Round 8 NDT

1NC

1NC DA 1
Obamas capital holding off domestic backlash key to a
successful deal with Iran failure insures regional war and Iran
nuclearization
COSTELLO 3 30 15 National Iranian American Council [Ryan
Costello, Stakes Are High for Iran Nuclear Negotiations,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ryan-costello/stakes-are-high-foriran_b_6973272.html]

the U.S. has a chance to lead an international coalition into an

agreement that would guard against any attempt by Iran to obtain a
nuclear weapon. However, the decades since the Iranian Revolution in 1979 are littered with missed
opportunities to resolve differences between the U.S. and Iran, including on the nuclear issue. With political
This week,

capital expended to keep the negotiations afloat, particularly in Washington , and the
list of issues to be resolved shrinking, these negotiations have steadily
risen in importance. As a result, failure or the rash rejection of a
breakthrough by Congress

or Iranian hardliners

could result in irreparable

damage to the diplomatic track, with profound consequences for an

already chaotic region.
We may never see a pair of U.S. and Iranian Presidents more willing to expend the
political capital necessary to reach a nuclear deal. President Obama famously
distinguished himself on the campaign trail in 2008 by vowing to sit down with any world leader without
preconditions, including Iran, and

has turned an Iran nuclear deal into what could be the

chief foreign policy goal of his second term . Secretary of State John Kerry and
other top U.S. diplomats have also spent countless hours doggedly pursuing a
deal that balances between the political imperatives of Washington and Tehran.
In Iran, President Rouhani campaigned on a platform of moderation and
outreach to the West. Rouhani was the lead nuclear negotiator for Iran between 2003-2005, which resulted in
Iran freezing its enrichment and implementing the IAEA's Additional Protocol. Rouhani's foreign minister,
Mohammad Javad Zarif, also has a successful track record of negotiating with the West, playing a critical role in the
effort to form a new government for Afghanistan at the Bonn conference in 2001. Over the past year and a half of
intense negotiations, Rouhani and Zarif have kept Iran's skeptical Supreme Leader united behind their efforts to
reach a deal, preventing counterproductive divides in Iran's political elite.

with the political scales tilted heavily in favor of diplomacy , failure

could eliminate diplomatic prospects for the foreseeable future.
Escalation will be the name of the game if negotiations fail , as lead U.S. negotiator
Wendy Sherman articulated in October. Congress would pass sanctions and President Obama
might not put up much of a fight. Iran would expand its nuclear program and
limit the access of international inspectors. The sanctions regime would fray or potentially
Now,

collapse , diminishing U.S. leverage over Iran. Tacit cooperation in Iraq to counter ISIS
militants could end, with dangerous consequences.

If diplomacy fails, President Obama would likely resist the reinvigorated calls
from neoconservative circles to attack Iran, but he has less than two years remaining in
office. Prominent Republicans weighing Presidential runs have already
staked out a hardline position by warning Iran that they would undo any
potential multilateral nuclear agreement "with the stroke of a pen. "
Democrats, as well, could be scarred by failure and rush toward a hawkish
position . Whereas a multilateral agreement would constrain the next President from returning to the
escalation route, an advancing Iranian nuclear program and the lack of diplomatic prospects would tempt many of

Those who
have dreamed of attacking Tehran ever since the fall of Baghdad are banking on such
an opportunity to renew their case for yet another disastrous war.
Obama's potential successors to consider the military option, regardless of the consequences.

It has been ten years since the European 3 (the United Kingdom, France and Germany) had a golden opportunity to
constrain Iran's nuclear program. Those talks fell apart largely due to the George W. Bush administration's
insistence that any agreement result in Iran eliminating its entire centrifuge program. As a result, Iran went from
hundreds to 20,000 centrifuges as economic pressure escalated but failed to achieve any strategic goal. Now,

diplomacy has once again halted the Iranian program's advance and could lead
to a historic breakthrough that reshapes the U.S.-Iran relationship, cuts
off Iran's pathways to a nuclear weapon and averts a disastrous war. If an
agreement falls through, however, getting through another ten years without
a war, an Iranian nuclear weapon, or both would likely prove more
challenging than reaching the diplomatic inflection point that the parties now face in Lausanne.

Legalization costs capital and triggers democrat backlash

Adam Nagourney 14, 4/5/2014, Despite Support in Party, Democratic
Governors Resist Legalizing Marijuana,
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/us/politics/despite-support-in-party-democraticgovernors-resist-legalizing-marijuana.html?_r=0,)
Even with Democrats and younger voters leading the wave of the prolegalization shift, these governors are standing back, supporting much
more limited medical-marijuana proposals or invoking the kind of law-andorder and public-health arguments more commonly heard from
Republicans. While 17 more states most of them leaning Democratic have seen
bills introduced this year to follow Colorado and Washington in approving
recreational marijuana, no sitting governor or member of the Senate has
offered a full-out endorsement of legalization . Only Gov. Peter Shumlin, a Democrat in
Vermont, which is struggling with a heroin problem, said he was open to the idea. Quite frankly, I dont think we
are ready, or want to go down that road, Dannel P. Malloy, the Democratic governor of Connecticut, which has
legalized medical marijuana and decriminalized possession of small amounts of marijuana, said in an interview.
Perhaps the best way to handle this is to watch those experiments that are underway. I dont think its necessary,
and I dont think its appropriate. The

hesitance expressed by these governors

reflects not only governing concerns but also, several analysts said, a historically rooted political
wariness of being portrayed as soft on crime by Republicans. In particular, Mr.
Brown, who is 75, lived through the culture wars of the 1960s, when Democrats suffered from being seen as

permissive on issues like this. Either they dont care about it as passionately or they feel embarrassed or

They fear the judgment, said Ethan Nadelmann, the founder of the
Drug Policy Alliance, an organization that favors decriminalization of marijuana. The fear of
being soft on drugs, soft on marijuana, soft on crime is woven into the
vulnerable.

DNA of American politicians, especially Democrats. He described that

sentiment as, Do not let yourself be outflanked by Republicans when it
comes to being tough on crime and tough on drugs. You will lose.

Goes nuclear
Hobson, professor of physics at University of Arkansas, 3/31/2015
(Art, Commentary: Absent agreement, Iran, U.S., Israel on path to war,
http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/mar/31/commentary-absent-agreement-iranu-s-is/?opinion)

One of history's greatest tragedies was the nuclear bomb dropped on

Hiroshima, Japan, in August 1945, a calamity compounded three days later by a second bomb exploded over
Nagasaki. It was, like most tragedy, made virtually inevitable by foregoing blunders:
revengeful treatment of Germany following World War I, U.S. failure to join World War II when it began in 1939,
thoughtless responses to Japanese aggression in Asia during the 1930s, and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
1941.

Since 1945, nuclear weapons have remained humankind's greatest

single immediate threat .

If we don't want to repeat the mistakes that led to Hiroshima, we had better treat
the Iranian nuclear question rationally, realistically, and without childish bravado. U.S. Sen.
Tom Cotton's recent letter to Iran, and Prime Minister Netanyahu's recent speech to Congress, were not serious.
Netanyahu argued that a nuclear agreement with Iran would be a bad deal and should be rejected. Cotton
suggested to Iran that a future U.S. president could revoke the agreement.

None of the agreement's opponents appear to have thought through the

consequences of following their leads. Iran, having no further reason for restraint
and every incentive for aggression, will move quickly toward a bomb; Israel will urge
action to prevent a bomb and will pressure the U.S. to join it in threatening Iran; and we
could easily be drawn into war -- a blunder that would dwarf even our foolish adventure into Iraq
beginning in 2003.
The realistic fact is that,

absent an agreement, the U nited S tates, Iran and Israel are

on the road to war, possibly a nuclear war

1NC T
Legalization is a PROCESS of removing penalties, it does not
include regulation the aff is extra topical and a voting issue
adds an unlimited number of unpredictable parts to the plan
and makes negative competition impossible voter for
competitive equity.
Rolles & Murkin 14 Senior Policy Analyst @ Transform Drug Policy Foundation & Communications
Officer @ Transform Drug Policy Foundation [Steve Rolles & George Murkin, How to Regulate Cannabis: A Practical
Guide, Transform Drug Policy Foundation, Updated May 2014

Historically, the drugs debate has been characterised by the imprecise or

inconsistent use of key terms , inevitably leading to misunderstandings
and myths about what is in reality being advocated by proponents of drug policy
reform. For a clear sense of what the legal regulation of cannabis markets
could look like, it is therefore necessary to clarify some of the terminology
commonly used to describe options for reform.

decriminalisation is used interchangeably with

legalisation or legal regulation, yet these terms mean very different
In much of the debate on drug policy,

things. While it has no strict legal definition, decriminalisation is generally

understood to refer to the removal of criminal sanctions for certain
offences26 usually the possession of small quantities of currently illegal drugs for personal use.
However, civil or administrative sanctions, such as fines, often remain. So
the possession of drugs remains unlawful and a punishable offence albeit
one that no longer attracts a criminal record. By contrast, any form of
legalisation and regulation necessarily entails the removal of all types of
penalty criminal or administrative for production, supply and
possession that takes place within the parameters of the regulatory
framework. Activities that take place outside any regulatory framework, such as sales to minors, are still
subject to punitive sanctions.
There is also a distinction to be made between de jure and de facto decriminalised or legally regulated drug control
systems. Under a de jure model the respective policies are implemented through specific reforms enshrined in law.
Under a de facto model, the same policies are enacted through the non-enforcement of criminal laws that
technically remain in place. In the Netherlands, for example, the possession and retail supply of cannabis is still
prohibited under law, yet is de facto legal, given it is tolerated within the licensing framework of the countrys
cannabis coffee shops.
Finally, while they are inherently related,

it is useful to differentiate between the terms

legal regulation and legalisation. Legalisation is merely a process

of making something illegal, legal. Legal regulation , on the other

hand, is the end point of this process, referring to a system of rules that govern the
product or behaviours in question. Consequently, just calling for the
legalisation of cannabis alone could reasonably be mistaken as a proposal
essentially,

for precisely the sort of commercial free market that Transform and most drug policy
reform advocates do not support. Legally regulated cannabis markets or legalisation
and regulation are more useful descriptive terms. Pg.

1NC DA 2
UN reform is inevitable but breaking technical compliance
undermines the entire UN
Hasse, 13 New York consultant for International Drug Policy Consortium and the
Harm Reduction Coalition (Heather, The 2016 Drugs UNGASS: What does it mean
for drug reform? 10/14,
http://drogasenmovimiento.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/13-10-14-the-2016-drugsungass-e28093what-does-it-mean-for-drug-reform_.pdf)

A little bit of background: At the UN level , drug issues are normally handled by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs
(CND) at annual meeting s in Vienna; however, a country or group of countries may request that the UNGA hold a
Special Session in NY to assess the world drug problem and review the situation . Much like the first drugs UNGASS
convened in 1998 , the 2016 UNGASS was called in response to a proposal from Mexico, and was co - sponsored by

This time around, the UNGA will review progresses made since
the 1998 UNGASS, including an assessment of the achievements and challenges in countering the world
drug problem, within the framework of the three international drug control conventions
and other relevant United Nations instruments. The 2016 UNGASS will be a
highly significant meeting, since it offers not only a broader venue (the CND is
comprised of 53 members while the UNGA consists of 193), but the chance for a fresh set of
eyes to review the issues. Finally, there may be an opportunity for a broader group of UN agencies
95 UN members .

(i.e., UNAIDS , UNDP , DPA ) to provide input into the process than usually happens at meetings of the CND.

2016 may sound like a long way off, but earnest preparations have already
begun: The UN Task Force on Transnational Organized Crime and Drug
Trafficking, appointed by Secretary General Ban Ki - Moon i n March 201 1 , and co - chaired by UNODC and
the UN Department of Political Affairs, is now tasked with helping to guide preparations for
the UNGASS. This past June, UNODC held an event on the International Day Against Drug Abuse
and Illicit Trafficking ( World Drug Day ) , which was hailed as part of the lead - up to the UNGASS. On the
civil society side, the ( longstanding but dormant ) NY NGO Committee on drugs haxs
been reconvened in New York as a conduit for NGOs to participate in the
2016 UNGASS and the preparations leading up to it. IDPC and Harm Reduction Coalition are both very active
in the process holding events at the UN to build awareness around drug issues , mee ting with missions and UN
agencies to garner support for the cause and ensure meaningful participation of civil society , and reporting back to

governments, heads of state, citizens, NGOs and

other organizations around the world are tuned in to the process.
the NGO community . Meanwhile,

many - especially in the US - are

asking if the UN is even relevant to domestic drug reform at this point. With the recent
But why? With all of the progress made in reform around the world lately,

marijuana laws passed in Colorado and Washington and the proposed legislation in Uruguay - not to mention
decriminalization measures enacted in Portugal and a growing number of other countries - reform seems inevitable.

the argument goes, the UN system will simply be overtaken by

"real world" reform on the ground. Why even bother with advocacy at the UN?
At some point,

This is not an easy question to answer; however, 1 truly believe that to be effective, reform efforts must be made at
every level - locally, nationally, and globally.
It may be true that reform efforts in the US and around the world have made significant progress in the last 10
years. But there is still a long way to go - marijuana is still not completely legal anywhere in the world (despite state
laws to the contrary, marijuana still remains illegal under federal law throughout the US), and many human rights

abuses continue to be carried out against drug users throughout the world in the name of drug control. Meanwhile,

the international drug control treaties - the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs and its
progeny - remain in place and, in fact, enjoy nearly universal adherence by 184
member states.

That so many countries comply at least technically , if not in spirit with the
international drug treaty system, shows just how highly the international
community regards the system. As well it should the UN system is invaluable
and even vital in many areas, including climate change, HIV/AIDS
reduction, and, most recently, the Syrian chemical weapons crisis (and dont forget that
the international drug treaty system also governs the flow of licit medication). While it is not unheard of for a
country to disregard a treaty,

a system in which countries pick and choose which

treaty provisions suit them and ignore the rest is, shall we say, less than ideal.
beyond the idea of simple respect for international law, there are
practical aspects of reform to consider. The drug problem is a global one ,
involving not only consuming countries but producing and transit countries as well. Without global
cooperation, any changes will at best be limited (marijuana reform in
Washington and Colorado hardly affects the issue of human rights abuses
in Singapore or the limitations on harm reduction measures in Russia). At worst, reform efforts
enacted ad hoc around the world could be contradictory and incompatible
But

- as might be the result if, for example, Colombia and the US opted for a regulated market without the cooperation
of Costa Rica or Honduras, both transit countries.

Full on state legalization linkstanks Obamas wait and see

approach
Bennett, 10/16/14 - Brookings fellow in governance studies (Wells, Interview
conducted by Jonathan Rauch,
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2014/10/16-marijuana-enforcementmodernize-international-drug-treaties-rauch)

As a legal matter, what do you think of the administrations argument that it

has this kind of discretion?
It has a basis in international lawthough the argument will lose a lot of
force quickly, if marijuana legalization moves forward and the federal
government holds back on enforcement. Considering the policy alternatives, the
United States approach is nevertheless quite well justified under the
circumstances, practically speaking.
So you think its okay as a short-term response?
Right, if you want to push domestic policy right now in a direction more respectful of
the drug treaties, you would have to do things in domestic law that would be either
very difficult or politically toxic. For example, there was a call in some quarters to
have the Justice Department bring a lawsuit establishing that the federal Controlled
Substances Act, which bans marijuana, preempts the states regimes. But doing that
would essentially only upend the states marijuana rules without restoring their

criminal prohibitions of marijuana. In other words, a legal victory on those grounds

which, by the way, is not assuredwould require the federal government to take on
a much broader enforcement portfolio with regard to marijuana, something it lacks
the resources and political appetite to do.
It also matters that the international cost to the United States, right now, is not
off the charts at all. The body established by the treaties to monitor
compliance has disagreed with the administrations claim that it is acting
lawfully, but it hasnt gone further than that. And other nations have not
publicly been making a lot of noise about the United States views. For those
and other reasons, wait-and-see is a short-term response that makes a lot
of sense .
So, if what the administration is doing makes some sense, whats the
problem?
A wait-and-see strategy, under these circumstances, will look really good if
marijuana legalization goes really badly. But if legalization proceeds in a smart
and rigorous wayif 10, 15, 20 states enact and operate responsible
regimes for the regulation of marijuanawe will be enforcing the Controlled
Substances Act less and less in jurisdictions that have regulated, legal marijuana
markets. And that will create more and more tension with our international
commitments to suppress marijuana. At that point, it will be
extraordinarily difficult for the U.S. to maintain that it complies with its
obligations.

Institution-based global cooperations key to manage

existential threats and great power stability
Graeme P. Herd 10, Head of the International Security Programme, Co-Director of
the International Training Course in Security Policy, Geneva Centre for Security
Policy, 2010, Great Powers: Towards a cooperative competitive future world order
paradigm?, in Great Powers and Strategic Stability in the 21 st Century, p. 197-198
Given the absence of immediate hegemonic challengers to the US (or a global
strategic catastrophe that could trigger US precipitous decline), and the need to cooperate to
address pressing strategic threats - the real question is what will be the nature
of relations between these Great Powers ? Will global order be characterized
as a predictable interdependent one-world system , in which shared
strategic threats create interest-based incentives and functional benefits which
drive cooperation between Great Powers? This pathway would be evidenced by the
emergence of a global security agenda based on nascent similarity across national
policy agendas . In addition. Great Powers would seek to cooperate by
strengthening multilateral partnerships in institutions (such as the UN,
G20 and regional variants), regimes (e.g., arms control, climate and trade), and shared
global norms, including international law . Alternatively, Great Powers may
rely less on institutions, regimes and shared norms, and more on
increasing their order-producing managerial role through geopolitical-bloc

formation within their near neighborhoods. Under such circumstances, a re-division of

the world into a competing mercantilist nineteenth-century regional order
emerges 17 World order would be characterized more by hierarchy and balance of
power and zero-sum principles than by interdependence.
Relative power shifts that allow a return to multipolarity - with three or more evenly matched powers - occur
gradually. The transition from a bipolar in the Cold War to a unipolar moment in the
post-Cold War has been crowned, according to Haass, by an era of non-polarity, where power is diffuse "a world
dominated not by one or two or even several states but rather by dozens of actors possessing and exercising

Multilateralism is on the rise , characterized by a

combination of stales and international organizations, both influential and
talking shops, formal and informal ("multilateralism light"). A dual system of global governance
various kinds of power"18

has evolved. An embryonic division of labor emerges, as groups with no formal rules or permanent structures
coordinate policies and immediate reactions to crises, while formal treaty-based institutions then legitimize the
results.'9
As powerfully advocated by Wolfgang Schauble:

Global cooperation is the only way to master the new, asymmetric global
challenges of the twenty-first century. No nation can manage these tasks on its own, nor can the entire
international community do so without the help of non-state, civil society actors. We must work together to find
appropriate security policy responses to the realities of the twenty-first century.20
Highlighting the emergence of what he terms an "interpolar" world - defined as "multipolarity in an age of

managing existential interdependence in an

unstable multipolar world is the key.21 Such complex interdependence
generates shared interest in cooperative solutions, meanwhile driving
convergence, consensus and accommodation between Great Powers.22 As a
result, the multilateral system is being adjusted to reflect the realities of a
global age - the rise of emerging powers and relative decline of the West :
interdependence" Grevi suggests that

"The new priority is to maintain a complex balance between multiple states."23 The G20 meeting in London in April
2009 suggested that great and rising powers will reform global financial architecture so that it regulates and
supervises global markets in a more participative, transparent and responsive manner: all countries have
contributed to the crisis; all will be involved in the solution.24

1NC DA 3
Canadas economy is recovering plan collapses it marijuana
exports to the US employ 1 out of 14 adults in Canada
Haddow 10 (Douglas Haddow, communications coordinator for the Canadian drug policy coalition, The
Guardian, "Marijuana may cause Canada's economic comedown,"
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/05/marijuana-industry-canada, 10/16 [Edited for ableist
language Sigalos])

If you've been paying attention to some of the more peculiar side-effects of the global recession, you
may have noticed that Canadians have been behaving uncharacteristically uppity of late. This new-found
swagger is a result of Canada having the dubious distinction of being the "least-bad-rich-worldeconomy" an honour that would be rather unimpressive if the rest of the G8 wasn't so persistently gloom-stricken.
the Canadian economy has
outpaced allcomers and will avoid the possibility of a double-dip recession
that continues to haunt the US. But beyond the chorus of self-congratulatory backslapping coming from Ottawa,
there has emerged a new and immediate threat of economic crisis that is being
While most wealthy economies are still stagnant, in decline or disrepair,

willfully ignored by Canadian politicians.

to legalise the
cultivation and use of marijuana. If passed, the change in law would be devastating to the
Canadian economy , halting the flow of billions of dollars from the US into
Canada and eventually forcing hundreds of thousands into unemployment .
This November, in an effort to increase tax revenue, California will hold a referendum on whether or not

Canada has developed a substantial and highly profitable marijuana

industry that is almost completely dependent on the US market. Between 60 and 90%
of the marijuana produced domestically is exported to the US via cross-border smuggling operations.
It's exactly like the alcohol prohibition of the 1920s, only far more sophisticated and more profitable.
The establishment of a legal industry based in the US would likely cripple [undermine]
these exports overnight .
Over the past 20 years,

Due to its contraband nature, it's difficult to determine exactly how much marijuana contributes to the Canadian economy, but a

agencies and economists have estimated that it is in the range of $20bn per year
(12.5bn), making it Canada's single largest agricultural product . The bulk of production is
based in British Columbia, where it employs a labour force of 250,000, roughly one in 14
adults. Although strict financial controls are often credited as the source of Canada's economic resilience, it's worth pointing out
that marijuana production often insulates communities from larger economic
phenomenon.
number of

After the lumber industry entered

into decline, Nelson was able to make the transition from a typical rural lumber town into a
thriving arts and mountain sports hotbed, due in part to the wealth generated by marijuana growers. If one
My hometown, Nelson, British Columbia, is an example of such a community.

were to have spent the last three years in this idyllic mountain hamlet, the economic crisis would have been barely noticeable.

All over Canada there are comparable situations. Countless cities, including major
centres like Vancouver, would have been far worse off if marijuana cultivation hadn't filled
the employment vacuum left by declining resource-based industries.

the current system only works if it exists in contrast to American

prohibition . If Californians vote to legalise, the only way for Canada to avoid taking a massive economic hit would be to

But

follow suit, legalising on a national level and taxing the industry a la tobacco or alcohol.

Causes Quebec to secede the economy is a rallying point

RT News 12 Quebexit: Canada's separation anxiety Published time: September 04, 2012
http://rt.com/news/quebec-election-separation-canada-309/

Quebecs separatist party is expecting a comeback amidst student protest and

economic uncertainty . As voters head to the polls to choose their government, the French-speaking province looks
on course for another referendum to split from Canada.
Tuesdays provincial election is a three-way fight between the incumbent Liberals, newly-formed coalition Avenir Quebec, and

the

separatist Party Quebecois (PQ).

PQ

has been proving most popular at the polls marching ahead of the others at around 33 per cent.

Liberal premier, Jean Charest, head of Quebecs government for nearly a decade, called for an early election on August 1 due to
looming student protests. However, throughout the election campaign he has trailed the separatist Party Quebecois leader Pauline
Marois in the polls.
PQs popularity means the issue of Quebecs separation from Canada has surfaced again.
Quebec has already had two unsuccessful referenda that came close to splitting Quebec from Canada in the past: one in 1980 with
40 per cent support and another in 1995 with almost 50 per cent voting for separation.

The separatists leading in the polls claim their short-term priority would be picking the economy up
off its knees, instead of pushing for a separation vote straight away.
"It's very important for me to manage our finances responsibly. That is without doubt why our engagements are the least costly of
all parties," Marois told Canadian media, while outlining a program that sets out new spending of $1 billion over five years.
At the same time she stated that she would hold an independence vote "tomorrow morning" if the conditions were right. Further,

the party leader clarified that a referendum on Quebec's independence would only be held if there
was complete confidence in a win. For now, opinion polls suggest that only less than 40 per cent of the province's
population would support a split.
Protests and lack of support for Liberals
The new buzz over Quebec comes after months of student and union protests raging this spring and summer against tuition hikes in
the province and the controversial new Bill 78, which restricts mass gatherings in the province.
Tens of thousands of students have made their outrage public by demonstrating and clashing with police, making headlines across
the world. Protests began in February, resulting in about 2,500 arrests. Tuesday's vote is seen by many as an echo of this public
discontent.

Experts believe that the more the economic uncertainty continues, the louder the
calls for Quebec's sovereignty will be.
After nine years of Liberals governing Quebec, people have grown wary and reluctant to reelect them considering the student unrest that evolved into a larger social protest, says Concordia political science Professor Bruce
Hicks.
"Quebecers tend to tire
of been the tradition in Quebec politics."

of the government and throw them out ," he says. "It's sort

"It's not going to be a referendum or nothing," said Antonia Maioni, a political scientist at McGill University. "The idea is to have
smaller wins and move towards an eventual, perhaps, referendum. At least [Pauline Marois] can then go back to her party and say
I'm moving to a third referendum."
Referendum agenda:

Marois plans to ask Ottawa for greater control in areas

economic development. Any kind of refusal from Ottawa would be met with a

PQs referendum agenda consists of two phases. First,

such as foreign policy and

legislative fight and any of PQs losses

would be added to the list of reasons why Quebec should

separate .
The second phase is setting referendum in motion. PQ has already transferred the responsibility for calling a referendum to the

as soon as 850,000 people sign a petition 15 per cent of Quebecs population

the public could demand a referendum . Moreover, Marois plans to establish a new cabinet post that
general public. Currently,

would manage such requests, CBC reported.

Canadian reporter Michael Forian says

Quebec is growing estranged from the rest of

Canada, while half of Canadians no longer care whether Quebec chooses to separate or not.

Extinction causes civil wars, diversionary wars with China,

Russia, and Iran and splits NATO.
Matthews 14

Daniel S. Matthews, Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC). The Quebec Wars
http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail?id=181216

Thought of Canada being the region where the sparks for World War III will be struck may not seem likely, but
there is one area where a foreign foe could surprise the West: Quebec. If Quebec
were to secede from Canada, two unsettling possibilities could occur. The first is that Canada could go to
war with its wayward province. The second is that some power like China or Russia could
build an alliance with Quebec. While such possibilities are unlikely, there are means of defense.
The Canadian

Civil War

If Quebec were to secede from Canada, there are several points that could spark a civil
war between the two. The least likely would be national pride. There are several economic reasons that
could provide the tinder for war. Quebec controls the mouth of the St. Lawrence River, and Quebec could
use that control to wage economic war with Western Canada . In addition, Quebec possesses
significant reserves of natural resources that currently contribute to the North American economy on a
free basis. An independent Quebec would change that. Finally, Canada proper would become a split
country, with a third of Canadian provinces being geographically separated from the Capital. In light of the fact that no state wants
to be divided, and Canada already has several fluttering independence movements,

the urge to prevent further

dissolution will be strong.

While it is true that Canada does not have a large military, and Quebec has none, it is not impossible for war to break out. The

Quebec separatists have used violence before, most notably with the murder of Quebec Labour Minister Pierre
Laporte, and it would be easy for a semi-independent Quebec to buy arms on the international
market.
civil war with Quebec, there are several options open to both sides if the war drags on.
Canada could invoke Article 5 of the NATO treaty, which could split NATO as France has
traditionally expressed support for Francophone Quebec. It is unlikely Britain would be unconcerned with a core
If Canada did get involved in

Commonwealth state being embroiled in civil war; especially depending on how the vote for Scottish independence goes this year.

The United States would be committed, as they are deeply intertwined with
Canada at every level.
Russia, China, or Iran could use the distraction of a civil war in the very center of the
Anglosphere to press their boundaries with the Western Alliance . Furthermore, they could start
supporting the Quebec rebels, either directly or through third party means. If the war was presaged by an
internationally recognized referendum, then Russia or China could take the position that they are
upholding international norms, and paint the Western states in a negative light. Attempts at arming the
rebels or openly supporting them would directly threaten the fundamental security of the United States,
States like

it would provide a foothold on the continent from which hostile states could
threaten the United States.
as

1NC CP
The United States should
- require energy performance standards for all electricity
generation for non-marijuana goods and services in the United
States.
- fully fund and expedite renewable energy generation,
generator retrofits, and micro-grids for its installations based
on the Smart Power Infrastructure Demonstration for Energy
Reliability and Security program.
- prohibit the production, sale, and cultivation of marihuana in
the United States.
- halt all existing efforts at liberalizing marijuana policy.
- fund and push for Aid For Trade funding for global climate
adaptation projects. The United States should substantially
increase funding for international adaptation financing.
-lift all import tariffs on ethanol.
California should implement groundwater monitoring and
conservation programs.
Solves the drought
Brian Stranko 2/13/14

is the Water Program Director for The Nature Conservancy's California chapter.
Mr. Stranko has spent more than two decades working on complex issues at well-respected environmental
organizations. Prior to joining The Nature Conservancy in 2009, he served as CEO and executive director of
California Trout (CalTrout) and worked at National Geographic Society, Trout Unlimited and the Millennium Institute
in Arlington, Virginia. Mr. Stranko has an MBA from Georgetown University, a BA from Syracuse University and
environmental policy education from the University of Maryland. Maurice Hall, Water Program Science and
Engineering lead for the Conservancy, also contributed.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-natureconservancy/california-must-look-bene_b_4776943.html California Must Look Beneath the Surface to Solve Water
Woes

While Californians rejoiced to the sound of rain this weekend, the recent wet weather is not going to solve our

If we want to
improve our water woes we should stop looking at the sky and start
looking underground.
drought, and we shouldn't lose this opportunity to fix long-term issues with water in our state.

We have had droughts before, and, while we've made some incremental fixes to improve efficiency and marginally

we have not tackled the critical challenge that is

necessary to meet the ongoing water needs of our farms, our cities and our unique natural
manage our water better,
environment.
Even as we scramble with emergency measures, the real question we should be asking is: How do we prepare for
the next drought...and the one after that?

we need to change how we

use water we pump from the ground. Under the surface of our lands and
rivers is a vast network of groundwater basins -- like giant reservoirs
underground -- that sustain our rivers and streams. And in California,
where it seems every drop of our rivers is allocated, we don't have rules
about groundwater usage in much of the state. We need to change that.
There are many improvements we could make. But, first and foremost,

in many parts of the state we

have slowly added well after well to pump groundwater without assessing
the impact that this pumping has had on our already stretched water supply. When we over-pump water, it
In some parts of the state, groundwater is closely monitored, but

may help in the short term, but it means we have less and less water in our rivers and streams. That's less water for
everyone's use -- cities, farms and wildlife.

we can, in many places, turn this around. Learning from the

areas where it's already being done right, we can start measuring
groundwater use and monitor how it decreases water in our rivers.
Collectively as a state, we can start setting appropriate limits on
groundwater pumping so that the reservoirs have a chance to replenish in
The good news is that

the dry times.

it's necessary . We need the state to

provide incentives and tools for local authorities to manage water both
underground and in our rivers. The governor's recently released California Water Action Plan is a
This will not be easy, politically or operationally. But

good beginning. We also need to move forward with a water bond that provides funding for infrastructure to better
manage our water and clean up our polluted groundwater basins.

If we don't start managing our groundwater, we will be trying to fill a tub

with a hole in it. All of our other actions and investments won't fix the problem. We need to do more than
hope for more rain. We need to get serious about managing the water under our feet. If we don't, California will be
in worse shape for the next drought than we are today.

Solves food prices.

American Meat Institute, 08 (AMI, Other Groups, Urge President To
Immediately Suspend Import Tariff on Ethanol, 6/2,
http://www.meatami.com/ht/display/ArticleDetails/i/39583)

The American Meat Institute, joined by more than 30 other organizations

concerned about skyrocketing corn prices, sent a letter today urging President
Bush to exercise his emergency authority and immediately suspend the
duties and quotas on imported ethanol used as a motor fuel additive. The
letter notes that the suspension of the tariff will help producers, processors
and consumers who are being directly and immediately impacted by rising
feed and food prices due to the government mandate to convert nearly 30
percent of the domestic corn crop into fuel. The President can immediately
suspend the tariff using the authorities provided by the Constitution, the
National Emergencies Act, Tariff Act of 1930, Trade Expansion Act of 1962
and the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. The suspension
of the 54 cents per gallon duty on ethanol will benefit Americans by
introducing market competition for a product that is mandated and foster

downward pressure for domestic ethanol and its feedstock. Domestic dairy,
livestock and poultry farmers, food and beverage manufacturers, employees in
these industries and American food consumers will benefit from this action, the
letter notes. AMI President and CEO J. Patrick Boyle said that while there are many
factors driving up corn prices, the combined impact of an ethanol mandate,
subsidies, and a trade-distorting ethanol tariff has concentrated the economic
consequences on American livestock and poultry producers and consumers. The
immediate suspension of this duty could lower the economic pressure on livestock
and poultry producers as well as on fuel consumers, Boyle said. The letter was sent
the day after Indiana Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) told President Bush that to
demonstrate leadership, the United States should lift the tariff on Brazilian ethanol
that now shelters the U.S. industry and several days after the USDA crop report
suggested a drop in corn production this year due to a wet spring and the historic
flooding in the Midwest. The letter explains that suspending the duties and tariff
will reintroduce market competition into the equation and alleviate a
portion of the unnecessary feed and food price inflationary pressures that
are adversely impacting our economic well-being. The suspension will also
help American consumers struggling with their grocery bill.

CP solves the impact to the grid

Ackerman 12Robert K. Ackerman has been the editor in chief of SIGNAL
Magazine for more than a dozen years, seasoned technology journalist, served as a
war correspondent covering the Iraq War embedded with the U.S. Armys 101st
Airborne Division, Cybersecurity and a power supply come together on local
bases, http://www.afcea.org/content/?q=node/2877]

No man may be an island, but

each U.S. military base may become an energy island

if a joint project among the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security and the Defense
Department comes to fruition. The effort aims to develop a microgrid that would supply a
base with internal power independent of any external source that might fail as a
result of enemy action.

Network security would be a key element of this energy microgrid. Facing the
possibility of a cyberattack on the nations power grid, military bases must be able to sustain internal power with a
degree of immunity from the online tactics employed by cybermarauders.

This program also seeks to blend a host of conventional and alternative

energy sources into a single entity that would respond seamlessly to internal
base power demands. Complicating the endeavor to link these energy sources is the requirement to
provide secure network control that could interoperate with the public power grid but still be immune to
cyberthreats that menace the larger network.

Known as the Smart Power Infrastructure Demonstration for Energy Reliability and Security, or SPIDERS,
the project is a Defense Department joint capability technology demonstration (JCTD). It
already is underway at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Oahu, Hawaii, and later phases will evaluate
progressively sophisticated systems at Fort Collins, Colorado, and Camp Smith, Hawaii.

Melanie Johnson, an electrical engineer with the Army Corps of Engineers Construction Engineering Research
Laboratory, explains that SPIDERS is designed to develop a template for bringing microgrid technology to military

Its success would have implications for installations

outside the United States, particularly in operational settings , she points out.
installations in the United States.

Part of the SPIDERS technical management team, Johnson explains that

a key element in SPIDERS is to

network security for the communications and control systems within that microgrid environment.
That security would be vital if a base loses power because of a cyberattack
provide

on the local power grid.

What sets SPIDERS apart from other microgrid efforts is its emphasis on cybersecurity
and network communications. Security is a primary SPIDERS objective, Johnson says, adding that this
includes information assurance certification and implementing emerging standards
from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the North
American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and Department of Energy
organizations.

Adding cybersecurity to the microgrid complicates the picture and requires a little
critical thinking, Johnson observes. However, SPIDERS is not employing the
traditional approach of first developing a control system and then overlaying
security. Instead, security will be integrated into the system as it is developed .
The result will be a comprehensive security solution that is tailored to the
system, she offers.
The microgrid control system continually will monitor power quality and conditions in the
regional power grid. If it detects instability or significant quality issues, it can alert monitors
who would decide to disconnect the base from the external grid. The microgrid
would continue to provide power to critical missions.

CP 2
The United States should: propose amendments to the
international drug control treaties to authorize signatories to
legalize marijuana, to be made binding upon the U.S. in event
of acceptance and freeze any additional moves towards
marihuana legalization, including halting legalization in the
District of Colombia, pending the outcome of treaty reform.
Upon acceptance of the treaty, the United States should
legalize marijuana in the United States.

Standards

AT: Salmon
Invasive species are the biggest threat to salmon populations.
The Oregonian, 3/5/2009. Invasive species are greatest threat to Northwest salmon,
report says,
http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2009/03/invasive_species_are_greatest.html.

A new report says invasive species might be the greatest threat to

salmon like this Chinook passing through Bonneville Dam in 2005.
Most discussions about the causes of declining salmon runs focus on the
four H's: habitat, hatcheries, harvest and hydropower. But the most
important factor may be an I, as in invasive species .
That's the conclusion of a new report from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's Northwest Fisheries Science Center in
Seattle.
You can see a PDF of the report here.

The study, which was published in the journal Bioscience , is sure to be

controversial because much of the Northwest's multi-billion dollar salmon recovery work is centered on
improving habitat, mitigating the damage of power-producing dams and curtailing commercial or
recreational fishing.

argues the greatest threat to fish are non-native species like

crappie or bass that can eat up juvenile salmon as the make their way
downstream from their birthplace to the ocean .
This report

"On a per-run basis, the mortality attributed to (invasive species) predation may be similar to that
associated with juvenile passage through each of the eight dams on the Columbia and Snake rivers,
estimated at approximately 5% to 15% per dam," the study says.

"These non-natives are here -- we're not going to get rid of them ," said the
report's lead author, Beth Sanderson. "But they are managing the native predators, and in my opinion,
that means we could manage non-native predators."
Another interesting tidbit from the study: The spawning population of non-native American shad in the
Columbia River is about 5,000,000, five times more than the annual salmon run on the river, but "no
studies have quantified the impacts of shad on salmon ecosystems."
Sanderson said a greater amount of the money dedicated to the 13 salmon stocks in the Northwest
listed as threatened or endangered should go to battling invasive species.
And at least one longtime salmon advocate agrees.

"There's no question that invasives are a major threat, right along with
hydropower and a loss of habitat," said Jim Martin, former chief of fisheries for the Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Martin cautions that working on invasives shouldn't come at the expense of addressing the effects of
dams and habitat loss, as well as the growing threat of climate change .

1NCResilient
Resiliency empirically checks environmental damage. Our
evidence cites the largest data sets.
Kareiva et al. 11Peter Kareiva is a Breakthrough Institute Senior Fellow and
chief scientist and vice president of The Nature Conservancy as well as a member of
the National Academy of Sciences. Robert Lalasz is director of science
communications for The Nature Conservancy. He is founding editor of the
Conservancy's blog, Cool Green Science. Michelle Marvier is professor and
department chair of Environmental Studies and Sciences at Santa Clara University.
[Fall, 2011, Conservation in the Anthropocene, Breakthrough Journal, No. 2,
http://breakthroughjournal.org/content/authors/peter-kareiva-robert-lalasz-an1/conservation-in-the-anthropoce.shtml]

As conservation became a global enterprise in the 1970s and 1980s, the movement's
justification for saving nature shifted from spiritual and aesthetic values to focus on biodiversity. Nature was
described as primeval, fragile, and at risk of collapse from too much
human use and abuse. And indeed, there are consequences when humans
convert landscapes for mining, logging, intensive agriculture, and urban
development and when key species or ecosystems are lost .
But ecologists and conservationists have grossly overstated the fragility
of nature , frequently arguing that once an ecosystem is altered, it is gone
forever. Some ecologists suggest that if a single species is lost, a whole
ecosystem will be in danger of collapse, and that if too much biodiversity
is lost, spaceship Earth will start to come apart. Everything, from the
expansion of agriculture to rainforest destruction to changing waterways,
has been painted as a threat to the delicate inner-workings of our
planetary ecosystem.
The fragility trope dates back, at least, to Rachel Carson, who wrote plaintively in
Silent Spring of the delicate web of life and warned that perturbing the intricate balance
of nature could have disastrous consequences.22 Al Gore made a similar argument in his
1992 book, Earth in the Balance.23 And the 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
warned darkly that, while the expansion of agriculture and other forms of
development have been overwhelmingly positive for the world's poor,
ecosystem degradation was simultaneously putting systems in jeopardy of
collapse.24
the data simply do not support the idea of a fragile
nature at risk of collapse. Ecologists now know that the disappearance of
one species does not necessarily lead to the extinction of any others,
much less all others in the same ecosystem. In many circumstances, the demise of
formerly abundant species can be inconsequential to ecosystem function.
The American chestnut, once a dominant tree in eastern North America,
The trouble for conservation is that

has been extinguished by a foreign disease, yet the forest ecosystem is

surprisingly unaffected. The passenger pigeon , once so abundant that its flocks darkened
the sky, went extinct, along with countless other species from the Steller's
sea cow to the dodo, with no catastrophic or even measurable effects.
These stories of resilience are not isolated examples -- a thorough review
of the scientific literature identified 240 studies of ecosystems following
major disturbances such as deforestation, mining, oil spills, and other
types of pollution. The abundance of plant and animal species as well as
other measures of ecosystem function recovered, at least partially, in 173 ( 72
percent ) of these studies.25

Prices Adv.

1NCGrid Resilient
Natural Gas Prices stable driven by increased production
long term trends
BUSINESS WIRE 4 1 15 [U.S. Natural Gas Supply is Expected to Reach
110 Billion Cubic Feet Per Day by 2035, According to Navigants Global Energy
Practice, http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150401005260/en/U.S.Natural-Gas-Supply-Expected-Reach-110#.VSF6Po54pAY]

A new report from Navigants global Energy Practice, the North American Natural Gas Market
Outlook, Year-End 2014, examines the state of the natural gas industry and provides
forecasts for supply and demand through 2035.
Driven by ongoing gas shale growth in the Northeast, production of natural gas in the United
States continued its strong growth trajectory in 2014, increasing by 6.1 billion
cubic feet per day (Bcfd), or 9.2 percent, over the course of the year. More growth in gas
production is expected in the future , particularly from the Marcellus shale
formation, with the only possible constraint the rate of infrastructure development in the region. Click to tweet:
According to the North American Natural Gas Market Outlook, Year-End 2014, published by Navigants Energy
Practice, U.S. natural gas supply is expected to increase from 72 Bcfd in 2015 to nearly 110 Bcfd by 2035.
Supply

side growth continues to drive most other aspects of the natural gas
industry in North America, says Gordon Pickering, Director with Navigants Energy Practice. As we
explain in the Natural Gas Market Outlook, this strong supply basis is giving rise to a new
chapter of the gas industry, with the culmination of a half decade of new LNG project development
and the beginning of a new, global market for natural gas.

The opening of this new market is signaled by the opening of new export capacity
on the U.S. Gulf Coast, according to the Natural Gas Market Outlook. The opening of Sabine Pass will signify the
point at which North America becomes connected to the global gas market for the first time in historywith truly
global consequences for gas markets in North America and around the world. Those consequences will become fully
apparent as more LNG export projects come online, the report concludes.

Other findings from the Natural Gas Market Outlook, Year-End 2014, include:
prices at Henry Hub are expected to stabilize over the near to midterm, and grow steadily over the long-termalbeit reaching only moderate levels
-Annual average natural gas

compared to historical gas price levels seen earlier this century.

-Additional

infrastructure in the Marcellus and Utica shale gas regions, coming online
around 2017, is expected to relieve bottlenecks and allow stranded gas to move to
market, enabling prices to recover to levels similar to the broader North American gas market.
-U.S. natural gas demand is expected to grow steadily through 2035, particularly for electricity generation, reaching
around 90 Bcfd annually by 2035.

Grid is resilient
Jim AVILA, Senior National Correspondent at ABC News, 12 [A U.S. Blackout as
Large as Indias? Very Unlikely, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/07/au-s-blackout-as-large-as-indias-very-unlikely/]

As India recovers from a blackout that left the worlds second-largest country and more than
600 million residents in the dark, a ripple of uncertainty moved through the Federal
Regulatory Commissions command center today in the U.S. The Indian crisis had some people asking
about the vulnerability of Americas grid.
What

people really want to know today is, can something like India
happen here? So if there is an outage or some problem in the Northeast, can it actually spread all the way to
California, John Wellinghoff, the commissions chairman, told ABC News. Its very, very unlikely that
ultimately would happen.
Wellinghoff said that first, the grid was divided in the middle of the nation.
Engineers said that it also was monitored more closely than ever. The grid
is checked for line surges 30 times a second .
Since the Northeast blackout in 2003 the largest in the U.S., which affected 55 million

16,000 miles of

new transmission lines have been added to the grid .

even though some lines in the Northeast are more than 70 years old, Wellinghoff said
that the chances of a blackout like Indias were very low.
And

1NC Energy Impact Defense

Meltdowns dont cause extinction (empirics)
WNA 12 (World nuclear association members are responsible for 95% of the
world's nuclear power outside of the U.S., as well as the vast majority of world
uranium, conversion and enrichment production, Safety of Nuclear Power
Reactors, March 2012, WNA, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html)
In the 1950s attention turned to harnessing the power of the atom in a controlled way, as
demonstrated at Chicago in 1942 and subsequently for military research, and applying the steady heat
yield to generate electricity. This naturally gave rise to concerns about accidents and their possible
effects. However, with nuclear power safety depends on much the same factors as in any comparable
industry: intelligent planning, proper design with conservative margins and back-up systems, highquality components and a well-developed safety culture in operations. A particular nuclear scenario
was loss of cooling which resulted in melting of the nuclear reactor core, and this motivated studies on
both the physical and chemical possibilities as well as the biological effects of any dispersed

nuclear power technology in the

effort to ensuring that a meltdown of the reactor
would not take place, since it was assumed that a meltdown of the core would create a

radioactivity. Those responsible for

West devoted extraordinary

core
major public hazard, and if uncontained, a tragic accident with likely multiple fatalities. In avoiding
such accidents the industry has been very successful. In over 14,500 cumulative reactor-years of
commercial operation in 32 countries, there have been only three major accidents to nuclear power
plants - Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima - the second being of little relevance to reactor
design outside the old Soviet bloc. It was not until the late 1970s that detailed analyses and largescale testing, followed by the 1979 meltdown of the Three Mile Island reactor, began to make clear
that

even the worst possible accident in a conventional western nuclear power plant or its
would not be likely to cause dramatic public harm. The industry still works hard to

fuel
minimize the probability of a meltdown accident, but it is now clear that no-one need fear a potential

Fukushima has made

that clear, with a triple meltdown causing no fatalities or serious radiation
doses to anyone, while over two hundred people continued working on the site to mitigate the
public health catastrophe simply because a fuel meltdown happens.

accident's effects. The decades-long test and analysis program showed that less radioactivity escapes
from molten fuel than initially assumed, and that most of this radioactive material is not readily
mobilized beyond the immediate internal structure. Thus, even if the containment structure that
surrounds all modern nuclear plants were ruptured, as it has been with at least one of the Fukushima
reactors, it is still very effective in preventing escape of most radioactivity. It is

the laws of

physics

and the properties of materials that mitigate disaster, more than the required
actions by safety equipment or personnel. In fact, licensing approval for new plants now requires

the effects of any core-melt accident must be confined to the plant

itself, without the need to evacuate nearby residents. The three significant accidents in the 50-year
that

history of civil nuclear power generation are: Three Mile Island (USA 1979) where the reactor was
severely damaged but radiation was contained and there were no adverse health or environmental

Chernobyl (Ukraine 1986) where the destruction of the reactor by steam explosion
and fire killed 31 people and had significant health and environmental consequences. The death
toll has since increased to about 5 Fukushima (Japan 2011) where three old
reactors (together with a fourth) were written off and the effects of loss of cooling due to a huge
consequences

tsunami were inadequately contained. A table showing all reactor accidents, and a table listing some
energy-related accidents with multiple fatalities are appended. These three significant

occurred during more than 14,000 reactor-years of civil

operation. Of all the accidents and incidents, only the Chernobyl and Fukushima accidents resulted
accidents

in radiation doses to the public greater than those resulting from the exposure to natural sources. The
Fukushima accident resulted in some radiation exposure of workers at the plant, but not such as to
threaten their health, unlike Chernobyl. Other incidents (and one 'accident') have been completely
confined to the plant. Apart from Chernobyl, no nuclear workers or members of the public have ever
died as a result of exposure to radiation due to a commercial nuclear reactor incident. Most of the

serious radiological injuries and deaths that occur each year (2-4 deaths and many more exposures
above regulatory limits) are the result of large uncontrolled radiation sources, such as abandoned
medical or industrial equipment. (There have also been a number of accidents in experimental
reactors and in one military plutonium-producing pile - at Windscale, UK, in 1957, but none of these
resulted in loss of life outside the actual plant, or long-term environmental contamination.) See also
Table 2 in Appendix.

2NC

AT: Drought
Solves drought and salmon
Stranko 14 , Water Program Director Water Program Director for The Nature Conservancy's California
chapter. Mr. Stranko has spent more than two decades working on complex issues at well-respected environmental
organizations. Prior to joining The Nature Conservancy in 2009, he served as CEO and executive director of
California Trout (CalTrout) and worked at National Geographic Society, Follow me on Twitter to get my perspective
on California water solutions. @BrianStranko http://www.conserveca.org/our-stories/all/2-blog/131-drought-how-tofix-californias-water-woes#.VSGAnPnF-So
While many of us celebrated the first rainstorm of 2014, those few inches of rain are not going to solve

our

drought . We use too much water during wet years and dont store enough for dry years, so there is not
enough water to go around when we really need it. The reality is that this drought is no surprise. We need to focus

We need
to protect and restore our Sierra Nevada forests and meadows, where 60
percent of our water typically comes from. We need to establish a drought-preparedness
on some long-term solutions that will help us be prepared for the next drought, and the one after that.

plan. Lastly, we need to stop looking at the sky and start looking underground.
I wrote an op-ed in the Huffington Post detailing exactly why

we need to look under our feet for

long-term solutions . Under the surface of our lands and rivers is a vast
network of groundwater basins like giant reservoirs underground that
sustain our rivers and streams. And in California, where it seems every drop
of our rivers is allocated, we dont have rules about groundwater usage in
much of the state. We have been adding more and deeper wells to pump groundwater, leaving less and
less water in our rivers and streams.

so much water has been pumped out of the Cosumnes

River watershed that the river runs dry each year and there are parcels of
land that have sunk 20 to 30 feet below sea level. Attempting to repair this problem is
expensive, difficult and unlikely when we continue to use more water than we have available. OverIn the Sacramento Valley,

pumping our groundwater has staggering impacts for farmers, cities and
wildlife, including salmon.

Adaptation
That is necessary and sufficient to enact adaptation policies
ANCHARAZ, GHISU & TRAUBEL 13 a. Senior Development Economist,
International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) b. Programme
Officer for the Competitiveness and Development Program, International Centre for
Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD) c. Former Intern for the
Competitiveness and Development Program at the ICTSD [Vinaye Ancharaz, Paolo
Ghisu, Sara Traubel, Financing LDC climate change adaptation through Aid for Trade,
BIORES, VOLUME 7 - NUMBER 4, 11 November 2013]

the aid for trade initiative has great potential to help address climate
change, the necessary conditions are not often present in LDCs. It is necessary to ensure the
institutional mechanisms are in place to allow for the effective delivery of
aid and, as this article points out, help the most vulnerable countries adapt to
climate change.
While

There is now a growing body of evidence suggesting that sub-Saharan Africa

is among the regions of the world most exposed to the damaging effects
of climate change. Effects such as decreases in precipitation levels, increased frequency of extreme
weather events, and shifting of rainy seasons would have a significant impact on the agricultural sector, livestock
and fisheries, water resources, coastal zones, tourism, and infrastructure. Given the economic importance of
agriculture in many African Least Developed Countries (LDCs) - for example, Burkina Faso, where agriculture and
forestry related activities account for 86 percent of the country's employment, contribute 40 percent to GDP, and
generate a significant share of foreign exchange, notably from cotton exports (over 50 percent) - these climate
change-induced events could have far-reaching effects on trade, food security, and indeed on livelihoods and longterm development.

Adapting to climate change is a necessity for African countries, especially the most
vulnerable economies, the LDCs. All African LDCs have drawn up a National
Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA); a key instrument of climate change mainstreaming, also meant
to serve as a fund-raising proposal for adaptation projects. The adaptation funds
maintained by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) are however both small relative to LDCs' adaptation needs and
require co-financing, which has proved difficult for poor countries to provide on their own. Borrowing from other
funds is costly and may not be a desirable option for debt-laden LDCs. Moreover, it is morally objectionable to ask
poor countries to borrow to deal with a problem that is not of their making.

The Aid for Trade (AfT) initiative could complement adaptation financing where
such projects have trade impacts. This article makes the case for an "Aid for Trade-plus"
initiative which consists of an augmented AfT initiative that finances
trade-related adaptation projects. As the international community gathers
in Warsaw to advance the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) discussions, the
synergies proposed in this paper merit consideration as a way to address
significant climate finance constraints, as well as making trade and
climate agendas more coherent and effective.

Treaty CP

2NC UQ Wall Stability Now

Reject their media spin experts conclude Afghanistan will
remain stable.
Karp and OHanlon 1/7, Candace: PhD, Senior Program Officer at US Institute for Peace,
Michael: PhD, director of research for the Foreign Policy program at the Brookings Institution, Adjunct
Professor at Johns Hopkins, 2015, Protecting the Gains in Afghanistan,
http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2015/01/07-protecting-afghanistan-gains-ohanlon,
Accessed 1/20/15

By most U.S. media accounts , Afghanistan is at best a largely forgotten cause; at worst,
lost. Even apart from the recent attacks on Kabul and Taliban gains, costs have been higher and
accomplishments less solid than they should have been.

But measured against core standards, the mission is far from a failure.
Two imperative goals have been preventing future extremist attacks against the
West from Afghan soil and giving Afghans a solid stake in their future so they will
not turn again to the Taliban or be vulnerable to a takeover. By both metrics,
success is much closer than failurethat is, if we stay the course and avoid a complete departure
in two years, as President Barack Obama and the international community intend.

Here is why those plans for premature departure should be revised.

Among the successes achieved since 2001:
*Life expectancy had increased to 61 years in 2012 from 51 years in 2001.
*Infant mortality had declined, in 2012, to 72 deaths before age 1 per 1,000 live
births, from 93 deaths in 2001.
*As of 2014, 50% of Afghans had access to basic health care.
*Fifty-six percent of the rural population had access to clean water in 2012,
up from 44% in 2008.
*Primary school enrollment (including overage, underage, and repeating
students) is up severalfold from 21% in 2001.
But all of these gains are not the main point. Less easily quantifiable, yet even more
important, is the shift in Afghans view of government. Many are no longer
willing to perceive central government as little more than an abstract irritation.
There is an expectation, even in outlying areas, that government must respond to
the interests of all Afghans and deliver a modicum of services to justify its presence and the
demands made of citizens. For the most part, the Taliban are widely disdained.
Islamic State extremists have been on the march in Iraq and Syria, and
bombing plots from Yemen in recent years have produced major near-misses in the
U.S. homeland, but Afghanistan has not produced another major attack. To
the contrary, it has provided bases that have helped coalition forces
significantly diminish the al-Qaeda threat in Pakistan.

The greatest threat to Afghan gains is political uncertainty. Last years presidential election process was flawed
involving an initial vote in April, a runoff in June, and lengthy negotiations before, finally, a new president in

Afghans, aided by Secretary of State John Kerry and United Nations Special Representative Jn
Kubi, found their way to a power-sharing compromise. President Ashraf Ghani and his
rival Abdullah Abdullah struggle to form a cabinet, but fears of all-out ethnic competition or civil war
have ebbed.
September. Yet

While the Taliban have taken back some rural areas, and have killed about 10,000
Afghan soldiers and police over the past two years, they are not winning. Afghan cities and
major roads are in government hands, and last years voter turnout shows that
Afghans overwhelmingly support their new national project. Recruits
continue to join the army and police. The Afghan people remain 90% opposed
to the Taliban, the Brookings Institutions Afghanistan index has found.

Drug revenues causing Afghan stability now the plan causes

instability.
--employment stops them joining the insurgency.
--alternative is collapse of the state because 50% of the illicit GDP comes from
opium
--small farmers dont matter whats needed is strong government support, political
instability comes from

Speri 5/21/14 (Alice,Alice Speri is an Italian-born journalist for VICE based in New York city. She
has lived in many countries including Italy, India, Benin, Egypt, Palestine, Haiti and the United
Kingdom. She is currently working on her PhD in Comparative Literature,
https://news.vice.com/article/afghanistans-opium-economy-is-doing-better-than-ever )
Afghanistans opium economy is bad news to the countrys growing population of drug addicts up
to 1.5 million, according to the UN, and as all illicit trades, it is vulnerable to violence and abuse.

for the country's economy and political stability, as

things in Afghanistan might actually be worse without it.
But it may not be such bad news

opium employs a lot of people. And at least until the end of harvesting season, it
keeps them too busy to join the insurgency.
For one,

'The alternative right now would be huge political instability and it would
also be huge unemployment.'
Theres

no legal economy in Afghanistan that can match the profits and

the amount of people opium can employ, Vanda Felbab-Brown, a senior fellow at
the Brookings Institute and expert on counter-narcotic efforts in Afghanistan, told VICE News.
Opium is both profitable and labor-intensive, an important combination in
a country with some 400,000 people entering the workforce every year. To
put things in perspective, if the 806 square miles Afghans cultivated with opium
last year were to grow wheat instead, they would employ about 20 percent
of the people currently working on opium fields, Felbab-Brown said.
What we really need to ask ourselves is, is it bad to have this illicit economy? It probably is bad, but
is it much worse than the alternative? The alternative right now would be

huge political instability and it would also be huge unemployment , she said.

its undesirable that there is a major illicit economy that constitutes

so much of the countrys GDP, but theres just no way to walk away from
that.
So yes,

Is an Illicit Economy Better than no Economy?

if the opium economy is illicit and fraught with potential for violence
and devastating public health implications, it is an economy nonetheless,
and a thriving one at that.
But

Afghanistan produced 75 percent of the worlds heroin supply in 2013, and its
on its way to produce as much as 90 percent this year. The country is also one of the
world's top exporters of cannabis mostly hashish.
poppy cultivation, which provides employment for more
than 200,000 families in Afghanistan and accounts for 73 million hours of labor
annually," Ashita Mittal, acting country director for the UN Office on Drugs and Crime in Kabul told
You have a sector, the

VICE News. "Those are huge numbers we are talking about.

growing opium makes more money than anything else for Afghan
farmers so its going to be very hard to stomp out .'
'Right now,

as 50 percent of
Afghanistans GDP, she noted, and was down to about 15 percent of it last year. But
In the early 2000s, the $18 billion-worth trade accounted for as much

Afghanistan which doomsayers have dubbed a "narcostate" years ago lacks the determination to
do away from such profits, despite massive financial incentives to do so, including some $7.5 billion
from the US alone.
"The

US has put three times more money on counter-narcotics in

Afghanistan than it did in Colombia, but what distinguishes Colombia from Afghanistan is the
political will that was demonstrated by the ruling parties there," Mittal said. "Unless there's a firm
commitment from the top, it's not going to change. Perhaps the new government will be an
opportunity to place this on the agenda."
The profits of the opium trade, she added, are not exactly enriching the country's most destitute. While the economic impact trickles down somewhat, the
largely poor farmers harvesting the white and pink poppy blooms are not the ones reaping the profits.

Local warlords and the Taliban often have their hands in the trade , but it
is wealthy elites with deep ties to the countrys government that have no
interest in seeing the opium cultivation stop.

New Advantage

AT: Foods
That causes global food crises
Grieff 14 (James Grieff, Bloomberg, California drought points to next food-price
shock, http://journalstar.com/news/opinion/editorial/columnists/california-droughtpoints-to-next-food-price-shock/article_58f2e16c-99a3-50ee-ae461f4e2d928d73.html, April 17, 2014)
Drought in the United States, past and present, might make 2014 one of the more volatile years for food prices and
supplies globally. U.S. consumers may get a preview of what's coming at the salad bar. The main culprit is the
parched land of California's Central Valley, which grows a large share of U.S. vegetables, fruits and nuts. Conditions
are so dry that some farmers aren't even bothering to plant. That might have even bigger implications for food
prices than the 2012 drought that baked the Corn Belt, U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said this week.
California has suffered a double hit: a dearth of rain in the lowlands and a lack of snow in the mountains in the north
and east. Snowmelt provides water for many of the state's farmers during the growing season and for the huge

Snow this year was only about 30 percent of the

historical average. Even though the snow now is melting, some streams
and rivers have so little water that wildlife crews have had to truck
stranded salmon fingerlings downstream so they can make it out to sea.
population centers in the south.

The harshest winter weather in more than three decades in the Midwest and Northeast also will send shock waves

Kansas's winter wheat crop took a

beating as did vineyards for producing wine grapes in New York's Finger
Lakes region. The U.S. Department of Agriculture had projected a 2.5
percent to 3.5 percent rise in the price of fresh fruits and vegetables this
year. That estimate, however, was made before the full extent of the damage from the winter weather and
California's drought could be assessed. The rise in commodities indexes since the start
through the food chain, according to the Wall Street Journal.

of the year has been about 20 percent, reflecting higher prices for hogs,
steers, lard and wheat . Because of the 2012 drought, farmers slaughtered huge numbers of cattle and
hogs as feed costs soared. All that extra meat on the market helped keep a lid on prices in 2013. But now, the U.S.
cattle herd is at a 63-year low (hogs are at a seven-year low).

The smaller supply of animals

ready for slaughter plus the expectation of higher feed costs have sent
prices soaring . Of course, no one consumes steers per se, so diners won't pay one-fifth more for steak just
because of the increase in commodity prices.

The cost of growing food accounts for only

about 15 cents of every $1 we spend on it. The rest goes to processing,

packaging, marketing and transportation. And even if prices rise more
than the USDA forecasts the latest economic reports suggest they
might most U.S. consumers are in a position to cope by spending less
on other goods or switching to other types of food . In other words, going to fewer
movies or purchasing less beef and more chicken, the price of which has risen much less than beef this year. What
bears watching isn't so much what increased prices mean in the United States which has the world's cheapest
food or other developed nations, but the implications for poorer countries. In much of the world, consumers
devote a far larger share of personal income to food. Just eyeball a map of the world and the hot spots tend to be
where rising food costs intersect with corruption and ineffectual government. Many analysts cite the rise in prices
for staples such as bread as the trigger for the Arab Spring uprisings. Food shortages also figure in the unrest in
Venezuela. The U.S. is the world's biggest food exporter by a wide margin. Whatever happens to domestic prices
won't be confined to U.S. shores.

Prices

AT: Aging Reactors

228 tests disprove their impact insert a charts
Trinity Atomic Web Site 01 (Feb 1, 2001Summary of U.S. Nuclear Test Series
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/atomic/atmosphr/ustable.html JT)
From 1945 to 1963 the U.S.A. conducted an extensive campaign of nuclear
tests, generally grouped into the 20 test "series" summarized in the table below.
Test Series

Year

Project Trinity

Location

Number of Tests

1945 U.S.A. 1

Number of Personnel*

164

Operation Crossroads

1946 Pacific2

40,112

Operation Sandstone

1948 Pacific3

11,782

Operation Ranger 1951 U.S.A. 5

Operation Greenhouse

266

1951 Pacific4

7,590

Operation Buster-Jangle 1951 U.S.A. 7

7,812

Operation Tumbler-Snapper
Operation Ivy

1952 Pacific2

Operation Upshot-Knothole
Operation Castle

1952 U.S.A. 8
11,650

1953 U.S.A. 11

1954 Pacific6

Operation Teapot 1955 U.S.A. 14

8,710

18,000

12,700
8,700

Operation Wigwam

1955 Pacific1

6,800

Operation Redwing

1956 Pacific17

11,350

Operation Plumbbob

1957 U.S.A. 24

13,300

Operation Hardtack I

1958 Pacific34

16,000

Operation Argus

1958 Atlantic

4,500

Operation Hardtack II

1958 U.S.A. 19

1,650

Operation Dominic I

1962 Pacific36

22,600

Operation Dominic II

1962 U.S.A. 4

2,900

Plowshare Program

1961-1962

U.S.A. 27

**

* These approximate numbers represent only Department of Defense personnel.

** Numbers for Plowshare not available.

-- No risk of reactor meltdown

UIC 7 (Uranium Information Center, Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors, Nuclear
Issues Briefing Paper, 14,
http://www.uic.com.au/nip14.htm)

Those responsible for nuclear power technology in the west devoted extraordinary
effort to ensuring that a meltdown of the reactor core would not take place, since it
was assumed that a meltdown of the core would create a major public hazard, and if
uncontained, a tragic accident with likely fatalities. In avoiding such accidents
the industry has been outstandingly successful . In 12,000 cumulative reactoryears of commercial operation in 32 countries, there have been only two major
accidents to nuclear power plants - Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, the latter being
of little relevance outside the old Soviet bloc. It was not until the late 1970s that
detailed analyses and large-scale testing, followed by the 1979 meltdown of the
Three Mile Island reactor, began to make clear that even the worst possible
accident in a conventional western nuclear power plant or its fuel could not cause
dramatic public harm. The industry still works hard to minimize the probability of a
meltdown accident, but it is now clear that no-one need fear a potential public
health catastrophe. The decades-long test and analysis program showed that less
radioactivity escapes from molten fuel than initially assumed, and that this
radioactive material is not readily mobilized beyond the immediate internal
structure. Thus, even if the containment structure that surrounds all modern nuclear
plants were ruptured, it would still be highly effective in preventing escape of
radioactivity. It is the laws of physics and the properties of materials that preclude
disaster, not the required actions by safety equipment or personnel. In fact,
licensing approval now requires that the effects of any core-melt accident must be
confined to the plant itself, without the need to evacuate nearby residents. The two significant accidents
in the 50-year history of civil nuclear power generation are: Three Mile Island (USA 1979) where the reactor was
severely damaged but radiation was contained and there were no adverse health or environmental consequences
Chernobyl (Ukraine 1986) where the destruction of the reactor by steam explosion and fire killed 31 people and
had significant health and environmental consequences. The death toll has since increased to about 56. A table
showing all reactor accidents, and a table listing some energy-related accidents with multiple fatalities are
appended. These two significant accidents occurred during more than 12,000 reactor-years of civil operation. Of all
the accidents and incidents, only the Chernobyl accident resulted in radiation doses to the public greater than those
resulting from the exposure to natural sources. Other incidents (and one 'accident') have been completely confined
to the plant. Apart from Chernobyl, no nuclear workers or members of the public have ever died as a result of
exposure to radiation due to a commercial nuclear reactor incident. Most of the serious radiological injuries and
deaths that occur each year (2-4 deaths and many more exposures above regulatory limits) are the result of large
uncontrolled radiation sources, such as abandoned medical or industrial equipment. (There have also been a
number of accidents in experimental reactors and in one military plutonium-producing pile - at Windscale, UK, in
1957, but none of these resulted in loss of life outside the actual plant, or long-term environmental contamination.)

a commercial-type power reactor simply cannot under any

circumstances explode like a nuclear bomb. The International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) was set up by the United Nations in 1957. One of its functions was to
act as an auditor of world nuclear safety. It prescribes safety procedures and the
reporting of even minor incidents. Its role has been strengthened in the last decade.
Every country which operates nuclear power plants has a nuclear safety
inspectorate and all of these work closely with the IAEA.
It should be emphasised that

-- Even the worst case scenario will be contained and cause no

harm
McGregor 1 (Douglas S., Director of the Semiconductor Materials and
Radiological Technologies Laboratory University of Michigan, Ph.D Nuclear
Engineering, Rethinking Nuclear Power, New American, 17(9), 4-23,
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/04-23-2001/vo17no09_nuclear.htm)
The most serious accident possible is the release of radioactive material into the
environment. It is not a nuclear explosion, for the simple reason that the uranium
fuel used in a nuclear power plant does not contain a high enough concentration of
U-235 to make a nuclear explosion even theoretically possible. To make such an explosion
possible, the uranium fuel inside a reactor would have to be enriched to about 90 percent U-235, but it is only
enriched to about 3.5 percent.

The worst nuclear power plant disaster in history occurred

when the Chernobyl reactor in the Ukraine experienced a heat (and gas) not nuclear
explosion. If such an explosion were to have occurred in a Western nuclear power
plant, the explosion would have been contained because all Western plants are
required to have a containment building a solid structure of steel-reinforced concrete that
completely encapsulates the nuclear reactor vessel. The Chernobyl plant did not have this fundamental
safety structure, and so the explosion blew the top of the reactor building off, spewing radiation and reactor core

the design of the Chernobyl plant was inferior in other ways as

well. Unlike the Chernobyl reactor, Western power plant nuclear reactors are designed,
under operating conditions, to have negative power coefficients of reactivity that
make such runaway accidents impossible. The bottom line is that the flawed Chernobyl
pieces into the air. But

nuclear power plant would never have been licensed to operate in the U.S. or any other Western country, and the
accident that occurred there simply would not occur in a Western nuclear power plant. The circumstances
surrounding the Chernobyl accident were in many ways the worst possible, with an exposed reactor core and an
open building. Thirty-one plant workers and firemen died directly from radiation exposure at Chernobyl. Also, it is
projected that over 3,400 local residents will eventually acquire and die of cancer due to their exposure to the
radioactive fallout. By comparison, within a matter of hours more than 2,300 were killed and as many as 200,000
others injured in a non-nuclear accident when a toxic gas cloud escaped from the Union Carbide pesticide plant in
Bhopal, India. According to conventional wisdom,

the worst nuclear power accident in this

country occurred at the Three Mile Island plant in Pennsylvania. Yet, in that incident,
nobody was killed and nobody was injured . One exception, perhaps, could be Dr. Edward Teller, the
distinguished pro-nuclear physicist who played a key role in the development of nuclear advancements during and
after World War II. In a two-page ad appearing in the Wall Street Journal for July 31, 1979, Dr. Teller explained that,
at 71 years of age and working 20 hours per day, the strain of refuting some of the anti-nuclear "propaganda that
Ralph Nader, Jane Fonda and their ilk" were "spewing to the news media" in the wake of Three Mile Island led to a
heart attack. He continued: "You might say that I was the only one whose health was affected by that reactor near
Harrisburg. No, that would be wrong. It was not the reactor. It was Jane Fonda. Reactors are not dangerous." The
event at Three Mile Island occurred from faulty instrumentation that gave erroneous readings for the reactor vessel
environment. Due to a series of equipment failures and human errors, plus inadequate instrumentation, the reactor

Yet radioactive water released from the core

configuration was safely confined within the containment building structure, and
very little radiation was released into the environment. The Three Mile Island
incident actually underscores the relative safety of nuclear power plants since the
safety devices worked as designed and prevented any injury from occurring to
core was compromised and underwent a partial melt.

humans, animals, or the environment. Moreover, the accident directly resulted in improved procedures,
instrumentation, and safety systems, and now our nuclear reactor power plants are substantially safer. The Three
Mile Island Unit 2 core has been cleaned up and the radioactive deposit properly stored; Three Mile Island Unit 1 is
still operating with an impeccable record.

AT: Electricity Prices

EIA evidence says the factors depend on SUPPLY SIDE aff
cant solve
EIA 12, Energy Information Administration (April 10, What are the major factors
affecting natural gas prices? http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=43&t=8)

Natural gas prices are mainly a function of market

supply and demand. Because there are limited short
term alternatives to natural gas as a heating fuel and as
a fuel for electricity generators during peak demand
periods, changes in supply or demand over a short
period may result in large price changes . Prices
themselves often act to balance supply and demand. Factors
on the supply side that affect prices include natural gas
production, net imports, and underground storage levels.
Increases in supply tend to pull prices down, while decreases
in supply tend to push prices up. Increases in prices tend to
encourage production and imports and sales from storage
inventories, and declining prices tend to have the opposite
effects.
Natural Gas Prices stable driven by increased production
long term trends
BUSINESS WIRE 4 1 15 [U.S. Natural Gas Supply is Expected to Reach
110 Billion Cubic Feet Per Day by 2035, According to Navigants Global Energy
Practice, http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150401005260/en/U.S.Natural-Gas-Supply-Expected-Reach-110#.VSF6Po54pAY]

A new report from Navigants global Energy Practice, the North American Natural Gas Market
Outlook, Year-End 2014, examines the state of the natural gas industry and provides
forecasts for supply and demand through 2035.
Driven by ongoing gas shale growth in the Northeast, production of natural gas in the United
States continued its strong growth trajectory in 2014, increasing by 6.1 billion
cubic feet per day (Bcfd), or 9.2 percent, over the course of the year. More growth in gas
production is expected in the future , particularly from the Marcellus shale
formation, with the only possible constraint the rate of infrastructure development in the region. Click to tweet:
According to the North American Natural Gas Market Outlook, Year-End 2014, published by Navigants Energy
Practice, U.S. natural gas supply is expected to increase from 72 Bcfd in 2015 to nearly 110 Bcfd by 2035.

Supply

side growth continues to drive most other aspects of the natural gas
industry in North America, says Gordon Pickering, Director with Navigants Energy Practice. As we
explain in the Natural Gas Market Outlook, this strong supply basis is giving rise to a new
chapter of the gas industry, with the culmination of a half decade of new LNG project development
and the beginning of a new, global market for natural gas.

The opening of this new market is signaled by the opening of new export capacity
on the U.S. Gulf Coast, according to the Natural Gas Market Outlook. The opening of Sabine Pass will signify the
point at which North America becomes connected to the global gas market for the first time in historywith truly
global consequences for gas markets in North America and around the world. Those consequences will become fully
apparent as more LNG export projects come online, the report concludes.

Other findings from the Natural Gas Market Outlook, Year-End 2014, include:
prices at Henry Hub are expected to stabilize over the near to midterm, and grow steadily over the long-termalbeit reaching only moderate levels
-Annual average natural gas

compared to historical gas price levels seen earlier this century.

-Additional

infrastructure in the Marcellus and Utica shale gas regions, coming online
around 2017, is expected to relieve bottlenecks and allow stranded gas to move to
market, enabling prices to recover to levels similar to the broader North American gas market.

AT: Aerospace
Key to aerospace!
Delpy and Pike 10 Professor David Delpy FRS, chief executive at Oxford
Economics, AND* Dr. Richard Pike, Ph.D. in chemical sciences, September 2010,
"The economic benefits of chemistry research to the UK,"
http://www.rsc.org/images/Economic_Benefits_of_Chemistry_Sep_2010_tcm18191337.pdf

Aerospace - The modern aerospace industry depends on

high-performance products that are lightweight, yet
strong enough to take harsh loading conditions, and it is
indeed the fruits of chemistry research which have
given rise to advanced materials such as the polymers
and composite materials now used in tails, fuselages and
propellers. Chemistry research also impacts this
industry through the development of coatings (e.g. to
inhibit corrosion) and fuel additives to enhance
performance. The aerospace industry also relies on
computational chemistry to better understand combustion
and the impact of elevated temperatures on the stability of
various components e.g. metal oxide surface coatings and
catalysts. Finally, key to the continued success of the
aerospace industry are the advances that chemistry
research has provided in security in aviation. The devices
which safeguard the security of passengers, workers and
cargo in airports and during transit are heavily dependent
upon chemistry research (i.e. metal detectors, x-ray systems,
trace explosives and narcotics screening devices, and, more
recently, biometric passports). The future of aerospace is
based upon the ability of researchers to provide solutions
which lessen the environmental impacts of aviation with
examples including the continued development of lightweight
materials. Such materials enable new wing designs aimed at
increasing efficiency and reducing drag and thereby fuel

consumption, which would not be possible with

traditional materials. In addition, the role that functional
coatings can have in helping to improve the performance
maintainability of the aircraft should not be underestimated.
Ground forces outweigh
Collins, 06 professor of national security studies at the National War College,
former deputy assistant secretary of defense for stability operations, and former
Army strategist
(Joseph, From the Ground Up, Armed Forces Journal,
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/10/2088164)

Dunlap's misunderstands what ground forces are supposed to do . He

believes ground operations should be adjuncts to air operations, but the opposite
has been the more usual case. Even in the 21st century, the seizure of territory and
its occupation will be essential in wars of various stripes, even if it increases our
Second,

casualties and opens us up to the possibility of the abuses attendant to close combat. Third,

counterinsurgency and stability operations will likely be a significant part of many

future conflict scenarios. Post-Desert Storm, we marched into the 1990s content
with our conventional general-purpose forces, only to find that peacekeeping,
counterinsurgency, counterterrorism and stability operations were the dominant
items on our agenda. Nearly 15 years later, that trend shows no sign of letting up.

-- Air power fails ground forces key

McInnes 1 (Colin, Professor of International Politics University, Fatal Attraction?
Air Power and the West, Contemporary Security Policy, 22(3), December)

Second, air power is unable to take and hold disputed territory. Only land power can do this.
Although air power can do much of the work in preparing the way for land power, and can perhaps deny the use

if territory is to be (re)gained and then held, ultimately land power will

have to be used. Air power may therefore be necessary, but on its own it may not be sufficient. The
of territory to an enemy,

limits of air power in holding and controlling territory raise a separate question: to what extent is control of territory
and the destruction of an enemys military forces, particularly their ground forces, important in coercing an enemy?
Admittedly in a campaign of brute force this might be the case (though perhaps not always then). But in a campaign
of coercion, might not discrete strikes against strategic targets prove more effective strikes which do not require
the occupation of territory until the campaign is over? This question has prompted a debate over the relative utility
of strategic and theatre strikes in which the US Air Force, the pre-eminent air power, has been a staunch advocate of
strategic attack. US Air Force General Michael Short, for example, commented that the attacks on Serb forces
in Kosovo did little to help achieve NATOs war aims. It was only when the emphasis shifted to attacking strategic
targets that coercive pressure was successfully applied. Attacking forces engaged in ethnic cleansing had not
prevented those atrocities, nor had it placed the Serb leadership under sufficient pressure to persuade them to
desist. Rather it was attacks upon state control and infrastructure, and the threat of more attacks to come, which

US Air Force Chief of Staff

General Michael Ryan commented Airpower could not stop the door-to-door thuggery and
ethnic cleansing that [was] going on directly The only way you were going to be able to do that [was
Short argues finally persuaded the Serb leadership to give way.74 Similarly

by] taking it to the heart of the matter in this case Belgrade.75 From a study of the empirical evidence, however,
Robert A. Pape has argued that strategic bombing is only marginally effective as a coercive tool and that attacks

against theatre targets are likely to be more effective in persuading an enemy that it cannot achieve its military
objectives. For Pape, strategic bombing is only likely to be effective in long wars of attrition, when material and
economic factors come into play, but not in short wars lasting a few weeks or months. In contrast theatre air
power is effective in both long and short wars. Papes thesis has yet to attain widespread acceptance76 and the US
Air Force for one has decided that strategic strikes remain the more effective option. What the debate does reveal

doubts remain over the

effectiveness of the decapitation strikes that would make war quick and easy for the
West. Nor does the evidence convince that air power can guarantee success in war,
particularly if air power is used on its own. Rather Papes thesis suggests that air power
remains more of a blunt instrument than a rapier, and that campaigns are likely to take
longer than expected in order to be successful. Neither of these claims has been
satisfactorily refuted. What is also clear is the degree of uncertainty which still surrounds the use of air
however is that the case for strategic bombing has not been proven. In particular,

power and how it can be used most effectively.

1NR

Add On
Plotkin ev is from 2000 and said quote We desperately need
new drugs, but that was 15 years agoempirically denies
impact of resistant diseases
MNT says it can reduce drug resistant bacteria like MRSA
not the plague level impacts their ev is about
Cant patent itmeans no company gets involved
Ruth C. Stern, M.S.W., attorney at law, and J. Herbie DiFonzo 9, J.D., Ph.D.,
Professor of Law, Hofstra University, The End of the Red Queen's Race: Medical
Marijuana in the New Century, 27 Quinnipiac L. Rev. 673

The federal government has grossly impeded research efforts by stringently limiting
access to marijuana for experimental purposes. n571 Further, government agencies such as the
National Institutes of Health [*756] have repeatedly refused to finance medicinal marijuana studies. n572 Typically,

pharmaceutical companies assume the cost of researching and demonstrating the

therapeutic benefits of new drugs. Once they receive FDA approval of a drug for which
they hold a patent, pharmaceutical companies stand to benefit in a very big way. As
a natural substance, however, marijuana is not patentable , n573 and drug
companies have little incentive to expend energies and resources studying
it.

Burnout prevents extinction or large death-tolls

Anders Sandberg, University of Oxford and Andrew SNYDER-BEATTIE,
Academic Project Manager at the Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford,
14 [May 18, 2014, From Human Extinction to Super Intelligence, Two Futurists
Explain, Epoch Times, http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/682658-from-humanextinction-to-super-intelligence-two-futurists-explain/

what do you think the risk is that an influenza strain (with high
infectivity and lethality) of animal origin will mutate and begin to pass from human to
human (rather than only animal to human), causing a pandemic? How fast could it spread and how
In the near future,

fast could we set up defences against it?

Low probability . Some models we have been discussing suggest that a flu
that kills one-third of the population would occur once every 10,000 years
or so.
Snyder-Beattie:

Pathogens face the same tradeoffs any parasite does. If the disease has a
high lethality, it typically kills its host too quickly to spread very far.
Selection pressure for pathogens therefore creates an inverse relationship
between infectivity and lethality.

This inverse relationship is the byproduct of evolution though theres no law of

physics that prevents such a disease. That is why engineered pathogens are of particular concern.

1NRO/V
Quebec secession causes world war III three warrants
First, civil war collapsed economy and hyper-nationalism
makes conflict inevitable. Rogue states will sell arms to
Quebec that makes escalation inevitable. Strategic and
economic ties assure US gets drawn in.
Second, proxy wars China, Russia, and Iran are all likely to
cooperate with Quebec as an independent state. They will use
Quebec as a proxy to attack the United States and create a
new cold war.
We control probability and magnitude any proxy conflict
could go nuclear.
Marshall 09 Andrew Gavin Marshall @ Global Research Canada. He is also a researcher and writer based
in Montreal, Canada. He is project manager of The Peoples Book Project, chair of the geopolitics division of The
Hampton Institute, research director for Occupy.coms Global Power Project and World of Resistance (WoR) Report,
and hosts a weekly podcast show with BoilingFrogsPost. A New World War for a New World Order The Origins of
World War III: Part 3 By Andrew Gavin Marshall Global Research, December 17, 2009 17 December 2009

The continuation of the Cold War stances of the West versus the East remain and
are exacerbated, in what can be referred to as a New Cold War. At the same time, global regional
conflicts continue to be waged and expanded, be it in the Middle East, Central Africa or Central Asia, with coups and
regime change being furthered in Eastern Europe, South America and across the globe. However, these two major global issues:

regional wars and conflict and the New Cold War, are not separate, but
inherently linked . An exacerbation of conflict, in any and all regions, will only serve to
strengthen the political-strategic conflict between the US-NATO alliance and the Russia-China
alliance.

All that is required for a new major world war is just one spark: whether it comes in the form of a
war between Pakistan and India, or a military strike on Iran, in which case China and Russia would not sit idly
by as they did with Iraq. A strike on Iran, particularly with nuclear missiles, as is proposed, would result in
World War III . So why does strategy on the part of the US and NATO continue to push in this direction?

Third, NATO collapse NATO ties to Canada mean intervention

is legally binding, but internal fights make and uncertainty
cause conflict. They have conceded that England and France
will fight over what to do with Canada and Quebec which
literally splits the alliance in half and makes the entire treaty
system ineffective.
That makes immediate nuclear war inevitable
OSullivan 98
[American Spectator]

John O'Sullivan, editor of the National Review and founder of the New Atlantic, 6-1998

Some of those ideas--notably, dissolution and "standing pat"--were never likely to be implemented. Quite apart from the sociological law that says
organizations never go out of business even if their main aim has been achieved (the only exception being a slightly ominous one, the Committee
for the Free World, which Midge Decter closed down after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact), NATO's

essential aim has not been

permanently achieved. True, the Soviet threat is gone; but a nuclear-armed and potentially unstable
Russia is still in the game; a major conflict has just been fought in the very Balkans which sparked the First World War; and there
are a number of potential wars and civil wars lurking in such regions as the Tyrol, the Basque country, Northern
Ireland (not yet finally settled), Corsica, Belgium, Kosovo, and Eastern Europe and the Balkans generally where, it is said, " every England has its
Ireland, and every Ireland its Ulster." If

none of these seems to threaten the European peace very urgently at present,
that is in part because the existence of NATO makes any such threat futile and even counter-productive. No nation
or would-be nation wants to take NATO on. And if not NATO, what? There are international bodies which could mediate some
of the lesser conflicts: the Organization for Security Cooperation in Europe is explicitly given that responsibility, and the European Union is always

The OSCE
is a collective security organization, and as Henry Kissinger said of a similar body: "When all participants agree, there
is no need for it; when they split, it is useless." And the EU only made itself look ridiculous when it
attempted to halt the Bosnian conflict in its relatively early stages when a decisive intervention might have succeeded. As for
dealing with a revived Russian threat, there is no military alliance in sight other than NATO that could
do the job. In a sense, NATO today is Europe's defense. Except for the American forces, Western armies can no longer
play an independent military role. They are wedded to NATO structures and dependent on NATO, especially
American, technology. (As a French general admitted in the Gulf War: "The Americans are our eyes and ears.") If NATO were to
dissolve--even if it were to be replaced by some European collective defense organization such as a beefed-up
Western European Union--it would invite chaos as every irredentist faction sought to profit from the sudden
absence of the main guarantor of European stability.
itching to show it can play a Big Power role. But neither body has the military heft or the prestige to deter or repress serious strife.

1NR UQCanada econ

Economy high Haddow evidence says Weed economy is acting
as a backstop to a recessionthats a brink
Economy is weak NOT dying some sectors are doing fine
GLOBE & MAIL 3 31 15 [http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-onbusiness/top-business-stories/from-fingers-crossed-to-atrocious-canadas-economyforecast-to-limp/article23690119/]

'Fingers crossed'
Canadians get their first full look today at the kickoff to what Stephen Poloz warns is an atrocious first quarter for
the economy.
A report from Statistics Canada at 8:30 a.m. ET is expected to show that the economy contracted in January by 0.1
per cent or 0.2 per cent, setting the stage for a lame showing for the first three months of the year. As The Globe
and Mails David Parkinson reports, the consensus among economists is for a 0.2-per-cent dip.

Much will depend, of course, on how February and March look, but economists
believe Canadas economy has lagged in the quarter that ends today.
Some observers suggest the economy may have actually contracted in the first three months of the year, though
modestly.
January is set to start the year off with a whimper, a sign of things to come in what is likely to be a disappointing
Canadian economy in 2015, said Nick Exarhos of CIBC World Markets.
He cited recent poor showings in the retail and manufacturing sectors, each down 1.7 per cent in January, which will
play into this mornings report.

Dont get the wrong idea here: No one is suggesting that Canada is
staring a recession in the face .
But the oil shock is forcing energy companies to slash their budgets and lay off workers, and governments to pull
back. This will all play out, as well, in looming election campaigns, particularly as unemployment, now at 6.8 per
cent, spikes, at least regionally.
Mr. Poloz, whose Bank of
looking at something far less.

Canada had hoped for first-quarter economic growth of 1.5 per cent, is now

Indeed, the central bank governor told The Financial Times that the first quarter of 2015 will look atrocious,
because the oil shock is a big deal for us.
In an interview with the news organization, he warned of the ripple effect from the stunning decline in crude prices,
despite the savings at the gas pump.
In theory lower oil prices mean [putting] more money in consumers pockets, but if an oil company cancels [an
investment] project, laying off a worker, that guy will not have the money to buy a new pickup truck, Mr. Poloz
said.
That spreads pretty quickly.
So whats the outlook?
Where Mr. Poloz is concerned, he

said recently that he has his fingers crossed for the rest of the year.

 Were

seeing good momentum in several pockets of the manufacturing

sector,

he said in a recent speech.

These sound like tame things, but

the investment story in the U.S.
But its shaping
weve seen so far.

they are pretty important categories that are connected to

up to a year of limping, rather than sprinting , particularly after what

Fiscal tightening, while not severe , will begin to take an additional dent
out of activity in Alberta and Quebec, said CIBC chief economist Avery Shenfeld, referring to their budgets
last week.

Canadian economy rebounding early year predictions were

wrong
Financial Times 3 31 -15 [Canadian economy shrinks less than feared,
http://www.ft.com/intl/fastft/300973/canada-jan-gdp]

It was not as bad as many had feared.

After posting relatively resilient growth in the final quarter of last year, Canada's
economy shrank 0.1 per cent in January from the previous month, Statistics Canada said on
Tuesday.

However , the performance was better than the 0.2 per cent contraction that the
market had forecast, prompting the Canadian dollar to rally on the news.
The Loonie was trading 0.4 per cent lower at C$1.27 per dollar in the minutes after the report. It had fallen by as
much as 0.8 per cent earlier.

A surprise rebound in the oil and gas helped offset a sharp decrease in
activity from the service industry in January.
Crude oil and gas output rose 2.6 per cent during the month, after a 2.1 per cent December fall, as
production rose following maintenance in the fourth quarter at some oil sands facilities, the statistics agency said.

The market has been bracing for a weak start to the year amid the ongoing rout in oil prices.
Poloz , Canada's central bank governor warned in an interview with the FT that
the slump in oil prices is having an "atrocious" effect on the Canadian economy.
Just this week, Stephen

"The first quarter of 2015 will look atrocious, because the oil shock is a big deal for us," he said, adding that capital
expenditure could fall by as much as 10 per cent as a result of energy companies cutting back on investment.

Adopt a wait and see approach

WSJ 3 31 15 [Canadas GDP Shrinks Modestly in January,
http://www.wsj.com/articles/canadas-gdp-shrinks-modestly-in-january-1427808837]

OTTAWACanadas

economy performed better than expected in January,

shrinking modestly as a drop in the services sector was somewhat offset by strength in resource
extraction and utilities.

Canadas g ross d omestic p roduct, the broadest measure of goods and services produced in the economy,
fell 0.1% to 1.65 trillion Canadian dollars ($1.30 trillion) following a 0.3% advance in December, Statistics
Canada said Tuesday. The January results slightly exceeded consensus expectations for a
0.2% decline, and some economists had forecast an even deeper drop.

The report is likely to reinforce the Bank of Canadas wait-and-see approach to

determining the impact of lower oil prices on the economy. The central bank cut its
benchmark interest rate in January to 0.75%, calling the surprise move insurance against the tumble in the price
of crude oil, Canadas top export.
Expectations for a weak reading for January were partly fueled by the Bank of Canada, which had warned that the
damage from lower crude prices would be front-loaded this year, with January bearing the bulk of the damage. Bank
of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz underscored this expectation in a speech in London last week in which he said
he expected to see quite a lot of economic weakness in the first quarter of 2015. In a subsequent interview with
the Financial Times, Mr. Poloz said the first quarter will look atrocious because of the importance of oil to Canadas
economy.
January

was weak, but not atrocious, said Avery Shenfeld, chief economist

at CIBC World Markets, following the release of the data.

Canada just looks bad because of short-term factors like oil but
its rebounding
Globe and Mail, 3/30/2015. Stephen Poloz warns of atrocious first-quarter economic
growth, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/stephen-poloz-warns-ofatrocious-first-quarter-economic-growth/article23681442/.

Canadas economy is closing out an atrocious quarter, slammed by the

crash in oil prices, Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz warns.
economists have already warned its
going to look ugly when the numbers come in. Indeed, some observers have
The first quarter of the year ends on Tuesday, and

suggested the economy may actually contract, though modestly, this quarter.
In an interview with The Financial Times, Mr. Poloz underscored those concerns, highlighting why he cut
his benchmark interest rate by one-quarter of a percentage point in a move that surprised the markets
in January.
When the oil shock came, it was clear we would no longer be able to close the output gap by 2016,
but by 2017, the central bank chief told the news organization.
Since we had some firepower, we took some insurance and cut rates.
Expect this to show up in Tuesdays report from Statistics Canada on how the economy performed in
January alone. Economists expect that report to show that gross domestic product slipped by up to 0.2
per cent, setting the first quarter up for a lame showing.

The

first quarter of 2015 will look atrocious, because the oil shock is a big
deal for us, Mr. Poloz said, citing the fact that the oil industry is slashing spending.
In theory lower oil prices mean [putting] more money in consumers' pockets, but ... if an oil company
cancels [an investment] project, laying off a worker, that guy will not have the money to buy a new
pickup truck, the Bank of Canada governor is quoted by the news organization as saying.
That spreads pretty quickly.

Some observers, of course, have pinned at least some of their hopes on the oilinduced decline of the Canadian dollar, but that, Mr. Poloz said, is slow to work
its way through the system.
It is however, still expected to have an impact.
Now

that the Canadian dollar has depreciated and U.S. investment is

starting to fire on all cylinders, we are reasonably confident the export
side will recover, Mr. Poloz said.
The

manufacturing sector is turning around nicely, he added.

The primary warrant for Canadian economy low now is because

oil prices crashed. But, they will recover
Arthur E. Berman, 3/13/2015. Petroleum geologist with 36 years of oil and gas industry
experience. Data Suggests An Oil Price Recovery Could Be Sooner Rather Than Later, Oil Price,
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Data-Suggests-An-Oil-Price-Recovery-Could-Be-Sooner-RatherThan-Later.html.

World oil demand increased by 1.1 million barrels per day in February.
This is a potentially important data point that suggests a crude oil price
recovery sooner than later. It is also important because it further supports the
view that a production surplus and not weak demand is the main cause for
the recent oil-price fall.
The latest data from EIA shows that February world liquids production was
flat with January but consumption increased 1.1 million barrels per day . This
reduces the relative production surplus (production minus consumption) from 1.68 million barrels per
day in January to 0.56 million barrels in February. The chart below shows production (supply) in blue
and consumption (demand) in red.

The gap between production and consumption shrunk to its lowest level
since April 2014, before the drop in world oil prices as shown in the chart below.

1NR I/LEconomy key to secession

Economic collapse causes Quebec secessions 2 warrants
First its a rallying point.
Current politics prove
CTV News 3/10

2015 PKP says sovereignty will make Quebec richer: economic platform
http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/pkp-says-sovereignty-will-make-quebec-richer-economic-platform-1.2272913

PQ leadership candidate Pierre Karl Peladeau presented his economic platform Tuesday
afternoon and not surprisingly, his first priority is sovereignty , which he says will make Quebec
richer.
He said Quebec
potential.

is being handcuffed by Canada, which is why it hasnt been able to reach its full

we're sending a lot of money to Ottawa and this money has

basically been lent to other parts of Canada , he said.
One thing I know is that unfortunately

Second province incentives bad economy means Quebec

gets nothing from being in the Canadian union their defense
doesnt apply to ethno-federalists
Hale 02

Henry E. Hale, Department of Political Science Indiana University A Political Economy Of Secessionism
In Federal Systems May 2002 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?
doi=10.1.1.203.5631&rep=rep1&type=pdf

separatism can pose a

grave threat even to the most powerful of countries. Canadas flirtation with breakup in
1995 illustrated that this danger was not limited to new or postcommunist democracies. In each of these ethnic
hotspots, however, one also finds ethnic regions with decidedly weaker or even nonexistent separatist
impulses: Uzbekistan in the USSR, Montenegro in Yugoslavia, and Nunavut in Canada, among others. This paper models
the economic determinants of secessionism in a way that helps us understand such variation.
Counterintuitively, it demonstrates that even in the absence of coercion, minority regions may opt to stay in a
political union even when exploitation is the likeliest outcome and is considered a worse outcome than secession. This logic
then leads us to the important conclusion that the most eager seceders are likely to be those regions that
are doing the best in the union rather than the worst. Empirical evidence is presented in the form of a quantitative
The collapse of the USSR and Yugoslavia in the early 1990s taught the world that ethnic

analysis of ethnic minority regions in Russia, one of the worlds largest ethnofederal countries.

advances in this
explore the effects of economic development and integration on general levels of
separatism either globally or within given countries (Alesina and Spolaore 1997; Meadwell 1996). The present paper builds on
This paper contributes to a growing literature on the economic determinants of secessionism. Notable
literature

these advances by explaining observed variation across regions within the same countries, holding national-level and internationallevel factors constant. Much of the existing work in this direction has claimed that the least rather than the most developed regions
are the most eager seceders (Hechter 1975, 19921 ; Horowitz 1981, 1985, 1992; Mitra 1995; Rudolph and Thompson 1985: 292;
Wood 1981). It is shown below that these works generate this expectation by unjustifiably omitting uncertainty in their models and
are not sustained by systematic empirical tests involving more than three or four ethnic groups. The present paper thus seeks to
establish more rigorous theoretical and empirical footing for suspicions voiced in several other works that

wealthier

regions may actually tend to be the leading seceders (Emizet and Hesli 1995; Frye 1992; Hale 2000;
Roeder 1991; Rogowski 1985; Treisman 1997; Wallerstein 1961: 88).
The analysis here focuses exclusively on dynamics in ethnofederal states, federal political systems that designate specific federal
regions for specific ethnic groups and that render regional leaders at least somewhat democratically accountable to their
populations. 2 This class of multiethnic state is prudently treated separately because ethnofederalism itself can be expected to
affect secessionism (Author 2002, Brubaker 1996; Bunce 1998, 1999; Leff 1999).

As far as economic factors are

concerned, ethnofederalism provides frames of reference for intergroup

comparisons and puts regions into a distinct kind of economic game whereby
ethnic groups are given a distinct voice and institutional resources to pursue their economic demands in the center and vis--vis the
center.3 Ethnofederal institutions thus make it reasonable to assume, as the model does below, that regional leaders have incentive

regional leaders can

want to maintain their positions, because popular support tends to enhance leaders job security,
and because secessionism is widely seen as an issue sufficiently important to influence
popular support for leaders. Ethnofederations are an important class of state to study because many of the
globes mightiest states with the most promising emerging markets fall into this category
(including the Russian Federation, India, Canada , and Nigeria) while other geopolitical giants have at least nascent
to respond to the strongest preferences of their populations to at least some degree. This is because
be assumed to

ethnofederal structures (including China and the European Union).

ECONOMICS, POLITICS, AND SECESSIONISM

Minority regions in federal states often do not have a choice as to whether to secede. The state typically has the ability to coercively
preserve its own territorial integrity, as has been demonstrated with brutal clarity in countries ranging from the United States to
Nigeria. But sometimes seceders do succeed, and Hechter (1992, 2000) observes that the vast majority of such cases have occurred

When
states weaken to this degree, we can talk about a window of opportunity though which
separatist regions can leap but which is likely to close over time as the central government regains its strength
should the regions choose to remain in the union. A similar window of opportunity might be said to be open
in well established democratic states like Canada that people believe would not employ military force to
prevent a region (in this case Quebec) from seceding if the people of that region expressed the desire to secede
when central governments have weakened to the point of near-collapse, as was the case in the USSR and Yugoslavia.

clearly and democratically. While these windows of opportunity are likely to be expected to remain open longer than those
generated by state-weakening, the dynamic is much the same as far as the purposes of this paper are concerned since populations
at any given time are likely to be uncertain about their own future opportunities either to successfully mobilize support for secession

when such windows of opportunity present themselves ,

as history has shown they do, regional attitudes toward separatism will be critical to whether
and how the state survives or disintegrates. While the author (2002) has discussed causes of such windows of
or to realize it. The crucial point here is that

opportunity elsewhere, the present model takes them for granted and seeks to explain why regions approaching such a situation
might choose to push for secession.

It is useful to characterize secessionism as essentially a problem of credible

commitment (Schelling 1980: 43; Hardin 1982: 211-3). Joining regions together eliminates transaction costs involved in
international borders and reduces the per capita cost of nonrival public goods (Alesina and Spolaore 1997). The resultant benefits
could theoretically be distributed in such a way that all expect to gain from unification. It is also theoretically possible that political
decentralization could be effected in those policy areas in which differences in preference or culture between a given region and the
central government might threaten to outweigh the benefits of political unity for that region. Language laws, for example, can be
adopted so as to ensure that losses in this sphere do not outweigh the overall gains of unity. The difficulty is that individual regions
cannot count on this good scenario happening. Central governments, typically controlling the military and other instruments of
power, have the capacity not only to ensure a universally beneficial distribution of resources but also to exploit any individual
region, making it less well off than it would be as an independent country. Thus while regions might prefer unity in an ideal setting,
the real world often presents them with the likelihood that unity could be detrimental.

the driving force behind secessionism is not so much a grab for

resources or even national pride as an implicit calculation about the value of the
future in the union state relative to the value expected with secession . Critically, however,
this essentially economic (broadly defined) calculation hinges not on a cold comparison of two certain
alternatives but on uncertainty that is generated by the state or other groups. Because of the
sources of this uncertainty, secessionist calculations are typically cast publicly in terms of group
security concerns, ethnic group pride and resilience, and the perceived aggression of other groups or of the
From this perspective, then,

state itself--in short, the discourse of nationalism.

THE MODEL

The model begins with the reasonable assumption that

regional populations want to acquire the goods of

economic development. We follow Bates (1974) operational definition: A region is more developed to the extent
that it attains higher levels of education, per capita income, urbanization, industrial employment and media of mass communication.

It is useful to express the logic of this model in the form of an extended-form

secession game played by one minority Region and the federal Center in an ethnofederal state, as diagramed in Figure 1.
The Region must choose whether to secede or to stay in the union. Since we assume here a window of
opportunity in the sense noted above, if the Region chooses to secede, it receives the payoff Vs,
which represents the long-run expected level of economic development as an independent unit, and
the Center receives 0. If the Region chooses union, the Center decides whether to exploit the Region or to cooperate with it after it

If the Center chooses cooperation, the Region receives the

payoff Vc, which is assumed to be slightly greater than Vs due to the surplus (S) associated with political integration
has regained its coercive power.

(due to the reduction in long-run transaction costs that political borders impose on trade and the per-capita more efficient provision
of public goods) and due to the short-run transaction costs associated with achieving secession (Ts). If the Center chooses
exploitation, however, the Region receives the worst possible payoff, Vx. Thus Vc > Vs > Vx. We also assume that the Regions
information about the relative valuation of the Centers payoffs (X and C) is imperfect and that the Region perceives a certain
probability (Pc) that C > X, that is, that the Center will choose a cooperative strategy of national economic development.
[FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE]

This framework helps illustrate a significant problem in some traditional conceptions of the separatist
calculus and aids us in developing a more accurate model. Misconception can easily occur when the probability of exploitation is
assessed to be greater than 50%. For regions in such a situation, it might seem logical to assume that since Vs > Vx and since Vx is
the likeliest outcome, secession will be the preferred option. Thus Horowitz (1985) argues that backwards ethnic groups tend to
secede because they find themselves at a competitive disadvantage in the union state (Vc > Vx), assume that the present situation
is likely to continue (Pc < 0.5), and would not face such a disadvantage if they achieved independent statehood (Vs > Vx). Likewise,
Hechter (1992: 275-6) is led to the conclusion that ethnic regions with the smallest industrial sectors have a relatively high
propensity to secede because they benefit least from an integrated economy and would be least harmed by independence (Vs > Vx)
and because this state of affairs in unquestioningly assumed to continue in the union state (Pc < 0.5). To automatically draw the
conclusion that secessionism is the likely outcome of this situation, however, is to mistakenly assume that any Pc < 0.5 is equivalent
to the situation in which Pc = 0. This, in turn, results in completely ignoring Vc, the potential payoff obtained if the union chooses to
cooperate with the ethnic region in promoting its economic development.
A critical omitted element in traditional assessments of the separatist calculus, then, is uncertainty. This is crucial to redress
because political outcomes are rarely if ever certain and there is good reason to think that people do not always treat them as

Nadeau et al. (1999) have convincingly demonstrated this on the issue of secession
using the case of Quebec . The proper way to think about the rational calculus of
regional leaders, therefore, is as a calculation of what economists call expected gains. Regional
certain.

leaders rarely weigh between certain options, but instead must identify a whole array of eventualities associated with each policy
choice and weight them according to their probabilities of actually occurring, choosing the option that produces the most attractive
portfolio of possibilities. Each policy choice, then, involves taking calculated risks, with risk defined following Nadeau et al. (1999:
527) as the exposure to an eventuality of loss.

the following implication: An ethnic group may choose to stay in a union that it deems
highly likely to be exploitative (based, say, on this unions history of exploiting minority groups) if it would reap a
sufficiently large economic gain in the event that exploitation does not occur; in such a case, the possible
gains would be worth the risk. This is easily demonstrated formally in terms of the secession game sketched above.
This has

When both possible outcomes of unionism are weighed in a calculation of expected gains, I show here that there exist values of Vc
such that the region in question will choose to stay in the union despite the fact that it believes exploitation to be the likeliest
outcome. The calculation of expected gains is such that the Region will opt for union if:
(Pc - 1)Vx + PcVc > Vs
This means that the Region will choose union if:
Vc > Vs (1/Pc) + Vx (1/Pc - 1)
Since this equation has solutions for Pc < 0.5, we can see that if the potential value of the union is great enough, it is logical to
expect that regions will be willing to take a chance on exploitation. 4
We then come to the critical factor explaining variation in levels of separatism across regions in a given ethnofederation.
For any level of Pc, this model highlights the critical importance of regions assessments of the gains to be had from political
unification. Indeed,

when all regional attributes are held equal other than regions levels of

wealth, there is good reason to expect Vc and Vs to hold the key to differential levels of support for
separatism across rich and poor regions. Vx can be assumed to be the same for both rich and poor regions in any given
country since exploitation is here defined as an outcome in which all but a minimum of a regions resources are appropriated, no
matter what their original levels.
There are two important consequences of this. First, and most obviously, we would expect the most developed region to remain
more developed as an independent country than the least developed region, ceteris paribus, since there is nothing about
independence that automatically brings any given level of wealth. Vs for the richer region will thus be greater than Vs for the poorer

the maximum benefit generated by the surplus to union (S) is expected to be

greater for the least developed regions of a country than for the most developed ones, resulting in a higher value of Vc
for poorer than for richer regions. Bates (1974, 1983) logic of the political economy of development
leads us to three essential reasons for this theoretical expectation. These reasons are labeled osmosis,
access and subsidies.
one. Secondly,

Osmosis. This term refers to the hope that economic development will seep across
regional borders in the union state, leading to more rapid local economic progress than
would otherwise be possible. As the transactions costs involved in cross-regional operation decrease, developedregion companies have incentive to take advantage of cheap labor in any given poor region, thereby building up the poor regions
industrial and technological base, offering up the possibility of eventual control by the people of the poor region. As more firms
move into the poor region, wages tend to rise and workers obtain advanced skills that will help them either start their own
businesses or find better-paying jobs elsewhere. While the poor region can hope that its economy will more rapidly approach the
level of development of the more developed regions without the transactions costs involved in international borders, the optimal
gains for developed regions are more modest. The developed region cannot hope to obtain much if any new technology or
infrastructure from the poor region that will help it move up the cycle of production and developmentfor this kind of
advancement, it can only look to the world market. While the developed region would still accrue economic benefit from its
association with the poor region, including remittances from businesses that operate outside of the developed region, these benefits
would not directly involve the prospect of rapid economic development, with its attendant cascading effects into the rest of its
economy.

2nc at never secede

Quebec secessionism will not die 5 reasons the only reason
they havent seceded yet is because of a strong economy
Arias 13 Natalia Arias 5 Reasons Why Quebec Separatism Is a Cause That Will Not
Die http://nataliearias.hubpages.com/hub/5reasonswhyquebecseparatismwillnotdie#
1 . There Have Been Historical Grievances

7 years war where Britain conquered Qubec, the lives of the local French population were left
the overlords became English

untouched for the most part, even with respect to religion but

this dynamic evolved so that wealth and power in Qubec was concentrated
within the hands of the English minority, the French majority were mostly agrarian farmers with large families
later on

and little education

this power imbalance created resentment on the part of the French, Bill 101 was passed to
preserve the rights of the French language and disenfranchise English, the result was a HUGE economic loss to Qubec as hundreds
of thousands of English speaking people and their companies (eg. Bank of Montreal) left Qubec for good and set up their
headquarters in Toronto, this dynamic still exists today, the economy suffers when the separatists win

the quiet revolution was the beginning of the francophone populations attempts to
assert themselves, much was achieved because of it (bill 101) but it had elements of terrorism in it
and the tensions raised then have never really gone away

2 . There are Cultural Differences

there are large gaps in understanding between the French and the English , if I were to
speculate as to the origins of French/English strife I could very well sit here all year and write a book, for the purposes of
Qubec, the cultural differences stem largely from religion and from different ideas
of the division of goods and services

Qubec has the highest level of socialism on the continent, this translates to the lowest post
secondary tuition fees, extensive social benefits, free healthcare and a culture of open and active protest to
perceived provocation (the student protests )

Qubec is also the most highly secular part of the continent, while for the most part religion is
dying all over the developed world, in Qubec there are actual laws on the books that discriminate against religious imagery and
that ban women from changing their names upon marriage
the protestant ethos of individual responsibility is less visible here as the culture focuses more on communal co-dependency

3 . There is linguistic antagonism

many people in Qubec do not speak English, and most English speaking people in North America cannot speak French, in the fear
of losing their own culture and language the French can be antagonistic to English, many are also resistant to learn English and
never travel outside of their province and so in a sense they live in a bubble and have no perspective on the outside world

4 . There is Racism or Tribalism based on an Us vs. Them context

I cannot count how many people I've met who have complained of racism
others as well who can't wait to graduate and leave Qubec because of racial tension

in Qubec, I've met plenty of

the Qubec francophone's are a tribe, a cohesive culture, they feel like members of the
same community and even though many do not wish to be racist they can still be

perceived that way simply because of their paranoia about keeping their culture
alive
5 . They do not feel like a part of Canada
because of the tribal feeling that the francophone community has towards each other it is difficult for
them to feel like they are part of a greater whole, a nation state that is not based around ethnic/cultural

lines but rather on the rule of law and democracy

those who have never believed in the separatist cause and have always voted against
it did so because they felt there were real economic benefits to remaining in
Canada, not because of a feeling of love or loyalty towards the united nation or to the British
even

monarchy

non separatist francophone's frequently say "I am a Quebecker first and a

Canadian second if at all."
I have heard many