuban Missile Crisis?”, September 15, 2008, http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/09/chaacutevez-venezuela-and-russia-a-new-cuban-missile-crisis)//SP
|
Chávez continues to pursue a course of regional provocation aimed at inflaming relations between the U.S. and Venezuela.
|
“Pink Tide” leads to US-Russia military confrontations
| 146 | 54 | 120 | 21 | 7 | 18 | 0.333333 | 0.857143 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,740 |
Through accidents of geography and history, Cuba is a priceless ecological resource. That is why many scientists are so worried about what will become of it after Fidel Castro and his associates leave power and, as is widely anticipated, the American government relaxes or ends its trade embargo.
|
Dean, 07 – science writer and former science editor at the New York Times (CORNELIA, “Conserving Cuba, After the Embargo”, New York Times, December 25, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/25/science/25cuba.html?pagewanted=1)//SP
|
Cuba is a priceless ecological resource many scientists are so worried about what will become of it after Fidel Castro and his associates leave power and, as is widely anticipated, the American government relaxes or ends its trade embargo.
|
Lifting the trade embargo against Cuba destroys the environment --- this is reverse causal --- Castro, Tourism
| 296 | 110 | 239 | 48 | 17 | 39 | 0.354167 | 0.8125 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,741 |
A recent video item on Discovery News has drawn attention to one of the positives of the US trade embargo on Cuba. It seems that the lack of tourism prompted by the embargo has greatly benefited the islands marine ecosystem. Apparently its position on the Caribbean and Atlantic has created a rich marine environment. Florida shares this advantage but mass tourism since the 1960s has destroyed much of this. Cuba on the other hand has had much less development. It has also learnt from the mistakes further north.
|
Cafehistoria, No Date – (“how us embargo helps protect cuba's marine environment”, cafehistoria, http://www.cafehistoria.net/casahistoria_latest_rambl/2011/02/how-us-embargo-helps-protect-cubas-marine-environment.html)//SP
|
. It seems that the lack of tourism prompted by the embargo has greatly benefited the islands marine ecosystem. Apparently its position on the Caribbean and Atlantic has created a rich marine environment. Florida shares this advantage but mass tourism Cuba on the other hand has had much less development. It has also learnt from the mistakes further north.
|
The trade embargo is specifically key to protect marine ecosystems
| 514 | 66 | 357 | 88 | 10 | 59 | 0.113636 | 0.670455 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,742 |
This past weekend’s Summit of the Americas, in Trinidad and Tobago, was a carnival of platitudes and absurdities. As a “gift,” Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez gave Pres. Barack Obama a radical-left history book written by Uruguayan author Eduardo Galeano. Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega delivered a buffoonish anti-U.S. rant that lasted 50 minutes. Press coverage of the summit was dominated by talk of the Obama-Chávez meeting, the Ortega harangue, and the weakening of U.S. sanctions against Cuba.
|
National Review, 09 – (Editors of the National Review, “Embrace Trade, Not Chávez”, National Review Online, APRIL 21, 2009, http://www.nationalreview.com/node/227336/print)//SP
|
Venezuelan leader Hugo Chávez gave Pres. Barack Obama a radical-left history book written by Uruguayan author Eduardo Galeano. Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega delivered a buffoonish anti-U.S. rant that lasted 50 minutes
|
Removing the embargo does not guarantee relations with Cuba
| 492 | 59 | 213 | 75 | 9 | 30 | 0.12 | 0.4 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,743 |
Ten years on from our first observations in Cuba, the country’s organopónicos remain, and elsewhere, not least in the US, urban agriculture experiments are testing out different scenarios. Baltimore, Milwaukee and Chicago are among a vanguard of North American cities actively encouraging urban agriculture. Recent discussions with planners and activists in the US confirm the observation that practice is outstripping policy, as individuals take forward urban agriculture projects at a range of scales and with diverse aims. At the time of writing, one could say (if we grossly simplify the situation) that in Europe wider urban strategies, broadly in line with the CPUL city concept, are being developed, while in the US a complete spectrum of pioneering individual projects are underway aiming to encompass and interlock desires for social gain, empowerment, community building, environmental improvement and commercial viability. The range of new projects is staggering, and if Cuba’s urban agriculture revealed spatial possibilities and the effectiveness of systematic support systems, the US is testing different spatial, technical and fi nancial models of production. In New York, for example, alongside a long-established radical and thriving community garden movement, new rooftop farms are appearing. Predominantly established by media-savvy young graduates and activists, these are pioneering projects whose participants – through sheer hard work – are prototyping new, commercially viable food-producing or educational enterprises. Across the US, hydroponics and soil-based cultivation are being utilised for rooftop and covered (glasshouse) cultivation with much work occurring in Milwaukee, led by Will Allen’s organisation Growing Power. Many new organisations, like Sweetwater Organics, prototyping large-scale urban aquaponic systems, can be traced back to Growing Power.
|
Viljoen and Bohn 12 (André , an architect and principal lecturer in architecture at the University of Brighton, and Katrin, an architect and joined the faculty in September 2001 where she teaches architecture at the University of Brighton “Scarcity and Abundance: Urban Agriculture in Cuba and the US”, 7 JUL 2012, Wiley)
|
Ten years on from our first observations in Cuba urban agriculture experiments are testing out different scenarios North American cities actively encouraging urban agriculture. activists in the US confirm the observation that practice is outstripping policy, At the time of writing, one could say wider urban strategies, are being developed while in the US a complete spectrum of pioneering individual projects are underway aiming to encompass and interlock desires for social gain, empowerment, community building, environmental improvement and commercial viability. if Cuba’s urban agriculture revealed spatial possibilities and the effectiveness of systematic support systems, the US is testing different spatial, technical and fi nancial models of production alongside a long-established radical and thriving community garden movement, new rooftop farms are appearing. activists, these are pioneering projects whose participants – through sheer hard work – are prototyping new, commercially viable food-producing or educational enterprises US, hydroponics and soil-based cultivation are being utilised for rooftop and covered (glasshouse) cultivation with much work occurring prototyping large-scale urban aquaponic systems, can be traced back to Growing Power.
|
US is modeling now
| 1,886 | 18 | 1,263 | 268 | 4 | 173 | 0.014925 | 0.645522 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,744 |
The Case for Cuba In the 1990s, in the face of a massive food shortage, the citizens of Havana did the only thing they could – take their lives into their own hands. On balconies, terraces, backyards, and empty lots, neighbors began planting beans, tomatoes, bananas – anything they could, anywhere they could. In the span of two years, there were gardens and farms in every neighborhood in Havana. [2] The government took notice, and instead of squelching these efforts, facilitated them. In 1994, the newly formed Urban Agriculture Department undertook a few key actions: (1) it adapted city law to the planning concept of Usufruct, making it not just legal, but free to adapt unused, public land into food production plots; (2) it trained a network of extension agents, community members who monitor, educate, and encourage gardeners in their neighborhoods; (3) created “Seed Houses” (agricultural stores) to provide resources/information; and (4) established an infrastructure of direct-sale Farmers’ Markets to make these gardens financially viable. [3] By 1998 there were over 8,000 officially recognized gardens in Havana – from individually run plots to large State-run estates – all organic (by necessity, no pesticides were being imported) and producing about 50% of the country’s vegetables. [2] On Viability and Visibility Of course, Cuba is far from perfect, and whether these policies remain successful, or even successfully in place, is doubtful (Cuba is again dependent on foreign imports. When Raúl Castro took over from his brother in 2008, one of his major promises was to revitalize an agriculture sector riddled with bureaucracy and un-productivity). But what’s fascinating about Cuba, is how, due to necessity, food once again became the guiding factor in the shaping of its capital city. What it required, however, was the complete and forced removal of its previously entrenched food system.
|
ArchDaily 12 (“Urban Agriculture Part I: What Cuba Can Teach Us” 24 May 2012, http://www.archdaily.com/237526/urban-agriculture-part-i-what-cuba-can-teach-us/)
|
The Case for Cuba In the 1990s, in the face of a massive food shortage, On balconies, terraces, backyards, and empty lots, neighbors began planting beans, tomatoes, bananas – anything they could, anywhere they could. In the span of two years, there were gardens and farms in every neighborhood in Havana. [2] The government took notice, and instead of squelching these efforts, facilitated them. In 1994, the newly formed Urban Agriculture Department undertook a few key actions: On Viability and Visibility Of course, Cuba is far from perfect whether these policies remain successful, or even successfully in place, is doubtful (Cuba is again dependent on foreign imports When Raúl Castro took over from his brother in 2008, one of his major promises was to revitalize an agriculture sector riddled with bureaucracy and un-productivity But what’s fascinating about Cuba, is how, due to necessity, food once again became the guiding factor in the shaping of its capital city. was the complete and forced removal of its previously entrenched food system.
|
Urban ag is inefficient and needs imports- Cuba proves
| 1,917 | 54 | 1,055 | 302 | 9 | 169 | 0.029801 | 0.559603 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,745 |
As the economy sputters into Q2, apocalyptic economic and environmental prophesies are splattered across the major newspapers. But as Canada’s National Post explains, there’s no reason to panic. Disaster has been forecast since time immemorial, and it never seems to happen. To the contrary, since the Industrial Revolution, the average quality of life across the globe has continued to rise by almost every meaningful measure.
|
Kennedy, 08 – Project Manager within the Integrated United States Security Database (IUSSD) (Jonathon, “Don't Panic! The Long-Term Is Up and To The Right”, 29 APRIL 2008, http://www.businessinsider.com.au/don-t-panic-2008-4)//SP
|
apocalyptic economic and environmental prophesies are splattered across the major newspapers. But as Canada’s National Post explains, there’s no reason to panic. Disaster has been forecast since time immemorial, and it never seems to happen. To the contrary, since the Industrial Revolution, the average quality of life across the globe has continued to rise by almost every meaningful measure.
|
No impact to scarcity
| 427 | 21 | 394 | 65 | 4 | 59 | 0.061538 | 0.907692 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,746 |
Despite this security, nuclear states must be cautious. Professor Waltz examines both superpowers and smaller unpredictable states. In all cases, nuclear weapons, with their extreme destructive power, induce caution.18 Even at the height of its revolutionary zeal, an Iran with nuclear weapons would face the very real condition that if it employed its weapons, it would risk a devastating retaliation. Since the Iranian regime is now pursuing the status-quo, the possibility that Tehran would risk such destruction is highly unlikely. Professor Waltz is not alone in his theory. Additional study has been made on the stabilizing effects of nuclear proliferation. Professor Peter Lavoy from the Naval Postgraduate School has predicted that nuclear weapons will prevent future wars between India and Pakistan.19 Although these two states have had minor conflicts that risked escalation to nuclear warfare, nuclear weapons provided a safety net that helped prevent escalation to general war. Both Martin van Creveld of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Shai Feldman of Brandeis University maintain a nuclear-armed Middle East will stabilize the Arab-Israeli conflict.20 Israel will resist regional nuclear proliferation; however, as outlined in Chapter II, there is significant evidence showing direct military attacks against a state’s nuclear program does not deter it. Quite the contrary, such attacks only further motivate states to pursue nuclear weapons.
|
Madson 06 – United States Navy, Master’s degree in National Security Affairs (Peter N., Lieutenant, , 3-6, “The Sky is Not Falling: Regional Reaction to a Nuclear Armed Iran,” http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA445779)//SP
|
In all cases, nuclear weapons, with their extreme destructive power, induce caution.18 Even at the height of its revolutionary zeal the possibility that Tehran would risk such destruction is highly unlikely. Professor Waltz is not alone in his theory. Additional study has been made on the stabilizing effects of nuclear proliferation. Professor Peter Lavoy from the Naval Postgraduate School has predicted that nuclear weapons will prevent future wars between India and Pakistan.19 Although these two states have had minor conflicts that risked escalation to nuclear warfare, nuclear weapons provided a safety net that helped prevent escalation to general war. Both Martin van Creveld of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and Shai Feldman of Brandeis University maintain a nuclear-armed Middle East will stabilize the Arab-Israeli conflict
|
Iranian prolif solves regional stability.
| 1,463 | 42 | 841 | 216 | 5 | 125 | 0.023148 | 0.578704 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,747 |
First, Iran’s development of nuclear weapons would give the United States an opportunity to finally defeat violent Sunni-Arab terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Here’s why: a nuclear Iran is primarily a threat to its neighbors, not the United States. Thus Washington could offer regional security — primarily, a Middle East nuclear umbrella — in exchange for economic, political and social reforms in the autocratic Arab regimes responsible for breeding the discontent that led to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Until now, the Middle East autocracies have refused to change their ways because they were protected by the wealth of their petroleum reserves. A nuclear Iran alters the regional dynamic significantly, and provides some leverage for us to demand reforms. Second, becoming the primary provider of regional security in a nuclear Middle East would give the United States a way to break the OPEC cartel. Forcing an end to the sorts of monopolistic practices that are illegal in the United States would be the price of that nuclear shield, bringing oil prices down significantly and saving billions of dollars a year at the pump. Or, at a minimum, President Obama could trade security for increased production and a lowering of global petroleum prices. Third, Israel has made clear that it feels threatened by Iran’s nuclear program. The Palestinians also have a reason for concern, because a nuclear strike against Israel would devastate them as well. This shared danger might serve as a catalyst for reconciliation between the two parties, leading to the peace agreement that has eluded the last five presidents. Paradoxically, any final agreement between Israelis and Palestinians would go a long way to undercutting Tehran’s animosity toward Israel, and would ease longstanding tensions in the region.
|
Lowther, 10 – defense analyst at the Air Force Research Institute (Adam, Feb. 8, op-ed in NYT, “Iran’s Two-Edged Bomb.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/09/opinion/09lowther.html?_r=1&ref=opinion)//SP
|
Iran’s development of nuclear weapons would give the United States an opportunity to finally defeat violent Sunni-Arab terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. Here’s why: a nuclear Iran is primarily a threat to its neighbors, not the United States. Thus Washington could offer regional security — primarily, a Middle East nuclear umbrella — in exchange for economic, political and social reforms in the autocratic Arab regimes responsible for breeding the discontent that led to the attacks of Sept. 11 A nuclear Iran alters the regional dynamic significantly, and provides some leverage for us to demand reforms. Second, becoming the primary provider of regional security in a nuclear Middle East would give the United States a way to break the OPEC cartel. Forcing an end to the sorts of monopolistic practices that are illegal in the United States would be the price of that nuclear shield, bringing oil prices down significantly and saving billions of dollars a year at the pump. Or, at a minimum, President Obama could trade security for increased production and a lowering of global petroleum prices. Third, Israel has made clear that it feels threatened by Iran’s nuclear program. The Palestinians also have a reason for concern, because a nuclear strike against Israel would devastate them as well. This shared danger might serve as a catalyst for reconciliation between the two parties, leading to the peace agreement that has eluded the last five presidents. Paradoxically, any final agreement between Israelis and Palestinians would go a long way to undercutting Tehran’s animosity toward Israel, and would ease longstanding tensions in the region.
|
Iran nuclearization gives the U.S. the negotiating ability to solve oil prices and create regional stability – solves the impact to the aff
| 1,809 | 139 | 1,651 | 288 | 23 | 263 | 0.079861 | 0.913194 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,748 |
Technology is part of the solution to climate change. But only part. Techno-fixes like some of those in the Guardian's Manchester Report simply cannot deliver the carbon cuts science demands of us without being accompanied by drastic reductions in our consumption. That means radical economic and social transformation. Merely swapping technologies fails to address the root causes of climate change.
|
Godhaven, 9– environmental writer and activist (Merrick, “Swapping technologies fails to address the root causes of climate change,” July 15,http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/cif-green/2009/jul/15/technofix-climate-change)//NG
|
Techno-fixes like some of those in the Guardian's Manchester Report simply cannot deliver the carbon cuts science demands of us without being accompanied by drastic reductions in our consumption That means radical economic and social transformation. Merely swapping technologies fails to address the root causes of climate change.
|
Tech fixes without decreasing consumption risk extinction – don’t address the root cause of climate change
| 400 | 106 | 330 | 60 | 16 | 48 | 0.266667 | 0.8 |
Cuba Trade Aff Wave 3 - Michigan7 2013 HJPP.html5
|
Michigan (7-week)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,749 |
The US and Mexico have agreed to work together to develop deep-water oil and gas fields that straddle their maritime border in the Gulf of Mexico.The deal was signed at a meeting of the G20 group of industrial and developing countries in Los Cabos, Mexico.US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said it would ensure responsible energy exploration in the Gulf.Mexican President Felipe Calderon said it would ease Mexican fears that their oil might be appropriated by the US.The deal, negotiated last year, was signed by Mrs Clinton and the Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa, with President Calderon acting as a witness.It ends a moratorium on oil development near the maritime boundary in the western Gulf and sets up a legal framework for companies to develop cross-border fields jointly."These reservoirs could hold considerable reserves that could benefit the US and Mexico alike, but they don't necessarily stop at our maritime boundary. This could lead to disputes," Mrs Clinton said."The agreement we are signing today will help prevent such disputes," she added.Mrs Clinton also stressed that it would allow US companies to work in partnership with the Mexican state oil company Pemex for the first time. President Calderon said the deal would boost Mexico's energy security and increase revenues from Pemex, which account for about a third of government income."This agreement was negotiated under the invariable principle of respecting the sovereign rights of each country to its natural resources," he said."Mexico's oil wealth belongs and will continue to belong to the Mexicans," he stressed.Both countries affirmed that the deal would also ensure greater environmental protection - a key concern after the huge Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf in 2010. Mexico is a major oil and gas producer but is well behind the US in developing deep water fields in the Gulf.
|
BBC News 2/20/12 “US and Mexico agree Gulf of Mexico oil cooperation” http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-17108286
|
The US and Mexico have agreed to work together to develop deep-water oil and gas fields that straddle their maritime border in the Gulf of Mexico The deal, ends a moratorium on oil development near the maritime boundary in the western Gulf and sets up a legal framework for companies to develop cross-border fields jointly."These reservoirs could hold considerable reserves that could benefit the US and Mexico alike, but they don't necessarily stop at our maritime boundary. This could lead to disputes," The agreement we are signing today will help prevent such disputes, it would allow US companies to work in partnership with Pemex for the first time Calderon said the deal would boost Mexico's energy security and increase revenues from Pemex, the deal would also ensure greater environmental a key concern after the huge Deepwater Horizon oil spill Mexico is a major oil and gas producer but is well behind the US in developing deep water fields in the Gulf.
|
First, the plan averts relations disasters from energy disputes in the Gulf
| 1,889 | 75 | 964 | 301 | 12 | 161 | 0.039867 | 0.534884 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,750 |
On this last issue, it is likely that the Mexican president inquired about the status of the Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement, signed with much fanfare in Los Cabos in February 2012. The agreement creates a framework for resolving the thorny issue of ownership of oil and gas reserves that exist across—or rather underneath—the international border between Mexico and the U.S. in the Gulf of Mexico. This proposed framework would put to rest long-standing Mexican fears of the “efecto popote,” or straw effect—the idea that U.S. companies aim to slurp up Mexican oil reserves from across the nations’ maritime border. The 2012 agreement marked a major shift by providing legal certainty for exploration and production activities near the border, and by allowing for the prospect of long-prohibited joint development of reserves that straddle the Gulf waters of both countries. At its core, the agreement seeks to set up legal guidelines for companies to jointly develop so-called transboundary reservoirs and lift the moratorium on oil and gas exploration and production for roughly 1.5 million acres in the Gulf. Mexico underscored its commitment to the agreement by quickly ratifying it; the Mexican Senate approved the treaty in April 2012. In the United States, meanwhile, progress stalled for more than a year. But just in time for yesterday’s bilateral meeting, the agreement is again under discussion as legislators revive the dormant ratification process, which is good news for those eager to see its approval in the U.S. Indeed, according to the White House, Obama spoke in positive terms yesterday about the recent progress made on the agreement: Both the House Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs and the House Committee on Natural Resources recently held hearings focused on the challenges and opportunities that approval of the accord would present for the United States. On April 18, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that would make way for the approval and implementation of the terms of the agreement. These are all positive steps, and their progress will be monitored closely by U.S. and international observers, especially Mexico. But it bears underscoring that further delay in U.S. adoption of the agreement makes little sense. The agreement is not an overly polarizing issue domestically: in fact, quite the opposite. Several lawmakers have described it as a win-win for both Mexico and the U.S. As the U.S. Congress debates the deal, it is worth revisiting the four key reasons the agreement merits an expeditious approval in the coming weeks. First, approval of the deal in the U.S. would be an important sign of bilateral concord, particularly at the outset of a new administration in Mexico and a second term for Obama. This is important, as it underscores the two nations' increasing ability to work together and conclude complicated agreements—and cooperation—on binational issues unrelated to immigration or crime and drugs. Second, this agreement makes clear that both nations are keenly aware of the energy potential of the Gulf, particularly along the maritime border. But it also firmly establishes the issue of increased regulation and standards for drilling in a bilateral agreement. Since the April 2010 Macondo accident, the largest oil spill in U.S. history, the U.S. has been more concerned with drilling safety not just in the U.S. but also in neighboring countries around the Gulf such as Cuba and Mexico. This agreement formalizes interaction in terms of regulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border. Third, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was correct to emphasize the commercial opportunity and energy security element of the accord when it was first announced. The agreement provides the possibility for U.S. firms to join with Mexico’s national oil company, Pemex, to exploit deep-water oil resources in the Gulf of Mexico along the countries' maritime boundaries. This could provide important opportunities for U.S. companies, including exciting joint venture opportunities with Pemex long thought impossible.
|
Martin 5/3/13 (Jeremy Martin, Duncan Wood, U.S. Should Act Quickly on Transboundary Hydrocarbon Agreement With Mexico, http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12923/u-s-should-act-quickly-on-transboundary-hydrocarbon-agreement-with-mexico)
|
the Mexican president inquired about the Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement This framework put to rest long-standing Mexican fears that U.S. companies aim to slurp up Mexican oil The agreement marked a major shift by providing for exploration and production activitie and by allowing long-prohibited joint development of reserves the agreement seeks to to jointly develop so-called transboundary reservoirs and lift the moratorium on oil and gas exploration and production in the Gulf. that further delay in U.S. adoption of the agreement makes little sense lawmakers have described it as a win-win for both Mexico and the U.S. approval of the deal in the U.S. would be an important sign of bilateral concord as it underscores the two nations' increasing ability to work together and conclude complicated agreements—and cooperation—on binational issues But it also firmly establishes the issue of increased regulation and standards for drilling in a bilateral agreement This agreement formalizes interaction in terms of regulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border. The agreement provides the possibility for U.S. firms to join with Mexico’s national oil company, Pemex This could provide important opportunities for U.S. companies, including exciting joint venture opportunities with Pemex long thought impossible.
|
Second, it sends a key signal of sustainable cooperation
| 4,118 | 56 | 1,340 | 644 | 9 | 198 | 0.013975 | 0.307453 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,751 |
Some $30 billion would be spent to increase patrols and fencing on the border between the United States in Mexico — funding that's viewed as being key to securing enough Republican support for the broader initiative. But Mexican journalist and Univision news anchor Enrique Acevedo argued in an opinion piece for ABC that the U.S.-Mexico border is already one of the most intensely patrolled places on earth, and adding more money for more security, including 700 miles of new fencing, is a bad plan. Acevedo says increased spending over the last two decades has led to migrant deaths steadily increasing, while human trafficking organizations, mostly run by Mexican drug cartels, have seen a boom in business. "Rather than viewing border enforcement as part of a broader strategy, border enforcement became the only strategy to stop undocumented immigrants from coming across the border," he wrote. "This security-based approach has led to a degradation of the quality of life for once dynamic border communities as well as grave human rights violations." U.S. Sen. John McCain, R.-Ariz., speaking to CNN Tuesday morning said this bill would make the U.S.-Mexico border the most militarized frontier since the fall of the Berlin Wall. And that's no good, according to Acevedo. Acevedo said the new plan will provide enough money for 40,000 armed border patrol agents, or one roughly every 250 feet if they lined up together at the same time, will only suffocate the border — "it won't seal it." "Millions of people live in these border communities and ... we're going to have one of the most militarized borders in the history of mankind, with a friend and a partner like Mexico," he said. "It's bad on many levels. It's bad for the bilateral relations with Mexico.... It's also going to hurt the environment, many species will be endangered. And finally, it's going to represent a challenge in human rights." Further, Acevedo says, our history of border patrols show only limited success, decades gone by and billions of dollars spent, with the biggest dent in border crossings coming from the 2008 economic collapse. "That has been the only time in the last 40, 50 years where we've had an actual reduction ... of illegal immigration into this country," he said. Acevedo says the better way to handle immigration is to look at the economy in general and U.S. employers specifically to try and make it so immigrants are less interested in risking so much to come here.
|
Public Radio International 6-26-13 (Repost by Enrique Acedevo on Boston’s WBUR, host @ Public Radio International, “Mexican Journalist Urgest US to Act Cautiously When Beefing Up Border Security, 6-26-13 http://www.pri.org/stories/politics-society/government/mexican-journalist-urges-u-s-to-act-cautiously-when-beefing-up-border-security-14211.html)
|
$30 billion would be spent to increase patrols and fencing on the border between the U S funding viewed as being key to securing enough Republican support But argued the U.S.-Mexico border is already one of the most intensely patrolled places on earth, and adding more money is a bad plan increased spending over the last two decades has led to migrant deaths steadily increasing, while human trafficking organizations have seen a boom in business "This security-based approach has led to a degradation of the quality of life for once dynamic border communities as well as grave human rights violations. 40,000 armed border patrol agents will only suffocate the border "Millions of people live in these border communities and ... we're going to have one of the most militarized borders in the history of mankind, with a friend and a partner like Mexico," he said "It's bad on many levels. It's bad for the bilateral relations with Mexico our history of border patrols show only limited success, decades gone by and billions of dollars spent the better way to handle immigration is to look at the economy so immigrants are less interested in risking so much to come here
|
U.S. Mexico relations strained by border security’s ramping up
| 2,470 | 62 | 1,169 | 413 | 9 | 199 | 0.021792 | 0.48184 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,752 |
The presidential meeting this week between Mexico’s Felipe Calderon and Barack Obama looked from the outside like a hastily arranged exercise in damage control. But while most analysts emphasized the tensions between the neighboring nations going into the meeting, the real crisis behind the visit was the failure of what the two leaders most strongly agree on: the war on drugs south of the border. Following a lengthy closed meeting, the presidents stood before the cameras to reaffirm their mutual commitment to a war that has cost 35,000 Mexican lives since 2007, with the death toll rising by often 50 homicides a day. Obama affirmed the U.S. strategy of increased engagement in the Mexican drug war, stating “We are very mindful that the battle President Calderon is fighting inside of Mexico is not just his battle, it’s also ours.” He promised to deliver $900 million this year of funds appropriated under the Merida Initiative, a security agreement launched in 2007 by the George W. Bush administration and extended indefinitely under Obama. The bi-national relationship suffered some serious blows in the weeks preceding Calderon’s Washington visit. The release of thousands of Wiki-leaks cables between the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City and the State Department revealed U.S. officials’ deep concerns regarding the Mexican government’s capacity to carry out its high-risk war on drug cartels and wavering public opinion. Cable 10MEXICO83, for example, states that “the GOM’s (Government of Mexico’s) inability to halt the escalating numbers of narco-related homicides in places like Ciudad Juarez and elsewhere… has become one of Calderon’s principal political liabilities as the general public has grown more concerned about citizen security.” The cable cites “official corruption,” inter-agency rivalries, “dismal” prosecution rates and a “slow and risk averse” Mexican army. In an interview with El Universal, Calderon responded angrily, calling the statements exaggerated, the ambassador “ignorant” and citing a lack of inter-agency coordination within the United States. Continued releases of the cables by the Mexican daily La Jornada promise more embarrassments for both governments in attempting to portray a confident and united front in the drug war. Tensions also followed the assassination of Jaime Zapata, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in San Luis Potosí on Feb. 15. Although the Mexican government has arrested the alleged attackers–members of the Zetas drug cartel–the incident highlighted the risks of the drug war cooperation and the power of the cartels. The Mexican government’s contradictory statements on what happened and the army’s absurd hypothesis that the assassins did not know they were attacking U.S. agents (the agents’ car bore US diplomatic plates) only deepened perceptions of a lack of transparency. Within Mexico, the incident heightened fears that the U.S. government would demand more direct involvement, in particular a lifting of the ban on foreign agents bearing arms within Mexican territory. A recent spate of comments from high-ranking U.S. officials served to fan the flame of distrust of the U.S. government. Sec. of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s speculated out loud of possible links between Mexican drug cartels and Al Qaeda, and Undersecretary of the Army Joseph Westphal characterized organized crime in Mexico as an “insurgency,” while openly raising the specter of US troops being sent in. Mexican columnists and anti-militarization activists have intensified criticism of U.S. growing involvement in the country’s national security. These tensions arise from the commitment of both governments to deepen and reinforce a military alliance based on a drug war that is rapidly losing the support of their populations and proving itself counterproductive. The central concern of the presidential summit wasn’t the relatively superficial frictions between the countries, but the desire to bolster the beleaguered drug war. Despite talk of a deteriorating relationship, in fact the Calderon and Obama administrations are overseeing the birth of historically unprecedented cooperation between the two nations. The problem is that nearly all of that cooperation centers on the severely flawed approach to confront transnational drug-trafficking. The Mexico City US Embassy has expanded into a massive web of Washington-led programs and infrastructure. The controversial Merida Initiative, up for another round of funding in Congress, has allocated more than $1.5 billion to help fight Mexico’s drug war with devastatingly negative effects. In addition to the rise in violence, the binational relationship, which should be multi-faceted and focused on peaceful co-existence, has been hijacked by proponents of a war model to reduce illicit drug flows to the U.S. market and confront organized crime where it is most powerful—in brutal battle. The Pentagon is thrilled with its open access to the Mexican security apparatus and the Calderon government—entering election mode—needs the political and economic support for its flagship war policy. But the new relationship forged in war rooms is bad news for the Mexican people. Polls now show that the majority of the population does not believe its government is winning the war on drugs and feels the social costs are too high. A new movement called No More Blood has taken hold throughout the country and regions like Ciudad Juarez, where militarization has been heaviest and not coincidentally violence has taken the highest toll, have seen the rise of grassroots movements to defend human rights, call for an end to militarization and put forward alternative strategies. Among their demands is to re-channel scarce resources away from the attack on cartels to address social needs, restore the armed forces to their constitutional mandate of national defense, and end impunity for crime by fixing the judicial and public security systems and attacking government corruption. It’s also bad news for the U.S. public. Opening up a war front in Mexico has not only destabilized our closest neighbor, but also drains resources needed in U.S. communities. The government-funded contracts granted to Blackwater and Blackhawk to fight Mexico’s war could be used for schools in crisis. With an on-going economic crisis and two wars across the ocean, the prospect of long-term involvement south of the border hurts all but the flourishing war economy.
|
Laura Carlsen 11 (holds a B.A. in Social Thought and Institutions from Stanford University and a Masters degree in Latin American Studies, also from Stanford and works for Center for International Policy, “US Mexico Relations Back on Track in the Wrong Direction”, Americas Program, 4-3-11 http://www.cipamericas.org/archives/4068)
|
The presidential meeting between Mexico and Obama looked like a hastily arranged exercise in damage control most analysts emphasized the tensions between the neighboring nations The bi-national relationship suffered some serious blows The release of thousands of Wiki-leaks cables between the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City and the State Department revealed U.S. officials’ deep concerns regarding the Mexican government’s capacity to carry out its high-risk war on drug cartels and wavering public opinion. the risks of the drug war cooperation only deepened perceptions of a lack of transparency. Mexican columnists and anti-militarization activists have intensified criticism of U.S. growing involvement in the country’s national security. These tensions arise from the commitment of both governments to deepen and reinforce a military alliance based on a drug war that is rapidly losing the support of their populations and proving itself counterproductive. In addition to the rise in violence, the binational relationship, which should be multi-faceted and focused on peaceful co-existence, has been hijacked by proponents of a war model But the new relationship forged in war rooms is bad news for the Mexican people It’s also bad news for the U.S. public
|
U.S. Mexico relations are one the brink
| 6,472 | 39 | 1,259 | 991 | 7 | 190 | 0.007064 | 0.191726 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,753 |
Former Mexican President Vicente Fox spent Thursday on the University of San Diego campus, where he delivered a speech titled, “Advancing U.S.-Mexican Relations in the 21st Century.” He spoke about immigration, security, drug trafficking, economic cooperation and the development of his Centro Fox research center in his home state of Guanajuato, which also houses his presidential library — Mexico’s first. The following are excerpts from his talk, remarks made at a news conference and a separate interview with The San Diego Union-Tribune at the Trans-Border Institute. Fox's visit was sponsored by the Trans-Border Institute and the Center for Community Service Learning.Q: How do you see the U.S.-Mexico relationship? A: It’s cold, it’s distant, it’s beginning to be conflictive. It never has happened before that a U.S. ambassador to Mexico resigned, or he was resigned. ... We have a big black cloud on the future of this relationship. We’re not having a vision of the future and where we should go.
|
Sandra Dibble Miami Herald Writer 3/7/11 “Former Mexican president sees U.S.-Mexico relations as cold, distant” http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2011/Apr/07/former-mexican-president-sees-us-mexico-relations-/
|
Former Mexican President Vicente Fox spent Thursday on the University of San Diego campus, where he delivered a speech titled, “Advancing U.S.-Mexican Relations in the 21st Century.” He spoke about immigration, security, drug trafficking, economic cooperation Q: How do you see the U.S.-Mexico relationship? A: It’s cold, it’s distant, it’s beginning to be conflictive. It never has happened before that a U.S. ambassador to Mexico resigned, or he was resigned. ... We have a big black cloud on the future of this relationship. We’re not having a vision of the future and where we should go.
|
US Mexico Relations are distant
| 1,006 | 31 | 591 | 160 | 5 | 96 | 0.03125 | 0.6 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,754 |
Mexican President Felipe Calderon says the U.S. government isn't doing enough to help Mexico in its fight against drug cartels.He also isn't happy about U.S. diplomatic cables that he contends wrong ly criticized Mexico's anti-drug strategy, saying U.S.-Mexico relations were strained after the documents were made public by WikiLeaks."I have found cooperation on this matter with President (George W.) Bush and with President (Barack) Obama, but obviously institutional cooperation ends up being notoriously insufficient," Calderon told the Mexican newspaper El Universal in an interview published Tuesday.Calderon said the U.S. government should help by reducing drug use in the United States, the biggest consumer of illegal drugs in the world, and by stemming the flow of automatic rifles to Mexican drug gangs."How can Americans cooperate? By reducing drug use, which they haven't done," Calderon said. "And, the flow of weapons hasn't slowed, it has increased."
|
E. EDUARDO CASTILLO, Associated Press 2/22/11 “Mexico President: US Doesn't Help Enough in Drug War” http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mexico-president-us-doesnt-help-enough-drug-war
|
He also isn't happy about U.S. diplomatic cables that he contends wrong ly criticized Mexico U.S.-Mexico relations were strained after the documents were made public by WikiLeaks. obviously institutional cooperation ends up being notoriously insufficient," Calderon "How can Americans cooperate? By reducing drug use, which they haven't done," Calderon said. "And, the flow of weapons hasn't slowed, it has increased."
|
US Mexico Relations are Strained Over Drugs
| 967 | 44 | 418 | 144 | 7 | 60 | 0.048611 | 0.416667 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,755 |
In combination with law enforcement agencies, the U.S. military and the intelligence community have been playing key roles in the fight against the cartels. In August 2011, the United States posted small numbers of CIA operatives and civilian military employees to Mexico to assist with intelligence collection, training, and operational planning. These efforts are being made to “get around Mexican laws that prohibit foreign military and police from operating on its soil, and to prevent advanced American surveillance technology from falling under the control of Mexican security agencies with long histories of corruption.”89 Despite current efforts by the United States to assist with the Mexican Drug War, the violence is increasing and the cartels are gaining ground. The United States must reassert its efforts in order to roll back the influence of the cartels and end their reign. We advise a two front approach to combatting the cartels: reducing the large demand for drugs in the U.S., and collaborate with the Mexican government to target the cartels in Mexico.
|
Tyler Keefe and Valentina Perez 12 (authors @ Harvard University Institute of Politics, “The War On Mexican Cartels: Options for US and Mexican Policy Makers”, September 2012, http://www.iop.harvard.edu/sites/default/files_new/research-policy-papers/TheWarOnMexicanCartels.pdf)
|
the U.S have been playing key roles in the fight against the cartels the U S small numbers of CIA operatives and civilian military employees to Mexico to assist with intelligence collection, training, and operational planning. The United States must reassert its efforts in order to roll back the influence of the cartels and end their reign. We advise a two front approach to combatting the cartels: reducing the large demand and collaborate with the Mexican government to target the cartels
|
US-Mexico relations key to battling drug cartels
| 1,074 | 49 | 492 | 169 | 7 | 81 | 0.04142 | 0.47929 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,756 |
Upon his inauguration, President Peña Nieto announced a reformist agenda with specific proposals under five broad pillars: reducing violence; combating poverty; boosting economic growth; reforming education; and fostering social responsibility. He then signed a “Pact for Mexico” agreement with the leaders of the PAN and leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) containing legislative proposals for implementing an agenda that includes energy and fiscal reform. Although the pact may ease opposition in Mexico’s Congress, Peña Nieto could face other constraints such as violence perpetrated by Mexico’s powerful criminal organizations and the performance of the U.S. and global economies. Some analysts maintain that the prospects for reform under this administration are good, while others are more circumspect. U.S.-Mexican relations grew closer during the Felipe Calderón Administration (2006-2012) as a result of the Mérida Initiative, a bilateral security effort for which Congress has provided $1.9 billion. Some Members of Congress may be concerned about whether bilateral relations, particularly security cooperation, may suffer now that the party controlling the presidency has changed. Although the transition from PAN to PRI rule is unlikely to result in seismic shifts in bilateral relations, a PRI government may emphasize economic issues more than security matters. President Peña Nieto has vowed to continue U.S.-Mexican security cooperation, albeit with a stronger emphasis on reducing violent crime in Mexico than on combating drug trafficking; what that cooperation will look like remains to be seen. He has also expressed support for increased bilateral and trilateral (with Canada) economic and energy cooperation.
|
Clare Ribando Seelke 13 (Specialist in Latin America @Congressional Research Office, Mexico’s New Administration: Priorities and Key Issues in U.S.-Mexican Relations” 1/16/13 http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42917.pdf)
|
Nieto announced a reformist agenda with specific proposals reducing violence perpetrated by Mexico’s powerful criminal organizations under good U.S.-Mexican relations as a result of the Mérida Initiative, a bilateral security effort for which Congress has provided $1.9 billion Although the transition from PAN to PRI rule is unlikely to result in seismic shifts in bilateral relations, a PRI government may emphasize economic issues more than security matters Nieto has vowed to continue U.S.-Mexican security cooperation, albeit with a stronger emphasis on reducing violent crime in Mexico than on combating drug trafficking
|
Good relations are needed to cooperate when dealing with drug cartels
| 1,743 | 70 | 626 | 250 | 11 | 91 | 0.044 | 0.364 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,757 |
President Calderon’s objective was plain: the state must exercise its monopoly of force. He deployed 27,000 troops within eleven Mexican states to achieve this objective instead of continuing to rely on law enforcement agencies. Calderon ordered Mexican security forces to intensify their cooperation with their US counterparts. Within the opening months of the new administration, as a result of systematic investigations, 284 Federal Preventative Police and Federal Investigative Agents were dismissed, including all thirty-four regional PFP coordinators; thousands of other Mexican officials were also dismissed for drug traffic-related corruption. The US government responded eagerly. Cooperation with the Mexican Navy increased. US agencies trained thousands of Mexican law enforcement agents in 2007, Calderon’s first year in office. As the US Department of State put it in its official report for 2007, “The Calderon Administration’s courage, initiative and success have exceeded all expectations,” in particular celebrating its “using the military to re-establish authority and counter the cartels’ firepower.” Bush and Calderon met in Merida in March 2007. They expanded bilateral and regional counter-narcotics and security cooperation. US and Mexican officials met behind closed doors over several months to craft Plan Merida. On May 22, 2007, Mexico’s full draft proposal called for the exchange of intelligence and focused on US support for training Mexicans. Mexico insisted that no US troops would enter Mexican territory, nor would US civilian agents participate in operations in Mexico. On October 22 2007, the two governments issued their first public joint statement, announcing the multiyear Plan Merida to assist Mexico and Central American countries to combat drug trafficking and other criminal organizations.
|
Jorge Dominguez and Rafael Castro 10 (editors of Contemporary US-Latin American Relations: Cooperation or Conflict in the 21st Century?, Chapter 2, published © 2010 by Routledge Taylor & Francis Group in New York and London)
|
Calderon’s objective was plain: the state must exercise its monopoly of force Calderon ordered Mexican security forces to intensify their cooperation with their US counterparts. The US government responded eagerly. Cooperation increased. US agencies trained thousands of Mexican law enforcement agents in Calderon’s first year success have exceeded all expectations,” They expanded bilateral and regional counter-narcotics and security cooperation Mexico’s full draft proposal called for the exchange of intelligence and focused on US support for training Mexicans announcing the multiyear Plan Merida to assist Mexico and Central American countries to combat drug trafficking and other criminal organizations
|
Relations key to US funding, drones, training of police forces against drug cartels
| 1,832 | 84 | 709 | 264 | 13 | 97 | 0.049242 | 0.367424 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,758 |
From border security and immigration to trade and investment, Americans see the impact of the U.S.-Mexico relationship on a daily basis. Despite deeply ingrained links between the two nations, the relationship has been marked by significant rough patches. A growing fence, patrol agents and violence along the border underline wavering economic and political partnerships. No U.S. president visited Mexico between 1979 and 1998. As relations today continue to oscillate, the Mexican-American community becomes only more important. At 10% of the U.S. population, Mexican-Americans comprise the majority of the Hispanic community, which at 16% is the largest minority in the country. Economically, Mexican immigrants have been and continue to be a key part of the American workforce. Today Mexico is in the midst of a dangerous drug war, how will the U.S. aid its neighbor to the south? What is the future of U.S.-Mexican relations?
|
Sarah M. Shore 11 (@the Foreign Policy Assosciation, “Great Decisions 2012 Preview: US and Mexico”, 11/22/12 http://www.fpa.org/features/index.cfm?act=feature&announcement_id=92)
|
From border security and immigration to trade and investment, Americans see the impact of the U.S.-Mexico relationship on a daily basis. deeply ingrained links between the two nations marked by significant patches along the border becomes only more important in the midst of a dangerous drug war, how will the U.S. aid its neighbor to the south
|
Relations key to border cooperation
| 930 | 36 | 344 | 144 | 5 | 57 | 0.034722 | 0.395833 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,759 |
When U.S. President Barack Obama travels to Mexico on May 2, he will arrive amid a period of sweeping transformation in the country. Embroiled in myriad political battles and seeking to implement an extensive slate of national reforms, Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto's administration has been focused almost solely on internal affairs. Meanwhile, after years of delay, the U.S. Congress has been debating gun control and immigration reform -- two issues of serious interest to the Mexican government. U.S.-Mexican relations are strategically important to both countries, and Mexico's period of transition has created opportunities for each to reshape the partnership. And although U.S. media attention has focused primarily on bilateral security issues ahead of Obama's visit -- namely cooperation in Mexico's drug war -- the Pena Nieto administration is working with Washington to re-orient the cross-border conversation to one centered primarily on mutual economic possibility.
|
Stratfor Global Intelligence 13 (Global Awareness and Guidance program and think-tank based in Texas, “Evolving Us-Mexico Relations and Obama’s Visit”, 5/2/13 http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/evolving-us-mexico-relations-and-obamas-visit”)
|
When U.S. President travels to Mexico on May 2, he will arrive amid a period of sweeping transformation in the country seeking to implement , Nieto's administration has been focused almost solely on internal affairs. Meanwhile, the U.S. Congress has been debating gun control and immigration reform -- two issues of serious interest to the Mexican government. U.S.-Mexican relations are strategically important to both countries Mexico's period of transition has created opportunities for each to reshape the partnership although U.S attention has focused primarily on bilateral security the Nieto administration is working with Washington to re-orient the cross-border conversation to one on economic possibility.
|
Relations are strategically key
| 985 | 32 | 714 | 145 | 4 | 104 | 0.027586 | 0.717241 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,760 |
Regardless of how one comes down on the issues of Cuba, immigration, drugs, and trade, the paternalistic impulse on the part of the United States has been unmistakable. Latin Americans find this tutorial attitude extremely irritating, and their objections have prompted a more collegial tone from the United States in certain cases. Unfortunately, it is still manifest in a variety of ways, from the overall diplomatic style to specific policies like drug cooperation decertification or suspending military training for countries that do not sign agreements that exempt US soldiers from prosecution under the International Criminal Court. While domestic politics is never completely divorced from foreign policy, it has an inordinate and particularly distorting influence on Latin American policy. Hardliners and liberals alike rarely consider the effects policies and statements will have on US-Latin American relations or the ultimate impact for US interests. The decision to build a “wall” along the US-Mexico border, for example, may have been politically expedient but was deeply insulting, not only to Mexico, but to the entire region. Close to the top of the list of foreign policy priorities for the next US administration should be addressing the security challenge in Mexico. President Bush was right when he said at the White House on September 5, 2001 that Mexico was “our most important relationship.” The reasons for Mexico’s significance are obvious: the country’s 2,000 mile border with the United States, the robust trade relationship under the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, the high levels of tourism and immigration, the environment, and an array of other important bilateral issues. These deepening connections are the product of dramatic shifts of technology and capital, reduced trade barriers, and remarkable cultural intermingling. The interplay of global forces and national trends has shaped two other central traits in Mexico. The first is its increasingly open, competitive and democratic politics. It has been nearly a decade since Mexico witnessed the alternation in power to the National Action Party (PAN) after seven decades of rule by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). As in all such situations, the country is a blend of the old and the new, but the overall tendency is toward greater give-and-take and less authoritarian control. The second trait is markedly less benign, an example of a far darker side of globalization. Mexico has increasingly become a main locus of organized crime, principally fueled by drug trafficking, with deadly consequences. Because of this pernicious phenomenon, there are now nearly 3,000 murders per year in Mexico, more than in Iraq. The rule of law is at serious risk as many towns are being overtaken by mafias that penetrate all realms of the state and society. The Mexican government is having difficulty asserting its authority. Sensing growing frustration amid a deterioration of the situation, President Felipe Calderon has turned to the country’s army to address the problem, though this approach involves considerable risks and has yielded limited results thus far. Fragile and often corrupt institutions like the Mexican police and courts help account for the dire situation. Displacement of the drug trade and the brazen conduct of agile criminal networks also form a large part of the explanation. With its high demand for drugs and stubborn unwillingness to control the flow of small arms, the United States is hardly an idle bystander in Mexico’s security crisis. Through the Mérida Initiative, the United States has offered $1.4 billion in training and equipment over the next three years, which may help mitigate the deleterious effects and help avert the worst-case scenario. A long-term solution to overcome this profound and pervasive problem, however, will require deeper cooperation along with more systematic and imaginative policies. Mexico is being overwhelmed by threats to its democratic governance, but the situation in much of Central America and the Caribbean may be even more combustible. Many states in this vulnerable sub-region have scant capacity to contend with the organized crime and drug trafficking contributing to enormous insecurity. In Guatemala, Central America’s largest country, conditions are particularly unsettling, as mafias operate largely unchecked. They are similarly active in much of the Caribbean, where governments are at a great disadvantage compared to well-organized and well-financed criminal gangs. Transnational forces have strengthened in recent years, thanks to the unencumbered transportation accompanying globalization. Street crime is also rampant in such countries as El Salvador, which registers the highest homicide rate per capita of any country in the world. Indeed, there are an estimated 100,000 maras or gang members operating in Central America. Making matters worse, Central America and the Caribbean are being battered by the current financial and economic crisis in the United States, including sharp declines in remittances, tourism and investment. Higher fuel and food costs have also put tremendous strain on already tight fiscal situations, contributing to a “perfect storm” of economic vulnerability. As a major oil producer, Mexico is better equipped to absorb such shocks. The 2005 Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which also includes the Dominican Republic, opened up markets and facilitated greater investment flows but also failed to stem mounting economic pressure and social dislocation. As a result, governments in the region are seeking to maintain the benefits of ties to the United States while trying to take advantage of alternative trading arrangements. Nicaragua, a signatory of CAFTA, is also a founding member of the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA), inspired and organized by Venezuela. Honduras decided to join in 2008. Costa Rica, hardly ideologically sympathetic to Venezuela, has become a member of Petrocaribe, an arrangement in which Venezuela provides discounted oil to some 19 cash-strapped governments. For Mexico, Central America and much of the Caribbean, the United States remains the central reference point and the dominant actor. The sub-region is highly sensitive to what happens in the United States, benefiting in good times and suffering during economic downturns. The United States is the main trading partner, and despite ebbs and flows in remittances and migration, it is doubtful that the shift towards deeper economic and cultural integration will be reversed over time. Such underlying, long-term trends, however, do not necessarily translate into political subordination and control. On the contrary, those countries geographically closest to the United States are joining the rest of Latin America in increasing their distance and independence from decisions made in Washington. Many countries of Central America and the Caribbean are pursuing economic and political relationships with Venezuela, an adversary of the United States. Despite being so inextricably intertwined, Mexico has become an influential global player far more autonomous from the United States.
|
Michael Shifter 08 (prof @ Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, “US Latin American Relations: Recommendations for the New Administration”, 10/27/08 http://www.thedialogue.org/page.cfm?pageID=32&pubID=1625)
|
While domestic politics is never completely divorced from foreign policy, it has an inordinate and particularly distorting influence on Latin American policy . The decision to build a “wall” along the US-Mexico border, for example was deeply insulting, not only to Mexico, but to the entire region Mexico was “our most important relationship.” The reasons for Mexico’s significance are obvious: the country’s 2,000 mile border with the United States, the robust trade relationship under N A F T A and an array of other important bilateral issues As a result, governments in the region are seeking to maintain the benefits of ties to the United States For Mexico The sub-region is highly sensitive to what happens in the United States On the contrary, those countries geographically closest to the United States are joining the rest of Latin America in increasing their distance and independence from decisions made in Washington. Many countries of Central America and the Caribbean are pursuing economic and political relationships with Venezuela, an adversary of the United States. Despite being so inextricably intertwined, Mexico has become an influential global player far more autonomous from the United States.
|
Decisions between US and Mexico affect Latin America
| 7,211 | 52 | 1,216 | 1,091 | 8 | 190 | 0.007333 | 0.174152 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,761 |
In Latin America, the relevant body is the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America based in Mexico. In Southeast Asia, the Southeast Asian NWFZ Commission is coordinated through the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta, Indonesia. In Africa, the recently established organization is the African Commission on Nuclear Energy (ACONE) based in Pretoria, South Africa. In practice, some of the most successful zones in terms of current universal adherence and universal recognition and ratification by nuclear weapon states did not, in fact, attract initial adherence by all parties. The Latin American Tlatelolco Treaty, for example, has secured universal adherence from all Latin American states and universal ratification of its negative security protocols by the five recognized nuclear weapon states. However, at the time of negotiations, 1963-67, the political conditions did not make it feasible to expect all regional states to immediately ratify the zone. While five Latin American states, Brazil, Mexico, Chile, Bolivia and Ecuador initially proposed negotiations on the zone in 1963, following the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, other states were not so enthusiastic. As Redick notes, Argentina argued at the time that such a treaty might freeze Latin American states into a “permanent state of inferiority”, and, as itself a country seeking to develop the entire nuclear fuel cycle, might adversely affects its own options for developing nuclear weapon capability. The zone looked even less likely to be successfully established when a military coup in early 1964 replaced the civilian government in one of the main and most influential proponents of the zone, Brazil. The new Brazilian military regime of General Castelo Branco was much more ambivalent about the zone, and moved towards a closer alignment with the United States while expressing reservations about aspects of the proposed zones, including the question of “peaceful” nuclear explosions. When the negotiations for the treaty concluded in 1967, both Brazil and Argentina (both now under military regimes following the 1966 Argentina military coup) declined to bring the treaty into force for their countries, and were not to do so for over two decades. Following a lengthy process of confidence-building on nuclear issues that was facilitated by the Tlatelolco Treaty framework, and by bilateral discussions that culminated in the 1991 Brazilian-Argentine Agency for Accounting and Control of Nuclear Materials (ABACC) agreement, both Brazil and Argentina finally brought the treaty into force for their territories in early 1994. Cuba was to be an even longer hold-out state, not bringing the treaty into force for its territory until 2002. In the case of the Treaty protocols, there was similarly no immediate ratification of the protocols by the relevant nuclear weapon states. Britain was the first to ratify these in 1969, the US followed in 1971, China and France in 1974, and Russia in 1979. In all it took over a decade to achieve universal recognition for the protocols, and over three decades to achieve universal adherence amongst all zonal states. There are some relevant parallels here for the Northeast Asian region. Nuclear weapon proliferation had already occurred prior to the NWFZ negotiations in the form of the 1961-62 Soviet deployment of short and intermediate range nuclear weapons in Cuba. Following the 1964 and 1966 military coups in Brazil and Argentina respectively, potential horizontal nuclear proliferation was also a very real possibility given the emerging nuclear capabilities in both countries and their military regime aspirations to keep nuclear weapon options open. In Northeast Asia, nuclear weapon proliferation has already occurred in the form of North Korea’s testing of two nuclear weapons, and acquisition of enrichment facilities that could lead to production of over 100 nuclear warheads. Other countries in the region, such as South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan have nuclear industries that could provide future capacity for nuclear weapon production, with two, South Korea and Taiwan, already having in the past conducted nuclear weapons related research. As in the case of Brazil, Argentina, and Cuba, one could expect North Korean initial reluctance to join a nuclear free zone now that the North Korean regime has demonstrably acquired nuclear weapon capabilities; but equally, North Korea may well be encouraged to join such an arrangement through the initial establishment of such a zone and comparable Tlatelolco-style mechanisms for subsequently bringing the treaty into force. In the case of Brazil and Argentina, it is noteworthy that fellow regional states, led particularly by Mexico, did not abandon or despair of the NWFZ concept but engaged closely with the Brazilian and Argentinian military regimes, integrated some of their specific concerns into the Tlatelolco Treaty, and developed an innovative entry-into-force mechanism (Article 28 under the original treaty, Article 29 under the current amended treaty) that permitted each regional state to join at a later date.
|
Michael Hamel-Green 12, ("Regions That Say No: Precedents and Precursors for Denuclearizing Northeast Asia", Nautilus Institute for Security and Stability, NAPSNet Special Reports, June 05, 2012, http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/regions-that-say-no-precedents-and-precursors-for-denuclearizing-northeast-asia/)
|
In Latin America, the relevant body is the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America based in Mexico The Latin American Tlatelolco Treaty, for example, has secured universal adherence from all Latin American states and universal ratification of its negative security protocols by the five recognized nuclear weapon states. However, at the time of negotiations the political conditions did not make it feasible to expect all regional states to immediately ratify the zone While Mexico initially proposed negotiation following the Cuban Missile Crisis Argentina argued such a treaty might freeze Latin American states into a “permanent state of inferiority Cuba was to be an even longer hold-out state, not bringing the treaty into force for its territory until 2002. In the case of the Treaty protocols, there was similarly no immediate ratification of the protocols by the relevant nuclear weapon states. Nuclear weapon proliferation had already occurred prior to the NWFZ negotiations in the form of the 1961-62 Soviet deployment of short and intermediate range nuclear weapons in Cuba. Following the 1964 and 1966 military coups in Brazil and Argentina respectively, potential horizontal nuclear proliferation was also a very real possibility given the emerging nuclear capabilities in both countries and their military regime aspirations In the case of Brazil and Argentina, it is noteworthy that fellow regional states, led particularly by Mexico, did not abandon or despair of the NWFZ concept but engaged closely with the Brazilian and Argentinian military regimes, integrated some of their specific concerns into the Tlatelolco Treaty, and developed an innovative entry-into-force mechanism that permitted each regional state to join at a later date
|
Relations with Mexico is key to denuclearization agenda
| 5,113 | 56 | 1,777 | 786 | 8 | 271 | 0.010178 | 0.344784 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,762 |
“Mexico is in the midst of a worsening security crisis,” warns David A. Shirk, director of the Trans-Border Institute at the University of San Diego in a new Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) Special Report. “Explosive clashes and territorial disputes among powerful drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) have killed more than thirty-five thousand people since President Felipe Calderón took office in December 2006.” Estimates place the profits from the drug industry at $30 billion per year—about 3 to 4 percent of Mexico's GDP.¶ Shirk stresses that the United States is not immune from the effects of this drug trade. “The February 2011 killing of a U.S. immigration and customs agent signals that U.S. law enforcement officials are now in the crosshairs.” Tensions between Washington and Mexico City flared up in the wake of the recent Wikileaks scandals. Cables criticizing Mexico's handling of the drug cartels resulted in Carlos Pascual, U.S. ambassador, resigning. However, “the United States remains the world's largest consumer of illegal drugs. It is also the world's largest supplier of weapons, which fuel the drug war in a more direct way.”¶ Shirk notes that “despite the most dismal assessments, the Mexican state has not failed, nor has it confronted a growing insurgent movement.” In addition, “Mexico has made impressive efforts to improve the transparency and credibility of elections, protect the rights of indigenous people, strengthen judicial independence, and even investigate past government abuses.”¶ In The Drug War in Mexico: Confronting a Shared Threat, Shirk points out that the United States has “much to gain by helping strengthen its southern neighbor and even more to lose if it does not” for the following reasons.¶ - The weaker the Mexican state, the greater difficulty the United States will have in controlling the nearly two-thousand-mile border. As the dominant wholesale distributors of illegal drugs to U.S. consumers, Mexican traffickers are also the single greatest domestic organized crime threat within the United States.¶ - Economically, Mexico is an important ally for the United States. It is the third-largest trade partner, the third-largest source of U.S. imports, and the second-largest exporter of U.S. goods and services. Trade with Mexico benefits the U.S. economy, and “the market collapse that would likely accompany a deteriorated security situation could hamper U.S. economic recovery.”¶ - Mexican stability serves as an anchor for the region. “Given the fragility of some Central American and Caribbean states, expansion of DTO operations and violence into the region would have a gravely destabilizing effect.”¶ - If the security conditions in Mexico were to worsen, “a humanitarian emergency might lead to an unmanageable flow of people into the United States. It would also adversely affect the many U.S. citizens living in Mexico.”¶ Shirk recommends a three-pronged approach for U.S. policy that can help Mexico overcome its security crisis.¶ - Enhance and consolidate the mechanisms for bilateral and multilateral security cooperation in Mexico and Central America.¶ - Focus on U.S. drug demand, firearms, and money laundering at home, and direct greater assistance for institutional and economic development, such as educational and judicial reform.¶ - Work toward drug policy adaptation that includes alternative approaches to reducing the harms caused by drugs.
|
CFR 11 (Council on Foreign Relations, independent nonpartisan membership organization think tank and publisher, 3-29-11, http://www.cfr.org/mexico/us-mexico-must-increase-cooperation-confront-drug-war-argues-cfr-report/p24514)
|
Explosive clashes and territorial disputes among powerful drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) have killed more than thirty-five thousand people since 2006 the U S is not immune from the effects of this drug trade. the U S remains the world's largest consumer of illegal drugs. It is also the world's largest supplier of weapons, which fuel the drug war in a more direct way. Shirk recommends a three-pronged approach for U.S. policy that can help Mexico overcome its security crisis. - Enhance and consolidate the mechanisms for bilateral and multilateral security cooperation in Mexico and Central America. - Focus on U.S. drug demand, firearms, and money laundering at home, and direct greater assistance for institutional and economic development, such as educational and judicial reform. - Work toward drug policy adaptation that includes alternative approaches to reducing the harms caused by drugs.
|
US- Mexico key to fighting drugs
| 3,434 | 33 | 909 | 525 | 6 | 140 | 0.011429 | 0.266667 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,763 |
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the U.S. can do more to help Mexico battle drug cartels that have started operating more like terrorists and insurgent groups.¶ "It is one of my highest priorities," Clinton said Friday during a speech in San Francisco at the nonpartisan Commonwealth Club. "This is one of the most difficult fights that any country faces today. We saw it over the last couple of decades in Colombia."¶ "We are watching drug traffickers undermine and corrupt governments in Central America, and we are watching the brutality and barbarity of their assaults on governors and mayors, the press, as well as each other, in Mexico," she added.¶ Clinton said the U.S. can do more than sending the Blackhawk helicopters it promised Mexico.¶ She said the U.S. is helping Mexico create an anonymous tipline to report drug cartels. However, she said, it can also help Mexico rebuild its criminal system and train its police force.¶ She likened recent drug cartel violence to terror groups.¶ "For the first time, they are using car bombings," Clinton said. "You see them being much more organized in a kind of paramilitary way."¶ Clinton's remarks come the same week she discussed the U.S. effort to find David Hartley, an American believed to have been shot by drug bandits on the border of Mexico and Texas.
|
CNN 10 (CNN, 10-16-12, “Clinton: US can do more to help Mexico fight drug cartels, http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/10/16/clinton.drug.cartels/index.html)
|
the U.S. can do more to help Mexico battle drug cartels "We are watching drug traffickers undermine and corrupt governments in Central America, and we are watching the brutality and barbarity of their assaults on governors and mayors, the press, as well as each other, in Mexico," the U.S. can do more than sending the Blackhawk helicopters it promised Mexico. For the first time, they are using car bombings," Clinton said. "You see them being much more organized in a kind of paramilitary way."
|
US needs to work with Mexico to control escalating drug violence
| 1,321 | 64 | 496 | 222 | 11 | 84 | 0.04955 | 0.378378 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,764 |
Certainly the U.S. government was very involved in the Calderon administration’s kinetic approach to the cartel problem, as shown by the very heavy collaboration between the two governments. The collaboration was so heavy, in fact, that some incoming Pena Nieto administration figures were shocked by how integrated the Americans had become. The U.S. officials who told Dana Priest they were uncomfortable with the new Mexican government’s approach to cartel violence were undoubtedly among those deeply involved in this process — perhaps so deeply involved that they could not recognize that in the big picture, their approach was failing to reduce the violence in Mexico. Indeed, from the Mexican perspective, the U.S. efforts have been focused on reducing the flow of narcotics into the United States regardless of the impact of those efforts on Mexico’s security environment.¶ However, as seen by the May 1 arrest of Coronel, which a Mexican official described as a classic joint operation involving the U.S Drug Enforcement Administration and Mexican Federal Police, the Mexican authorities do intend to continue to work very closely with their American counterparts. But that cooperation must occur within the new framework established for the anti-cartel efforts. That means that plans for cooperation must be presented through the Mexican Interior Ministry so that the efforts can be centrally coordinated. Much of the current peer-to-peer cooperation can continue, but within that structure.¶ As in the United States, the law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Mexico have terrible problems with coordination and information sharing. The current administration is attempting to correct this by centralizing the anti-cartel efforts at the federal level and by creating coordination centers to oversee operations in the various regions. These regional centers will collect information at the state and regional level and send it up to the national center. However, one huge factor inhibiting information sharing in Mexico — and between the Americans and Mexicans — is the longstanding problem of corruption in the Mexican government. In the past, drug czars, senior police officials and very senior politicians have been accused of being on cartel payrolls. This makes trust critical, and lack of trust has caused some Mexican and most American agencies to restrict the sharing of intelligence to only select, trusted contacts. Centralizing coordination will interfere with this selective information flow in the short term, and it is going to take time for this new coordination effort to earn the trust of both Mexican and American agencies. There remains fear that consolidation will also centralize corruption and make it easier for the cartels to gather intelligence.¶ Another attempt at command control and coordination is in the Pena Nieto administration’s current efforts to implement police consolidation at the state level. While corruption has reached into all levels of the Mexican government, it is unquestionably the most pervasive at the municipal level, and in past government operations entire municipal police departments have been fired for corruption. The idea is that if all police were brought under a unified state command, called “Mando Unico” in Spanish, the police would be better screened, trained and paid and therefore the force would be more professional.¶ This concept of police consolidation at the state level is not a new idea; indeed, Calderon sought to do so under his administration, but it appears that Pena Nieto might have the political capital to make this happen, along with some other changes that Calderon wanted to implement but could not quite pull off. To date, Pena Nieto has had a great deal of success in garnering political support for his proposals, but the establishment of Mando Unico in each of Mexico’s 31 states may perhaps be the toughest political struggle he has faced yet. If realized, Mando Unico will be an important step — but only one step — in the long process of institution building for the police at the state level.¶ Aside from the political struggles, the Mexican government still faces very real challenges on the streets as it attempts to quell violence, reassert control over lawless areas and gain the trust of the public. The holistic plan laid out by the Pena Nieto administration sounds good on paper, but it will still require a great deal of leadership by Pena Nieto and his team to bring Mexico through the challenges it faces. They will obviously need to cooperate with the United States to succeed, but it has become clear that this cooperation will need to be on Mexico’s terms and in accordance with the administration’s new, holistic approach.
|
Forbes 13 (Forbes, 5-6-13, “U.S.-Mexico Cooperation Against Cartels Remains Strong”, http://www.forbes.com/sites/stratfor/2013/05/16/u-s-mexico-cooperation-against-cartels-remains-strong/)
|
U.S. efforts have been focused on reducing the flow of narcotics into the United States regardless of the impact of those efforts on Mexico’s security environment. cooperation must occur within the new framework established for the anti-cartel efforts. That means that plans for cooperation must be presented through the Mexican Interior Ministry so that the efforts can be centrally coordinated. Centralizing coordination will interfere with this selective information flow in the short term, and it is going to take time for this new coordination effort to earn the trust of both Mexican and American agencies. There remains fear that consolidation will also centralize corruption and make it easier for the cartels to gather intelligence. While corruption has reached into all levels of the Mexican government, it is unquestionably the most pervasive at the municipal level, and in past government operations entire municipal police departments have been fired for corruption. The idea is that if all police were brought under a unified state command, called “Mando Unico” in Spanish, the police would be better screened, trained and paid and therefore the force would be more professional. the Mexican government still faces very real challenges on the streets as it attempts to quell violence, reassert control over lawless areas and gain the trust of the public They will obviously need to cooperate with the United States to succeed, but it has become clear that this cooperation will need to be on Mexico’s terms and in accordance with the administration’s new, holistic approach.
|
US coop needed for effective Mexican drug policy
| 4,744 | 48 | 1,590 | 753 | 8 | 250 | 0.010624 | 0.332005 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,765 |
Outreach to Latin America is seen by the Iranian regime first and foremost as a means to lessen its deepening international isolation. Since 2003, when its previously clandestine nuclear program became a pressing international issue, Tehran has sought to mitigate the mounting political and economic restrictions levied against it by the United States and its allies through intensified diplomatic outreach abroad.¶ Due to its favorable geopolitical climate—typified by vast ungoverned areas and widespread anti-Americanism—Latin America has become an important focus of this effort. Over the past decade, the regime has nearly doubled the number of embassies in the region (from six in 2005 to ten in 2010) and has devoted considerable energy to forging economic bonds with sympathetic regional governments.[2]¶ Far and away the most prominent such partnership has been with Venezuela. Since Hugo Chavez became president in 1999, alignment with Tehran has emerged as a cardinal tenet of Caracas's foreign policy. The subsequent election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to the Iranian presidency in 2005 kicked cooperation into high gear with dramatic results. Today, the two countries enjoy an extensive and vibrant strategic partnership. Venezuela has emerged as an important source of material assistance for Tehran's sprawling nuclear program as well as a vocal diplomatic backer of its right to atomic power.[3] The Chavez regime also has become a safe haven and source of financial support for Hezbollah, Iran's most powerful terrorist proxy.[4] In turn, Tehran's feared Revolutionary Guard has become involved in training Venezuela's secret services and police.[5] Economic contacts between Caracas and Tehran likewise have exploded—expanding from virtually nil in the early 2000s to more than $20 billion in total trade and cooperation agreements today.[6]¶ Just as significantly, Venezuela has served as Iran's gateway for further economic and diplomatic expansion into the region. Aided by its partnership with Caracas and bolstered by a shared anti-American outlook, Tehran has succeeded in forging significant strategic, economic, and political links with the regime of Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael Correa in Ecuador. Even Iran's relations with Argentina, where Iranian-supported terrorists carried out major bombings in 1992 and 1994, have improved in recent times, as the government of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner has hewed a more conciliatory line toward Tehran.[7]¶ It would be a mistake, however, to view these contacts as simply pragmatic—or strictly defensive. The Iranian regime's sustained systematic outreach to regional states suggests that it sees the Western Hemisphere as a crucial strategic theater for expanding its own influence and reducing that of the United States. Indeed, a 2009 dossier prepared by Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that "since Ahmadinejad's rise to power, Tehran has been promoting an aggressive policy aimed at bolstering its ties with Latin American countries with the declared goal of 'bringing America to its knees.'"[8] This view is increasingly shared by the U.S. military: In its 2010 report on Iranian military power, the Office of the Secretary of Defense noted that "Iran seeks to increase its stature by countering U.S. influence and expanding ties with regional actors" in Latin America.[9]¶ To this end, Tehran is ramping up its strategic messaging to the region. In late January, on the heels of Ahmadinejad's very public four-country tour of Latin America, the Iranian regime formally launched HispanTV, a Spanish-language analogue to its English-language Press TV channel.[10] The television outlet has been depicted by Ahmadinejad as part of his government's efforts to "limit the ground for supremacy of dominance seekers"—a thinly-veiled reference to U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere.[11]¶ As Ahmadinejad's statement indicates, Tehran is pursuing a strategy that promotes its own ideology and influence in Latin America at Washington's expense. In this endeavor, it has been greatly aided by Chavez, who himself has worked diligently to diminish U.S. political and economic presence in the region under the banner of a new "Bolivarian" revolution.¶ Since the start of the international crisis over Iran's nuclear ambitions nearly nine years ago, it has become an accepted belief that Tehran's atomic program is now largely self-sufficient and that its progress is, therefore, largely inexorable. This, however, is far from the truth; in fact, the Iranian regime currently runs a considerable, and growing, deficit of uranium ore, the critical raw material needed to fuel its atomic effort.¶ According to nonproliferation experts, Tehran's indigenous uranium ore reserves are known to be both "limited and mostly of poor quality."[12] When Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi mapped out an ambitious national plan for nuclear power in the 1970s, his government was forced to procure significant quantities of the mineral from South Africa. Nearly four decades later, this aging stockpile has reportedly been mostly depleted.[13] As a result, in recent years, Tehran has embarked on a widening quest to acquire uranium ore from abroad. In 2009, for example, it is known to have attempted to purchase more than 1,000 tons of uranium ore from the Central Asian republic of Kazakhstan at a cost of nearly half-a-billion dollars.[14] In that particular case, deft diplomacy on the part of Washington and its European allies helped stymie Tehran's efforts—at least for the time being.¶ The Iranian quest, however, has not abated. In February 2011, an intelligence summary from a member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency reaffirmed the Islamic regime's continued search for new and stable sources of uranium to fuel its nuclear program.[15] This effort has recently focused on two principal geographic areas. The first is Africa where Tehran has made concerted efforts to engage a number of uranium producers such as Zimbabwe, Senegal, Nigeria, and the Democratic People's Republic of Congo.[16] The second is Latin America where Tehran now is exploring and developing a series of significant resource partnerships.¶ The best known of these partnerships is with Venezuela; cooperation on strategic resources has emerged as a defining feature of the alliance between the Islamic Republic and the Chavez regime. The Iranian regime is currently known to be mining in the Roraima Basin, adjacent to Venezuela's border with Guyana. Significantly, that geological area is believed to be analogous to Canada's Athabasca Basin, the world's largest deposit of uranium.[17]¶ Bolivia, too, is fast becoming a significant source of strategic resources for the Iranian regime. With the sanction of the Morales government, Tehran is now believed to be extracting uranium from as many as eleven different sites in Bolivia's east, proximate to the country's industrial capital of Santa Cruz.[18] Not coincidentally, it is rumored that the now-infamous Tehran-Caracas air route operated jointly by Conviasa, Venezuela's national airline, and Iran's state carrier, Iran Air, will be extended in the near future to Santa Cruz.[19] Additionally, a series of cooperation agreements concluded in 2010 between La Paz and Tehran have made Iran a "partner" in the mining and exploitation of Bolivia's lithium, a key strategic mineral with applications for nuclear weapons development.[20]¶ Iran even appears to be eyeing Ecuador's uranium deposits. A $30 million joint mining deal concluded between Tehran and Quito back in 2009 has positioned the Correa regime to eventually become a supplier for the Islamic Republic.[21]¶ Regional experts note that Iran's mining and extraction efforts in Latin America are still comparatively modest in nature, constrained by competition from larger countries such as Canada and China and by Tehran's own available resources and know-how.[22] However, the region is unquestionably viewed as a target of opportunity in Iran's widening quest for strategic resources—both because of its favorable political operating environment and because states there (especially Bolivia) represent unknown quantities in terms of resource wealth. This raises the possibility that Latin America could emerge in the near future as a significant provider of strategic resources for the Iranian regime and a key source of sustenance for Iran's expanding nuclear program.¶ Tehran's formal political and economic contacts with regional states are reinforced by a broad web of asymmetric activities throughout the Americas. Illicit financial transactions figure prominently in this regard. Over the past several years, Tehran's economic ties with Caracas have helped it skirt the sanctions being levied by the international community as well as to continue to operate in an increasingly inhospitable global financial system. It has done so through the establishment of joint companies and financial entities as well as the formation of wholly Iranian-owned financial entities in Venezuela and the entrenchment of Iranian commercial banks there.[23] Experts note that this financial activity exploits an existing loophole in the current sanctions regime against Tehran—one that leverages the freedom of action of Venezuelan banks to provide the Islamic Republic with "an ancillary avenue through which it can access the international financial system despite Western pressure."[24]¶ Tehran is also known to be active in the region's ubiquitous gray and black markets as well as its free trade areas—operating both directly and via its terrorist proxy Hezbollah.[25] Most notoriously, these include the so-called "Triple Frontier" at the crossroads of Argentina, Paraguay, and Brazil as well as Venezuela's Margarita Island.¶ The Iranians also boast an increasingly robust paramilitary presence in the region. The Pentagon, in its 2010 report to Congress on Iran's military power, noted that the Qods Force, the Revolutionary Guard's elite paramilitary unit, is now deeply involved in the Americas, stationing "operatives in foreign embassies, charities and religious/cultural institutions to foster relationships with people, often building on existing socioeconomic ties with the well-established Shia Diaspora" and even carrying out "paramilitary operations to support extremists and destabilize unfriendly regimes."[26]¶ This presence is most pronounced in Bolivia. Tehran has been intimately involved in the activities of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (ALBA) since the formation of that Cuban- and Venezuelan-led geopolitical bloc—which also encompasses Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and a number of other nations—in the early 2000s. As part of that relationship, Tehran reportedly provided at least some of the seed money for the establishment of the bloc's regional defense school situated outside Santa Cruz. Iranian defense minister Ahmad Vahidi reportedly presided over the school's inauguration in May 2011, and Iran—an ALBA observer nation—is now said to be playing a role in training and indoctrination at the facility.[27] Regional officials currently estimate between fifty and three hundred Iranian trainers to be present in Bolivia.[28] Notably, however, a personal visit to the facility by this author in January 2012 found it to be largely unattended.
|
Berman 12(Ilan Berman, Vice President of the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, Middle East Quarterly, “Iran Courts Latin America”, http://www.meforum.org/3297/iran-latin-america)
|
Outreach to Latin America is seen by the Iranian regime first and foremost as a means to lessen its deepening international isolation Tehran has sought to mitigate the mounting political and economic restrictions levied against it by the United States and its allies through intensified diplomatic outreach abroad. Due to its favorable geopolitical climate—typified by vast ungoverned areas and widespread anti-Americanism—Latin America has become an important focus of this effort. Economic contacts between Caracas and Tehran likewise have exploded—expanding from virtually nil in the early 2000s to more than $20 billion in total trade and cooperation agreements today , Venezuela has served as Iran's gateway for further economic and diplomatic expansion into the region. Aided by its partnership with Caracas and bolstered by a shared anti-American outlook The Iranian regime's sustained systematic outreach to regional states suggests that it sees the Western Hemisphere as a crucial strategic theater for expanding its own influence and reducing that of the United States. Tehran has been promoting an aggressive policy aimed at bolstering its ties with Latin American countries with the declared goal of 'bringing America to its knees In February 2011, an intelligence summary from a member state of the International Atomic Energy Agency reaffirmed the Islamic regime's continued search for new and stable sources of uranium to fuel its nuclear program Latin America where Tehran now is exploring and developing a series of significant resource partnerships. the region is unquestionably viewed as a target of opportunity in Iran's widening quest for strategic resources—both because of its favorable political operating environment The Iranians also boast an increasingly robust paramilitary presence in the region
|
US losing Latin America to Iran
| 11,360 | 32 | 1,824 | 1,699 | 6 | 271 | 0.003531 | 0.159506 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,766 |
PEMEX leaders plan to raise production to 2.7 mbd in 2013 and 3 mbd by 2017, requiring up to $38 billion annually in investment. Near term growth is expected to come primarily from Chicontopec, a highly complex unconventional onshore project that is subject of great hope and scorn. Despite years of development and reportedly $5 billion in investment, the project is well behind expectations and currently only 70,000 barrels per day are produced, which puts claims of near-term growth in serious doubt. Over the longer-term PEMEX has set a goal to increase production to 3.3 mbd by 2024.¶ Achieving that goal will require significantly more new production than the difference between the 3.3 mbd goal and today’s 2.6 mbd given expected large declines in KMZ. Field decline emphasizes the urgent need for Mexico to have several new projects in the pipeline in order to maintain and boost production. Skepticism of PEMEX’s ability to compensate for declining fields has led to some dire forecasts. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has estimated that Mexico will be a net importer of oil by 2020,4 thus also raising concerns about impacts on its balance of trade.¶ Dealing with this challenge is complicated by the fact that PEMEX is as much a bureau of the government as it is a company. In defiance of conventional business sense (of both private companies and state oil companies), multiple Ministries and a politically appointed Board of Directors make key decisions, including deciding the amount and direction of investment in exploration and development of future production.¶ While oil provides vital government revenue, lack of natural gas development threatens to stunt Mexican industry. It is reported that parts of Mexico could face natural gas shortages in the coming year. Meanwhile, Mexico sits on a sea of unconventional natural gas reserve.¶ The United States government estimates that Mexico has one of the largest shale gas reserves in the world at more than 680 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of technically recoverable reserves, although Mexico itself uses estimates as low as 140 tcf. Much of that shale gas is thought to be contained in an extension of the Eagle Ford formation that is already producing in Texas. PEMEX reportedly has drilled just a handful of exploratory wells, and with prices being held down by the United States gas boom, it has little economic incentive to invest heavily in shale in its own right, let alone the opportunity cost of that capital compared to much more lucrative oil. Absent natural gas pricing reform, it is unlikely that PEMEX will choose to invest heavily into shale gas.¶ Developing Mexico’s shale gas reserves, as with technologically challenging new oil frontiers, will requireenergy reform to galvanize private investment, technology, and expertise. At the same time, an additional level of government capacity building will be useful to aid official understanding in the geology, economics, and environmental protections necessary for shale production.¶ The Transboundary Agreement (TBA) provides a bilateral basis upon which both countries can develop the legal framework necessary for joint production of oil and natural gas reserves that extend across our national maritime borders in the Gulf of Mexico.¶ Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs Patricia Espinosa Cantellano signed theTransboundary Agreement (TBA), officially called the Agreement between the United States of America and the United Mexican States Concerning Transboundary Hydrocarbon Reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico, on February 20, 2012, at Los Cabos, Mexico.¶ It is widely acknowledged in both capitals that the TBA negotiations moved quickly in order to be completed in time for the ratification in Mexico prior to 2012 Congressional elections. Both PAN and PRI political leaders used their influence to gain support for the TBA, which the Mexican Senate ratified.¶ In the United States, the TBA stalled within the Obama administration despite support by key officials in the Departments of State and Interior. Prior to completing the agreement, the Departments of State and Interior participated in Senate Foreign Relations Committee briefings to discuss status of the negotiations; however, there was no consultation on specific text.¶ An executive agreement would not require the two-thirds vote necessitated by a treaty, but instead it would be approved in the same form as a statute, requiring passage by majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives. Legislation approving the agreement, necessary implementing authorities, and clarifications regarding certain provisions of the TBA could be subject to amendment, including by items unrelated to the TBA itself, thus possibly miring the TBA in other political fights.¶ Regardless of whether Congress considers the TBA as a treaty or executive agreement, Congressional hearings and thorough examination of the TBA and its implementing legislative proposals are needed. So far the Obama administration has declined to officially submit its proposed implementing legislation to the committees of jurisdiction for action through regular order.¶ The centerpiece of the TBA is the mandate to establish so-called ‘‘unitization’’ agreements by which companies licensed by the United States and Mexico’s state oil company PEMEX would jointly develop oil and gas reservoirs that have been discovered to extend across the maritime boundary. In effect, unitization agreements would work similarly to more well-known production sharing agreements (PSAs), whereby companies involved will jointly develop a project in order to spread risk given that deep water developments will cost billions of dollars each.¶ Given PEMEX’s lack of experience in deep water, the most likely outcome is that IOCs licensed by the United States would operate the developments and utilize infrastructure based on the United States side of the border, which is more extensive than that of Mexico near to the area of operation. However, the United States does have an interest in PEMEX gaining expertise in operation in deep water in order to improve the integrity of potential PEMEX operated developments exclusively in Mexican territory.¶ A key difference between the unitization agreements envisioned under the TBA and traditional PSAs is that physical barrels produced will be allocated to the legal jurisdictions of the United States and Mexico, presumably in proportion to the amount of reserves found on their respective sides of the border.¶ The TBA would unlock the maritime border region from moratoria, thereby offering long-term opportunities to increase U.S. domestic production.¶ The TBA further contains requirements of data sharing and notification of likely reserves between the United States and Mexico, opening the opportunity for increased government-to-government collaboration on strategic energy policy choices.¶ On issues of environmental protection and safety, the TBA envisions that the U.S. and Mexico in the geographic area under the agreement will have common standards and that regulators from both countries will have access to oil and gas development facilities with the ability to order shutdowns in both jurisdictions if necessary. The Obama administration contends that means that Mexican environmental and safety standards, and enforcement, willhave to rise to U.S. levels. There is no guarantee that passage of the TBA will precipitate systemic improvement in Mexican environmental and safety enforcement, but any improvement is welcome by the Mexican safety regulator and should be welcomed in the United States given possible impacts of a spill on U.S. economic interests and quality of life.¶ There is reason to believe that the TBA can receive broad bipartisan backing in Congress. It would benefit bilateral relations, promote domestic oil production, and improve environmental protections in the Gulf of Mexico.¶ Power sector reforms prompted by NAFTA demonstrate that a trilateral effort can have major results. Most importantly, key leaders from both the PRI and PAN in Mexico City are interested in making progress. Recently, President Pen˜ a Nieto wrote: ‘‘Together with the United States and Canada, [energy shifts] may well contributeto guaranteeing North American energy independence— something from which we would all greatly benefit.’’
|
Smart Energy Universe 12 (Smart Energy Universe, Civilian Group of Scientists, 2012, http://www.smartenergyuniverse.com/regulatory-update/13077-u-s-mexico-transboundary-hydrocarbons-agreement”)
|
Developing Mexico’s shale gas reserves, as with technologically challenging new oil frontiers, will requireenergy reform to galvanize private investment, technology, and expertise. At the same time, an additional level of government capacity building will be useful to aid official understanding in the geology, economics, and environmental protections necessary for shale production. The TBA) provides a bilateral basis upon which both countries can develop the legal framework necessary for joint production of oil and natural gas reserves that extend across our national maritime borders in the Gulf of Mexico. United States and Mexico’s state oil company PEMEX would jointly develop oil and gas reservoirs that have been discovered to extend across the maritime boundary. In effect, unitization agreements would work similarly to more well-known production sharing agreements (PSAs), whereby companies involved will jointly develop a project in order to spread risk given that deep water developments will cost billions of dollars each. Given PEMEX’s lack of experience in deep water, the most likely outcome is that IOCs licensed by the United States would operate the developments and utilize infrastructure based on the United States side of the border, which is more extensive than that of Mexico near to the area of operation. However, the United States does have an interest in PEMEX gaining expertise in operation in deep water in order to improve the integrity of potential PEMEX operated developments exclusively in Mexican territory. The TBA further contains requirements of data sharing and notification of likely reserves between the United States and Mexico, opening the opportunity for increased government-to-government collaboration on strategic energy policy choices. On issues of environmental protection and safety, the TBA envisions that the U.S. and Mexico in the geographic area under the agreement will have common standards and that regulators from both countries will have access to oil and gas development facilities with the ability to order shutdowns in both jurisdictions if necessary. The Obama administration contends that means that Mexican environmental and safety standards, and enforcement, willhave to rise to U.S. levels. any improvement is welcome by the Mexican safety regulato given possible impacts of a spill on U.S. economic interests and quality of life. the TBA can receive broad bipartisan backing in Congress. It would benefit bilateral relations, promote domestic oil production, and improve environmental protections in the Gulf of Mexico.
|
TBA will lead to US advancing Mexican oil development
| 8,403 | 53 | 2,592 | 1,287 | 9 | 386 | 0.006993 | 0.299922 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,767 |
At its core, the agreement seeks to set up legal guidelines for companies to jointly develop so-called transboundary reservoirs and lift the moratorium on oil and gas exploration and production for roughly 1.5 million acres in the Gulf.¶ ¶ Mexico underscored its commitment to the agreement by quickly ratifying it; the Mexican Senate approved the treaty in April 2012.¶ ¶ In the United States, meanwhile, progress stalled for more than a year. But just in time for yesterday’s bilateral meeting, the agreement is again under discussion as legislators revive the dormant ratification process, which is good news for those eager to see its approval in the U.S. Indeed, according to the White House, Obama spoke in positive terms yesterday about the recent progress made on the agreement: Both the House Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere Affairs and the House Committee on Natural Resources recently held hearings focused on the challenges and opportunities that approval of the accord would present for the United States. On April 18, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives that would make way for the approval and implementation of the terms of the agreement. ¶ ¶ These are all positive steps, and their progress will be monitored closely by U.S. and international observers, especially Mexico. But it bears underscoring that further delay in U.S. adoption of the agreement makes little sense. The agreement is not an overly polarizing issue domestically: in fact, quite the opposite. Several lawmakers have described it as a win-win for both Mexico and the U.S. ¶ ¶ As the U.S. Congress debates the deal, it is worth revisiting the four key reasons the agreement merits an expeditious approval in the coming weeks. ¶ ¶ First, approval of the deal in the U.S. would be an important sign of bilateral concord, particularly at the outset of a new administration in Mexico and a second term for Obama. This is important, as it underscores the two nations' increasing ability to work together and conclude complicated agreements—and cooperation—on binational issues unrelated to immigration or crime and drugs. ¶ ¶ Second, this agreement makes clear that both nations are keenly aware of the energy potential of the Gulf, particularly along the maritime border. But it also firmly establishes the issue of increased regulation and standards for drilling in a bilateral agreement. Since the April 2010 Macondo accident, the largest oil spill in U.S. history, the U.S. has been more concerned with drilling safety not just in the U.S. but also in neighboring countries around the Gulf such as Cuba and Mexico. This agreement formalizes interaction in terms of regulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border.¶ Third, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was correct to emphasize the commercial opportunity and energy security element of the accord when it was first announced. The agreement provides the possibility for U.S. firms to join with Mexico’s national oil company, Pemex, to exploit deep-water oil resources in the Gulf of Mexico along the countries' maritime boundaries. This could provide important opportunities for U.S. companies, including exciting joint venture opportunities with Pemex long thought impossible. ¶ ¶ Finally, the agreement is relevant and worthy of attention in both the U.S. and Mexico because of the important role of Mexican oil in the U.S. energy security equation, and the importance of the U.S. market for Mexican oil exports and revenue. ¶ ¶ During her remarks at the signing ceremony, Clinton called the agreement part of a commitment to improve energy security for both countries and to ensure safe, efficient, responsible exploration of the oil and gas reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico.¶ ¶ This last point has echoed throughout the congressional hearings on the topic, while members of Congress from both parties and from across the country have focused on the importance of collaboration with our neighbors, shared technology and the opportunity to boost energy security on both sides of the border. ¶
|
Martin and Wood 5-13 (Jeremy Martin, Writer from the Institute of Americas at the University of California San Diego, Duncan Wood, Director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 5-3-13, WPR, “U.S. Should Act Quickly on Transboundary Hydrocarbon Agreement With Mexico”)
|
the agreement firmly establishes the issue of increased regulation and standards for drilling in a bilateral agreement. the largest oil spill in U.S. history, the U.S. has been more concerned with drilling safety not just in the U.S. but also in neighboring countries around the Gulf such as Cuba and Mexico. This agreement formalizes interaction in terms of regulation and any responses to incidents along the maritime border. then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was correct to emphasize the commercial opportunity and energy security element of the accord when it was first announced. The agreement provides the possibility for U.S. firms to join with Mexico’s national oil company, Pemex, to exploit deep-water oil resources in the Gulf of Mexico along the countries' maritime boundaries. This could provide important opportunities for U.S. companies, including exciting joint venture opportunities with Pemex long thought impossible. Clinton called the agreement part of a commitment to improve energy security for both countries and to ensure safe, efficient, responsible exploration of the oil and gas reservoirs in the Gulf of Mexico.
|
US safety regulations and assistance can help Mexico with TBA
| 4,081 | 62 | 1,149 | 654 | 10 | 175 | 0.015291 | 0.267584 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,768 |
"Obviously, our challenge is we need to deliver on the pending reforms and governing responsibly over the next years, but I do see this as a very good opportunity for Mexico to retake a path of higher productivity and higher economic growth," he said. Mexico's conservative opposition, the National Action Party, largely favors a broader opening of the energy business to private investment, while the leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution has proposed a more limited opening for areas like refining. Mr. Newman believes Mr. Peña Nieto may well deliver a broad-ranging reform. "I don't think the prospects for reform have been this strong in Mexico in over 20 years," Mr. Newman said. The son of a former energy minister, Mr. Lozoya has had a tough start as head of Mexico's largest company, which had 2011 sales of $111 billion. An explosion at a Pemex office building at the company's Mexico City headquarters last month killed 37 workers. The company said the blast was caused by a buildup of methane in the building's cellar, but doesn't yet know what caused the gas to accumulate. The investigation, led by the country's attorney general's office, will take a few more weeks, Mr. Lozoya said. "We are in mourning, but we're standing and looking forward, and working on our modernization plans," said the executive, who is the grandson of a revolutionary general and politician. He pointed to the shale-gas revolution in the U.S., along with deep-water and heavy oil, as examples of how Mexico can benefit from new technologies that boost energy output, lower prices and create jobs. Mexico may hold the world's fourth-biggest reserves of shale gas, according to the U.S. government. But Pemex has drilled only a few wells and not produced any gas. "Mexico ought to be producing more of its own gas, and eventually exporting it," Mr. Lozoya, a lawyer and economist who got his master's degree in public policy at Harvard said. "Clearly the geology that you have in some parts of the U.S. extends into Mexican territory. So it's a matter of just investing and getting it done." Mr. Lozoya also envisions Pemex acting as a lever of development for the economy, spurring the development of a stronger oil service sector and promote new industries like ethanol. "It is important we support medium-size companies, together with programs from national development banks, so they can access credit and be suppliers to Pemex, and make sure over the next few years that we develop a strong oil-servicing industry in Mexico that can grow and be regionally competitive," he said, speaking in English.
|
Laurence Iliff and David Luhnow 13(Iliff is the Mexico correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones Newswire, Dalls Morning News, and graduate of the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and University of California and Luhnow serves as the Wall Street Journals’ Latin American Buereau Chief and recently won the Columbia University Cabot Journalism Award on Latin American Caribbean Reporting. “Mexico Moves on Energy in Economic Reset”, WSJ, 2/13/13, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324162304578302343638712694.html)
|
we need to deliver on the pending reforms as a very good opportunity for Mexico to retake a path of higher productivity and higher economic growth Newman believes Mr. Peña Nieto may well deliver a broad-ranging reform. "I don't think the prospects for reform have been this strong in Mexico in over 20 years," Lozoya pointed to the shale-gas revolution in the U.S., along with deep-water and heavy oil, as examples of how Mexico can benefit from new technologies that boost energy output, lower prices and create jobs. Mexico may hold the world's fourth-biggest reserves of shale gas, according to the U.S. government. But Pemex has drilled only a few wells and not produced any gas Lozoya, a lawyer and economist who got his master's degree in public policy at Harvard it's a matter of just investing and getting it done Lozoya also envisions Pemex acting as a lever of development for the economy, spurring the development of a stronger oil service sector and promote new industries "It is important we support medium-size companies, together with programs from national development banks, so they can access credit and be suppliers to Pemex, and make sure over the next few years that we develop a strong oil-servicing industry in Mexico that can grow and be regionally competitive," he said
|
PEMEX growth is key to long-term Mexican diversification away from oil
| 2,599 | 70 | 1,295 | 433 | 11 | 217 | 0.025404 | 0.501155 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,769 |
As noted above, the history of cooperation between the United States and Mexico on oil issues has been ¶ limited by the historical sensitivity of Mexico’s government and people to any hint of interference from ¶ the U.S. in what has traditionally been seen as a central element in the nation’s sovereignty. Nonetheless, ¶ recent years have shown a softening on this sensitivity, in part due to generational change, in part due to ¶ political change, and in part due to the success of negotiating a Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement ¶ in 2012. That agreement laid out a framework for determining the management and exploitation of crossborder oil reserves, and was hailed as a positive development. It was quickly ratified in the Mexican ¶ Senate, but is has yet to be ratified in the United States, and so has not yet come into force. Before ¶ moving on to discuss new areas of cooperation, it is important that this existing agreement is ratified.¶ It is widely expected that the government of Enrique Peña Nieto will present an energy reform initiative ¶ to the Mexican Congress early in 2013. While it is still unknown how ambitious that reform proposal will ¶ be, it is thought that the government will present an initiative that will be aimed at opening the sector to ¶ greater levels of private participation in refining, petrochemicals and even in exploration and production. ¶ Such an opening will of course offer significant possibilities for foreign as well as Mexican firms, and ¶ will also open the door to new areas of technical and regulatory collaboration between the two countries. Mexico’s energy establishment, and increasingly it seems, the government, hope that private investment ¶ will occur in unconventional hydrocarbons sector. For Mexico the most interesting plays in the future will ¶ be found in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, in the as yet untapped shale reserves that are found ¶ throughout the east of the country, and in the geologically-complex fields of Chicontepec, where Pemex ¶ has been consistently failing to meet production targets over the past four years. The application of ¶ cutting-edge technologies and techniques from U.S. firms would likely be important in all three of these ¶ areas, and the experience of American firms in shale plays would provide them with an advantage in the ¶ event of an opening in that area. ¶ Of particular interest in thisregard is the experience of U.S. firms in the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) ¶ business. The ability to extract shale oil and gasin areas that suffer from water shortages (such as Texas) ¶ will be crucial to developing shale resources in Mexico, particularly in the north of the country. In fact ¶ existing knowledge of the geological characteristics of the Eagle Ford formation will also be crucial in ¶ exploiting its oil and gas reserves in Coahuila, where the formation extends. One Mexican company, Alfa, ¶ has already worked extensively with U.S. partners in the shale industry north of the border, and we can ¶ expect higher levels of private sector collaboration to develop.¶ Beyond exploration and production, the pressing need for infrastructure stands out as an area with high ¶ potential for bilateral collaboration. First, it is vital that large scale construction of gas pipelines occurs, ¶ both within Mexico and across the border. Within Mexico, the Calderon administration identified the ¶ need for multi-billion dollar investments in the creation of a truly national gas pipeline network: at the ¶ present time the majority of western portion of the country lacks access to natural gas. Secondly, as was ¶ made painfully clear to a number of private sector industrial consumers during 2012, during times of short ¶ supply, the country lacks the capacity to import extra supplies of gas from the United States due to the ¶ limitations of the cross-border pipeline network. In 2012 this led to complaints from companies that they ¶ were unable to secure stable and sufficient supplies of gas for their manufacturing processes.¶ The second deficit in energy infrastructure can be found in the refining sector. The much-publicized ¶ efforts of the Calderon administration, announced in January 2009, to build a new refinery at Tula in the ¶ state of Hidalgo that was designed to process up to 300,000 barrels a day of Mexican heavy crude have ¶ thus far come to nothing. The project has been repeatedly delayed, first due to problems in securing the ¶ land, then due to bureaucratic problems and political wrangling. At the same time, Mexico’s dependence ¶ on imported gasoline has increased in line with rising demand. Mexico therefore needs to find a solution ¶ to this issue in the near future, and one option that presents itself is the example of the Deer Park refinery ¶ complex in Texas where since 1993 Pemex and Shell have worked together in a joint venture to refine ¶ 340,000 barrels a day of crude oil. Part of the production of the refinery heads back to Mexico and has ¶ become an important source of income for Pemex as well as helping to satisfy the country’s need for ¶ refined products.¶ Lastly, Mexico’s petrochemicalsector is in urgent need of investment. For many years now the industry ¶ has languished due to a lack of funds and a lack of direction from the government. Despite encouraging ¶ signs of new investment interest in recent months, the major Mexican petrochemicals project of the last ¶ few years, Ethylene XXI, has suffered repeated delays. When completed in 2015, the project will be a ¶ private petrochemical complex for the production of polyethylene, producing up to one million tons of ¶ polyethylene, and replace up to $2 billion worth of imports resulting in the creation of thousands of jobs. ¶ But the prospect of huge supplies of cheap gas from Mexico and the U.S. shale gas industry offers the ¶ tantalizing prospect of turning Mexico into a production and export base for these products, and there will ¶ be a major opportunity for joint ventures with foreign firms.
|
Wood 10 (Duncan Wood, Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2010, “Growing Potential for US Mexico Energy Cooperation”, p.3-4, http://wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/wood_energy.pdf)
|
that the government will present an initiative that will be aimed at opening the sector to ¶ greater levels of private participation in refining, petrochemicals and even in exploration and production Such an opening will of course offer significant possibilities for foreign as well as Mexican firms, and will also open the door to new areas of technical and regulatory collaboration between the two countries. For Mexico the most interesting plays in the future will be found in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, in the as yet untapped shale reserves that are found The application of cutting-edge technologies and techniques from U.S. firms would likely be important in all three of these areas, and the experience of American firms in shale plays would provide them with an advantage in the event of an opening in that area The ability to extract shale oil and gasin areas that suffer from water shortages will be crucial to developing shale resources in Mexico, existing knowledge of the geological characteristics of the Eagle Ford formation will also be crucial in exploiting its oil and gas reserves in Coahuila . The second deficit in energy infrastructure can be found in the refining sector. Mexico’s dependence on imported gasoline has increased in line with rising demand. a solution is the Deer Park refinery complex in Texas Mexico’s petrochemicalsector is in urgent need of investment the prospect of huge supplies of cheap gas from Mexico and the U.S. shale gas industry offers the tantalizing prospect of turning Mexico into a production and export base for these products, and there will be a major opportunity for joint ventures with foreign firms
|
TBA will increase Mexico production from US assistance
| 6,038 | 54 | 1,673 | 1,016 | 8 | 276 | 0.007874 | 0.271654 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,770 |
The United States-Mexico Transboundary Agreement (TBA) would enable cooperation between our two federal governments and our companies to unlock the potential for oil and natural gas reserves that extend across our Gulf of Mexico maritime boundary.¶ Congressional approval of the TBA would enrich U.S.-Mexico relations in the near term while laying the foundation for improved energy security and enhanced environmental protection for the Gulf Coast.¶ Bilateral relations with Mexico have improved dramatically in recent years, yet energy cooperation has lagged. Oil holds a privileged position of national pride and constitutional protection in Mexico, historically putting it off limits for domestic reform and bilateral cooperation with the U.S. The TBA is, therefore, more than just an energy agreement. Its approval by the Mexican government is a political statement opening a window to richer relations.¶ While the area under future jurisdiction of the TBA could provide incremental domestic oil production, a far greater prize for the U.S. oil portfolio is the prospect of more reliable oil trade with our ally Mexico. The TBA would, for the first time, allow oil majors to work in joint production arrangements with PEMEX and support the confidence building necessary to enable those arrangements more widely in Mexico. That is not only good for oil major shareholders, it is good for our nation’s energy security.¶ Even as U.S. domestic oil production increases, the sources of our imports remain critical for economic stability and national security flexibility. Recently, Mexico was supplanted by Saudi Arabia as our second largest foreign oil source after Canada.¶ Mexican oil production has dropped by more than a quarter over the last decade, and U.S. refiners geared for heavy oil had to look elsewhere to make up the difference. Canadian heavy crude production is increasing in the country’s oil sands region, but pipeline infrastructure is insufficient. Therefore, in effect, the U.S. has had to increase imports of Middle East crudes in order to make up for shortfalls in Mexico. The TBA alone will not structurally reverse Mexico’s oil decline, but it is likely a necessary first step along that path.¶ Regardless of TBA approval, Mexico’s PEMEX will continue its deepwater exploration near the U.S. border. With memories of Deepwater Horizon still fresh, it is worrisome that Mexico’s oil safety regulator, known as CNH, has almost no capacity to provide independent on-site inspections. All facilities operating under the TBA would be subject to U.S. inspectors with the ability to stop operations. Moreover, U.S. and Mexican regulators would work hand in hand, offering support for more systematic improvement.¶ Given the foreign policy, energy security, and environmental benefits of the TBA signed in February 2012, it is disappointing that the Obama administration has delayed taking steps necessary for Congress to approve the agreement. That delay does not make it any less important for Congress to approve the agreement soon.¶ Congress has a critical role in clarifying certain provisions of this international agreement. Dispute resolution mechanisms warrant particular attention. Already, it has been mistakenly argued that the TBA requires greater secrecy in payments of oil deals, encouraging an effort to exempt the agreement from the Cardin-Lugar transparency law. No such secrecy is required by the TBA, which subordinates its confidentiality rules to domestic law.¶ The longer the TBA sits on the shelf, the more likely it will be hamstrung as a proxy for more rancorous energy disputes.¶ Prompt Congressional activity could be a useful vote of confidence in the upcoming domestic energy sector reform in Mexico. Mexico needs new oil production from more complex fields to counterbalance its declining fields, let alone increased production. Leaders in Mexico’s two largest political parties know that under current capital and management constraints, PEMEX alone is extremely unlikely to turn Mexico’s oil and natural gas abundance into prosperity for the Mexican people. International oil majors are needed, but that will take political courage.¶ Congressional approval of the TBA would tangibly demonstrate that the U.S. government and our companies are willing partners. That is good for Mexico and for the U.S.¶
|
Brown and Meachem 13 (Neil Brown and Carl Meachem, Senior Advisor at Goldwyn Global Strategies and Director of CSIS, The Hill, 6-5-13, “Time for US- Mexico Transboundary Agreement”, http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/303739-time-for-us-mexico-transboundary-agreement)
|
The TBA would enable cooperation between our two federal governments and our companies to unlock the potential for oil and natural gas reserves that extend across our Gulf of Mexico maritime boundary. the TBA would enrich U.S.-Mexico relations in the near term while laying the foundation for improved energy security and enhanced environmental protection for the Gulf Coast. the TBA could provide incremental domestic oil production, a far greater prize for the U.S. oil portfolio is the prospect of more reliable oil trade with our ally Mexico. The TBA would, for the first time, allow oil majors to work in joint production arrangements with PEMEX and support the confidence building necessary to enable those arrangements more widely in Mexico. Regardless of TBA approval, Mexico’s PEMEX will continue its deepwater exploration near the U.S. border. All facilities operating under the TBA would be subject to U.S. inspectors with the ability to stop operations. Moreover, U.S. and Mexican regulators would work hand in hand, offering support for more systematic improvement. PEMEX alone is extremely unlikely to turn Mexico’s oil and natural gas abundance into prosperity for the Mexican people. International oil majors are needed, but that will take political courage. Congressional approval of the TBA would tangibly demonstrate that the U.S. government and our companies are willing partners.
|
TBA allows for US to increase Mexican production and safety
| 4,357 | 59 | 1,405 | 668 | 10 | 216 | 0.01497 | 0.323353 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,771 |
President Enrique Peña Nieto intends to tackle the vexing problem of how to restore Mexico’s oil and natural gas production without letting any of that petroleum fall into the hands of foreign companies.¶ Last month, Peña Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party (the PRI) amended its charter to allow foreign participation in Mexico’s oil sector. The president assured Mexico that Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), the national oil company, would not be privatized.¶ But throughout last year’s presidential campaign, and in the pact he signed after taking office with Mexico’s other two major parties, Peña Nieto has emphasized the need for energy reforms.¶ It’s easy to see why. Mexico’s oil accounts for a third of the federal budget, but production has dropped by more than a fourth since 2004. In 2011, Mexico earned $49.4 billion exporting crude oil — but paid $9.17 billion to import gasoline. With rising demand and falling production, Mexico could be a net importer of oil by the end of the decade.¶ The petroleum business is booming in Texas but slumping in Mexico. Natural gas is selling in a glutted U.S. market for little more than $3 per thousand cubic feet, while Mexico is importing liquefied natural gas from Nigeria for $20 per thousand cubic feet.¶ Mexico should have abundant resources of shale gas and deep-water oil. But Pemex, which has a monopoly on developing Mexico’s oil and gas, is struggling. The company lacks capital, technology and staff expertise.
|
Landers 13 (Jim Landers, Dallas Morning News Columnist, 4-8-13, “Mexico’s Struggling Oil Industry”, http://www.dallasnews.com/business/columnists/jim-landers/20130408-jim-landers-mexicos-struggling-oil-industry.ece)
|
Nieto intends to tackle the problem of how to restore Mexico’s oil and natural gas production Mexico’s oil accounts for a third of the federal budget, but production has dropped by more than a fourth since 2004. In 2011, Mexico earned $49.4 billion exporting crude oil — but paid $9.17 billion to import gasoline. With rising demand and falling production, Mexico could be a net importer of oil by the end of the decade. The petroleum business is slumping in Mexico Pemex lacks capital, technology and staff expertise.
|
Mexico’s oil production is declining and key to the economy
| 1,477 | 60 | 519 | 239 | 10 | 88 | 0.041841 | 0.368201 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,772 |
Any time a single company is responsible for nearly 10% of a country’s GDP, it’s a problem. Thanks to a lack of competition, Pemex, the Mexican oil company responsible for producing all of the country’s oil, has seen production fall steadily over the past decade.¶ It’s a monopoly, man¶ Since Pemex was nationalized 75 years ago, it has enjoyed complete reign over Mexico’s oil production. According to the Mexican constitution, Pemex has exclusive rights to: explore, exploit, refine and process crude oil and natural gas; produce basic petrochemicals and liquid petroleum gas; and carry out firsthand sales of such hydrocarbon products. Could it really be a coincidence that two of Mexico’s slowest growing sectors—oil and electricity—are also its least competitive?¶ Mexico’s oil production has fallen every year since 2009. As comparatively inefficient as Pemex looks in the chart below, it’s even more inefficient today. Pemex’s oil production hit an eight-year low in 2012.¶ Crude oil production has been falling in Mexico since 2004, led by tumbling output from Pemex’s largest oil field Cantarell, which is located offshore in the Bay of Campeche. As three of the company’s four main subsidiaries have made large financial losses, falling profits and productivity have followed, and are forcing the company to rely on more external borrowing to finance its investments. The company hasn’t turned a profit since 2006.¶ What’s worse is the Mexican government’s unhealthy dependence on oil revenues: Pemex provides the government with roughly 40% of its budget. Opening up the oil market to private competition could mean slicing off a chunk of Mexico’s fiscal revenues.
|
Ferdman 13 (Roberto A. Ferdman, Editorial Intern at Quartz, 5-17-13, “A state run monopoly is killing Mexico’s chances of oil independence”, http://finance.yahoo.com/news/state-run-monopoly-killing-mexico-210925580.html)
|
Any time a single company is responsible for 10% of a country’s GDP, it’s a problem , Pemex, has seen production fall steadily over the past decade. Mexico’s oil production has fallen every year since 2009 Pemex’s oil production hit an eight-year low in 2012. Crude oil production has been falling in Mexico since 2004, led by tumbling output from Pemex’s largest oil field Cantarell As three of the company’s four main subsidiaries have made large financial losses, falling profits and productivity have followed What’s worse is the Mexican government’s unhealthy dependence on oil revenues: Pemex provides the government with roughly 40% of its budget
|
Mexico Production Down and Oil Key to Economy
| 1,678 | 45 | 656 | 263 | 8 | 105 | 0.030418 | 0.39924 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,773 |
Despite E&P projects that exceeded expectations, most notably the prolific Kunah-1 well, the showings weren’t enough to help lift Pemex from a net income loss of about US $723 million so far this year, compared to last year’s first half (1H).¶ Crude oil production decreased slightly, but natural gas production dropped even more when the Mexican national oil company compared statistics for the 1H 2012 to the same period last year. Crude oil production dropped to 2,538 b/d from 2,565 b/d last year, while natural gas production sank to 5,708 MMcf/d compared to 6,052 MMcf/d.
|
Addison 12 (Velda Addison, Associate Editor at Hart Energy Publishing, 7-27-12, “Pemex Reports Production Declines”, http://www.epmag.com/Production/Pemex-Reports-Production-Declines_104286)
|
Despite E&P projects that exceeded expectations the showings weren’t enough to help lift Pemex from a net income loss of about US $723 million so far this year, compared to last year’s first half Crude oil production decreased slightly, but natural gas production dropped even more when the Mexican national oil company compared statistics for the 1H 2012 to the same period last year Crude oil production dropped to 2,538 b/d from 2,565 b/d last year, while natural gas production sank to 5,708 MMcf/d compared to 6,052 MMcf/d.
|
Mexico oil production declining
| 577 | 31 | 528 | 95 | 4 | 88 | 0.042105 | 0.926316 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,774 |
The political agenda of incoming Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto has profound implications for Latin America’s second largest economy, including new labor laws, fiscal restructuring to broaden the tax base, and a take-no-prisoners stance against the drug cartels. But no industry, arguably, stands to be potentially transformed the way the energy sector does. Pena Nieto, who takes office Dec. 1, vowed during his campaign to push for further private sector participation in the state-owned oil and gas monopoly, Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex. Pemex, a major source of revenue for the Mexican government, was partially deregulated in 2008, allowing private and foreign companies to bid on projects for the exploration and production of natural gas and oil refining. It still limits their ability to share risk, however, or share in the potential upside of any oil finds. Pena Nieto’s reform initiative would open Pemex to further private sector investment — and potentially even list the company as a publicly traded stock down the road, a la Brazil’s semi-public energy company Petrobras , which was deregulated in 1997 and began selling shares in 2010. “If he succeeds, it would have huge beneficial effects for Mexico's economy,” says Shannon O’Neil, senior fellow for Latin America studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. “The most obvious is an increase in foreign direct investment in the energy sector itself. But the benefits would spread to infrastructure more broadly, to services, and would lower the energy costs for companies in general — improving competitiveness.” Oil contributes to roughly one-third of Mexico’s total federal budget. Pena Nieto has publicly stated that energy deregulation is necessary to provide Pemex the capital needed for deepwater oil exploration and technology upgrades. Indeed, crude oil production at Pemex, the world’s fourth-largest oil producer, has been falling for the last eight years despite abundant reserves. And economic growth has caused energy demand to outpace the country’s ability to generate supply. “The reform that happened a few years ago under [current Mexican president Felipe] Calderon opened up space forservice companies, but a more fundamental reform is necessary to bring in the major [energy companies] for exploration, production, and potentially distribution,” says O’Neil. Thus far, only oilfield-services companies are getting a piece of the pie.(More:Crime Explodes — but an Economy Booms) In May, engineering firm McDermott International in Houston was awarded a Pemex contract to construct an offshore drilling platform for oil exploration and production. And Houston, TX-based Schlumberger won a contract in June to develop oil fields in Northern Mexico with U.K.-based Petrofac. Chevron in San Ramon, Calif., Baker Hughes of Houston, TX and Halliburton of Houston, are also reportedly making bids for rights to develop offshore oilfields in the Gulf of Mexico. The opportunity for growth, as deregulation takes shape, is not lost on New York investment firm Morgan Stanley Private Equity, which announced in January it was working with former Pemex CEO Jesus Reyes Heroles to identify drilling and oil services companies that are ripe for investment. It plans to invest between $35 million and $110 million in each of Mexico’s most promising energy companies. More private capital on its way? In its “Mexico Equity Strategy” report in June, Morgan Stanley Research Latin America says it would “not be surprised” to see several rapid initiatives that would welcome private capital into the gas exploration, pipeline construction and downstream areas going forward, namely the opening of shale and conventional gas exploration, further deregulation of the selling and distribution of petrochemicals, and development of pipelines and energy distribution.“These reforms will likely produce both significant business development and investment, major changes to many industries and some inflation,” the report points out.
|
Shelly Schwartz, (Specialist @ CNN, 9/18/12, CNN “How Mexico’s Oil Industry Could Benefit US investors”, http://www.cnbc.com/id/49024104)
|
But no industry, arguably, stands to be potentially transformed the way the energy sector does. Pena Nieto, who takes office Dec. 1, vowed during his campaign to push for further private sector participation in the state-owned oil and gas monopoly Pemex, was partially deregulated in 2008, allowing private and foreign companies to bid on projects It still limits their ability to share risk, however, or share in the potential upside of any oil finds. Nieto’s reform initiative would open Pemex to further private sector investment — and potentially even list the company as a publicly traded stock down the road, a la Brazil’s semi-public energy company Petrobras , which was deregulated in 1997 and began selling shares in 2010. “If he succeeds, it would have huge beneficial effects for Mexico's economy,” an increase in foreign direct investment in the energy sector itself. would spread to infrastructure more broadly, to services, and would lower the energy costs for companies in general — improving competitiveness rapid initiatives would welcome private capital into the gas exploration, pipeline construction and downstream areas going forward, namely the opening of shale and conventional gas exploration, further deregulation of the selling and distribution of petrochemicals, and development of pipelines and energy distribution.“These reforms will likely produce both significant business development and investment
|
Nieto wants PEMEX to have foreign investment – it would help grow Mexico’s economy
| 4,004 | 82 | 1,430 | 607 | 14 | 215 | 0.023064 | 0.354201 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,775 |
Much of Mexico's remaining oil wealth lies thousands of meters below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. The question is: how to get at it. When state monopoly Pemex discovered its 'Supergiant' oil fields in the 1970s, they were found in barely 100 meters of water. At the time, they were the envy of the world and made Pemex one of the biggest oil producers. But since 2004, production has declined by nearly one million barrels a day as reservoirs dwindle. To compensate for the aging Supergiants, Pemex must now exploit resources at depths of up to 3,000 meters -- where they estimate there may be some 29 billion barrels of oil. There's a vast area of the Gulf of Mexico to explore and the size of the task is really brought into focus when you visit an exploration rig. After a 20-minute helicopter flight over an endless expanse of shimmering ocean, a lone platform can just be seen on the horizon. Pemex has only three exploration rigs available to explore hundreds of thousands of square kilometers and to probe the subsoil they must drill wells which take around 100 days to complete. Progress is painfully slow compared to the United States. "The U.S. has a contract scheme which allows private investment, which allows concessions," says Carlos Ramirez of the Eurasia Group, a risk assessment organization. "So there is a lot of activity coming from the big oil companies. In Mexico, that's not the case so Pemex has to do it by itself, with its own resources. And the resources Pemex has are limited." This is the root of the Mexico's dilemma. When the government expropriated the country's reserves in 1938, the principle of national ownership of oil was enshrined in the constitution. Pemex is forbidden from entering into production sharing agreements (PSAs) with multinational companies, which would see a BP or ExxonMobil share the exploration risks in exchange for a stake in the oil discovered. Private investment in the company is also prohibited, so a partial IPO -- along the lines of Brazil's Petrobras -- is out of the question. Pemex has so far invested some $3.8 billion in its Deep Water exploration, which many analysts say is not enough.
|
Nick Parker 12 (Reporter/Producer @ CNN from Mexico City, “Mexico Looking at Risky Deep Water Oil”, CNN 10/24/12, http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/business/mexico-deep-water-oil)
|
Much of Mexico's remaining oil wealth lies thousands of meters below the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. The question is: how to get at it. When state monopoly Pemex discovered its 'Supergiant' oil fields in the 1970s, they were found in barely 100 meters of water. At the time, they were the envy of the world But since 2004, production has declined by nearly one million barrels a day Pemex must now exploit resources at depths of up to 3,000 meters Pemex has only three exploration rigs available to explore hundreds of thousands of square kilometers and to probe the subsoil they must drill wells which take around 100 days to complete Progress is painfully slow The U.S. has a contract scheme which allows private investment, which allows concessions," says Ramirez , a risk assessment organization. "So there is a lot of activity coming from the big oil companies. In Mexico, Pemex has to do it by itself And the resources Pemex has are limited Pemex has so far invested some $3.8 billion in its Deep Water exploration, which many analysts say is not enough.
|
Mexico is failing at deepwater drilling now
| 2,165 | 43 | 1,063 | 372 | 7 | 186 | 0.018817 | 0.5 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,776 |
In recent days a coalition of Mexican advocacy groups has been protesting in front of Televisa, the country's largest TV network, to contest the legitimacy of President-elect Enrique Pena Nieto's July 1 victory. These protests are the second in a string of such demonstrations scheduled before Pena Nieto takes office in December. They bode ill for Mexico's near-term political future, pointing to a rocky transition at a time when the challenges facing the country are anything but modest. Americans might assume that tackling the drug trade that has resulted in more than 47,000 deaths since 2006 would top the agenda. But a strong case can be made that energy reforms are at least as urgent, for if Mexico can't stem its sharply deteriorating energy situation, its ability to tackle other systemic problems will be severely compromised. Despite some recent progress in diversifying its economy, Mexico still relies on oil for 30 percent of its fiscal revenue. Yet oil production has plummeted from 3.4 million barrels a day in 2004 to 2.5 million in 2011, with most experts predicting a continuing decline over the next decade. Absent changes, Mexico could be a net importer of oil by 2020, ceasing exports to the U.S. altogether. Oil Reserves This assessment might sound odd to Americans who are getting used to the idea that their energy future is brightening significantly on account of burgeoning resources at home and among their neighbors. There is no question that Mexico, with the 12th-largest oil reserves in the world, has the geological resources to maintain and even improve its ranking as the eighth-largest oil producer. Equally striking is Mexico's recently acknowledged endowment of shale gas. Not surprisingly, the prolific formations in Texas do not end at the border; Mexico is thought to have the fourth largest deposits of shale gas in the world, after Argentina, China and the U.S. But, as is often the case, politics trump natural endowments in determining the energy profile of a geological giant. Mexico's constitution makes it illegal for foreign companies to develop the country's natural resources; Petroleos Mexicanos, the national oil and gas company known as Pemex, holds the exclusive ability to explore and bring to market vast petroleum reserves. Pemex, however, doesn't have sufficient capital and technology to do so, and is burdened by a bloated bureaucracy and persistent interference by the state. Without significant reform, Pemex won't be up to the task of reversing Mexico's energy decline.
|
Meghan O’ Sullivan 12 (Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of Practice on International Affairs and Senior Fellow @ Harvard and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, “Mexico Oil Reforms are Vital to Both Sides of the Border”, Council on Foreign Relations, 7/30/12 http://www.cfr.org/oil/mexican-oil-reforms-vital-both-sides-border/p28770)
|
energy reforms are urgent, for if Mexico can't stem its sharply deteriorating energy situation, its ability to tackle other systemic problems will be severely compromised. Despite some recent progress in diversifying its economy, Mexico still relies on oil for 30 percent of its fiscal revenue Yet oil production has plummeted from 3.4 million barrels a day in 2004 to 2.5 million in 2011, with most experts predicting a continuing decline Mexico could be a net importer of oil by 2020, ceasing exports to the U.S. altogether Mexico, with the 12th-largest oil reserves in the world, has the geological resources to maintain and even improve its ranking Mexico is thought to have the fourth largest deposits of shale gas in the world But, as is often the case, politics trump Mexico's constitution makes it illegal for foreign companies to develop the country's natural resources; Pemex, holds the exclusive ability to explore and bring to market vast petroleum reserves Pemex, however, doesn't have sufficient capital and technology to do so Pemex won't be up to the task of reversing Mexico's energy decline
|
Mexico lacks the investment and resources to succeed in deepwater drilling
| 2,535 | 75 | 1,108 | 407 | 11 | 180 | 0.027027 | 0.44226 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,777 |
Mexico, one of the largest suppliers of oil to the United States, has a big problem: Its production of crude is falling fast. In 2008, the country's production peaked at 3.2 million barrels a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Last year, it didn't even produce 3 million a day. The reason: aging oil fields and years of underinvestment.Industry experts say Mexico could revive production if it allowed more investment from international oil companies. But under current policy, EIA says Mexico will have to start importing oil by 2020.For the United States, the decline in Mexico's oil industry means it will likely be buying more oil from Canada and Saudi Arabia, the No. 1 and No. 2 sources of U.S. oil imports. Mexico is now third. And because oil is a global market, any drop in production one place could mean higher prices worldwide.The loss of Mexico's current exports of about 1 million barrels a day would be greater than the amount lost due to sanctions on Iran -- albeit over a longer time period.Many experts blame the structure of Mexico's oil industry for the decline.Mexico nationalized its oil industry in 1938. Since then companies such as Exxon Mobil, Royal Dutch Shell and BP have been prohibited from taking a meaningful stake in the country's oil operations. The state oil giant, Petroleos Mexicanos, or PEMEX, has run the show. PEMEX is one of the largest companies in the world, and provides the Mexican government with 32% of its revenues, according to the EIA.But oil exploration requires big investments and Mexican lawmakers have long resisted giving the firm the money it needs to go out and find new sources of crude.
|
Steve Hargreaves 8/17/12 “Mexico's big oil problem” http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/17/news/economy/mexico-oil/index.html
|
Mexico, one of the largest suppliers of oil to the United States, has a big problem: Its production of crude is falling fast. In 2008, the country's production peaked at 3.2 million barrels a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Last year, it didn't even produce 3 million a day. The reason: aging oil fields and years of underinvestment. under current policy, EIA says Mexico will have to start importing oil by 2020. because oil is a global market, any drop in production one place could mean higher prices worldwide.The loss of Mexico's current exports of about 1 million barrels a day would be greater than the amount lost due to sanctions on Iran But oil exploration requires big investments and Mexican lawmakers have long resisted giving the firm the money it needs to go out and find new sources of crude.
|
Mexican Oil Production Is Falling
| 1,674 | 33 | 838 | 282 | 5 | 144 | 0.01773 | 0.510638 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,778 |
Since reaching a peak of nearly 3.4 million barrels per day in 2004, Mexico’s crude oil production has declined each year (Figure 1), although at a slower rate since 2010. Much of the production declines are the natural result of aging fields, particularly Cantarell and other large offshore fields. Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex), the state-owned oil company, is the sole oil operator in the country, and the Mexican constitution prohibits foreign ownership and investment in the exploration, production, refining, and marketing of the nation’s hydrocarbon resources. Earnings from the oil industry, including taxes and direct payments from Pemex, accounted for 34 percent of total government revenue in 2011.In an effort to reverse the declining production, the Mexican government passed the 2008 Energy Reform to create incentive-based service contracts with foreign oil companies. Under the new arrangement, Pemex retains ownership of the crude oil produced and provides a fee-per-barrel rate to encourage technological innovation that would increase production. Since passing the 2008 Energy Reform, Pemex has entered into a handful of partnerships, but has yet to attract major international oil companies. The projects so far have been concentrated in lower-risk production areas, where a relatively high recovery rate is likely.Falling crude oil production in Mexico has contributed to lower crude oil exports both to the United States and the rest of the world (Figure 2). From 2003 to 2012, the United States received roughly 80 percent of Mexico’s crude exports. Despite the declining export volumes, this ratio has stayed fairly constant. Increasing production in the United States has offset some of the demand for light sweet crude oil imports from countries other than Mexico, but has not yet affected the U.S. demand for Mexican crude, which is primarily heavy.
|
U.S. Energy Information Administration 5/9/13 “Mexico Deals With Declining Crude Oil Production” http://agfax.com/2013/05/09/mexico-deals-with-declining-crude-oil-production/
|
Since reaching a peak of nearly 3.4 million barrels per day in 2004, Mexico’s crude oil production has declined each year Much of the production declines are the natural result of aging fields, particularly Cantarell and other large offshore fields. (Pemex), the state-owned oil company, is the sole oil operator in the country, and the Mexican constitution prohibits foreign ownership and investment in the exploration, production, refining, and marketing of the nation’s hydrocarbon resources. Pemex has entered into a handful of partnerships, but has yet to attract major international oil companies. Falling crude oil production in Mexico has contributed to lower crude oil exports both to the United States and the rest of the world
|
Mexico Oil Production is Falling Behind
| 1,874 | 39 | 737 | 287 | 6 | 115 | 0.020906 | 0.400697 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,779 |
The irreversible decline of Mexico’s Cantarell field has been the subject of a steady stream of discussion in both OGJ and the industry in general. There is a broad consensus that Mexican oil production levels are at serious risk, with concomitant implications for international oil markets. For the most part, however, analysts have focused on what a drop off would mean for the United States since as much as 16% of our crude imports have come from our southern neighbor. Less attention has been paid to what Cantarell’s decline means for Mexico itself, currently the world’s sixth largest oil producer. Consider these overriding issues: Revenues from these oil exports are the primary pillar of Mexico’s drive toward modernization and economic growth. In fact, funds from the state-owned oil company, Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex), comprise over 40% of the Federal budget. Cantarell’s production has declined from about 2.1 million barrels per day (b/d) in 2006 to 1.12 million b/d so far in 2008 (OGJ Online, Dec. 11, 2006 and Aug. 22, 2008). Pemex officals believe production at Cantarell will average an annual decline of about 14% per year in the coming years. Cantarell has generally accounted for more than 50% of Mexico’s production since 2000, and not coincidently, Mexico has exported the majority of its oil during that time – over 80% going to the United States. Given this situation, the socioeconomic consequences of a decrease in oil production for Mexico would be profound indeed. As Wertheim has noted: “so the decline of oil output could leave the country with a nightmarish budget crisis,” (OGJ Online, Dec. 11, 2006). As the erosion of Cantarell’s output relentlessly proceeds, the pressure on Mexico’s oil industry to somehow offset the decline intensifies. A nitrogen injection program earlier in the decade increased production for several years, but such stimulation techniques have limitations and simply extract oil from the ground at a faster rate. Thus, the search is on to find and develop new fields that will not only replace losses from Cantarell, but ultimately will allow Mexican production to resume its once upward trajectory. It is increasingly clear, however, that a hard – and different – road lies ahead. Two leading experts on Mexico’s oil situation have stressed that “business as usual” will not enable the country to get where it needs to go in terms of oil production. George Baker, publisher of Mexico Energy Intelligence, has indicated Pemex must be permitted to develop strategic alliances with technologically sophisticated international oil companies. David Shields, an independent oil analyst and the author of several books on Pemex, has pointed out that a systematic refurbishment and expansion of infrastructure along the entire energy supply chain is needed. Further, Shields has emphasized that the overwhelming emphasis on production at Pemex must be balanced by more attention to exploration if the country is to have any hope of meeting long-term goals. These changes will require significant attitudinal and behavioral modification on the part of many of the country’s leaders. The 2008 energy reform bill debates are not offering much hope this will occur. Mexico is still coming to grips with the stark reality of replacing one of the largest, most prolific, and readily accessible oil fields in the world. The dashing of hopes relating to Noxal 1 demonstrates the scope of the problem. In March, 2006, then-President Vicente Fox claimed that Mexico was opening a new chapter in oil exploration with the discovery of Noxal 1 in the deepwater of the Gulf of Campeche. The reservoir supposedly contained 10 billion barrels of oil. Subsequent tests, however, designated it as a modest find and certainly not the game changer Fox portrayed it to be. Despite this disappointment, Pemex officials have expressed confidence that two other oil systems will be able to compensate for the terminal decline of Cantarell. The Chicontepec Basin and Ku Maloob Zaap (KMZ) collectively are estimated to hold 53% of Mexico’s known reserves and 72% of non-Cantarell reserves.1 While these regions will require extensive capital expenditures, sophisticated technology, and take time to develop, they appear to be Mexico’s greatest windows of opportunity over the next decade to compensate for Cantarell’s terminal decline. Unfortunately, there is a growing likelihood that even if the key technical challenges are tractable, above ground issues internal to Mexico will constrain future production and limit exports. Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) contends that the greatest threats to global production increases are not below ground but rather from the human condition of politics, economics, regulation, and a sheer hesitancy to proceed.
|
Jude Clemente 08 (Technical writer and Energy analyst @ Department of Homeland Security with B.A. in Political Science from Penn State University and an M.S. in Homeland Security, “Above Ground Constraints on Mexico’s Oil Production”, Peer-reviewed paper from Penn State’s Research Project on North American Energy Supply, November 2008, http://www.academia.edu/952498/Above_Ground_Constraints_on_Mexicos_Oil_Production)
|
The irreversible decline of Mexico’s Cantarell field has been the subject of a steady stream of discussion There is a broad consensus that Mexican oil production levels are at serious risk, with implications for international oil markets. Less attention has been paid to what Cantarell’s decline means for Mexico itself, currently the world’s sixth largest oil producer. evenues from these oil exports are the primary pillar of Mexico’s drive toward modernization and economic growth. In fact, funds from the state-owned oil company, Pemex), comprise over 40% of the Federal budget Cantarell’s production has declined from about 2.1 million barrels per day to 1.12 million b/d so far Pemex officals believe production at Cantarell will average an annual decline of about 14% per year Cantarell has generally accounted for more than 50% of Mexico’s production since 2000, and not coincidently, Mexico has exported the majority of its oil during that time – over 80% going to the United States. Given this situation, the socioeconomic consequences of a decrease in oil production for Mexico would be profound the decline of oil output could leave the country with a nightmarish budget crisis As the erosion of Cantarell’s output relentlessly proceeds, the pressure on Mexico’s oil industry to somehow offset the decline intensifies. the search is on to find and develop new fields that will not only replace losses from Cantarell, but ultimately will allow Mexican production to resume its once upward trajectory. It is increasingly clear, however, that a hard – and different – road lies ahead. Pemex must be permitted to develop strategic alliances with international oil companies a systematic refurbishment and expansion of infrastructure along the entire energy supply chain is needed The Chicontepec Basin and Ku Maloob Zaap (KMZ) collectively are estimated to hold 53% of Mexico’s known reserves and 72% of non-Cantarell reserves. While these regions will require extensive capital expenditures, sophisticated technology, and take time to develop, they appear to be Mexico’s greatest windows of opportunity Unfortunately, there is a growing likelihood that even if the key technical challenges are tractable, above ground issues internal to Mexico will constrain future production and limit exports.
|
Mexican oil production is falling, and the effects will be severe
| 4,795 | 65 | 2,304 | 756 | 11 | 356 | 0.01455 | 0.470899 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,780 |
The vast Ku Maloob Zaap oil field is the jewel in the crown of Mexico's oil industry, pumping one in every three barrels of crude the country produces, at some of the lowest costs in the world. But behind the luster, state oil monopoly Pemex quietly expects a gloomier future for the aging field, leaving a big gap in supply and casting serious doubt on its public proclamations of a new era of oil growth. In the main control center on the KU-S platform, a 12,500-tonne tangle of tanks and pipes at the heart of Ku Maloob Zaap, monitors flash real-time data showing how much crude is being sucked up from deposits two-thirds of a mile below the ocean floor in the 58-square-mile (150-sq-km) field. Workers beam when talking about the platform, the hub for a network of 173 shallow water wells that produces crude for the equivalent of only about $6 a barrel. They tout a five-year streak without an accident; a hotel for visitors; even a gym for the 116 workers who live here above the glittering waters of the Bay of Campeche. What they don't discuss - and what Pemex would rather avoid talking about - is that in a few years, production here is expected to begin a precipitous decline. In February, Pemex said it expected Ku Maloob Zaap's output to hold steady at 850,000 barrels per day (bpd) through 2017. Since then, Pemex CEO Emilio Lozoya has repeatedly declared that Mexico, the world's seventh-largest oil producer, is making a comeback. "Production is not declining. It is actually beginning to rally," he said recently, referring to total national output. "This is big news for our country, and something that is not necessarily known to the public." But many analysts question that scenario. A closer look at Ku Maloob Zaap helps explain why. In a presentation at Rice University in Houston, Texas, early last year, Lozoya's predecessor, Juan Jose Suarez Coppel, estimated production at the giant offshore oilfield, whose Maya name means "good nest of coals," will fall 60 percent by 2023. Pemex officials initially declined to comment on the estimate until Reuters showed them the Rice presentation. At that point they confirmed that the forecast still stands. Even a cursory examination of Pemex's own figures underlines why oil analysts do not share Lozoya's confidence. Mexico's average annual crude production has been edging down for years. At the outset of 2013, average first-quarter oil output sank to 2.54 million bpd, its lowest level since 1990. The data and the forecasts highlight a disconnect between Pemex's optimism and the reality at fields like Ku Maloob Zaap. Two-thirds of fields are already in decline, and Lozoya's latest forecast for a 20 percent rise in output to 3 million bpd over the next five years is premised on production from some that have yet to be developed, analysts say. For many, it sounds all too familiar. Just a few years ago the giant Cantarell field was thought to be a stalwart; output has now plunged to one-tenth of 2004 levels, a shockingly abrupt decline that caught world oil markets off guard. "Production is going to fall and there's nothing obvious that will replace it," said Dave Pursell, an oil analyst with Houston-based energy development bank Tudor Pickering Holt, who worked on reservoir studies in Mexico in the 1990s.
|
David Alire Garcia 6/5/13 (reporter @ reuters, graduate of Harvard University and correspondent in Mexico City, “Insight: Clouds Gather over Mexico’s Proclamation of a New Oil Dawn”, Reuters, 6/5/13 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/05/us-mexico-oil-insight-idUSBRE9540ZB20130605)
|
behind the luster, state oil monopoly Pemex quietly expects a gloomier future and casting serious doubt on its public proclamations of a new era of oil growt what Pemex would rather avoid talking about - is that in a few years, production here is expected to begin a precipitous decline CEO Lozoya has repeatedly declared that Mexico, is making a comeback But many analysts question that scenario. A closer look at Ku Maloob Zaap helps explain why. In a presentation at Rice University , Lozoya's predecessor, Coppel, estimated production at the giant offshore oilfield will fall 60 percent by 2023 Pemex officials confirmed that the forecast stands Even a cursory examination of Pemex's own figures underlines why oil analysts do not share Lozoya's confidence Mexico's average annual crude production has been edging down for years. At the outset of 2013, average first-quarter oil output sank to 2.54 million bpd, its lowest level since 1990 Two-thirds of fields are already in decline a few years ago the giant Cantarell field was thought to be a stalwart; output has now plunged to one-tenth of 2004 levels, a shockingly abrupt decline that caught world oil off guard. "Production is going to fall and there's nothing obvious that will replace it
|
Oil production is falling steadily – a precipitous decline will occur in the status quo
| 3,292 | 88 | 1,250 | 558 | 15 | 207 | 0.026882 | 0.370968 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,781 |
A bigger test of the Pact will come after the elections, when Mr Peña is due to publish his next proposal, a combined fiscal and energy reform designed to realise the enormous potential of Mexico’s oil and gas reserves. The country does not make the most of these: half its oil is in deep waters, of which Pemex, the state-owned oil and gas monopoly, has little experience. The state’s milking of Pemex’s profits has left it unable to invest in the necessary technology. To wean itself off oil revenue the government will have to raise taxes, probably applying value-added tax to food and medicine. The PRI changed its party constitution last month to allow this. But polls show overwhelming opposition to taxing those essentials.
|
The Economist 4/6/13 (“Mexico’s New President: Working through a Reform Agenda”, The Economist, Print Edition 4/6/13, http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21575768-enrique-pe%C3%B1a-nieto-has-set-furious-pace-he-will-be-judged-implementation-well)
|
A bigger test of the Pact will come , a combined fiscal and energy reform designed to realise the enormous potential of Mexico’s oil and gas reserves. The country does not make the most of these half its oil is in deep waters which Pemex, has little experience unable to invest in the necessary technology. To wean itself off oil revenue the government will have to raise taxes, probably applying value-added tax to food and medicine polls show overwhelming opposition to taxing those essentials
|
Lower oil revenues can’t be filled in
| 730 | 37 | 495 | 124 | 7 | 84 | 0.056452 | 0.677419 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,782 |
Mexico, the third-largest supplier of foreign oil to the United States, could lose the capacity to export crude altogether within a decade without major new investments in exploration and production, warns a research group report released on Friday. The country’s shift from exporter to importer would deal a severe blow to Mexico’s federal government, which depends on oil sales for roughly a third of its budget, said the report, a two-year investigation by researchers with the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University in Houston. “A shift toward oil importer status would be a severe burden on the Mexican government and curb its ability to provide important services, both related to social programs and internal peace and security,” it states. Production by Pemex, the national oil company, has fallen 25 percent from its peak in 2004, while internal demand has climbed, sharply curtailing the amount of crude available for export. The drop in supply is largely due to steep declines at Cantarell, an aging super-giant field formerly responsible for the bulk of Mexico’s oil output. Much of the country’s undeveloped oil reserves, meanwhile, are found in complex formations on land or in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, necessitating a high level of technical expertise and investment to exploit. “It would appear that the days of easy oil are over for Pemex,” the report notes.
|
John Collins Rudolf 11 (journalist @ the New York Times, Washing Post, and National Review Institute “Mexico Oil Exports Could End Within Decade, Report Warns”, Green, New York Times, 4/29/11 http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/mexico-oil-exports-could-end-within-decade-report-warns/)
|
Mexico, the third-largest supplier of oil to the U S could lose the capacity to export crude altogether within a decade without major new investments The country’s shift from exporter to importer would deal a severe blow Mexico’s federal government depends on oil sales for roughly a third of its budget, A shift toward oil importer status would be a severe burden and curb important services social programs and internal peace and security
|
Absent increased oil production, Mexico’s economy and security would be unstable
| 1,416 | 81 | 440 | 231 | 11 | 73 | 0.047619 | 0.316017 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,783 |
The national oil company created after the 1938 seizure, Pemex, is entering a period of turmoil. Oil production in its aging fields is sagging so rapidly that Mexico, long one of the world’s top oil-exporting countries, could begin importing oil within the decade. Mexico is among the three leading foreign suppliers of oil to the United States, along with Canada and Saudi Arabia. Mexican barrels can be replaced, but at a cost. It means greater American dependence on unfriendly countries like Venezuela, unstable countries like Nigeria and Iraq, and on the oil sands of Canada, an environmentally destructive form of oil production. “As you lose Mexican oil, you lose a critical supply,” said Jeremy M. Martin, director of the energy program at the Institute of the Americas at the University of California, San Diego. “It’s not just about energy security but national security, because our neighbor’s economic and political well-being is largely linked to its capacity to produce and export oil.” Mexico probably still has plenty of oil, especially beneath the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, but Pemex lacks the technology and know-how to get it out. Inviting foreign companies into the country to help is one of the touchiest propositions in Mexican politics. As the Mexican government struggles to find a way forward, production keeps falling. The basic problem is simply that Mexico’s readily accessible oil is used up — pretty much the same thing that happened to the United States when production began falling in the 1970s. Output from Mexico’s giant Cantarell field, in shallow waters near the eastern shore, has plunged by 50 percent in recent years. Output at the country’s other large field is expected to begin falling in the next year or two. Historically, oil has supplied 30 to 40 percent of the Mexican government’s revenue. Confronting a potential calamity, President Felipe Calderón has pushed through the strongest reforms he can defend politically, in hopes of attracting foreign investment. But he dare not do anything that would appear to reverse the 1938 nationalization. Even the modest reforms he has managed to pass are being challenged in court. Officially, the government is optimistic that Mexico can reverse its decline as an oil-producing nation. But its efforts so far have yielded more rhetoric than oil. Last year, on the day celebrating the 1938 seizure, the president’s helicopter landed in a hilly oil field outside this farming town. He announced that a new era of Mexican gushers would dawn soon. “Under this soil,” Mr. Calderón told thousands of oil workers, lay “the richness that could propel development in our country and help Mexico accelerate our path to progress and well-being.” He promised that 20 wells would be spurting crude “very soon” from the ground on which he stood. Almost a year later, only three wells were pumping on a recent afternoon. Eleven had been shut after producing little or no oil. In fact, the effort to develop the geologically challenging Chicontepec field here, near the gulf coast, is deteriorating into an embarrassing disaster for Pemex, the latest in a string of them. In all, Mexican oil output has dropped from just short of 3.5 million barrels a day in 2004 to a projected average of 2.5 million barrels this year. Mexican oil exports to the United States, now 1.1 million barrels a day, have fallen by nearly a third in the last six years. The United States Energy Department projects that Mexican production will decline by an additional 600,000 barrels a day by 2020; combined with growing domestic demand, that would probably make the country an oil importer. In the last two years, Mexico provided about 12 percent of all crude oil imports to the United States, supplying about 8 percent of the total oil used by American refineries, according to the Energy Department. Pemex — officially Petróleos Mexicanos — is the most important company in Mexico, employing 140,000 people. Oil money is used for everything from building schools to fighting the war against drug cartels. “The fact that Mexico’s production is rapidly declining could potentially cause a financial crisis not only for Pemex but for the government,” said Enrique Sira, the Mexico director of IHS Cera, an energy consulting firm.
|
Clifford Krauss and Elizabeth Malkin 10 (Latin America correspondents @ The New York Times, “Mexico Oil Politics Keep Riches Just Out of Reach”, New York Times,3/8/10 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/09/business/global/09pemex.html?pagewanted=all)
|
Pemex, is entering a period of turmoil. Oil production in its aging fields is sagging so rapidly that Mexico could begin importing oil within the decade It means greater American dependence on unfriendly countries like Venezuela, unstable countries like Nigeria and Iraq, and on the of Canada, an environmentally destructive form of oil production It’s not just about energy security but national security, because our neighbor’s economic and political well-being is largely linked to its capacity to produce and export oil Mexico has plenty of oil Pemex lacks the technology and know-how to get it out Mexican oil exports to the United States, now 1.1 million barrels a day, have fallen by nearly a third in the last six years Pemex — officially Petróleos Mexicanos — is the most important company in Mexico, employing 140,000 people. Oil money is used for everything from building schools to fighting the war against drug cartels. “The fact that Mexico’s production is rapidly declining could potentially cause a crisis
|
Lack of oil means Mexican economic collapse
| 4,290 | 44 | 1,021 | 705 | 7 | 165 | 0.009929 | 0.234043 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,784 |
For Mexicans, Pemex is more than just an oil company. It is the only supplier of subsidized gas to motorists around the country. And more importantly, it paid for many of the roads they drive on -- as well as schools, hospitals and much of the nation's infrastructure. Pemex's earnings account for 35% of the Federal budget. Deep water drilling is notoriously difficult. At depths of 3,000 meters, temperatures are so low that oil can freeze as it leaves the subsoil and equipment must be able to withstand strong currents. It raises memories of the Deepwater Horizon disaster along the U.S. Gulf coast, which Morales says has cast a shadow. "It made us a lot more aware of the issues. We are in tough environments, no doubt. They have to make you think of the risks. You have to evaluate the worst case scenarios before going into the decision of drilling a well. You have to design your well perfectly." This month's deadly gas explosion at a Pemex processing center underlines the ever-present risk of industrial accidents in the energy industry. So with the obvious need for more expertise and capital, what are the prospects of a landmark constitutional amendment? Mexico's President-Elect Enrique Pena Nieto campaigned on a pledge to reform the energy sector and aides say he will tackle this in early 2013.
|
Nick Parker 12 (Reporter/Producer @ CNN from Mexico City, “Mexico Looking at Risky Deep Water Oil”, CNN 10/24/12, http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/business/mexico-deep-water-oil)
|
For Mexicans, Pemex is more than just an oil company. It is the only supplier of subsidized gas to motorists around the country. And more importantly, it paid for many of the roads they drive on -- as well as schools, hospitals and much of the nation's infrastructure. Pemex's earnings account for 35% of the Federal budget. Deep water drilling is notoriously difficult temperatures are so low that oil can freeze and equipment must be able to withstand strong currents the Deepwater Horizon disaster has cast a shadow
|
Oil is key to the Mexican economy and infrastructure
| 1,313 | 52 | 518 | 224 | 9 | 88 | 0.040179 | 0.392857 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,785 |
Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto said overhauling the country's energy sector is a top priority for his administration. Reforms under consideration include letting national oil companies partner with their foreign counterparts to open the country to new investments. U.S. lawmakers this week passed legislation that would open the Gulf of Mexico border with Mexico to energy explorers. Oil made up about 16 percent of Mexico's export earnings in 2011 and the industry accounted for more than 30 percent of the government's revenue, the U.S. Energy Department's Energy Information Administration reports. "While fiscal policy continues to be prudent, public debt has increased during the recession, as in other countries, and the government budget is overly dependent on oil," a review from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development states. "The risk of decline in oil output, in the absence of energy reform, is a threat to fiscal stability." The U.S. Energy Department said natural gas imports increased 21 percent last year to 2.1 billion cubic feet per day year-on-year. Though Mexico is one of the 10 largest oil producers in the world, its production has declined steadily since 2004.
|
OECD, 5/7/13 (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, “OECD Warns Mexico on Oil Dependence”, United Press International, 5/17/13 http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2013/05/17/OECD-warns-Mexico-on-oil-dependence/UPI-49691368786702/)
|
Reforms under consideration include letting national oil companies partner with foreign counterparts to open the country to new investments. Oil made up about 16 percent of Mexico's export earnings in 2011 and the industry accounted for more than 30 percent of the government's revenue "The risk of decline in oil output, in the absence of energy reform, is a threat to fiscal stability." The U.S. Energy Department said natural gas imports increased 21 percent last Though Mexico is one of the 10 largest oil producers in the world, its production has declined steadily since 2004
|
Continued oil production decline would lead to fiscal instability
| 1,210 | 65 | 582 | 188 | 9 | 95 | 0.047872 | 0.505319 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,786 |
For decades, Mexico's energy policy has largely boiled down to exporting oil for cash to fund state spending. Now the new government is negotiating with rival political parties to curb that practice and instead use state monopoly Petróleos Mexicanos to a different end: cheaper energy, said Pemex CEO Emilio Lozoya. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, the 38-year-old chief said the administration of President Enrique Peña Nieto was striving to overhaul tax and energy laws this year that Mr. Lozoya said would result in cheaper energy for consumers and companies that could drive a more competitive economy. Now, the Mexican government relies on Pemex, one of the world's biggest oil firms, for 35% of government spending, leaving the company with little left over to invest in areas like natural gas. Private companies, meanwhile, are largely barred from investing thanks to Mexico's nationalistic energy laws. The result now is an energy-rich country where companies often pay higher prices for energy than elsewhere. Mexico has large reserves of natural gas, for instance. But since Pemex doesn't invest enough in gas, the country imports gas from the U.S.—raising costs to Mexican firms as they try to compete with global players like China. "Energy ought to be looked at on a competitive basis and not as a foreign-exchange generator," Mr. Lozoya said, pointing to a prospective investment boost in industries ranging from gas to petrochemicals to fertilizers. Complicating matters, Mexico's oil output has slipped to 2.55 million barrels a day from a peak of 3.4 million in 2004, as easy oil in the Gulf is replaced by more difficult reserves of deep-water oil and heavy oil onshore. To boost production, the company will need more money, technology and know-how. Changing Mexico's energy laws is widely seen as an important test for a country that captured the imagination of investors for linking its economy in a free-trade deal with the U.S. in the mid-1990s, but which saw its star dim to other emerging markets like China and Brazil in recent years. For Mexico, beset by drug violence the past few years, such a move would send a powerful signal to investors, likely driving billions in foreign investment, economists say. "This is all about regaining the reform momentum, and you don't see that that often in emerging markets today. Taking on those taboos, and those changes, it would re-establish the Mexican narrative as a reformer and be very positive," said Gray Newman, chief economist for Latin America at Morgan Stanley MS +0.45% .
|
Laurence Iliff and David Luhnow 13(Iliff is the Mexico correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones Newswire, Dalls Morning News, and graduate of the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and University of California and Luhnow serves as the Wall Street Journals’ Latin American Buereau Chief and recently won the Columbia University Cabot Journalism Award on Latin American Caribbean Reporting. “Mexico Moves on Energy in Economic Reset”, WSJ, 2/13/13, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324162304578302343638712694.html)
|
For decades, Mexico's energy policy has largely boiled down to exporting oil for cash to fund state spending cheaper energy for consumers and companies could drive a more competitive economy The result now is an energy-rich country where companies often pay higher prices for energy than elsewhere. Mexico has large reserves of natural gas, for instance. But since Pemex doesn't invest enough in gas, the country imports gas from the U.S.—raising costs to Mexican firms as they try to compete with global players like China To boost production, the company will need more money, technology and know-how Mexico saw its star dim to other emerging markets like China and Brazil For Mexico such a move would send a powerful signal to investors, likely driving billions in foreign investment, economists say it would re-establish the Mexican narrative as a reformer and be very positive," said Gray Newman, chief economist for Latin America at
|
Increased oil production is key to long-term economic growth
| 2,563 | 61 | 938 | 419 | 9 | 152 | 0.02148 | 0.362768 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,787 |
The US and Mexico have signed an agreement allowing exploration and development of oil and gas resources along the two countries’ maritime boundary in the Gulf of Mexico. The accord, which still requires legislative approvals in both countries, makes US Outer Continental Shelf acreage with potentially 172 million bbl of oil and 304 bcf of gas available for leasing, US Sec. of the Interior Ken Salazar said.“This agreement removes uncertainties which have kept US operators from exploring nearly 1.5 million acres of the US [OCS],” he told reporters by teleconference from Los Cabos, Mexico, where US Sec. of State Hillary R. Clinton and Mexican Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa signed the agreement. “That’s an area larger than the state of Delaware. It’s the culmination of many years of hard work and is the outgrowth of many meetings we have held in Mexico and the US the last couple of years.”Under the agreement, US companies and Mexico’s state-run Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex) can voluntarily agree to jointly develop reservoirs that cross the boundary. If a consensus can’t be reached, it provides a way for US producers and Pemex to develop resources on their respective sides while protecting each nation’s interests and resources. “No US company wanted to develop close to the transboundary because of this uncertainty,” Salazar said. “Each nation will continue sovereignty and its own regulatory system in its own territory.”“We believe that because of the structure of this agreement, there’s a strong incentive toward voluntary unitization,” added Tommy P. Beaudreau, US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management director, who also participated in the teleconference. “It was reached in consultation with both US operators and Pemex.” BOEM will offer leases along the maritime boundary will be offered for the first time at a sale scheduled for June, he said. The agreement also provides for joint inspections of facilities developing transboundary reservoirs, as well as reviews of development plans and oil spill containment capabilities, according to Salazar. “US companies can now move forward with legal certainty which has been missing in this area,” he said.“A significant part of the agreement is that we’re moving forward jointly with Mexico, which is beginning to move into deeper waters, to develop protocols by sharing information and helping it make sure that its development occurs as safely as possible,” the secretary continued. “Pemex has been exploring the possibility of working with Helix to use the rapid spill responsive capability it developed for the gulf.”
|
Nick Snow, Washington Editor OGJ 2/20/12 “US, Mexico sign Gulf of Mexico transboundary agreement” http://www.ogj.com/articles/2012/02/us-mexico-sign-gulf-of-mexico-transboundary-agreement.html
|
The US and Mexico have signed an agreement allowing exploration and development of oil and gas resources along the two countries’ maritime boundary in the Gulf of Mexico. The accord, which still requires legislative approvals in both countries, makes US Outer Continental Shelf acreage with potentially 172 million bbl of oil No US company wanted to develop close to the transboundary because of this uncertainty, .”“We believe that because of the structure of this agreement, there’s a strong incentive toward voluntary unitization US companies can now move forward with legal certainty which has been missing in this area,” he said.“A significant part of the agreement is that we’re moving forward jointly with Mexico, which is beginning to move into deeper waters, to develop protocols by sharing information and helping it make sure that its development occurs “Pemex has been exploring the possibility of working with Helix to use the rapid spill responsive capability it developed for the gulf.”
|
The plan is key to legal certainty in the drilling industry
| 2,590 | 59 | 1,001 | 406 | 11 | 158 | 0.027094 | 0.389163 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,788 |
Mexican hydrocarbon resources belong to the Mexican people. Popular enthusiasm and national pride is attached to those resources, and many Mexicans directly depend on the existing oil industry for their livelihood and business interests. Crossing into the territory of energy sector reform requires political courage on behalf of Mexican politicians. The United States government emphatically recognizes the privileged position of oil in Mexico’s politics. Nonetheless, the United States has direct interests in the future of oil and natural gas in Mexico. Most important among U.S. interests is enhancing the prosperity of the Mexican people. With strong cultural ties and a shared border, the U.S. benefits when Mexico grows. Petroleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) has successfully staved off years of decreasing oil production and discovered deep water resources, but it has not been able to meaningfully increase production beyond its zone of comfort in shallow water. Without reform, Mexico’s oil resources will not be developed in a way that translates into a higher quality of life for Mexicans. Mexico is a reliable supplier of oil to the United States. The question for U.S. policymakers is what volumes Mexico will be able to export in the future. Mexican production dropped by more than a quarter in the last decade, leaving U.S. refiners on the Gulf Coast geared for heavy oil having to look elsewhere. Venezuelan heavy oil production has also collapsed. Canadian heavy crude production is increasing in the oil sands region, but pipeline infrastructure is insufficient. Therefore, in effect, the U.S. has had to increase imports of Middle East crudes in order to make up for shortfalls in Mexico. Understanding the likely trajectory of reform in Mexico is necessary to appropriately plan for future volumes and types of crude oil traded with the United States, which also will have broader implications for U.S. security and economic growth. Mexican energy reforms will determine to what extent Mexico will be part of future U.S., and North American, energy security. Progress, but can it last? A snapshot of Mexico’s oil sector Mexico has a long history of oil production and has prospects for a bright future as an oil power, but such an outcome is not guaranteed. Mexico sits atop significant amounts of oil estimated at 10.4 billion barrels of proven reserves, but that number could more than double when unconventional and deep offshore reserves are fully proven. The large unconventional Chicontopec area alone is estimated to hold up to 17.7 billion barrels. Turning Mexico’s oil resources into prosperity for the Mexican people is a tremendous challenge for PEMEX, its 100% state-owned national oil company established in 1938 after international oil companies were expelled.3 Mexican oil production relies primarily on a few major fields, the largest of which (Cantarell) is in steep decline. Oil production in Mexico peaked in 2003 at about 3.4 million barrels per day (mbd), falling to 2.6 mbd in 2010. That precipitous fall is due primarily to the estimated 75% decline in production from the massive Cantarell field from its peak. In recent years, Cantarell’s decline has been compensated for by the Ku-Maloob-Zaap (KMZ) fields; however, many analysts doubt the longevity of current production in those fields. Large increases in direct and third-party investment in recent years has enabled PEMEX to halt net decreases in production, at least temporarily. Importantly, PEMEX also now reports achieving a 100% replacement rate for reserves, improving prospects for continued production. Increased investment also has led to discoveries of large new deep water resources at Trion, Supremos, and Maximino, achievements of which PEMEX officials are justifiably proud. Several interlocutors credited energy reforms passed in 2008 for enabling those finds by giving PEMEX more flexibility to partner with international companies on a service contract basis, building on the shift to reliance on contracting services to enable investments stretching from the late 1990s. PEMEX leaders plan to raise production to 2.7 mbd in 2013 and 3 mbd by 2017, requiring up to $38 billion annually in investment. Near term growth is expected to come primarily from Chicontopec, a highly complex unconventional onshore project that is subject of great hope and scorn. Despite years of development and reportedly $5 billion in investment, the project is well behind expectations and currently only 70,000 barrels per day are produced, which puts claims of near-term growth in serious doubt. Over the longer-term PEMEX has set a goal to increase production to 3.3 mbd by 2024. Achieving that goal will require significantly more new production than the difference between the 3.3 mbd goal and today’s 2.6 mbd given expected large declines in KMZ. Field decline emphasizes the urgent need for Mexico to have several new projects in the pipeline in order to maintain and boost production. Skepticism of PEMEX’s ability to compensate for declining fields has led to some dire forecasts. The U.S. Energy Information Administration has estimated that Mexico will be a net importer of oil by 2020,4 thus also raising concerns about impacts on its balance of trade. While not investigated on this StaffDel, that situation highlights the need for more attention to demand management policies and continued reform of fuel subsidies.5 Mexico needs a diverse portfolio of future oil projects with staggered capacities over time. PEMEX leaders have identified such a set of oil development projects, including deep offshore and the Chicontopec unconventional area, each of which are complex undertakings with high potential, forming a growth strategy to complement conventional shallow offshore projects and investment in enhanced recovery at previous wells. Some observers point out that privatization of the sector would bring competition and private investment; however, that prospect is so remote as to be non-existent and not under even speculative consideration. Therefore, the question is what PEMEX can achieve on its own or in partnership with international companies. Most interlocutors are skeptical of PEMEX having the capital or expertise necessary to develop deep offshore fields, and, probably, the unconventional reserves at Chicontopec. Analysts point out that PEMEX took over 15 years and more than 20 wells to discover the most recent deep water finds. Moreover, deep water requires massive investments over many years, and even the world’s largest international oil companies (IOCs) partner with one another to generate capital and spread the risk of such investments. PEMEX’s capital limitations are further complicated by the company’s large debt burden. On the other side, proponents of PEMEX’s ability argue that they have gained expertise and dramatically lessened the risks implicit in development. PEMEX likely could develop a deep offshore project by buying technology and expertise through very generous service contracts with many of the same companies with which the IOCs contract. However, under current capital and management constraints,6 PEMEX alone is extremely unlikely to have the resources necessary to undertake multiple massive deep offshore developments while also investing in conventional oil production. Moreover, while some technology can be purchased through service contracts, project management expertise to run that type of project is not easily acquired. Therefore, the decision on whether IOCs should be granted access individually or in partnership with PEMEX to develop oil in Mexico depends on how much oil the Mexican Government wants produced and over what span of time. Interlocutors did not indicate that the expectations of either of the largest political parties or the Mexican public are conducive to the long time horizons it would take for PEMEX under current conditions to fully develop Mexico’s oil. Dealing with this challenge is complicated by the fact that PEMEX is as much a bureau of the government as it is a company. In defiance of conventional business sense (of both private companies and state oil companies), multiple Ministries and a politically appointed Board of Directors make key decisions, including deciding the amount and direction of investment in exploration and development of future production. It is not clear that all board members put the interests of the company, and hence future finances for the Mexican state, at the forefront of decision making. Having politicians with multiple constituencies (including the petroleum worker’s union and companies that thrive off the oil supply chain) and short-term political considerations often make essential decisions is incompatible with the long-term planning needed in the oil sector. However, precisely because PEMEX can be a useful tool for political goals, achieving fundamental structural change is very difficult. In sum, the authors agree that reform must happen to sustain and robustly grow Mexican oil production. The stakes of doing so are high for the Mexican Government. PEMEX directly provides 40% of government revenues, including significant resources transferred to the individual Mexican states. Decreased oil production has, thus far, been offset by higher than average global oil prices, but no government budget should rely so heavily on volatile commodity markets. While some commentators have argued that the budgetary pain of falling production would be useful to wean the budget from PEMEX, such a prospect could have wide repercussions on all programs funded in the Mexican budget, from poverty alleviation to the rule of law, let alone broader economic growth.
|
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 12 (“OIL, MEXICO, AND THE TRANSBOUNDARY AGREEMENT A MINORITY STAFF REPORT PREPARED FOR THE USE OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS Second Session” pg. 3-5, Congress, 12/21/12)
|
Mexicans directly depend on the existing oil industry for their livelihood and business interests. Mexican production dropped by more than a quarter in the last decade, Turning Mexico’s oil resources into prosperity for the Mexican people is a tremendous challenge for PEMEX after international oil companies were expelled.3 Mexican oil production relies primarily on a few major field the largest of which is in steep decline Despite years of development and reportedly $5 billion in investment, the project is well behind expectations and currently only 70,000 barrels per day are produced, which puts claims of near-term growth in serious doubt Over the longer-term PEMEX has set a goal to increase production to 3.3 mbd by 2024. Achieving that goal will require significantly more new production than the difference between the 3.3 mbd goal and today’s 2.6 mbd because PEMEX can be a useful tool to sustain and robustly grow Mexican oil production The stakes of doing so are high for the Mexican Government Decreased oil production has, thus far, been offset by higher than average global oil prices, but no government budget should rely so heavily on volatile commodity markets While some have argued that the budgetary pain of falling production would be useful to wean the budget from PEMEX, such a prospect could have wide repercussions on all programs funded in the Mexican budget, from poverty alleviation to the rule of law, let alone broader economic growth.
|
Oil decline does not wean Mexico off oil – it would cause a crash
| 9,706 | 66 | 1,471 | 1,498 | 14 | 238 | 0.009346 | 0.158879 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,789 |
For all practical purposes, the world's supply of oil is not finite. It is more like a supermarket's supply of canned tomatoes. At any given moment, there may be a dozen cases in the store, but that inventory is constantly being replenished with the money the customers pay for the cans they remove, and the more tomatoes that customers buy, the bigger an inventory the store will carry. Someday, of course, consumers will decide they want less oil at the current price. Someday we may move beyond oil altogether. When that day comes, the investment will stop -- and nobody will ever know or care how much oil remains in the ground. Adelman's assessment is being corroborated once more, this time in Mexico. Mexican oil production has been declining over the past decade, mostly because of under-investment and mismanagement by the state oil monopoly, Pemex. (On January 31, a deadly tragedy reminded the world of Pemex's troubles when a methane leak in a Pemex building in downtown Mexico City exploded, killing more than 30 people and injuring 120 others.) In October, Pemex announced discovery of a big new field in the Gulf of Mexico. Newly elected Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto is urging his country to amend its constitution to allow foreign investment in Mexican oil fields. Experts assess that opening the Mexican oil industry to global investment will revive Mexican oil production and boost Mexico's economic growth by potentially 2 points a year. Nieto's PRI party -- the very party that nationalized Mexican oil 80 years ago -- is expected to vote this weekend to approve the new policy. Meanwhile, the International Energy Agency is warning oil markets to ready themselves for a "flood" of cheap oil from Iraq. Last year, Iraq for the first time exceeded pre-1990 oil production. The agency expects Iraq eventually to overtake Russia as the world's second-largest oil exporter. In 1972, the year of the famous "Limits to Growth" report by the Club of Rome, the world produced about 55 million barrels of oil per day. In 2011, the world produced almost 80 million barrels. If today's prices hold, many experts expect production of 90 million barrels by decade's end. Our oil problem is not that "we're running out." Our oil problem is that we're producing so much of the stuff that we are changing the planet's climate. Yet on the environmental front too, there's reason for optimism. One of the technologies developed by the oil industry -- fracking -- has made available vast new supplies of cheap natural gas. Gas has become so cheap that it can be substituted for coal as an electricity-generating fuel. In just eight years, coal's share of the U.S. electricity market has tumbled from one-half to one third -- and still falling. Gas emits only half the carbon per unit of energy of coal. The transition from coal to gas explains why U.S. carbon emissions declined 8% from 2011 to 2012, reaching the lowest level since 1992. Soon the United States and Canada will be producing so much gas that they can export it to Europe, perhaps also to China, helping to cut carbon emissions in those economies as well. No, it's not the answer to everything: Gas still emits carbon. But it's an improvement -- and that's how progress comes. Instead of fantasizing about catastrophes (running out of oil) and miracles (a rapid transition to solar power), our energy thinking needs to emphasize the achievable and the incremental. Convert from coal to gas. Tax gasoline to induce people to live closer to work and to buy more fuel-efficient cars. We can enjoy a rising quality of life with declining energy inputs. Put us on the path to the right kind of "peak oil" -- and peak carbon -- the peak that comes, not because we find less and less, but because we want less and less.
|
David Frum 13 (Special Assistant to President George W. Bush, Contributor @ CNN and Contributing Editor @ Newsweek. “Peak Oil Doomsayers Proved Wrong” CNN, 3/4/13, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/04/opinion/frum-peak-oil)
|
consumers will decide they want less oil at the current price. we may move beyond oil altogether. When that day comes, the investment will stop -- and nobody will ever know or care how much oil remains in the ground. Adelman's assessment is being corroborated once more, this time in Mexico oil production has been declining over the past decade, mostly because of under-investment by the state oil monopoly, Pemex. Newly elected Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto is urging his country to amend its constitution to allow foreign investment in Mexican oil fields. Experts assess that to global investment will revive Mexican oil production and boost Mexico's economic growth by potentially 2 points a year No, it's not the answer to everything: Gas still emits carbon. But it's an improvement -- and that's how progress comes. Instead of fantasizing about miracles our energy thinking needs to emphasize the achievable and the incremental. Convert from coal to gas. Tax gasoline to induce people to live closer to work and to buy more fuel-efficient cars. Put us on the path to peak oil" not because we find less and less, but because we want less and less
|
Increased production leads to an economic boost – and one day Mexico will wean itself off oil
| 3,786 | 94 | 1,158 | 649 | 17 | 195 | 0.026194 | 0.300462 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,790 |
Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto’s administration is weighing profit-sharing contracts for companies that invest in the country’s state-controlled oil industry, said Eduardo Medina Mora, the ambassador to the U.S. Allowing profit-sharing agreements is one of “several routes that could be followed” in the energy overhaul proposal that the government is drafting to submit to Congress in the second half of the year, Medina Mora said today. Opening the industry to more private investors would require changing the constitution, he said. issue.” He’s pursuing tax and energy overhauls to help wean the government off oil sales that fund a third of the federal budget and restore output at state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos after Mexico’s biggest oil discovery, Cantarell, collapsed over the past decade. “We have to provide certainty to players, to economic agents that would participate in this market,” Medina Mora said in an interview at Bloomberg’s headquarters in New York. “It would very much help to have a constitutional amendment to do that.” Production Declines Mexican law currently prohibits Pemex, as Petroleos Mexicanos is known, from profit-sharing agreements with other companies for exploration, extraction and refining. Pemex, which was founded after Mexico expropriated assets from U.K. and U.S. companies and changed its constitution in 1938, is looking to reverse a drop in production that reached an eighth consecutive year in 2012. Pena Nieto’s Institutional Revolutionary Party in March voted to end its opposition to taxing food and medicine, giving the president the option to propose such a strategy in a tax initiative to raise revenue. He already signed a bill to improve education by making teachers more accountable for performance, and last year as president-elect helped pass a labor-system overhaul designed to boost productivity. The PRI, as the party is known, also worked with major opposition parties earlier this year to approve an initiative increasing competition in telecommunications and broadcasting and strengthening government regulation of the industries.
|
Jose Enrique Arrioja and Nacha Cattan 6/6/13 (contributing writers @ Bloomberg, “Pemex Profit-Sharing Mulled in Energy Deal, Diplomat Says”, Bloomberg, 6/6/13 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-06/mexico-weighing-profit-sharing-in-oil-overhaul-ambassador-says.html)
|
Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto’s administration is weighing profit-sharing contracts for companies that invest in the country’s state-controlled oil industry, one of “several routes that could be followed” in the energy overhaul proposal pursuing energy overhauls to help wean the government off oil sales that fund a third of the and restore output at state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos We have to provide certainty to players, to economic agents “It would very much help to have Pemex, profit-sharing agreements with other companies for exploration, extraction and refining Nieto voted to end taxing food and medicine, giving the president the option to propose such a strategy to raise revenue
|
Energy reform is key to weaning off oil in the long-term – attracts investors and creates stability
| 2,105 | 100 | 700 | 316 | 17 | 106 | 0.053797 | 0.335443 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,791 |
Yet the two recent studies suggest that economic and demographic trends in Mexico are already changing the dynamics of the American migrant-worker system. In the longer term, the increasing urbanization and prosperity of the Mexican middle class will dramatically diminish the abundant, very cheap Mexican farm labor that has flooded across the southern border for decades to harvest the crops of America. "The longstanding assumption that the region has an endless supply of less-educated workers headed for the US is becoming less and less accurate when it comes to Mexico; and in the years ahead, it is also likely to become less accurate first for El Salvador and then Guatemala," says the executive summary of the report released Monday by the Migration Policy Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. The second study agrees with the first and connects the trend directly to issues at the heart of immigration reform. "This [trend] means that immigration policy will cease to be a solution to the US farm labor problem in the long run and probably sooner. In fact, we already may be witnessing the start of a new era in which farmers will have to adapt to labor scarcity by switching to less labor-intensive crops, technologies, and labor management practices," according to the University of California study released in March. Together, the two studies reinforce statistically what experts have been cataloging anecdotally since the 1980s, pointing to several reasons for the historic drop in cheap Mexican farm labor. · As incomes in Mexico have risen, workers have shifted out of farm work into other sectors. Mexico's farm workforce fell by nearly 2 million - 25 percent - from 1995 to 2010, and its per capita income now exceeds $15,000 per year. "Moving away from farm work as your income rises, reflects a pattern seen in many other countries," says Edward Taylor, one of the authors of the University of California report. · Fertility rates have changed dramatically - down from a norm of seven children per woman in 1970 to just over two today. · Rural education has also improved dramatically. The average schooling for rural Mexicans 50 or older is 4.9 years, but for those in their 20s it is 9.7 years. "Better educated children eschew farm work in Mexico," says Mr. Taylor. These developments could help proponents of immigration reform dull some criticism of the plan. "This study suggests that the level of illegal immigration will never return to its prior levels," says Steven Schier, a political scientist at Carleton College in Northfield, Minn., referring to the University of California research. "That may serve to reduce the heat surrounding the issue and prompt Washington to address the problem with legislation for the first time in decades." But groups against immigration say the studies show the need to focus on other ways of getting US food harvested. "American agriculture's reliance on low-wage foreign labor has impeded capital investment in technology that would have made it more efficient and competitive," says Ira Mehlman, national spokesman for the Federation of American Immigration Reform. "There are machines that can do many agricultural jobs much more efficiently and mor e cost effectively. Our government should have policies in place that incentivize that sort of capital investment in efficiency, not policies that perpetuate exploitative inefficiency." More broadly, the research helps clarify the questions Congress ought to be asking, many say. "This ... raises a series of questions for policymakers and those in the agricultural industry," says Catherine Wilson, an immigration specialist at Villanova University. "First, given the increasing trend of Mexicans moving into nonagricultural occupations, how can the US secure a steady and reliable flow of workers in the agricultural industry? And second, does comprehensive immigration reform legislation provide a time-sensitive and effective response to this phenomenon?" The answers to those questions could push the US toward working with illegal immigrants already in the country, some say. "The boom in Mexican immigration is over. Mexico's rural sector is declining, labor force growth is decelerating, Mexico is becoming an aging society, its middle class is expanding, and incomes are rising," says Douglas Massey, a sociologist at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University in New Jersey. "The critical need at this point is some kind of legalization for those already here."
|
Bridges 6/7/2013 (Eunice Bridges, Immigration reform too late to fix one big problem, studies say,” http://www.lexisnexis.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/lnacui2api/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T17836730304&format=GNBFI&sort=BOOLEAN&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T17836730308&cisb=22_T17836730307&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=8149&docNo=8”)
|
the two recent studies suggest that economic and demographic trends in Mexico are already changing the dynamics of the American migrant-worker system the increasing urbanization and prosperity of the Mexican middle class will dramatically diminish the abundant, very cheap Mexican farm labor that has flooded across the border "The assumption that the region has an endless supply of less-educated workers headed for the US is becoming less and less accurate when it comes to Mexico says the report by the Migration Policy Institute and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. This means that immigration policy will cease to be a solution to the US farm labor problem in the long run As incomes in Mexico have risen, workers have shifted out of farm work into other sectors. Mexico's farm workforce fell by nearly 2 million and its per capita income now exceeds $15,000 per year Rural education has also improved dramatically This study suggests that the level of illegal immigration will never return to its prior levels," says Steven Schier, a political scientist at Carleton College The boom in Mexican immigration is over. Mexico's rural sector is declining, labor force growth is decelerating, Mexico is becoming an aging society, its middle class is expanding, and incomes are rising," says Douglas Massey, a sociologist at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affair
|
Mexican economic boom causes decrease in immigration to U.S.
| 4,565 | 60 | 1,405 | 722 | 9 | 224 | 0.012465 | 0.310249 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,792 |
The US was more reliant on the Middle East for its oil imports last year, underscoring the critical importance of the politically unstable region for the country despite the growing energy independence its shale gas revolution is bringing. That domestic production boom has triggered intense debate over whether the US would still guard the world’s critical sea lanes, such as the Strait of Hormuz in two decades’ time – or whether China, whose dependence on Middle Eastern crude imports is rapidly rising, would replace it. However, recent oil import trends from the Gulf region suggest why the US might continue to play a critical security role in the region. While domestic production increased the most in 150 years last year, Washington will confirm later this week that oil imports from the Gulf region continued to rise. By the end of November the US had already imported more than 450m barrels of crude from Saudi Arabia, more than it imported from Riyadh in the whole of 2009, 2010 or 2011, according to figures from the US energy department. For the first time since 2003, Saudi imports accounted for more than 15 per cent of total US oil imports. The Gulf as a whole accounted for more than 25 per cent, a nine-year high. Other Gulf exporters are also seeing unusually strong US demand. By the end of November, Kuwait had shipped more oil to the US than in any year since 1998. Analysts are expecting annual figures to be released later this week to confirm the trend seen up to November.
|
Makan 13, staff writer (Ajay, US Dependence on Middle Eastern Oil Grows, Feb 26th, Restoring Liberty, http://joemiller.us/2013/02/us-dependence-on-middle-eastern-oil-grows/ )//XG
|
The US was more reliant on the Middle East for its oil imports last year, underscoring the critical importance of the politically unstable region for the country despite the growing energy independence its shale gas revolution is bringing However, recent oil import trends from the Gulf region suggest why the US might continue to play a critical security role in the region. By the end of November the US had already imported more than 450m barrels of crude from Saudi Arabia, Saudi imports accounted for more than 15 per cent of total US oil imports. The Gulf as a whole accounted for more than 25 per cent, a nine-year high. Other Gulf exporters are also seeing unusually strong US demand. By the end of November, Kuwait had shipped more oil to the US than in any year since 1998.
|
The US is dependent on the Middle East for oil
| 1,499 | 46 | 783 | 260 | 10 | 139 | 0.038462 | 0.534615 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,793 |
President Barack Obama is in Mexico today, meeting with that country’s leader Enrique Peña Nieto. They’ll be talking immigration, border security and trade. But analysts say their conversation will likely turn to one touchy topic: Oil and gas reserves in Mexico. Twenty years after the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexico’s oil reserves have remained closed to U.S. investment, but that may soon be changing. There’s pretty much one brand of gasoline you’ll see in Mexico: Pemex, the state fuel monopoly. But Pemex is in trouble. Mexico’s oil production has been dropping, and in less than 10 years, the country could be importing more oil than it exports.Analysts say the fossil fuel reserves are there. Mexico remains one of the world’s top 10 oil producers. There could also be tens of billions of barrels in untapped deep-sea oil reservoirs. The country has, ”The proven fourth largest shale gas reserves in the world,” said Michael Shifter is president of Inter-American Dialogue. Shifter said Pemex lacks the technology to tap those reserves. International companies have the expertise, but Mexico’s constitution prohibits joint ventures in the sector. Shifter said reforms maybe on the way.”I think if there are joint ventures, U.S. companies would be very attracted to the opportunities in Mexico,” he said.Arturo Sarukhán, who was Mexican ambassador to the U.S. until January, said he expects Mexico to introduce oil and gas reforms in July or August this year.”This is a big strategic game changer,” said Sarukhán, who is now the chairman of Global Solutions, a consultancy within the Podesta Company.He said those joint ventures could change the oil and gas game globally.”By bringing Mexico’s energy assets to the table, overnight Canada, Mexico and the United States become the largest producer of oil on the face of the earth, far outstripping Saudi Arabia,” he said.
|
Collins, Jennifer, a Marketplace reporter 5/2/13 “As Obama visits Mexico, the slippery topic of oil comes up” http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/obama-visits-mexico-slippery-topic-oil-comes)
|
Obama is in Mexico today, meeting with that country’s leader Enrique Peña Nieto. They’ll be talking immigration, border security and trade. But analysts say their conversation will likely turn to one touchy topic: Oil and gas reserves in Mexico. Twenty years after the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexico’s oil reserves have remained closed to U.S. investment, but that may soon be changing. There’s pretty much one brand of gasoline you’ll see in Mexico: Pemex, the state fuel monopoly. But Pemex is in trouble. Mexico’s oil production has been dropping, Analysts say the fossil fuel reserves are there . There could also be tens of billions of barrels in untapped deep-sea oil reservoirs. The country has, ”The proven fourth largest shale gas reserves in the world,” Pemex lacks the technology to tap those reserves. International companies have the expertise, but Mexico’s constitution prohibits joint ventures in the sector. Shifter said reforms maybe on the way think if there are joint ventures, U.S. companies would be very attracted to the opportunities in Mexico, Arturo Sarukhán, who was Mexican ambassador to the U.S. until January, said he expects Mexico to introduce oil and gas reforms in July or August this year. joint ventures could change the oil and gas game globally.”By bringing Mexico’s energy assets to the table, overnight Canada, Mexico and the United States become the largest producer of oil on the face of the earth, far outstripping Saudi Arabia
|
The plan would turn North America into an energy superpower
| 1,889 | 59 | 1,482 | 302 | 10 | 239 | 0.033113 | 0.791391 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,794 |
Let's face it. Ensuring the free flow of oil has been the main driver of American strategy in the Middle East for decades. Our nation's economic wellbeing depends on a well-supplied global oil market, and countries in the Middle East account for a significant portion of the world's production. The cartel they dominate, OPEC, today controls between 30 and 40 percent of the international market while possessing the vast majority of the world's proven reserves.¶ As a result, America and the global economy are incredibly vulnerable to what happens in the region. Every U.S. recession but one since World War II has been preceded by an oil price shock. And in the majority of cases, those shocks have been triggered by events originating in the Middle East. Think the 1973 Arab oil embargo, the 1979 Iranian revolution, or Saddam's 1991 invasion of Kuwait.¶ But you don't have to go back that far to appreciate the problem we face. Last year's revolution in Libya, along with broader unrest across the Arab world, sent oil prices skyrocketing. Ditto Iran's threats in January to blockade the Straits of Hormuz. And concern about an eventual war with Iran continue to impose a significant risk premium on global prices, a reality Americans confront every day at the gas pump. Even short of tipping the economy back into recession, the effects of this kind of price volatility are highly negative: our trade deficit rises; disposable income and consumer spending decline; and economic growth takes a significant hit.¶ Concerns about oil prices have often badly distorted U.S. policy toward the Middle East. The most acute example is the effort to pressure Iran to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions. U.S. policymakers have long known that the most effective step we could take against the mullahs is to cut off Iran's oil sales and starve them of the enormous revenues they need to keep their repressive regime afloat. Yet for years, first President Bush and then President Obama fiercely resisted sanctioning the Islamic Republic's petroleum sector. The reason? Because they quite legitimately feared that removing Iranian crude from the market would disrupt global supplies and trigger a devastating price shock. Only in late 2011, with Iran rapidly approaching the nuclear threshold, did Congress finally steamroll the administration by forcing through legislation that targeted Iranian oil.¶ Even then, implementation of the sanctions was watered down. The administration was given a six-month grace period to assess the possible impact that sanctions would have on the global oil market. And rather than demanding that customers of Iranian oil end their purchases entirely, countries were granted waivers from U.S. sanctions if they only "significantly reduced" their buy -- which in practice required them to cut back between 15 and 20 percent. While the U.S. effort, together with complimentary EU sanctions, have no doubt had a major effect on Iran's economy -- reducing its oil exports by as much as 50 percent -- a full embargo would have been far more impactful and the obvious course of action for Washington to pursue if not for the countervailing concern about oil markets. In the meantime, the Iranian regime continues to pocket perhaps $3 billion per month from the million or so barrels of oil that it still exports daily, all the while pressing ahead with its nuclear program.¶ America doesn't have a higher national security priority than stopping the world's most dangerous regime from going nuclear. And yet the sad reality is that our dependence on oil has for years, and to our great peril, systematically deterred us from fully deploying the most powerful tool in our arsenal -- all-out sanctions on Iran's petroleum sector -- for resolving the crisis peacefully. Not surprisingly, that underlying logic applies in spades when it comes to any discussion about the possible use of force against Iran, where predictions of oil spiking to an economy-crippling $200 per barrel are commonplace.¶ The fact that our oil vulnerability has put such severe constraints on our freedom-of-maneuver to address the most pressing national security threat we face is deeply troubling. The big question is whether we can do anything about it. Admittedly, history doesn't offer much reason for optimism. For almost 40 years, successive U.S. presidents have promised to tackle the problem with very little to show for it.
|
Hannah 12 (John Hannah, political pundit and advisor who served as a national security aide to former Vice President Dick Cheney, “Energy insecurity: How oil dependence undermines America's effort to stop the Iranian bomb”, http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/12/energy_insecurity_how_oil_dependence_undermines_america_s_effort_to_stop_the_irania?wp_login_redirect=0)
|
Ensuring the free flow of oil has been the main driver of American strategy in the Middle East for decades. Our nation's economic wellbeing depends on a well-supplied global oil market, and countries in the Middle East OPEC, today controls between 30 and 40 percent of the international market while possessing the vast majority of the world's proven reserves. , America and the global economy are incredibly vulnerable to what happens in the region. Every U.S. recession but one since World War II has been preceded by an oil price shock And in the majority of cases, those shocks have been triggered by events originating in the Middle East Last year's revolution in Libya, along with broader unrest across the Arab world, sent oil prices skyrocketing. Ditto Iran's threats in January to blockade the Straits of Hormuz. And concern about an eventual war with Iran continue to impose a significant risk premium on global prices, . Even short of tipping the economy back into recession, the effects of this kind of price volatility are highly negative: our trade deficit rises; disposable income and consumer spending decline; and economic growth takes a significant hit. Concerns about oil prices have often badly distorted U.S. policy toward the Middle East. The most acute example is the effort to pressure Iran to give up its nuclear weapons ambitions. U.S. policymakers have long known that the most effective step we could take against the mullahs is to cut off Iran's oil sales and starve them of the enormous revenues they need to keep their repressive regime afloat. Yet for years, first President Bush and then President Obama fiercely resisted sanctioning the Islamic Republic's petroleum sector. Because they quite legitimately feared that removing Iranian crude from the market would disrupt global supplies and trigger a devastating price shock. Only in late 2011, with Iran rapidly approaching the nuclear threshold, did Congress finally steamroll the administration by forcing through legislation that targeted Iranian oil. Even then, implementation of the sanctions was watered down. The administration was given a six-month grace period to assess the possible impact that sanctions would have on the global oil market. America doesn't have a higher national security priority than stopping the world's most dangerous regime from going nuclear. And yet the sad reality is that our dependence on oil has for years, and to our great peril, systematically deterred us from fully deploying the most powerful tool in our arsenal -- all-out sanctions on Iran's petroleum sector -- for resolving the crisis peacefully Not surprisingly, that underlying logic applies in spades when it comes to any discussion about the possible use of force against Iran, where predictions of oil spiking to an economy-crippling $200 per barrel are commonplace. The fact that our oil vulnerability has put such severe constraints on our freedom-of-maneuver to address the most pressing national security threat we face is deeply troubling.
|
Dependence on the Middle East threatens the US and world economy, allows Iranian nuclear proliferation, and forces the US to strike Iran
| 4,428 | 136 | 3,031 | 718 | 22 | 483 | 0.030641 | 0.672702 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,795 |
HOUSTON — The United States is increasing its dependence on oil from Saudi Arabia, raising its imports from the kingdom by more than 20 percent this year, even as fears of military conflict in the tinderbox Persian Gulf region grow. The increase in Saudi oil exports to the United States began slowly last summer and has picked up pace this year. Until then, the United States had decreased its dependence on foreign oil and from the Gulf in particular. This reversal is driven in part by the battle over Iran’s nuclear program. The United States tightened sanctions that hampered Iran’s ability to sell crude, the lifeline of its troubled economy, and Saudi Arabia agreed to increase production to help guarantee that the price did not skyrocket. While prices have remained relatively stable, and Tehran’s treasury has been squeezed, the United States is left increasingly vulnerable to a region in turmoil. The jump in Saudi oil production has been welcomed by Washington and European governments, but Saudi society faces its own challenges, with the recent deaths of senior members of the royal family and sectarian strife in the eastern part of the country, making the stability of Saudi energy and political policies uncertain. The United States has had a political alliance with the Saudi leadership that has lasted for decades, one that has become even more pivotal to Washington during the turmoil of the Arab spring and rising hostilities with Iran over that nation’s nuclear program. (Saudi Arabia and Iran are bitter regional rivals.) The development underscores how difficult it is for the United States to lower its dependence on foreign oil — especially the heavy grades of crude that Saudi Arabia exports — even as domestic oil production is soaring. It is a development that has alarmed conservative and liberal foreign policy experts alike, especially with oil prices and Mideast tensions rising in recent weeks. “At a time when there is a rising chance of either a nuclear Iran or an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, we should be trying to reduce our reliance on oil going through the Strait of Hormuz and not increasing it,” said Michael Makovsky, a former Defense Department official who worked on Middle East issues in the George W. Bush administration. Senior Iranian officials have repeatedly threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow neck through which most Gulf oil is shipped, and the Iranian navy has held maneuvers to back up the threats. Most analysts say it is doubtful the Iranians would take such an extreme measure because that would block exports vital to the country’s economy, but the United States Navy has been preparing for such a contingency. Many oil experts say that the increasing dependency is probably going to last only a couple of years, or until more Canadian and Gulf of Mexico production comes on line. “Until we have the ability to access more Canadian heavy oil through improved infrastructure, the vulnerability will remain,” said David L. Goldwyn, former State Department coordinator for international energy affairs in the Obama administration. “The potential for an obstruction of the Strait of Hormuz therefore poses a physical threat to U.S. supply as well as a potential price shock on a global level.” Obama administration officials said they were not overly worried for several reasons. In the event of a crisis, the United States could always dip into strategic petroleum reserves; domestic production continues to climb; and Gulf of Mexico refineries could be adjusted to use higher-quality, sweeter crude oil imported from other countries. “There are going to be tensions in the Middle East whether that oil is going to the United States or going to somewhere else,” said Adam Sieminski, administrator of the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration. “And if oil prices go up because of a problem in the Middle East, that causes a problem for the world in general and not one that is specific to the United States.” In the United States, several oil refining companies have found it necessary to buy more crude from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to make up for declining production from Mexico and Venezuela, insufficient pipeline connections between the United States and Canadian oil sands fields, and the fallout from the 2010 BP disaster, which led to a yearlong drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico. “As refiners, we buy from wherever the supply is readily available and where we can get the best price,” said Bill Day, a spokesman for Valero Energy, the largest domestic refiner. The United States imported a daily average of more than 1.45 million barrels of Saudi crude over the first five months of this year, compared to a daily average of roughly 1.15 million barrels over the same period last year, according to Energy Department estimates. Similar increases have come from Kuwait and Iraq, even while total OPEC and non-OPEC imports declined. The United States has imported little Iranian oil in recent years. In recent years, United States oil imports have been trending lower, although total imports are little changed from the end of last year. But the big change came in imports from the Persian Gulf, spiking to 2.6 million barrels a day in May from 1.9 million barrels a day last December, now roughly 23 percent of total imports, compared with about 17 percent before.
|
Krauss, 12, a correspondent for The New York Times (Clifford, “US Reliance on Oil From Saudi Arabia Is Growing Again”, August 16th, New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/17/business/energy-environment/us-reliance-on-saudi-oil-is-growing-again.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) //XG
|
The United States is increasing its dependence on oil from Saudi Arabia, raising its imports from the kingdom by more than 20 percent this year, even as fears of military conflict in the tinderbox Persian Gulf region grow. The increase in Saudi oil exports to the United States began slowly last summer and has picked up pace this year. the United States had decreased its dependence on foreign oil and from the Gulf in particular. Saudi Arabia agreed to increase production to help guarantee that the price did not skyrocket. the United States is left increasingly vulnerable to a region in turmoil. The development underscores how difficult it is for the United States to lower its dependence on foreign oil — especially the heavy grades of crude that Saudi Arabia exports — even as domestic oil production is soaring. In the United States, several oil refining companies have found it necessary to buy more crude from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to make up for declining production from Mexico and Venezuela The United States imported a daily average of more than 1.45 million barrels of Saudi crude over the first five months of this year, compared to a daily average of roughly 1.15 million barrels over the same period last year the Persian Gulf, spiking to 2.6 million barrels a day in May from 1.9 million barrels a day last December, now roughly 23 percent of total imports, compared with about 17 percent before.
|
US heavily relies on Middle East oil export
| 5,389 | 43 | 1,420 | 889 | 8 | 243 | 0.008999 | 0.273341 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,796 |
It’s no secret that Americans are their favorite targets. Just in the last week, they executed the American ambassador to Libya, stormed numerous embassies, and forced U.S. troops in Afghanistan to pull back because they are being attacked by the very people they had trained.
So what does America do to mitigate this threat? Everything except the only thing that will free us from our bondage, and that is to become energy independent.Has it dawned on either party that this latest episode of Middle Eastern Terror Theatre has been brought to us by the very people whom we have sworn allegiance to by prostrating ourselves at the altar of Islamic Crude Oil?
Petroleum and natural gas are the most valuable substances on Earth, the lack of either would send our economy into collapse. Yet despite having the world’s largest reserves, America continues to ignore that Godsend, instead choosing to rely on, and pay top dollar to, the very same people who are rioting because a spoof film doesn’t depict Muhammad favorably.Ironically, these fundamentalists are funded by the United States, through both foreign aid and trillions of American petro dollars — the greatest transfer of wealth in history. The only thing more infuriating is the total lack of awareness among our elected officials, both presidential candidates, and the media. So more Americans will die trying to extinguish these flames that surely will reignite, and the real issue will not be addressed, let alone solved. Here’s what can be done to avoid a future conflagration:
1) Admit the truth. We are only involved because of our dependence on Middle Eastern oil barons to keep the crude spigots open. And since that flow of petroleum must be unimpeded, we are forced to maintain large diplomatic and military presences in that region, making us viewed as occupiers and swelling Islamic resentment.Here’s a novel idea: if we drilled more domestically, we wouldn’t be bent over the Middle East oil barrel, and therefore, wouldn’t give a hoot about those countries. Evidence? Where was America when millions were massacred in the 1994 Rwandan genocide? Not in Rwanda, because it has no oil. Ditto for most conflicts. End of story.
|
Chris Friend Writer at Newsmax 9/24/12 “Oil Dependence Fuels Middle East Problems” http://www.newsmax.com/Freind/Oil-Dependence-Mideast-Muslim/2012/09/24/id/457331 //ZC
|
It’s no secret that Americans are their favorite targets. Just in the last week, they executed the American ambassador to Libya, stormed numerous embassies, and forced U.S. troops in Afghanistan to pull back because they are being attacked by the very people they had trained.
So what does America do to mitigate this threat become energy independent. Petroleum and natural gas the lack of either would send our economy into collapse. the total lack of awareness among our elected officials, both presidential candidates, and the media. So more Americans will die trying to extinguish these flames that surely will reignite, and the real issue will not be addressed, let alone solved Admit the truth. We are only involved because of our dependence on Middle Eastern oil barons to keep the crude spigots open. we drilled more domestically, we wouldn’t be bent over the Middle East oil barre
|
Middle East Oil Reliance Harmful
| 2,197 | 32 | 890 | 362 | 5 | 147 | 0.013812 | 0.406077 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,797 |
Though the U.S. is a top producer of crude oil, its current rate of petroleum consumption is between 18 and 19 million barrels of oil per day, and its domestic production cannot handle the demand, hence its reliance on imported oil. As President George W. Bush stated in his 2006 State of the Union Address to the nation: “Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. And here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world” (January 31, 2006). From the mouth of the nation’s top leader, the U.S. suffers from an addiction. Most modern machinery runs on oil and its utility is seen in everyday products from plastics to cosmetics, from paint to lubricants, and, most especially, as a source of fuel for the modern combustion engine. Over time, to feel “normal”, the addict develops an abnormal psychological dependency on the addictive substance and will utilize any means to obtain the drug in spite of cultural or moral restraints. In the case of oil, this abnormal dependency has led the United States to engage in bribery and corruption to obtain oil, from control of markets to the exclusion of countries from such commerce, from the overthrow of regimes deemed belligerent because of their attempts to take control of their own oil resources to outright murder, assassination, and war. Indeed, few Americans today doubt that the recent eight-year war on Iraq (2003-2011) was conducted primarily to obtain oil. And this is why veteran scholar on the politics of oil, Dr. Michael Klare, concludes in a recent article that: “the Strait of Hormuz will undoubtedly remain the ground zero of potential global conflict in the months ahead” (January 31, 2012).¶ When a U.S. President refers to the necessity to import oil from “unstable parts of the world,” what he means is that some regions of the world are asserting their sovereign right to control their natural resources, e.g. oil, and they are neither subordinate nor answerable to the U.S. government, especially as regards how much oil is produced and available for purchase on world markets and how much they wish to charge for this oil—hence, the nomenclature of “instability”. ¶ With the recent American military “departure” from Iraq, it is becoming evident that the days of kowtowing to U.S. military dictate are over. Hence, there will be many “unstable” areas in the world in the years to come.¶ Given an ever-increasing demand for oil, because of its “addiction”, and given its limited domestic sources of crude oil, the U.S. will remain dependent on imported oil well into the future. U.S. policymakers, by their past and present actions since the end of WWII in pursuing this addiction, have apparently concluded that the nation’s interest in oil and other ‘strategic’ resources outweighs the nation’s avowed values to support democracy.
|
Cavell 12 (Colin S. Cavell, Ph.D. in political science ,former Assistant Professor at the University of Bahrain, 4-11-12,“AMERICA’S DEPENDENCY ON MIDDLE EAST OIL”, http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-s-dependency-on-middle-east-oil/30177)
|
the U.S. current rate of petroleum consumption is between 18 and 19 million barrels of oil per day, and its domestic production cannot handle the demand, hence its reliance on imported oil America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world In the case of oil, this abnormal dependency has led the United States to engage in bribery and corruption to obtain oil, from control of markets to the exclusion of countries from such commerce, from the overthrow of regimes deemed belligerent because of their attempts to take control of their own oil resources to outright murder, assassination, and war. the Strait of Hormuz will undoubtedly remain the ground zero of potential global conflict in the months ahead” Given an ever-increasing demand for oil, because of its “addiction”, and given its limited domestic sources of crude oil, the U.S. will remain dependent on imported oil well into the future. U.S. policymakers, by their past and present actions since the end of WWII in pursuing this addiction, have apparently concluded that the nation’s interest in oil and other ‘strategic’ resources outweighs the nation’s avowed values to support democracy.
|
US dependency on oil makes oil conflict likely and support oppressive regimes
| 2,881 | 77 | 1,188 | 476 | 12 | 193 | 0.02521 | 0.405462 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,798 |
The energy trade between the United States and Mexico is growing, especially for America’s finished petroleum and natural gas exports. Mexico’s heavy oil production is falling, but that means more spare refining capacity on the Gulf Coast if Canadian oil sands can be transported to the Gulf Coast. The Gulf of Mexico is one of the most prolific hydrocarbon-producing areas for both the United States and Mexico. Oil production, especially in deepwater on the U.S. side of the border, has moved closer to the U.S.-Mexico maritime border in recent years. Until last year, however, there was no agreement on how to divide resources between the United States and Mexico for resources that straddle the border.
|
Daniel Simmons 3/30/13 Writer for the Times “U.S.-Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement: A Rare Victory for Oil and Gas in the Obama” http://www.masterresource.org/2013/04/u-s-mexico-transboundary-hydrocarbons-agreement/#sthash.qT19SjJC.dpuf
|
The energy trade between the United States and Mexico is growing, especially for America’s finished petroleum and natural gas exports. The Gulf of Mexico is one of the most prolific hydrocarbon-producing areas for both the United States and Mexico. Oil production, especially in deepwater on the U.S. side of the border, has moved closer to the U.S.-Mexico maritime border in recent years. Until last year, however, there was no agreement on how to divide resources between the United States and Mexico for resources that straddle the border.
|
The plan increases US-Mexico energy trade
| 706 | 41 | 542 | 115 | 6 | 87 | 0.052174 | 0.756522 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
3,799 |
President Barack Obama is in Mexico today, meeting with that country’s leader Enrique Peña Nieto. They’ll be talking immigration, border security and trade. But analysts say their conversation will likely turn to one touchy topic: Oil and gas reserves in Mexico. Twenty years after the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexico’s oil reserves have remained closed to U.S. investment, but that may soon be changing. There’s pretty much one brand of gasoline you’ll see in Mexico: Pemex, the state fuel monopoly. But Pemex is in trouble. Mexico’s oil production has been dropping, and in less than 10 years, the country could be importing more oil than it exports.Analysts say the fossil fuel reserves are there. Mexico remains one of the world’s top 10 oil producers. There could also be tens of billions of barrels in untapped deep-sea oil reservoirs. The country has, ”The proven fourth largest shale gas reserves in the world,” said Michael Shifter is president of Inter-American Dialogue. Shifter said Pemex lacks the technology to tap those reserves. International companies have the expertise, but Mexico’s constitution prohibits joint ventures in the sector. Shifter said reforms maybe on the way.”I think if there are joint ventures, U.S. companies would be very attracted to the opportunities in Mexico,” he said.Arturo Sarukhán, who was Mexican ambassador to the U.S. until January, said he expects Mexico to introduce oil and gas reforms in July or August this year.”This is a big strategic game changer,” said Sarukhán, who is now the chairman of Global Solutions, a consultancy within the Podesta Company.He said those joint ventures could change the oil and gas game globally.”By bringing Mexico’s energy assets to the table, overnight Canada, Mexico and the United States become the largest producer of oil on the face of the earth, far outstripping Saudi Arabia,” he said.
|
Collins, Jennifer, a Marketplace reporter 5/2/13 “As Obama visits Mexico, the slippery topic of oil comes up” http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/obama-visits-mexico-slippery-topic-oil-comes)
|
Obama is meeting with leader Enrique Peña Nieto. They’ll be talking immigration, border security and trade. But analysts say their conversation will likely turn to one touchy topic: Oil and gas reserves in Mexico. Mexico’s oil reserves have remained closed to U.S. investment, but that may soon be changing. But Pemex is in trouble. Mexico’s oil production has been dropping Analysts say the fossil fuel reserves are there There could also be tens of billions of barrels in untapped deep-sea oi The country has, ”The proven fourth largest shale gas reserves in the world,” Pemex lacks the technology to tap those reserves. International companies have the expertise, but Mexico’s constitution prohibits joint ventures in the sector. Shifter said reforms maybe on the way. Arturo Sarukhán Mexican ambassador he expects Mexico to introduce oil and gas reforms in July or August this year. joint ventures could change the oil and gas game globally bringing Mexico’s energy assets to the table, overnight Canada, Mexico and the United States become the largest producer of oil on the face of the earth
|
The plan is the most relevant issue in US-Mexico trade
| 1,890 | 54 | 1,099 | 302 | 10 | 178 | 0.033113 | 0.589404 |
Mexico THA Aff - MichiganClassic 2013 DW.html5
|
Michigan (Classic)
|
Affirmatives
|
2013
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.