Spending

A. Uniqueness - Spending decreasing now, NASA budgets are constrained. Space Politics.com 5/13/11 Another sign of tight budgets ahead
http://www.spacepolitics.com/2011/05/13/another-sign-of-tight-budgets-ahead/ Its been clear for some time that the budget environment for the next fiscal year (and beyond) will be constrained, given concerns about massive budget deficits and the nations growing debt. This week has given another clue about how tight those budgets might be for next year for NASA and other agencies. The House Appropriations Committee released its draft funding allocations for FY12, broken down by subcommittee. For Commerce, Justice, and Science, which includes NASA, the current notional spending allocation is $50.2 billion, compared to $53.3 billion in 2011 and nearly $57.7 billion in the administrations 2012 budget request. In 2011 NASAs funding of just under $18.5 billion accounted for nearly 35 percent of the subcommittees total; if that fraction holds in 2012 NASA would end up with about $17.5 billion, or more than $1 billion less than the agencys request of $18.7 billion.

B. Link New Spending destroys fiscal discipline Hurt 2-14-11 [Robert Hurt, Virginia Congressman, Charting A New Course Of Fiscal Discipline
And Restraint, February 14, 2011, http://virginiafifthwatchdog.com/2011/02/charting-a-newcourse-of-fiscal-discipline-and-restraint/] Unfortunately, the Administrations initial suggestions to freeze spending at current levels, combined with its continued commitment to more failed stimulus-style spending, eludes the real kind of change that needs to take place in Washington. With our national debt soaring past $14 trillion and our deficit reaching nearly $1.5 trillion, freezing spending at an artificially high and accelerated level is not enough. And with unemployment continuing to remain at an unacceptable rate, the last thing we need is more government spending, more taxing, and more borrowing. To truly
turn our economy around, we need a renewed commitment to the kinds of policies that will inject a level of certainty into our economy that will give our job creators the confidence necessary to hire and expand once again. Reining

in government spending and returning to pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, reducing unnecessary regulations, and forcing our government to live within its means by passing a balanced budget amendment are all steps in the right direction. The actions next week in the House will seek to continue to move our economy
forward as we chart a new course of fiscal discipline and restraint. For the first time in years, the House will debate cutting government spending rather than increasing it as we initiate the consideration of a budget proposal for the remaining seven months of this fiscal year. This historic bill stands in direct contrast to last years Congress, which failed to propose or even pass a budget,

allowing government spending to go unchecked and putting us on an unsustainable path that threatens the economic outlook of our country.

C. Impact - Continued deficit spending collapses the economy Roe 11 (Phil, member of the Education and Workforce Committee and Representative from
Tennessee, Cut, cap and balance: A fight toward fiscal responsibility, 5-18, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federaleye/2010/05/navy_plebes_scale_herndon_monu.html) On Monday, the United States reached the legal limit of its borrowing authority further evidence that out-of-control spending is a matter of national security. Serious reforms and government spending cuts need to be made to avoid severe economic disruptions both in the short and long-term. The national debt and
deficits are rising at an unconscionable rate. The national debt now exceeds $14 trillion, and the government is still piling up debt at the rate of $200 million an hour, $30 billion a week, $120 billion a month and $1.6 trillion a year. Its clear we dont have a revenue problem we have a spending problem. Raising the debt ceiling without these serious reforms will only burden our future generations with outrageous debt. Worse, the president and Senate Democrats are saying they want a clean debt ceiling increase, which means that they want to continue spending and borrowing more money with no strings attached. My view is we must not raise the debt ceiling by $1 without simultaneously making deep cuts in spending and taking real steps towards a balanced budget.

It is imperative to the future of the country that we fight for an immediate shift toward fiscal responsibility. That is why I, along with my colleagues in the Republican Study Committee (RSC), wrote a letter to House Speaker John Boehner
asking him to Cut, Cap and Balance. Specifically, we advocated for discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year; enacting statutory, enforceable total-spending caps to reduce federal spending to 18 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP); and a Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment (BBA) with strong protections against federal tax increases and including a Spending Limitation Amendment (SLA). This proposal will put us on a path to prosperity, and I will work to see provisions like this are included in any final agreement. I believe it is prudent to limit the extension of borrowing authority as much as possible, in order to demand accountability from Senate Democrats and the Obama Administration. Every day, we see more and more evidence of the need to confront the problem now. The International Monetary

Fund (IMF)

report released in April adds urgency to the need for meaningful actions both short and long-term to confront the nation's debt head-on. Additionally, Moody's Analytics released a report several weeks ago forecasting a downgrade in our countrys bond rating. Its clear that if we fail to stop the spending spree, our nation will face economic collapse in the long-term.

D. Global nuclear war

Auslin 9 (Michael, Resident Scholar American Enterprise Institute, and Desmond Lachman Resident Fellow American Enterprise Institute, The Global Economy Unravels, Forbes, 3-6, http://www.aei.org/article/100187) What do these trends mean in the short and medium term? The Great Depression showed how social and global chaos followed hard on economic collapse. The mere fact that parliaments across the globe, from America to Japan, are
unable to make responsible, economically sound recovery plans suggests that they do not know what to do and are simply hoping for the least disruption. Equally worrisome is the adoption of more statist economic programs around the globe, and the concurrent decline of trust in free-market systems. The threat of instability is a pressing concern. China, until last year the world's fastest growing economy, just reported that 20 million migrant laborers lost their jobs. Even in the flush times of recent years, China

faced upward of 70,000 labor uprisings a year. A sustained downturn poses grave and possibly immediate threats to Chinese internal stability. The regime in Beijing may be faced with a choice of repressing its own people or diverting their energies outward, leading to conflict with China's neighbors. Russia, an oil state completely dependent on energy sales, has had to put down riots in its Far East as well as in downtown Moscow. Vladimir Putin's rule has been predicated on squeezing civil liberties while providing economic largesse. If that devil's bargain falls apart, then wide-scale repression inside Russia, along with a continuing threatening posture toward Russia's neighbors, is likely. Even apparently stable societies face increasing risk and the threat of
internal or possibly external conflict. As Japan's exports have plummeted by nearly 50%, one-third of the country's prefectures have passed emergency economic stabilization plans. Hundreds of thousands of temporary employees hired during the first part of this decade are being laid off. Spain's unemployment rate is expected to climb to nearly 20% by the end of 2010; Spanish unions are already protesting the lack of jobs, and the specter of violence, as occurred in the 1980s, is haunting the country. Meanwhile, in Greece, workers have already taken to the streets. Europe

as a whole will face dangerously increasing A

tensions between native citizens and immigrants, largely from poorer Muslim nations, who have increased the labor pool in the
past several decades. Spain has absorbed five million immigrants since 1999, while nearly 9% of Germany's residents have foreign citizenship, including almost 2 million Turks. The xenophobic labor strikes in the U.K. do not bode well for the rest of Europe.

prolonged global downturn, let alone a collapse, would dramatically raise tensions inside

these countries. Couple that with possible protectionist legislation in the United States, unresolved ethnic and territorial disputes in all regions of the globe and a loss of confidence that world leaders actually know what they are doing. The result may be a series of small explosions that coalesce into a big bang.

CP
Text: United States federal government should [__________________________________________] The Net Benefit is Geopower. Use of The before United States federal government inscribes nationalistic geopolitics, creating us-them dichotomies
Thrift 0
(Nigel | University of Warwick Vice Chancellor, University of Bristol Professor of Geography | Its the Little Things | Geopolitical Traditions: A Century of Geopolitical Thought p.383-385)

Let us finally come to one more arena: the arena of words. After all, here we might be thought to have the clearest example of representation at work, the word. Yet, what we do not get from critical geopolitics is a clear enough sense of how words function to bring about geopolitical change and it is not possible to do so as long as geopolitical forces continue to be framed as big and commanding (with all the masculine overtones). Some of the most potent geopolitical forces are, I suspect, lurking in the little details of peoples lives, what is carried in the specific variabilities of their activities (Shotter and Billig 1998:23), in the context of utterances. And these variabilities have immediate consequences. Thus, As Bakhtin notes, and as is
confirmed by the work in conversational analysis, we sensitively catch the smallest shift in intonation, the slightest interruption of voices in anything of importance to us in another persons practical everyday discourse. All those verbal sideward glances, reservations, loopholes, hints, thrusts do not slip past our ear, are not foreign to our own lips (Bakhtin 1984:201). And we in turn show our stance to what they do or say also in fleeting bodily reactions, facial expressions, sounds of approval or disapproval, etc. Indeed, even in the continuously responsive unfolding of non-linguistic activities between ourselves and othersin a dance, in a handshake, or even a mere chance collision on the street we are actively aware of whether the others motives are, so to speak, in tune or at odds with ours. And in our sense of their attunement or lack of it, we can sense their attitude to us as intimate or distant, friendly or hostile, deferential or arrogant, and so on. (Shotter and Billig 1998:23) Thus, very effective work has been done in disciplines like

national identity and an accompanying geopolitical stance are inscribed through the smallest of details. Thus, for example, national identity is not accomplished in grand displays which incite the citizen to wave the flag in a fit of patriotic fervour. Instead, it goes on in more
anthropology and discursive psychology (Billig 1995, 1997) which attempts to provide a sense of how mundane citations:

it is done unobtrusively on the margins of conscious awareness by little words such as

the and we. Each day we read or hear phrases such as the prime minister, the nation, or the weather. The definite article assumes deictically the national borders. It points to the homeland: but while we, the readers or listeners, understand the pointing, we do not follow it with our consciousnessit is a seen but unnoticed feature of our everyday discourse.6 (Shotter and Billig 1998:20) Such work goes some way towards understanding the deep, often unconscious aggressions which lurk behind so much geopolitical reasoning, which through
small details build a sense of us as not like them, and from which political programmes then flow as infractions are identified and made legible.7 In these few brief comments, , one still based on discourse, but on discourse understood in a broader way, and one which is less taken in by representation and more attuned to actual practices. In turn, such an agenda leads us

I hoped to have outlined a parallel agenda for critical geopolitics

towards the (I hesitate to say real) work of discourse, the constant hum of practices and their attendant territorializations within which geopower ferments and sometimes boils over.
away from interpretation of hyperbolic written and drawn rhetorics (which, I suspect, are often read by only a few and taken in by even fewer)

1NC - The PIC

And - Geopolitical borders breed racism - this must always be rejected

Dike 2
(Mustafa | University of London Royal Holloway Geography Dept. Human Geography Lecturer | Pera Peras Poros: Longing for Spaces of Hospitality | Theory Culture Society) Californias Proposition 187 was an attempt to build safe homes for Californians, not for all of them of course. The political abuse of the image of home as a sheltered and safe place drew upon an exclusionary, territorializing, xenophobic, premodern and patriarchal cult of home (Antonopoulos, 1994: 57). It was an elaborate fixing of boundaries, making California a safe home for its legal residents based on the exclusionary politics of home. but of hostility and

Boundaries, evidently, not only evoke the idea of hospitality,

in the case of , it is both receiving populations and immigrants [that] . . . risk mutual transformation, [that] . . . engage and attenuate their home-yearning for each others sakes and for the sake of their political life together (Honig, 1999: 203). The point, therefore, is about openings, about keeping open the question of who the people (the demos) is, since the question of democracy always arises at the limit of the demos . . . wherein native, subject, citizen, or people receives its designation as such from the way the human encounter with the stranger and the strange is assumed (Dillon, 1999: 120 and 96).

racism as well.12 It is important to remember, however, that it is not only the situation of the guest but also the host that needs to be reconsidered since, immigration, for example There is a need to

reconsider the boundary, not only as a separator but as a connector as well, where hospitality comes into play
pointing beyond the boundaries. There is a need, perhaps, to reflect on what the title words, in Greek, of this text suggest: Pera peras poros: the other side/beyond limit passage; beyond the limits that interdict passage (Baptist, 1999: 102). There is a need, more importantly, if a cosmopolitan approach is to be assumed, to think about hospitality that would be more than cosmopolitical, that would go beyond strictly cosmopolitical conditions, that would go beyond the interests, authority, and legislation of the state

there is no way, I would argue, to escape the advent of the stranger, to avoid questions and questionings that tremble, if not stir, the socio-political order that once appeared, perhaps, as a safe home. Nor is there a way to avoid the production of others. What is more important, instead of reflecting on the ways by which no other would be produced, is to be able to resist processes that produce and reproduce others; processes that stabilize themselves, that close spaces, and that derive their sustainability from the very process of othering itself. Again, what is more important, rather than reflecting on the ways by which to avoid the disturbance of the stranger, is to be able to provide for the social, cultural, institutional, ethical and political spaces where we could learn to engage with and learn from each other, while being able to constitute our subjectivities free from subordination, in democratic ways. The point, then, is to open spaces, spaces where recognition as well as contestation and conflict can take place. Furthermore, the point is not merely to open spaces; more importantly, it is to keep them open. Hospitality is aimed at such a concern.
(Derrida, 1999a: 43). To conclude,

Warming
Warming isnt anthropogenic 31,000 scientists agree
Victoria Hardy, The American Chronicle, 6/26/08, The Global Warming Scam,
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/66237 Others are beginning to step forward and 31,000

scientists have signed a petition rejecting global warming. The petition states, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth." The scientists signing the petition consist of 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master's
level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a Bachelor of Science or equivalent academic degree. According to research

"Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse." World Net Daily
professor of chemistry Art Robinson,

Cows are the main cause of global warming

Reuters, December 1 2006, Cattle Cause Most Global Warming, (http://www.financialexpress.
com/old/fe_full_story.php?content_id=147739)

Who is contributing most to global warming? Dumb cattle and not emissions from factories and power plants, says the United Nations. The increasing world population, a new UN report warns, would lead to further increase in the number of livestock as demand for meat and milk increases and that would mean emission of more greenhouse gases. Not only that. Cattle are also a major contributor to land degradation and pollution of water, the report says. The livestock business, the report says, is among the most damaging sectors to the earth's increasingly scarce water resources, contributing among other things to water pollution from animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and the pesticides used to spray feed crops. Stressing that cattlerearing generates more global warming greenhouse gases as measured in carbon dioxide equivalent, the UN has called for improved animal diets to reduce enteric fermentation and consequent methane emissions.