Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

Stalemate creates an antiwar congressional coalition that guts our commitment to Afghanistan

Lieberman 10—Independent Democratic senator from Connecticut ~Joseph I. Leiberman, "Back to a Bipartisan Foreign Policy," Wall Street Journal, November 16, 2010, pg. http://tinyurl.com/m5z623w~~

This year’s midterm elections marked the first time since 9/11 that national security was not a major consideration for American voters. But it is precisely in the realm of foreign policy and national security that we may have the greatest opportunities for bipartisan cooperation between President Obama and resurgent Republicans in Congress.
Seizing these opportunities will require both parties to break out of a destructive cycle that has entrapped them since the end of the Cold War and caused them to depart from the principled internationalist tradition that linked Democratic presidents like Truman and Kennedy with Republican presidents like Nixon and Reagan.
During the 1990s, too many Republicans in Congress reflexively opposed President Clinton’s policies in the Balkans and elsewhere. Likewise, during the first decade of the 21st century, too many Democrats came to view the post-9/11 exercise of American power under President Bush as a more pressing danger than the genuine enemies we faced in the world.
The larger truth was that the foreign policy practices and ideals of both President Clinton and Bush were within the mainstream of American history and values. And if one can see through the fog of partisanship that has continued to choke Washington since President Obama was elected in 2008, the same is true of the new administration as well.
President Obama has moved to the internationalist center on several key issues of national security. Although both parties are hesitant to acknowledge it, the story of the Obama administration’s foreign policy is as much continuity as change from the second term of the Bush administration—from the surge in Afghanistan to the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, and from drone strikes against al Qaeda to a long-term commitment to Iraq.
Republicans have also stayed loyal to the internationalist policies they supported under President Bush. When they have criticized the Obama administration, it has reflected this worldview—arguing that the White House has not been committed enough in its prosecution of the war in Afghanistan or done enough to defend human rights and democracy in places like Iran and China.
The critical question now, as we look forward to the next two years, is whether this convergence of the two parties towards the internationalist center can be sustained and strengthened. There are three national security priorities where such a consensus is urgently needed.
The first is the war in Afghanistan. To his credit, President Obama last December committed more than 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan as part of a comprehensive counterinsurgency campaign, despite opposition within the Democratic Party.
Having just returned from Afghanistan, I am increasingly confident that the tide there is
AND
long-term commitment by the U.S. beyond this date.
Sustaining political support for the war in Afghanistan therefore will increasingly require President Obama and Republicans in Congress to stand together. Failure to sustain this bipartisan alliance runs the risk that an alternative coalition will form in Congress, between antiwar Democrats and isolationist Republicans. That would be the single greatest political threat to the success of the war effort in Afghanistan, which remains critical to our security at home.

The executive will fall back on immigration authority

Chow 11 (Samuel, JD Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, "THE KIYEMBA PARADOX: CREATING A JUDICIAL FRAMEWORK TO ERADICATE INDEFINITE, UNLAWFUL EXECUTIVE DETENTIONS", 19 Cardozo J. Int’l 26 Comp. L. 775 2011)
The facts that legitimized the Court’s holding in Munaf are substantially different from the facts
AND
Uighurs were forced to remain, indefinitely, as prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.

Bribery will determine the outcome.  US action is irrelevant

Eviatar 12 - Senior counsel in the Law and Security Program of Human Rights First ~Daphne Eviatar, "U.S. must aid Afghan judicial system," Politico, March 13, 2012 09:38 PM EDT, pg. http://tinyurl.com/cmvkfkv 

Afghanistan’s justice system, meanwhile, is notoriously corrupt, failing to provide even the
AND
the suspect may be tortured into confessing to a crime he didn’t commit.
Once the case gets to court, getting a judge to even listen to a defense lawyer’s objections or allow presentation of real evidence is challenging. Most Afghans I interviewed insist that evidence is irrelevant in any case. The popular sentiment is that with money, anyone can buy his way out of jail. Those without, guilty or innocent, will be left to rot in prison.
The United States is aware of these problems. Washington knows that a successful U.S. withdrawal depends on the Afghan government’s eventual ability to deliver law, order and justice to its people.
To the U.S. military’s credit, it’s been trying to improve Afghan
AND
project will continue after the U.S. hands authority to Afghanistan.
It should. Despite mounting pressure to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, the United States needs to remain involved by providing assistance not only to the military and police, as it’s doing now, but also to the Afghan justice system.
This judicial system needs far more than a few mentors for judges and prosecutors. It needs investigators trained to produce reliable evidence, prosecutors who understand its value and defense lawyers trained to demand that evidence and challenge confessions resulting from torture. It also needs to be able to ensure the safe and humane treatment of detainees.

Afghani anti-Americanism is high

PressTV 3/15/13 ~"Anti-Americanism increases worldwide: Poll," Friday Mar 15, 201311:10 AM GMT, pg. http://www.presstv.ir/usdetail/293712.html

The worldwide approval rate of the image of U.S. leadership has plunged to its lowest level since President Barack Obama took office, with the highest disapproval ratings being recorded in the Middle East and South Asia, a new Gallup survey has shown.
According to the survey, more than three out of four residents in Pakistan (79) and Palestine (77) disapproved of U.S. leadership in 2012.
Overall, the median approval rate of U.S. leadership across 130 countries fell to 41 percent last year from 49 percent Obama’s first year.
 Although most of the countries with the highest disapproval ratings are in the Middle East and South Asia, median approval rate of U.S. leadership in Europe also dropped 11 points since Obama’s first year in office.
There are a number of factors driving anti-Americanism around the world. Pewglobal.org
There is a general perception that the U.S. acts unilaterally in the international arena, failing to take into account the interests of other countries when it makes foreign policy decisions. Pewglobal.org
The so-called U.S.-led war on terrorism is also perceived quite negatively throughout much of the Muslim world. A Pew survey has found declining support for America’s anti-terrorism efforts in many parts of the globe. Pewglobal.org
The United States has carried out more than 360 assassination drone attacks in Pakistan since 2004, killing over 3,500 people, according to a recent study by the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
A report on the secret drone war in Pakistan says the attacks have killed far more civilians than acknowledged, traumatized a nation and undermined international law. In "Living Under Drones," researchers conclude the drone strikes "terrorize men, women, and children, giving rise to anxiety and psychological trauma among civilian communities." Democracy Now
"The number of ’high-level’ militants killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low — estimated at just 2 ~of deaths~", says the report.
Also in Afghanistan, anti-American sentiment is at record high levels. eurasianet.org
Afghanistan is becoming a "drone war," with a 72 percent increase in the number of drone strikes inside Afghanistan from 2011 to 2012, meaning drones now account for 12 percent of all air strikes in the occupied nation. Antiwar
Attacks by U.S. military forces in Afghanistan, including airstrikes, have reportedly killed hundreds of children over the last four years, according to the UN body monitoring the rights of children. AP
(impact is schor)

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin
Plan can’t overcome legislature, terrorism, and Anbar
UN News Centre 3-27 ~Recent crisis in Anbar most serious challenge to state-building in Iraq – UN envoy, http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=4745026Cr=iraq26Cr1=~~23.UzVr1K1dXEg~~
The crisis in Iraq’s Anbar province, where three months of fighting has displaced over
AND
the occasion to forge links across the border and extend their support base.

Plan can’t solve legal enforcement which is the problem
Mahmoud 3-23 ~Nawzad, quoting Hajim al-Hassani, former speaker of the Iraqi parliament, Former Iraqi Speaker: ’The Unity of Iraq is Only a Slogan’ http://rudaw.net/english/interview/23032014~~
Rudaw: How do you evaluate the issues between Baghdad and the Kurdistan Region?
AND
or one side, which intends to impose its authority on the rest.

The Iraqi system is broken.  The can’t solve for judge intimidation

Temple-Raston 08 ~Dina Temple-Raston, "Iraqis on Slow Road to Building Judicial System,: NPR,  March 27, 2008 4:02 PM, pg. http://www.npr.org/people/11209543/dina-temple-raston 

It is a stifling existence but, Gallo says, necessary. There are about 1,200 judges in all of Iraq — three-dozen of them have been murdered since 2003.
"If you can intimidate that aspect of the judicial system — the judges — then it doesn’t matter how many witnesses you have and it doesn’t matter how many investigators you have or prosecutors. If the judges don’t feel they can make a decision in a secure environment that is fair and even-handed, then the whole system is going to crumble," he says.
Two Judicial Systems: Before Saddam and After
The judicial assassinations are only the beginning. The little hinges that make a judicial system function — legal traditions, precedents, even something as simple as court transcripts — just don’t exist in Iraq.
Judge Faiq Zaidan, the chief investigative judge in one of Baghdad’s Central Criminal Courts, has worked in the Iraqi legal system since 1999 — both before and after the rule of Saddam Hussein.
"During the Saddam era, justice wasn’t independent. Before 2003, if a judge refused to listen to the suggestions of politicians, Saddam put him in jail," Zaidan recalls. "Now, we have to convince people we operate differently, independently."
Creating an Iraqi judicial system that inspires that kind of confidence is the job of Philip Lynch, the rule of law coordinator for Iraq. He says the experiences of the Saddam years continue to haunt the present. Witness intimidation, for example, is still a huge issue in Iraq.

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

Judicial involvement in war power authority debates turns and escalates every impact

POSNER 26 VERMEULE 07 *Professor of Law at the University of Chicago Law School. Professor of Law at Harvard ~Eric A. Posner 26 Adrian Vermeule, Terror in the Balance: Security, Liberty, and the Courts, Oxford University Press~ page 17-18

Whatever the doctrinal formulation, the basic distinction between the two views is that our
AND
the deferential position that judges have historically taken in emergencies is a mistake.
The deferential view does not rest on a conceptual claim; it rests on a
AND
cause substantial losses. At time 2, an emergency response is undertaken.
Several characteristics of the emergency are worthy of note. First, the threat reduces
AND
is no general template that can be used for evaluating the government’s response.
In emergencies, then, judges are at sea, even more so than are
AND
but to defer heavily to executive action, and the judges know this.

D

Legitimacy not key to heg—popularity isn’t a factor

Brooks and Wohlforth 9—*Stephen G. Brooks is Associate Professor of Government at Dartmouth College. William C. Wohlforth is the Daniel Webster Professor of Government at Dartmouth College ~March-April, 2009, "Reshaping the world order: how Washington should reform international institutions," Foreign Affairs, Emory~

FOR ANALYSTS such as Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger, the key reason for skepticism
AND
States today has the necessary legitimacy to shepherd reform of the international system.

PRISM destroyed legitimacy/soft power

Migranyan 13—Andranik is the director of the Institute for Democracy and Cooperation in New York. He is also a professor at the Institute of International Relations in Moscow, a former member of the Public Chamber and a former member of the Russian Presidential Council ~July 5, 2013, "Scandals Harm U.S. Soft Power," http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/scandals-harm-us-soft-power-8695~~

For the past few months, the United States has been rocked by a series
AND
America—and its model for governance—with a more critical eye.

Liberal norms will survive US decline

IKENBERRY 11 – (May/June issue of Foreign Affairs, G. John, PhD, Albert G. Milbank Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University in the Department of Politics and the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, "The Future of the Liberal World Order," http://www.foreignaffairs.com/
articles/67730/g-john-ikenberry/the-future-of-the-liberal-world-order?page=show)
For all these reasons, many observers have concluded that world politics is experiencing not
AND
and prosperity that it has provided since the middle of the twentieth century. 

US decline will not spark wars.

MacDonald 26 Parent 11—Professor of Political Science at Williams College 26 Professor of Political Science at University of Miami ~Paul K. MacDonald 26 Joseph M. Parent, "Graceful Decline? The Surprising Success of Great Power Retrenchment," International Security, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Spring 2011), pp. 7–44~

Our findings are directly relevant to what appears to be an impending great power transition
AND
security competition that sets in when an aspiring hegemon appears in Eurasia." 92
Contrary to these predictions, our analysis suggests some grounds for optimism. Based on
AND
is a greater geopolitical gamble than withdrawing to cheaper, more defensible frontiers.
Some observers might dispute our conclusions, arguing that hegemonic transitions are more conflict prone
AND
readily identify and eliminate extraneous burdens without exposing vulnerabilities or exciting domestic populations.
We believe the empirical record supports these conclusions. In particular, periods of hegemonic
AND
ability to sustain its economic performance or engage in foreign policy adventurism. 94
Most important, the United States is not in free fall. Extrapolating the data
AND
exacerbate U.S. grand strategic problems and risk unnecessary clashes. 101

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

The United States federal judiciary should apply a clear statement principle to presidential war powers authority that Substantive Due Process applies to individuals indefinitely detained at the will of the United States

A. Substantive Due Process is at risk of unraveling – it is critical to check tyranny and rights abuses – legal precedent also means in the world of the permutation the Supreme Court would only rule on procedural due process which destroys the substantive due process doctrine

Peter J. Rubin, Associate Professor of Law, Georgetown University  ~103 Colum. L. Rev. 833~ May, 2003
The concept of "substantive due process" has long since earned its place as
AND
claim is "covered by" another, more explicit, constitutional provision.

B. We must reject every violation of freedom with undying spirit or it culminates in the end of all human aspirations

Petro 1974
However, one may still insist echoing Ernest Hemingway- "I believe in only
AND
every invasion of freedom must be emphatically identified and resisted with undying spirit.

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 3 | Opponent: Vermont Broughton-Brough | Judge: Bausch, Davis, Gerber
The discourse of “whiteness” as a “nothing but oppressive and false” prevents effective anti-racist struggle.
There are two problems with their characterization of “whiteness”
whiteness is treated as purely negative—their discourse attaches whiteness instrincally to hierarchy rather than difference.  slippage in their rhetoric equates “whiteness” with white supremacy.  
historical oversimplification. though there is continuity between different white projects failure to recognize, and productively cooperate with alternative white racial formations makes their method counterproductive.

Howard WINANT Sociology @ UCSB ’97 Behind Blue Eyes: Contemporary White Racial Politics  http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/faculty/winant/whitness.html

In a quiet office at a Washington think tank, a balding white man with
AND
legislation, agreement about the continuing existence of racial subordination has vanished.  The
meaning of race has been deeply problematized. Why?  Because the legacy of centuries
AND
is this situation which can be described as white racial dualism.1

indig essentialism creates a notion of a superior “indigenous people” that should reorder the world, creating a new set of elites
Gordon and Krech 12 David M. Gordon is an associate professor of history
AND
, edited with John McNeill and Carolyn Merchant. Indigenous Knowledge and the Environment
Despite the instrumental, moral, and ideological qualities of indigeneity, some still insist
AND
of a certain size; or on myriad other historical and cultural factors.
In its emphasis on an unchanging body of knowledge and in its opposition to modernity
AND
flexibility. Like tradition, indigenous knowledges have hidden and often repressed histories.
Over time, cultural (including indigenous) knowledge is unevenly produced, unevenly shared
AND
or several people might think or perceive is held universally in that society.

their starting point understands all existing white racial projects as coded forms of white-supremacy.  instead, we develop an alternative starting point that recognizes distinct white racial projects.  

Howard WINANT Sociology @ UCSB ’97 Behind Blue Eyes: Contemporary White Racial Politics  http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/faculty/winant/whitness.html

Yet it would be inaccurate to describe the racial reaction of the post-civil
AND
far right, new right, neoconservative, neoliberal, and new abolitionist.

their understanding of whiteness leaves whites with one option – repudiation.
repudiation is bound to fail—instead we need a representation of “whiteness” that faciliates rearticulating a positive, and anti-racist white racial formation.

Howard WINANT Sociology @ UCSB ’97 Behind Blue Eyes: Contemporary White Racial Politics  http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/faculty/winant/whitness.html

Nevertheless, the neoliberal project does undertake a crucial task: the construction of a
AND
by a mere act of political will, or even by widespread and repeated
acts aimed at rejecting white privilege?  I think not; whiteness may not be
AND
you don't know how American you are" (Thompson 1995, 429).

our pedagogical method is necessary to address issues like the environment, trade, and militarism that exceed whiteness. their representation of “whiteness” as a root cause reduces all these to products of whiteness instead of dealing with them in their full complexity.

George YÚDICE Latin American and Caribbean Studies; Spanish and Portuguese Languages and Literatures; Social and Cultural Analysis @ Princeton ‘95“Neither Impugning nor Disavowing Whiteness Does a Viable Politics Make: The Limits of Identity Politics” in After Political Correctness eds. Christopher Newfield and Ronald Strickland p. 279-281

It is arguments such as those of SWOP and Ganados del Valle, not simply
AND
and thus requiring a global politics that works outside of the national frame,
Of course, such a politics is meaningless unless it can be articulated among diverse constituencies and to the location of power and capital in the state. In City of Quartz, Mike Davis has mapped the ways in which urban ethnoracial politics and a myriad of global forces brokered by the US. state are imbricated:
The privatization of the architectural public realm, moreover, is shadowed by parallel restructurings of electronic space, as heavily policed, pay-access "information or- ders:' elite data-bases and subscription cable services appropriate part of the invisible agora. Both processes, of course, mirror the deregulation of the economy and the re- cession of non-market entitlement. 63
The erosion of public space, the bunkerization of the wealthy, the segregation of
AND
black, or brown, or queer, or none of the above?

only a project that rearticulates rather than condemns whiteness can succeed – we need a critical race theory that can connect the pedagogical method and language to dominant institutions and groups in our society.

George YÚDICE Latin American and Caribbean Studies; Spanish and Portuguese Languages and Literatures; Social and Cultural Analysis @ Princeton ‘95“Neither Impugning nor Disavowing Whiteness Does a Viable Politics Make: The Limits of Identity Politics” in After Political Correctness eds. Christopher Newfield and Ronald Strickland p. 273-275

It is incumbent upon multiculturatists, then, to project a new democratic vision that
AND
white supremacism:  If ethnic identity and ethnic suffering are valued now, what's
a mongrel white kid to do? (Most of the skin headis are
AND
late capitalism, which now brings us the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

Modeling

No modeling

Law 26 Versteeg 12—Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law @ Washington University 26 Professor of Comparative Constitutional Law @ University of Virginia ~David S. Law 26 Mila Versteeg, "The Declining Influence of the United States Constitution," New York University Law Review, Vol. 87, 2012

The appeal of American constitutionalism as a model for other countries appears to be waning
AND
States, but the manner in which constitutions are written increasingly does not.
If the U.S. Constitution is indeed losing popularity as a model for other countries, what—or who—is to blame? At this point, one can only speculate as to the actual causes of this decline, but four possible hypotheses suggest themselves: (1) the advent of a superior or more attractive competitor; (2) a general decline in American hegemony; (3) judicial parochialism; (4) constitutional obsolescence; and (5) a creed of American exceptionalism.
With respect to the first hypothesis, there is little indication that the U.
AND
one that has been collectively forged rather than modeled upon a specific constitution.
Another possibility is that America’s capacity for constitutional leadership is at least partly a function
AND
this Article is potentially indicative of a broader decline in American soft power.
There are also factors specific to American constitutionalism that may be¶ reducing its appeal
AND
jurisprudence or to the U.S. Constitution itself for inspiration.275
It is equally plausible, however, that responsibility for the declining appeal of American
AND
would still lack the power to update the actual text of the document.
Indeed, efforts by the Court to update the Constitution via interpretation may actually reduce
AND
attention from the fact that the Constitution itself is an increasingly atypical document.
One way to put a more positive spin upon the U.S. Constitution’s
AND
to respect for the exceptional character of the nation and its constitution.286
Unfortunately, it is clear that the reasons for the declining influence of American constitutionalism
AND
the spread of American constitutionalism. But this did not come to pass.
Once global constitutionalism is understood as the product of a polycentric evolutionary process, it
AND
But the world would surely pay close attention.  Pg. 78-83 

US is an anti-model

Schor 08 - Professor of Law @ Suffolk University Law School. ~Miguel Schor, "Judicial Review and American Constitutional Exceptionalism," Osgoode Hall Law Journal, Vol. 46, 2008

This article questions the conventional wisdom that the logic of Marbury has conquered the world’s
AND
and that courts have the power and the duty to maintain that distinction.  
This assumption was rejected because other democracies learned from the American experience that courts that
AND
use appointments as a vehicle for constitutional battles.  Pg. 37-38

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

NSA reforms will pass – found a sweet spot – Obama is key

ROLL CALL 3 – 25 – 14 ~Hill’s Bipartisan Deadlock on Phone Records May Be Easing, http://blogs.rollcall.com/hawkings/obama-nsa-reform-plan-could-ease-congressional-deadlock-on-spying/~~

Eight months ago, in one of its most important and fascinatingly nonpartisan votes of recent memory, the House came up just seven members short of eviscerating the government’s vast effort to keep tabs on American phone habits.
The roll call revealed a profound divide in Congress on how assertively the intelligence community should be allowed to probe into the personal lives of private citizens in the cause of thwarting terrorism. It is a split that has stymied legislative efforts to revamp the National Security Agency’s bulk data collection programs.
Until now, maybe. Senior members with jurisdiction over the surveillance efforts, in both parties and on both sides of the Hill, are signaling generalized and tentative but nonetheless clear support for the central elements of a proposed compromise that President Barack Obama previewed Tuesday and will formally unveil by week’s end.
The president, in other words, may be close to finding the congressional sweet spot on one of the most vexing problems he’s faced — an issue that surged onto Washington’s agenda after the secret phone records collection efforts were disclosed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.
If Obama can seal the deal, which he’s pledged to push for by the end of June, it would almost surely rank among his most important second-term victories at the Capitol. It also would create an exception that proves the rule about the improbability of bipartisan agreement on hot-button issues in an election season.
"I recognize that people were concerned about what might happen in the future with that bulk data," Obama said at a news conference in The Hague, where he’s been working to gain support for containing Russia from a group of European leaders who have their own complaints about U.S. spying on telephone calls. "This proposal that’s been presented to me would eliminate that concern."
The top two members of the House Intelligence Committee, GOP Chairman Mike Rogers of Michigan and ranking Democrat C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, introduced their own bill to revamp surveillance policy Tuesday — and declared they expect it would track very closely with the language coming from the administration. They said they had been negotiating with White House officials for several weeks and viewed the two proposals as compatible.
At their core, both the Obama and House bills would end the NSA practice
AND
their databases in hopes of finding calling patterns that suggest national security threats.
Since both Rogers and Ruppersberger have been prominent defenders of the bulk collection system, any agreement they reach that has Obama’s blessing can be expected to pass the House.
It should garner support from a lopsided majority of the 217 House members (three
AND
of the databases should be limited to information about existing targets of investigations.
But one leader of that camp vowed to work for the defeat of any measure that looks like either the Obama or Intelligence panel plans. Republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, who as chairman of House Judiciary a decade ago was instrumental in writing the Patriot Act, believes that law has been grossly misapplied by the NSA to invade personal privacy much too easily.
Sensenbrenner said he would continue to push his measure to almost entirely prevent the NSA from looking at telecommunications metadata. But the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., said he would remain open to finding the makings of a deal in the Obama plan. Leahy signaled the legislative negotiating would be much smoother if Obama suspended the bulk data collection during the talks.
Much more enthusiastic was Calfornia’s Dianne Feinstein, the Democratic chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who said she generally supports the House proposal and views Obama’s plan "a worthy effort." Her committee’s top Republican, the retiring Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, was a bit more equivocal but gave a strong indication he was eager to cut a deal based on the ideas from the House and the White House.
There are plenty of important points over which to haggle: about the ways the metadata is to be retained, the format for FBI to view the information, the liability for the telecommunications companies, the specificity of the search requests and the reach and secrecy of the judicial oversight.
And the American Civil Liberties Union said it had already found enough differences between the two measures unveiled Tuesday to give its "crucial first step" blessing to the Obama plan while rejecting the Rogers-Ruppersberger bill. The ACLU said that proposal would end up expanding the FBI’s investigative reach instead of limiting it.
But in a year when all sides say they are still ready to share the credit for at least one more top-tier legislative accomplishment, the knot over surveillance may be starting to unravel.

Must maintain momentum and avoid other fights

NBC NEWS 3 – 26 – 14 Boehner Expects Government Will End Collection of Bulk Data, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/nsa-snooping/boehner-expects-government-will-end-collection-bulk-data-n62661

House Speaker John Boehner hailed a series of proposed NSA reforms that could ease President Barack Obama’s expected proposals through Congress.
The Capitol’s top Republican praised a bipartisan proposal that would end the government’s bulk collection of meta-data — a key reform Obama is expected to embrace later this week when his administration formally unveils its own proposals.
"I’ve long said these programs exist to save American lives, and they have," Boehner said. "And while there are some valid privacy concerns, it would be irresponsible to end these programs before we have a credible alternative."
"I expect that part of this effort will include the end of the government holding onto bulk data," Boehner added.
Boehner’s comments represent a significant accession to to heart of Obama’s expected reforms. Though a number of details could still split lawmakers, Boehner’s remarks represent signs of hope that the president’s NSA reforms could work their way through Congress without encountering too much familiar gridlock.

PLAN slays Obama’s agenda

Loomis 07 Visiting Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, and Department of Government at Georgetown University ~Dr. Andrew J. Loomis, "Leveraging legitimacy in the crafting of U.S. foreign policy", March 2, 2007, pg 36-37, http://citation.allacademic.com//meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/7/9/4/8/pages179487/p179487-36.php

Declining political authority encourages defection. American political analyst Norman Ornstein writes of the domestic
AND
affects the character of U.S. policy, foreign and domestic. 

NSA scandal being unhandled risks a rupture in trans-atlantic ties

HEUSER 13 executive director of the Washington, DC-based Bertelsmann Foundation ~Annette Heuser, Euractive, The erosion of the transatlantic trust, 10/25/13 http://www.euractiv.com/global-europe/erosion-transatlantic-trust-analysis-531335~~

Allegations of the NSA’s tapping of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s mobile phone have yet to be proved, but the agency’s spying is already causing unprecedented damage to the trans-Atlantic relationship. The controversy has festered for five months, but it reached a new peak with yesterday’s call from the chancellor to President Barack Obama. Her message to the president, who is increasingly besieged by his closest allies: Spying on her or her government is unacceptable.
Three things are remarkable about this recent development.
First, the chancellor is known to be a cautious political leader. She takes time to determine her course of action and then still proceeds carefully. But her quick and personal involvement in placing a call to her friend, Barack, would not have occurred if the German intelligence service had not provided her with robust information about US hacking.  
Second, President Obama’s reportedly cool response to the chancellor reconfirms the skepticism of European
AND
era who does not appear to be a trans-Atlanticist at heart.
Third, the Obama administration continues to underestimate the short- and long-term effects of the NSA scandal on the trans-Atlantic relationship. Europe is now united in its repugnance of American spying practices, and this abhorrence goes beyond any personal targeting of the German chancellor or her government. Europeans feel that Washington has disregarded and disrespected their privacy, which they, in general, safeguard more than Americans do.
The latest allegations mean the US has likely crossed a line. A European response is now coming, and it will be a collective one. Negotiations for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) may be put on hold. There have already been calls among high-ranking European officials to do so.
A recent Bertelsmann Foundation study estimated a TTIP could create 740,000 new American jobs. Putting such a deal in jeopardy means the potential loss of a significant economic boon and the only prestigious project in which the US and Europe are currently engaged.
The NSA scandal and its (mis)management by the White House are causing
AND
a profound and tragic break in that fragile tradition could now be unfolding.

Relations solve extinction

Stivachtis 10 – Director of International Studies Program @ Virginia Polytechnic Institute 26 State University ~Dr. Yannis. A. Stivachtis (Professor of Poli Sci 26 Ph.D. in Politics 26 International Relations from Lancaster University), THE IMPERATIVE FOR TRANSATLANTIC COOPERATION," The Research Institute for European and American Studies, 2010,  pg. http://www.rieas.gr/research-areas/global-issues/transatlantic-studies/78.html~~
There is no doubt that US-European relations are in a period of transition, and that the stresses and strains of globalization are increasing both the number and the seriousness of the challenges that confront transatlantic relations.
The events of 9/11 and the Iraq War have added significantly to these
AND
require further cooperation among countries at the regional, global and institutional levels.
Therefore, cooperation between the U.S. and Europe is more imperative than ever to deal effectively with these problems.  It is fair to say that the challenges of crafting a new relationship between the U.S. and the EU as well as between the U.S. and NATO are more regional than global, but the implications of success or failure will be global.
The transatlantic relationship is still in crisis, despite efforts to improve it since the
AND
on issues from global warming and biotechnology to peacekeeping and national missile defense.
Questions such as, the future role of NATO and its relationship to the common European Security and Defense policy (ESDP), or what constitutes terrorism and what the rights of captured suspected terrorists are, have been added to the list of US-European disagreements.
There are two reasons for concern regarding the transatlantic rift. First, if European
AND
leaders who want to forge a new relationship to make the necessary accommodations.
If both sides would actively work to heal the breach, a new opportunity could be created. A vibrant transatlantic partnership remains a real possibility, but only if both sides make the necessary political commitment.
There are strong reasons to believe that the security challenges facing the U.S. and Europe are more shared than divergent. The most dramatic case is terrorism. Closely related is the common interest in halting the spread of weapons of mass destruction and the nuclearization of Iran and North Korea. This commonality of threats is clearly perceived by publics on both sides of the Atlantic.
Actually, Americans and Europeans see eye to eye on more issues than one would expect from reading newspapers and magazines. But while elites on both sides of the Atlantic bemoan a largely illusory gap over the use of military force, biotechnology, and global warming, surveys of American and European public opinion highlight sharp differences over global leadership, defense spending, and the Middle East that threaten the future of the last century’s most successful alliance.
There are other important, shared interests as well. The transformation of Russia into
AND
economic transformation and integrating these states into larger communities such as the OSCE.
This would also minimize the risk of instability spreading and prevent those countries of becoming
AND
in dealing with the rising power of China through engagement but also containment.
The post Iraq War realities have shown that it is no longer simply a question of adapting transatlantic institutions to new realities. The changing structure of relations between the U.S. and Europe implies that a new basis for the relationship must be found if transatlantic cooperation and partnership is to continue. The future course of relations will be determined above all by U.S. policy towards Europe and the Atlantic Alliance.
Wise policy can help forge a new, more enduring strategic partnership, through which the two sides of the Atlantic cooperate in meeting the many major challenges and opportunities of the evolving world together. But a policy that takes Europe for granted and routinely ignores or even belittles European concerns, may force Europe to conclude that the costs of continued alliance outweigh its benefits.

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 1 | Opponent: Trinity Solice-Rothenbaum | Judge: Kearney, Perkins, Polin

The frame of security around detention continues otherization and expands executive powers

Margulies and Metcalf 11 ~*Joseph Margulies is a Clinical Professor, Northwestern University School of Law. He was counsel of record for the petitioners in Rasul v. Bush and Munaf v. Geren. He now is counsel of record for Abu Zubaydah, for whose torture (termed harsh interrogation by some) Bush Administration officials John Yoo and Jay Bybee wrote authorizing legal opinions. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at workshops at the American Bar Foundation and the 2010 Law and Society Association Conference in Chicago. Margulies expresses his thanks in particular to Sid Tarrow, Aziz Huq, Baher Azmy, Hadi Nicholas Deeb, Beth Mertz, Bonnie Honig, and Vicki Jackson. Hope Metcalf is a Lecturer, Yale Law School. Metcalf is co-counsel for the plaintiffs/petitioners in Padilla v. Rumsfeld, Padilla v. Yoo, Jeppesen v. Mohammed, and Maqaleh v. Obama. She has written numerous amicus briefs in support of petitioners in suits against the government arising out of counterterrorism policies, including in Munaf v. Geren and Boumediene v. Bush. Metcalf expresses her thanks to Muneer Ahmad, Stella Burch Elias, Margot Mendelson, Jean Koh Peters, and Judith Resnik for their feedback, as well as to co-teachers Jonathan Freiman, Ramzi Kassem, Harold Hongju Koh and Michael Wishnie, whose dedication to clients, students and justice continues to inspire.~ "Terrorizing Academia" http://www.swlaw.edu/pdfs/jle/jle603jmarguilies.pdf
But by framing the Bush Administration’s response as the latest in a series of regrettable
AND
Red Scare to the internment of the Japanese during World War II.8
And because we were studying the elephant with the wrong end of the telescope,
AND
, including most prominently Johnson v. Eisentrager and Ex Parte Quirin. 11
Regardless of political viewpoint, a common notion among most unilateralist and interventionist scholars was
AND
the torture memo authorized illegal behavior and must be given no effect.13
Recent developments, however, cast doubt on two grounding ideas of interventionist and unilateralist
AND
would have predicted change and redemption, we have seen retreat and retrenchment.
This conundrum is not adequately addressed by dominant strands of post-9/11
AND
political resources, capable of mobilizing public sentiment and generating social expectations.15
From that view, a victory in Rasul or Boumediene no more guaranteed that prisoners
AND
policies will continue largely unchanged, at least for the foreseeable future.19
Just as we see a widening gap between judicial recognition of rights in the abstract
AND
others," such as Muslims) cannot, by definition, be equal.

National security frame justifies extinction in the name of saving human life.

Dillon 96—Michael, University of Lancaster ~October 4, 1996, "Politics of Security: Towards a Political Philosophy of Continental Thought"~

The way of sharpening and focusing this thought into a precise question is first provided
AND
doing to the body and what the principle of security does to politics.
What truths about the human condition, he therefore prompted me to ask, are
AND
technology, and the advent of the real prospect of human species extinction.

Alternative—Challenge to conceptual framework of national security.  Only our alternative displaces the source of executive overreach. Legal restraint without conceptual change is futile.

Aziz RANA Law at Cornell 11 ~"Who Decides on Security?" Cornell Law Faculty Working Papers, Paper 87, http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clsops_papers/87 p. 45-51~

If both objective sociological claims at the center of the modern security concept are themselves
AND
, we can expect our prevailing security arrangements to become ever more entrenched.

Tournament: Ndt | Round: 3 | Opponent: Vermont Broughton-Brough | Judge: Bausch, Davis, Gerber
Strat K
In order to change status quo politics, the affirmative needs to explain how to change things, including specific mechanisms and steps that can be taken. While concepts of “rejecting racism” are compelling, they do not help resolve the problem. All successful historical movements had specific goals and collective strategies
Reed 09 Adolph Reed Jr. is a professor of political science at the University of Pennsylvania. “The limits of anti-racism”
Antiracism is a favorite concept on the American left these days. Of course, all good sorts want to be against racism, but what does the word mean exactly?
The contemporary discourse of “antiracism” is focused much more on taxonomy than politics
AND
predecessors in the period of high insurgency in the struggle against racial segregation.
This view, however, is mistaken. The postwar activism that reached its crescendo
AND
goals like the effective exercise of voting rights and specific programs of redistribution.
Clarity lost
Whether or not one considers those goals correct or appropriate, they were clear and
AND
, like Brigadoon, sporadically appears and returns impelled by its own logic.
Ironically, as the basis for a politics, antiracism seems to reflect, several
AND
of the real estate industry in creating and recreating housing segregation and ghettoization.
Tasty bunny
All too often, “racism” is the subject of sentences that imply intentional activity or is characterized as an autonomous “force.” In this kind of formulation, “racism,” a conceptual abstraction, is imagined as a material entity. Abstractions can be useful, but they shouldn’t be given independent life.
I can appreciate such formulations as transient political rhetoric; hyperbolic claims made in order
AND
“racism” itself doesn’t do anything more than the Easter Bunny does.
Yes, racism exists, as a conceptual condensation of practices and ideas that reproduce
AND
Thus the logic of straining to assign guilt by association substitutes for argument.
My position is—and I can’t count the number of times I’ve said this
AND
to any particular action except more taxonomic argument about what counts as racism.

Supporting care of the self helps you feel good without doing good.  Reject their doping mechanism.

David SIMPSON English @ UC Davis 2 Situatedness, or Why We Keep Saying Where We’re Coming From p. 218-221

The Persistence of Ethics The assertions of belonging that inform declarations of situatedness can then
AND
profound loneliness it can no longer derive from the metaphysics of individuality itself.

To transform the world, we need to be collective strategists. multiple movements prove
Lewis 13 Civil Rights and the Changing World HOW HISTORY WAS MADE AND HOW IT'S BEING WRITTEN. By Earl Lewis | HUMANITIES, January/February 2013 | Volume 34, Number 1.5
If the participants can be seen as strategists, they can also be seen as
AND
all, Hamer demonstrated the intellectual work that went into organizing for change.
A number of local community studies augment biographical accounts, illustrating an important historiographical fact
AND
affair until the radicalization of SNCC and the emergence of Black Power.18
If anything, Black Power reflected the emergence of a latent sentiment in the battle
AND
black nationalist groups that came of age during the period recommended separation.19
If civil rights figures in general frightened the state and law enforcement leaders, proponents
AND
shootouts with the Panthers in Los Angeles, Oakland, and Chicago.20
To fully comprehend both Black Power and the civil rights movement, we now know
AND
Deal coalition emanated from the battle for civil rights in the North.21
The history books are written about those who claim center stage, even if only
AND
In the end, it was a movement many wished they hadn’t missed.
New scholarship does, however, offer a glimpse into the social milieu activists and
AND
for the first time, a small group of black music moguls.22
If through the 1950s, radio had been used in support of the dominant social
AND
without question the modern civil rights movement and television grew up together.24
Finally, scholarship since the early 1990s reminds us that civil rights participants embraced the
AND
, they came to see themselves as part of an African diaspora.25
That means the affirmative could easily endorse racist policies. Plenty of things that are said to be anti-racist can end up being more racist than the status quo. Many Americans think that the welfare program is an integral solution, however just as many would argue that it is part of the problem. The main the issue is that we are unsure which tactics will be successful. Michelle Fine outlines a few examples from studying how the health department has been coopted
Fine 12 Michelle Fine, Distinguished Professor, Graduate Center, CUNY “Notes on Whiteness and Health” http://www.racismreview.com/blog/2012/12/15/whiteness-and-health/
Finally, I was struck by the ironies of anti-racist interventions being co
AND
very racial “differences”  and disparities they were presumably designed to combat.
Before we can think about “impacts” we have to think about methods – while we can make compelling arguments about the existence of racism, it is important to know what to do next. Just as anti-racism movements have used different tactics, Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges constantly point out the flaws of American imperialism, but have not figured out which strategy to use to solve the issue. The lack of tactics is why movements like the Occupy protest could gather lots of people, but go no further. In order to have a truly revolutionary argument, the affirmative must supply both strategy and tactic.
Webb 10 Sam Webb is the national chairperson of the Communist Party, USA
AND
of Connecticut. “Some left intellectuals fall short on strategy and tactics”
The left is blessed with a plethora of astute writers and powerful voices against capitalism and its predatory policies.
Their articles get wide circulation and they occasionally pop up on television. Last year they spoke regularly at the Occupy protests.
Like many others in left and progressive circles I look forward to their interventions. They offer both insight and inspiration.
But as good social analysts as they are, some of them - Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges come to mind - come up short at the political level. By that I mean that, other than insisting that people on the left resist the predatory actions of capitalism, they offer little in the way of strategic and tactical thinking on how to build an enduring mass movement.
Or to put it differently, while their critique of capitalism and insistence on resistance to its dehumanizing values and practices are on point, what is missing from their articles,speeches, and interviews is a sense of how to proceed, that is, how to fight in concrete conditions.
They don't inform their audience about which change agents are critical to the success of any social struggle or to the durability of any social movement.
Nor do they suggest which alliances among which social groups are crucial to political advance.
The reader/listener gets no insight as to what the main political obstacle to social progress, including getting rid of capitalism, is at this moment.
And besides the need to resist capitalism's outrages, you get no inkling as to what the main political task is at this moment - certainly not the coming elections.
If organized labor enters into their analysis, it is never as a prime-time player whose role is of overriding importance to prospects of any social movement's durability, advance and victory. In fact, too often labor either comes in for criticism or as an afterthought or as just one among many other agents of change.
Few of these analysts emphatically say that the nation's working people - the multi-racial working class and its organized sector - have to be in the forefront of the democratic and revolutionary movement for it to succeed.
Much the same could be said about their attitude towards people of color and the
AND
at the center of the struggle for all-people's unity and victory.
Nor does one get the impression that these writers see women as a strategic force.
As far as divisions in the ruling class, little is mentioned. In fact, the tendency among these commentators is to treat the ruling class (including its two parties) as one undifferentiated mass - quite a different approach than that taken by the prophetic leader Martin Luther King, who was very conscious of splits in the top layers of society and between and within the two parties.
Perhaps more fundamentally, an appreciation of the balance of class and social forces at any given moment doesn't figure much in their political calculus nor do the mass moods of the overall population - all of which can lead to a sense that either everything is possible or nothing is possible but individual resistance.
What they put a lot of stock in - I would say even go overboard about - is expressions of resistance on the part of radicalized young people. A decade or so ago it was the youth in Seattle who were getting rave reviews from this grouping of left intellectuals and more recently the Occupy movement was at the top of their agenda.
Certainly both these manifestations of youthful upsurge justifiably generated excitement on the left and beyond. Both contributed mightily to recasting the conversation in the country. But neither one constituted by itself a fundamental political challenge to the existing power relations and arrangements nor replaced the main social forces of change.
Now don't get me wrong. Young people play an absolutely important and necessary role in any social movement. And in many cases their actions set off wider struggles in society. But to note their necessary and catalytic role in any broader social advance is not the same as turning them into a people's - oops I dare say the word - vanguard.
To be fair, no one on the left has come up with a compelling enough strategic and tactical visualization that reaches and excites millions and moves the country forward in a democratic and socialist direction.
Instead, we endorse a discussion focused on the question of strategy. This can make sure that our methods move away from oppression and don’t get coopted. Of course, there are numerous strategies and advantages and disadvantages to every single one. Thus, in order to decide which method to use, we must debate them. This is the only way to achieve the benefits of the affirmative
Lewis 13 Civil Rights and the Changing World HOW HISTORY WAS MADE AND HOW IT'S BEING WRITTEN. By Earl Lewis | HUMANITIES, January/February 2013 | Volume 34, Number 1.5
Longtime social and civil rights activist, educator, and propagator of nonviolence Bernard Lafayette has told me more than once that professional historians, while getting the main story correct, miss part of the essence of what occurred during the American civil rights movement.
In their concern for social movements (and their associated theories about those movements),
AND
outcomes reflected long, quiet work before their more recognizable public displays.1
Lafayette, in his critique, called on historians and other scholars to rethink the
AND
of racial subjugation and the struggle for opportunity in the United States.3

More? The aff’s performance of care of the self privileges ethics over democratic politics.  Survival strategies and self-elaboration areincontestable – but self-determination becomes narcissism.  

Ella MYERS Poli Sci @ Utah ‘8 “Resisting Foucauldian Ethics: Associative Politics and the Limits of the Care of the Self” Contemporary Political Theory 7 p. 134-138

Ethics as the Care of the Self Foucault’s inquiry into the care of the self
AND
that the specter of solipsism remains close at hand (1997b, 287).
Focus on the freedom to be oneself supports the culture of self-affirmation.  The politics of performing self-determination turns into conformity and authoritarian enclave politics.

Ella MYERS Poli Sci and Gender Studies @ Utah ’13 Worldly Ethics: Democratic Politics and Care for the World p. 46-49

The therapeutic ethics advanced by Foucault and Connolly resonate strongly with dominant features of American
AND
with the idea that one can be an engaged citizen all by oneself.