Indian Wind Aff

UTNIF 2008 1
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AFF
1AC 2-11
SOLVENCY EXT. 12-15
ANSW ERS TO CO2 DISAD 16-19
ANSW ERS TO CAP K 20-24
ANSW ERS TO ESSENTIALISM K 25-27
NEG
CAPITALISM KRITIK 1NC 28-31
CAP K LINK EXTENSIONS 32-35
CO2 GOOD DISAD 1NC 36-39
CO2 DISAD EXTENSIONS 40-41
ESSENTIALISM KRITIK 1NC 42-44
ESSENTIALISM K EXTENSIONS 45-46
SOLVENCY TAKEOUTS 47-50

UTNIF 2008 2
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
1AC
OBSERVATION ONE: ENERGY GENOCIDE
THE AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY W AS FOUNDED ON THE

EXPLOITATION OF NATIVE AMERICANS AND INDIAN TRIBAL LANDS –
LAND CONFISCATION, DEATH, DISEASE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL RUIN HAVE
BEEN THE RESULT – TO THIS DAY, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTINUES
THESE PRACTICES BY DISCOURAGING TRIBAL PARTICIPATION IN THE
ENERGY INDUSTRY
La Duke, Economist and Native American activist, ‘04

(Winona, Indigenous People, Power, Politics: A Renewable Future for the
SeventhGeneration,http://www.honorearth.org/media/pdfs/multimedia/b
ooks/Indigenous%20Peoples%20Power%20and%20Politics.pdf)
“The history of the American electric power industry is the story of America’s rise to world-
wide economic preeminence. For Indian Tribes, it is a history of injustice and abuse of power
by the federal government as well as hostility to Tribal political and economic interests by the
states.Whether the subject is fossil fuels, nuclear energy or hydropower, the story is the
same. In spite of treaties and the Federal Indian trust protection responsibility to the contrary,
Indian resources were confiscated for the benefit of others at the expense of Indian people.
Through forced land sales, Indian removal and through abuse of the federal trusteeship, Tribes
were denied fair participation in any phase of development of America’s electricity
industry.The legacy continues today. Indian Tribes contribute vast amounts of their energy
and water resources to American electric supply and energy security but receive so little in
return. The Tribes in the Four Corners states of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico and Utah
provide the mineral and water resources that supply Southern California with one quarter of
its electricity supply. Three million people in Southern California depend on Indian resources
for their economic and social well-being. The Tribes of the upper Missouri River Basin had
lands and waters confiscated to build the federal water projects on the Missouri River. Those
projects give the non-Indian economies in the region over $1.5 billion in economic benefit.
These examples illustrate that no peoples give more than Indian Tribes and receive less in
return. Tribal citizens pay among the highest electricity rates in the country, have the highest
percentage of homes without electricity, and have the least control over the quality of electric
service. The Navajo Nation, for example, the country’s most prolific energy tribe, has some
50,000 people without regular electric service. No other group of Americans has suffered more
from energy development in terms of pollution, radioactive waste, lost homelands flooded for
federal water projects and the social destruction that results from one group’s exploitation of
another.To be sure, America fully expected Indian Tribes to disappear. This legacy too lives on
as governmental policies and industry practices still discourage Tribal participation. But things
are changing! – Council of Energy Resource Tribes.
UTNIF 2008 3
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
DESPITE THE GREAT POTENTIAL TRIBAL LANDS OFFER FOR W IND

ENERGY DEVELOPM ENT, A FUNCTIONALLY DISCRIMINATORY TAX
CODE LOCKS THEM OUT OF THE PROCESS – STATUS QUO POLICY
UNFAIRLY DISADVANTAGES TRIBES DEVELOPING W IND ENERGY
PROJECTS
Shahinian, Law student @ U. of M ichigan, ’07

(Mark, “The Tax M an Com eth Not: How the Non-transferability of
tax credits harm s tribes”, 32 Am . Indian L. Rev. 267)
With the power to tax also comes the power to push, to encourage, to foster and to
favor. If taxation can sap economic power, tax policy can also confer vast economic
rents on certain favored groups.However, America's Indian tribes are a group not
favored by federal tax policy. n2 This paper is concerned with elements of U.S. tax
policy that do [*269] unrecognized harm to Indian tribes. In the standard analysis,
Indian tribes benefit from tax-free status - it is a bright line rule of U.S. tax policy
that tribes and their subsidiary corporations do not pay federal income taxes.
However, the guarantee of tax-free status for Indian tribes also guarantees the
tribes cannot use tax credits granted by the federal government.In certain industries,
federal tax credits play such an important financial role that entities unable to use
those tax credits are at a significant financial disadvantage to entities able to utilize
the tax credits. Federal tax credits play a key role in the coal bed methane extraction
industry, n3 the low-income housing development industry n4 , and the wind power
industry, n5 among others. In some of these fields, tribes cannot make use of the
tax credits, and so face a severe financial handicap as compared to entities that can
utilize the tax credits. Perversely, this handicap is present in precisely the industries
the federal government has decided to nurture and encourage - for instance, the
wind energy industryTo bring focus to the discussion of tax credits and tribes, this
article examines how, this inability of tribes to access federal tax credits handicaps
tribes' ability to own and develop wind farms. Indian tribes could be a major force in
the growing U.S. wind industry. Wind power from tribal lands could provide 22% of
installed U.S. electric power generation capacity. n6 Renewable energy development
is an issue with broad support in the United States and has the potential to bring
significant economic benefits to the tribes
UTNIF 2008 4
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
THIS SYSTEM ATIC DENIAL OF NATIVE AMERICAN LIVLIHOOD IS

PART OF A BROADER PATTERN OF A CONTINUING COLONIAL
RELATIONSHIP – THE ENERGY INDUSTRY HAS BEEN AT THE
FOREFRONT OF THIS ENVIRONMENTAL RACISM - PEOPLE OF COLOR
W ORLD-W IDE HAVE BORNE THE BRUNT OF THE FREE MARKET’S
INDIFFERENCE TO THEIR FUTURE – IN THE NAM E OF MAXIMIZING
PROFIT, SOM E COM M UNITIES ARE POISONED W HILE OTHERS LOOK
THE OTHER W AY
BULLARD, ENVIRONM ENTAL JUSTICE RESOURCE CENTER – CLARK

ATLANTA UNIVERSITY, ’02 (Robert,
http://w w w .ejrc.cau.edu/PovpolEj.htm l, “Poverty, pollution, and
environm ental racism )
The systematic destruction of indigenous peoples' land and sacred sites, the poisoning of
Native Americans on reservations, Africans in the Niger Delta, African-Americans in
Louisiana's "Cancer Alley," Mexicans in the border towns, and Puerto Ricans on the
Island of Vieques all have their roots in economic exploitation, racial oppression,
devaluation of human life and the natural environment, and corporate greed. [1]Unequal
interests and unequal power arrangements have allowed poisons of the rich to be offered
as short-term remedies for poverty of the poor. The last decade has seen numerous
developing nations challenge the "unwritten policy" of Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries shipping hazardous wastes into their
borders. Most people of color communities in the United States and poor nations around
the world want jobs and economic development-but not at the expense of public health
and the environment.Why do some communities get dumped on while others escape?
Why are environmental regulations vigorously enforced in some communities and not in
other communities? Why are some workers protected from environmental and health
threats while other workers (such as migrant farm workers) are allowed to be poisoned?
How can environmental justice be incorporated into environmental protection? What
institutional changes are needed in order to achieve a just and sustainable society? What
community organizing strategies and public policies are effective tools against
environmental racism?The paper analyzes the causes and consequences of environmental
racism and the strategies environmental justice groups, community-based organizations,
and government can use to improve the quality of life for their constituents.Anatomy of
Environmental Racism The United States is the dominant economic and military force
in the world today. The American economic engine has generated massive wealth, high
standard of living, and consumerism. This growth machine has also generated waste,
pollution, and ecological destruction. The U.S. has some of the best environmental laws
in the world. However, in the real world, all communities are not created equal.
Environmental regulations have not achieved uniform benefits across all segments of
society. [2] Some communities are routinely poisoned while the government looks the
other way.People of color around the world must contend with dirty air and drinking
water, and the location of noxious facilities such as municipal landfills, incinerators,
hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities owned by private industry,
government, and even the military.[3] These environmental problems are exacerbated by
racism. Environmental racism refers to environmental policy, practice, or directive that
differentially affects or disadvantages (whether intended or unintended) individuals,
groups, or communities based on race or color. Environmental racism is reinforced by
government, legal, economic, political, and military institutions. Environmental racism
UTNIF 2008 5
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
combines with public policies and industry practices to provide benefits for the countries
in the North while shifting costs to countries in the South. [4]Environmental racism is a
form of institutionalized discrimination. Institutional discrimination is defined as "actions or practices
carried out by members of dominant (racial or ethnic) groups that have differential and negative impact on members of
subordinate (racial and ethnic) groups." [5] The United States is grounded in white racism . The nation was
founded on the principles of "free land" (stolen from Native Americans and Mexicans),
"free labor" (African slaves brought to this land in chains), and "free men" (only white
men with property had the right to vote). From the outset, racism shaped the economic,
political and ecological landscape of this new nation.Environmental racism buttressed the
exploitation of land, people, and the natural environment. It operates as an intra-nation
power arrangement--especially where ethnic or racial groups form a political and or
numerical minority.
THE EXPLOITATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES BY U.S. BASED ENERGY +

MINING INTERESTS IS RAMPANT– A PROFITS BEFORE PEOPLE LOGIC HAS
LED TO WIDESPREAD ENVIRONMENTAL INJUSTICE AND AN ENERGY
GENOCIDE
Norrell, 7-24-06 (Brenda, Indian Country Today, “Energy genocide, backlash

yield new people’s movement in the Americas”)
The longtime exploitation of indigenous peoples' land and water resources in the Americas by
governments and corporations has resulted in ''energy genocide'' for indigenous peoples; now,
this energy
genocide is unleashing an environmental movement, with Native people taking on
governments and holding corporations accountable, according to the Indigenous
Environmental Network. Tom Goldtooth, executive director of IEN, said the seizure of land,
mineral and water rights, particularly in Central and South America, has
resulted in the rape, torture and murder of indigenous peoples. Goldtooth said globalization,
pushed by countries like the United States, has allowed U.S. corporations to come into the
territories of indigenous communities of Central and South America in need of minerals, oil,
gas, water, trees and the medicinal knowledge of indigenous peoples.
''This market-based system has created privatization of land and competition of natural
resources, causing our indigenous brothers and sisters of the Latin American countries to
organize and resist. Indigenous peoples are mobilizing against mining companies in
Venezuela, Brazil, Colombia, Guatemala, Peru and Panama. 'There are wars fueled by mining
companies such as Denver-based Newmont that cause mine workers to fight local
communities, of which many are indigenous peoples,'' Goldtooth told Indian Country Today.
Where there is mining within remote rural communities in Latin American countries, he said,
there are rapes and abuses of indigenous women. ''Racism is alive and well in many of these
countries where tribal people are discriminated.'' Goldtooth said the result of this onslaught is
indigenous people are mobilizing throughout the Americas and the world. ''Indigenous peoples
throughout the world, and especially in the Latin American countries, have been increasingly
mobilizing and building solidarity movements to establish their self-determination, control of
natural resources and redefining the concepts of development. ''Our indigenous environmental
and economic justice movement of the north has built networks with the indigenous struggles
of the Latin America countries to mobilize a unified struggle to oppose an economic
globalization agenda being pushed by countries like the U.S., Canada and other industrialized
countries that are members of the World Trade Organization.'' Goldtooth said indigenous
UTNIF 2008 6
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
summits like the Second Continental Summit of Indigenous Peoples and Nationalities of Abya
Yala held in Quito, Ecuador, in 2004 brought more than 800 indigenous peoples from 64
indigenous tribal nations and 25 countries from Canada to Argentina. The summit, he said,
was an expression of a mounting indigenous movement to consolidate their autonomy to
engage in new strategies to fight to defend their rights, access to land, water and self-
governance.
WE THEREFORE PRESENT THE FOLLOWING PLAN:
THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY INCENTIVES BY MAKING THE RENEWABLE ENERGY
PRODUCTION TAX CREDIT TRADABLE FOR WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
BY NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES.
0BSERVATION II. SOLVENCY
WIND POWER PROJECTS UNITE THE GOALS OF ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AND TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY – THE MOVE TO WIND ENERGY IS
AN EVOLUTION OF ANTI-COLONIAL RESISTANCE AND TOWARD
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Powell, PhD. Candidate in Anthropology @ UNC Chapel Hill, ’06 (Dana,

“Technologies of Existence”, Development (2006) 49, 125-132. Doi:
10.1057/palgrave.development.1100287)
Situated within the broader IEJM in North America, these projects mark a shift
towards wind energy activism within the movement, which traces its own history of
resistance to the recent action of the 1960s and 1970s, but more deeply to the
resistance that has always been a part of the colonial experience of being occupied
and 'developed'. The Rosebud turbine is a community-based development project
imagined and executed by local and regional activists and engineers, but funded by a
combination of national foundations and federal agencies, including the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, Department of Interior
and US Department of Agriculture, making for complex and contradictory alliances
between tribes and the state. The project is also situated within the context of
environmental and political debates on energy development around the state of
South Dakota, where plans are underway to develop 2000 MW of coal-fired power by
the end of 2010 (LaDuke, 2004). The wind turbine is moving to centre stage as a
potential solution to many of movement's primary concerns: climate and ecological
change, natural resource conflicts, cultural preservation, globalization, and tribal
sovereignty.
UTNIF 2008 7
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
DEVELOPM ENT OF W IND ENERGY RESOURCES OFFERS TRIBES AN

OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK W ITH THE PAST – TO MOVE TOW ARD SELF
DETERM INATION AND OUT FROM UNDER THE THUMB OF STATUS
QUO ELECTRICITY AND M INING INTERESTS
. LaDuke, economist and Native American activist, ’06 (Winona, Race,

Poverty, and the Environment: A Journal for Social and Environmental
Justice, “Indigenous Power: A New Energy Economy”)
Wind energy is now the fastest-growing renewable energy source across the country.
There was 35 percent more wind generation capacity in 1998 than in 1997, or
enough to power more than one million households in the U.S. alone.9 Attorney
Gough says it all, when he says, “We can either give you coal, or we can give you
wind.”10 We stand on the cusp of something important. It is our choice to determine
the legacy we leave for future generations. Alternative energy represents an
incredible social and political reconstruction opportunity and one that has the
potential for peace, justice, equity, and some recovery of our national dignity.
Renewable energy makes economic sense. The European Union estimates that there
will be 2.77 jobs in wind for every megawatt produced, 7.24 jobs per megawatt in
solar, and 5.67 jobs per megawatt in geothermal. Or, in short, l000 megawatts of
alternative energy power averages 6000 jobs, or 60 times more high paying jobs
than in fossil fuels and nuclear power. It is our choice. We can either create jobs and
economic stability in Indian Country, or we can continue to line the pockets of
utilities and energy companies. Some of us believe that instead of nuclear waste
going to Yucca Mountain, there should be solar panels. And we know that the wind
blows endlessly on Pine Ridge, where we believe that, in the poorest county in the
country, there should be wind turbines. We must be about democracy and about
justice. We must put the power back into the hands of the people where it truly
belongs.
THE DECIDING FACTOR WILL BE TRIBAL CONTROL – UNLESS TRIBES HAVE

ENOUGH INFLUENCE OVER WIND ENERGY PROJECTS, THE COLONIAL
LEGACY WILL CONTINUE
LaDuke, Economist and Native American activist, ’07 (Winona, Yes!

Magazine, Winter, “Local Energy, Local Power”)
That is why the Rosebud Tribe's wind project—a 750-kilowatt turbine that sits behind
the small tribal casino—is remarkable. Despite immense bureaucratic obstacles—the
“white tape” so common on reservations—and the absence of big political or financial
champions, the Rosebud Tribal Utility Authority was born. Tribal advocates like Bob
Gough, attorney for the Rosebud people and the heirs of Crazy Horse, and Tony
Rogers, director of the Rosebud Tribal Utility Authority, found funding for the project,
jumped through regulatory hoops, and found a market locally and on one of the
Dakotas' many air force bases. The project, generating electricity for the past three
years, is now the prototype for a larger 30 megawatt project planned for the
reservation.The reality is that this region of North America has more wind power
UTNIF 2008 8
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
potential than almost anywhere in the world. Twenty-three Indian tribes have more
than 300 gigawatts of wind generating potential. That's equal to over half of present
U.S. installed electrical capacity. Those tribes live in some of the poorest counties in
the country, yet the wind turbines they are putting up could power America—if they
had more markets and access to power lines.Nationally, groups like the Intertribal
Council on Utility Policy are working with tribal leaders to bring more wind-generated
power on line and to manage the growth of the next energy economy, a critical
element of development strategy. Indian reservations may be the windiest places in
the country, but tribes are still struggling to develop the financial and technical
resources and tribal infrastructure needed to realize the potential and to keep jobs
and control in the community. As Bob Gough explains, “In the business of renewable
energy, tribes are either going to be at the table or on the menu.” Who controls the
next generation of power production will determine much about the success of the
local, renewable energy strategy. Honor the Earth, a national Native American
foundation, is working with tribal communities in a number of states to build local
tribal capacity for renewable energy. Tribal communities are spiritually and socially
aligned with the need for “natural power,” or natural energy in keeping with
traditional values. Honor the Earth has teamed up with allies like Solar Energy
International to train Native youth in two separate projects in the basics of solar and
wind generation. New trainings are planned for the Skull Valley Goshute reservation
(which was slated to receive nuclear waste from XCEL's Prairie Island Nuclear Power
plant—until a recent victory), other Western Shoshone reservations, and a Chiapas
project.
BECAUSE OF HIGH START-UP COST, MOST W IND PROJECTS ARE

DEVELOPED BY BIG ENERGY CORPORATIONS – DENYING TAX
CREDITS TO TRIBES ENSURES THIS W ILL CONTINUE + W RECKS
ANY CHANCE FOR TRIBAL OW NERS – PTC REFORM REVERSES THIS

Wind projects are extremely capital-intensive but have low overhead once up and
running. n31 As investments, they are conceptually similar to long-term bonds - low
risk, fixed-income investments. Like any capital project, three parties have a role in
building a wind farm: (1) the customer, (2) the financier, and (3) the project
owners.The customer: In a wind project, the customer, once identified and locked
into a long-term contract, is a relatively silent element. The customer is the buyer of
the electricity the project produces, and is usually a utility or power marketer. n32
The customer's main role is to provide the project with a Power Purchase Agreement
(PPA). The PPA is usually in the form of a ten- to fifteen- year year output contract
for a set price per kWh generated, with built-in escalators.The financier: The
developer uses that PPA as the finance-able asset, and with that PPA in hand, finds
money to build the project. Financiers of wind projects, for reasons discussed below,
are typically large investors with a significant tax liability.The project owners: Project
ownership is the key to the issues discussed in this paper. Only certain owners will
find profit in wind farms. These owners must, for financial reasons, meet two criteria.
First, they must have easy access to the capital markets. Wind farms are extremely
UTNIF 2008 9
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
capital intensive. A 30MW n33 wind farm (enough to power, on average, 12,000
homes) such as one proposed for the Rosebud Reservation can cost $ 48 million to
build. n34 Modern wind farms are generally in the 100-200MW range, and can
represent capital investments of half a billion dollars. n35 Second, the owner must
have a large, steady tax liability from non-wind operations that they can offset with
the PTC credits. A 30MW wind farm throws off more than $ 1.6 million per year in
tax credits for the first ten years of its operation. n36 [*275] The two requirements
above - access to capital markets and large tax liability - mean wind farm owners
tend to be some of the largest corporations in the world, and that the owners and
financiers of projects tend to be one in the same. American investment bank
Goldman Sachs, financial giant General Electric and Australian investment bank
Babcock & Brown all own or have owned significant wind properties. n37III. Tax
Credits and TribesHowever, the two requirements - access to capital markets and
large tax liability - also work to wreck the hopes for tribal ownership of wind
projects. Tribes, as discussed infra, are non-taxable entities. As such, they cannot
use tax credits, and are at a competitive disadvantage compared to taxable owners
of wind projects.
UTNIF 2008 10
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
MAKING THE PTC TRADEABLE IS THE BEST INCENTIVE FOR TRIBAL WIND
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT

To help resolve the problems outlined above, Congress should institute tax- credit
tradability for tribes, including a tradable PTC. Congress should change the current
non-assignable status of tax credits and allow tribes to trade their tax credits to
business partners with tax liabilities in return for cash, equity or other consideration
equal to the value of the credits minus any (presumably minor) transaction costs.
This is a narrow, targeted fix to a problem, which does not require large-scale
revisions of the tax code or of the federal-tribal [*283] relationship. With this sort
of provision in place, tribes could become involved in businesses that make heavy
use of tax credits.A. Tradable PTC is Win-Win. Tradable tax credits would be an ideal
solution for all parties - tribes, government and private business. Tribes would gain
economic development opportunities; government would be able to further promote
the business ventures it is trying to encourage through the tax code and would
reduce tribal dependency on federal dollars; private business would be able to
partner (and profit) with tribes in developing an important natural resource. Each
party would bring something to the table. The tribes would contribute the resources -
land, wind and labor. The outside investor would contribute the capital. The federal
government would contribute the tax credits. The tribes and the outside investor
would be partners, both sharing in the venture's profits. The tribe would take much
of the cash flow, while the outside equity investor would take all of the tax credits
and, depending on the arrangement, some of the cash flow from the project.The idea
of a tradable tax credit is not a new one, nor is it without precedent. A group
advocating renewable energy development on Indian lands originally proposed the
idea for tribes n72 and the Western Governors' Association has supported it. n73
THE PTC IS THE KEY INCENTIVE FOR W IND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT

– IT CAN M AKE OR BREAK A PROJECT -

In order to successfully develop a wind farm, a wind project's owners must have
access to federal tax credits. Tax credits for wind production are so valuable that
wind farm owners who cannot make use of the tax credits are at a severe financial
disadvantage as compared to those who can take advantage of tax credits.A. Federal
Tax Credits for Wind PowerTwo programs are the primary drivers of wind
development in the U.S. today: (1) State Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and;
(2) Federal tax credits, especially the Production Tax Credit. Two types of federal tax
credits come into play: the Production Tax Credit (PTC) and MACRS. n27 These tax
credits, especially the PTC, make or break a wind project. The PTC gives owners of
wind farms a 1.9 tax credit for each kilowatt-hour (kWh) the wind farm generates.
UTNIF 2008 11
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
n28 The current building boom in wind generation is evidence of the PTC's
importance - the boom exists now precisely because the current authorization of the
PTC expires on Dec. 31, 2008, and developers are racing to get projects in the
ground before that deadline. n29The PTC is more valuable than the 1.9 /kWh figure
would indicate because it effectively supplements earnings after taxes. To make up
1.9 after taxes, the project owner would have to earn about 2.6 before taxes,
making the PTC worth 2.6 in additional earnings. Note that this is 2.6 in earnings,
not revenue, and a corporation with 20% profit margins would have to take in 13 in
revenues to earn this amount. n30 Companies invest in projects only if they expect a
return at least equal to the next best alternative, and the PTC has made wind energy
an extremely attractive investment.
UTNIF 2008 12
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
SOLVENCY: TRIBES CAN BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT
EVERY TRIBE IN INDIAN COUNTRY CAN BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT

WITH RENEWABLES DEVELOPMENT
Booth, 1-2-’08 (Terrence H., Reznet News, “Alternative Energy: Path to

Tribal Prosperity, )
Every tribe in Indian Country, USA their tribal homes can have a system whereby all the home
on tribal lands could be producing there own electricity. Alternatively, the tribal housing
authorities can convert their entire sewer lagoons to using alternative energy and lessening
the tribes use of off reservation utility companies. Tribes that are even more important can
become energy independent. Every tribe in Indian Country, USA has adequate solar, wind,
wave, falling water, and/or biomass waste resources to achieve sustainable tribal energy
independence. Market Drivers.The Tribes can free themselves from the higher costs of energy
that has increased due to higher fuel costs. On some tribal lands especially in area of biomass
waste (landfills) instead of a usable asset it is environmental problem and yet it has
possibilities to create new tribal companies through sequestering of carbon creating a metal
like substance or be converted into producing energy.
EVERY TRIBE CAN BECOM E ENERGY INDEPENDENT

So tribes can stop the largest economic leakage (dollars paying off reservation utilities) and
keep the revenues on reservations earned from homeowners and renters, tribal government,
tribal buildings, tribal enterprises and other tribal businesses on reservation. Further tribe or
tribes can sell energy from their energy parks to on or near non-native utility companies.Call
to ActionThe future of tribal energy parks is the future of our national tribal substantial and
prosperous tribal economy for all tribes of Indian Country. Every tribe in Indian Country, USA
has adequate solar, wind, wave, falling water, and/or biomass waste resources to achieve
sustainable tribal energy independence. Already in existence for the tribes is the uses of these
renewable resources with combination of the all to create tribal energy parks or establishing
tribal utility companies. This in of itself stops a major economic leakage (dollars going off
reservations) and keeping the revenues on the reservations creates substantial tribal
economic wealth. Several Tribes are forging ahead with wind power, solar power, doing
feasibility studies to see what will work on their particular reservations. With America
continuing to look for fossil fuel which is readily burning up tribes can position themselves to
become American’s energy supplier for all of America by the year 2016 will need 70% more
electricity. The technology exists for alternative energy and there are non-profits willing to
transfer knowledge and know how to the Tribes instead of a joint venture or partnership
where revenues are shared versus a tribe full receiving all of the benefits for uses of
alternative energy. It address tribal environmental problems while turning waste into profits.
More information for the tribes contact: terrancehbooth
UTNIF 2008 13
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
SOLVENCY – WIND = SELF DETERMINATION
WIND ENERGY = DEMOCRATIZATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTION – POWER IS

TAKEN OUT OF CORPORATE AND GOVT. HANDS AND PUT INTO THE HANDS
OF THE PEOPLE
LaDuke, Economist and Native American activist, ’07 (Winona, Yes! Magazine,
Winter, “Local Energy, Local Power”)
Indeed, it is a time of change, brought on by rising oil prices and crumbling

infrastructure. Native peoples have an eye to the horizon, where wind turbines, solar
panels, and a movement for local control of energy are rising. This is a movement,
not about technologies and gadgetry, but about what the future should look like. Will
it be centralized, with the necessities of life coming from far away, or will it have
local food and local energy? This is about a movement which is found in the winds
that sweep the reservations and ranches of the Great Plains, in the sun that bakes
the Southwest, and in the grasses and grains of the prairies. All of these resources
lend themselves to locally controlled power production.In the United States, we are
missing the canoe. Centralized power production based on fossil fuel and nuclear
resources has centralized political power, disconnected communities from
responsibility and control over energy, and created a vast, wasteful
system.Renewable energy, which has the opposite effect, is the fastest growing
energy source in the world. And according to Exxon, energy is the biggest business
in the world. So tackling this issue has some large implications.At the very least, the
United States is missing major economic opportunities. When the Rosebud Sioux
wanted to build a wind generator, they had to import turbine parts from Denmark,
and that's a long way away.When George Bush can say in his State of the Union
address that the United States is addicted to oil, it's time to admit that we are
energy junkies. The United States, with only 5 percent of the world's population,
consumes one third of the world's energy. In just the past 70 years, the world has
burned 97 percent of all the oil ever used.We have allowed our addictions to
overtake our common sense and a good portion of our decency. We live in a country
with the largest disparity of wealth between rich and poor of any industrialized
nation. As the price of energy rises, the poor are pushed farther out on the margins.
Renewable energy is a way to reverse that trend. We need to recover democracy,
and one key element is democratizing power production.
UTNIF 2008 14
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
SOLVENCY – WIND = SELF DETERMINATION

RENEWABLE ENERGY ENABLES PRODUCTION OF ENERGY THAT MINIMIZES
CORPORATE AND GOVERNMENT INFLUENCE
LaDuke, Economist and Native American activist, ’07 (Winona, Yes!

Magazine, Winter, “Local Energy, Local Power”)
We must reduce our consumption, then create distributed energy systems, where
local households and businesses can produce power and sell extra into the grid.
Relatively small-scale and dispersed wind, solar, or even biomass generation
provides the possibility for production at the tribal or local level without involving big
money and big corporations. That, in turn, allows for a large measure of local
accountability and control—pretty much the definition of democracy—and an
appreciation for where we are and where we need to go.Some of the largest wind
projects in the country are in Minnesota, where the Plains come to the edge of the
Great Woods and the winds sweep across the southern part of the state. Funding for
Minnesota's renewable energy programs is largely the result of a hard-fought battle
in the Minnesota legislature over a nuclear waste dump adjacent to the Prairie Island
Dakota reservation. The tribe's concern over the health effects of nuclear waste next
to their community led to state legislation requiring a significant investment in
renewable energy, which spear–headed wind development.Elsewhere, indigenous
peoples have four of the nation's 10 largest coal strip mines on our territories; have
been inundated and drowned for dam projects like Pick Sloan (Missouri River Basin),
James Bay, Kinzua, and Columbia River; and have been irradiated by uranium mines
and proposed nuclear waste dumps in Western Shoshone and Goshute communities.
Native communities are ready for a change.
ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CAN INCREASE TRIBAL CAPACITY FOR ECONOMIC

STABILITY – RENEWABLES OFFER AN OPPORTUNITY FOR GREATER TRIBAL
SELF DETERMINATION
Mills, Master’s Thesis @ UC Berkeley in the Energy + Resources Group, ’06

(Andrew, “Wind Energy in Indian Country: Turning To Wind for the Seventh
Generation”, rael.berkeley.edu/files/2006/Mills-Masters-2006.pdf)
Energy development can play and important role in economic development by

building capacity within tribes and by providing revenues to tribal governments for
economic development projects. Capacity is built within tribal governments by taking
on responsibility of managing energy projects. Capacity can also be built within tribal
businesses by taking part in energy projects as subcontractors, partners, or even
project owners. The thesis of Marjane Ambler’s book on Indian control of energy
development, Breaking the Iron Bonds, is that early energy development with tribes
did not involve the tribes in the decision making process and that they had no control
over energy development. The lack of control was associated with very little
economic benefits to the tribes.
UTNIF 2008 15
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
SOLVENCY:WIND SAVES TRIBES MILLIONS
ENERGY IS A HUGE ECONOMIC LEAKAGE FOR TRIBES – RENEWABLES SAVE

TRIBES HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF $

If tribes would give consideration and prioritize the potential uses of alternative
energy and have a in depth economic analysis and a look at tribal economies will
reveal that energy is a huge “economic leakage” (monies going off of tribal lands
that pay for goods and services) which creates wealth for others and tribal
dependence for goods and services economic research will reveal that if goods and
services were on tribal lands it would greatly prosper their tribal local economies.
UTNIF 2008 16
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 DISADVANTAGE ANSWERS
CARBON DIOXIDE NOT KEY TO INCREASING AG. YIELDS -

TECHNOLOGY IS
NO INCREASE IN CROP YIELD – GLOBAL WARMING WILL

INCREASE PLANT DISEASES
(CARD ON NEXT PAGE)

UTNIF 2008 17
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 CANT SOLVE – BENEFITS TAPER OFF AND ARE OFFSET BY

WARMING IMPACT ON AGRICULTURE
UTNIF 2008 18
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
UTNIF 2008 19
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
WARMING DECREASES PLANT WATER SUPPLY – NO AG

BENEFITS
UTNIF 2008 20
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CAPITALISM KRITIK ANSWERS
THE NEGATIVE’S KRITIK OVERLY SIMPLISTIC – INDIGENOUS

PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES DON’T HAVE THE LUXURY OF
SIMPLY “REJECTING CAPITALISM”
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT LED WIND ENERGY

DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ARE CHANGING THE MEANING AND
CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN TRIBAL LANDS
RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION COUNTERS THE HISTORY

OF COLONIAL BIOPOLITICAL CONTROL OF INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE IN NORTH AMERICA

In her work with the indigenous movement in Ecuador, Catherine Walsh speaks of
the movement's building of local alternatives as 'the resignifying in meaning and
practice of 'development' (Walsh, 2002: 7). Development, with its long history of
top-down, state-driven, regulatory, and often export- and expert-oriented goals, is
being increasingly challenged by indigenous social movements in the Americas
seeking to decentralize and gain local control over various aspects of governance,
economic growth, cultural projects, and natural resources. Not completely unlike the
Ecuadorian Pachakutik movement Walsh describes, the movement for 'environmental
justice' in indigenous communities in the US is experimenting with alternative
strategies to restructure the production of power to advance democracy and
sovereignty for indigenous communities. This essay addresses the possible
resignification of development being produced by the practices and discourses of a
particular indigenous movement in the US, which addresses controversies over
natural resource management on reservation lands. In particular, I consider the
emergence of renewable energy projects within the movement as new modes of
economic, ecological, and cultural development, countering the history of biopolitical
regimes of natural resource extraction, which have marked indigenous experience in
North America since Contact. I argue that these emerging technologies not only
resist but also propose alternatives to the dominant models of energy production in
the US.
UTNIF 2008 21
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON TRIBAL LANDS IS PART OF A

MOVEMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE THAT IS CHALLENGING NEO-
LIBERAL DEVELOPMENT MODELS

The Indian Self-Determination and Education Act of 1975 enabled American Indian
tribes for the first time to self-determine their own resource policies and regulatory
agencies, overseeing tribal programs, services, and development projects. In 1988,
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act opened the way for the development of casinos on
reservations as a new mode of tribal economic development, and today 34% of all
federally recognized tribes run full-scale (class III) casino gambling, although only a
minute fraction of these represents the soaring economic success of places like the
Foxwoods Casino and Resort on the Mashantucket Pequot reservation. These and
other approaches to economic development – especially natural resource extraction
and casino gaming – have become issues of intense debate among scholars and
activists (LaDuke, 1999; Gedicks, 2001; Blaser et al., 2004; Cattelino, 2004; Hosmer
and O'Neill, 2004), as well as among tribal governments, federal agencies, and
within the general population. In the cacophony of competing moral claims and
recommended approaches elicited by these various controversies, the voices with
alternative proposals are sometimes lost. Against these two dominant approaches,
there is another trend in tribal economic development beginning to emerge,
connected to the indigenous environmental justice movement (IEJM) in North
America and critical of neo-liberal development models. Drawing upon an historical
conflict over resource extraction on reservation lands (see Figure 1), this movement
is turning towards what David Korten has called an 'emergent alternative wisdom' of
development practice (Korten, 2005).
UTNIF 2008 22
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ON TRIBAL LANDS IS ABOUT

CONSOLIDATING MOVEMENTS OF RESISTANCE TO COLONIZATION AND
RESOURCE EXPLOITATION – THE AFF RESIGNIFIES ‘DEVELOPMENT’ AS
‘ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE’

These emerging practices of a social movement-driven development agenda draw

our attention to the cultural politics, meanings, histories, and conceptual
contributions posited by unconventional development projects. As part of an
emerging movement in support of localized wind and solar energy production on
tribal lands, these projects are responses to the biopolitical operations of 20th
century development projects. They respond to a long history of removal, regulation,
knowledge production, and life-propagating techniques administered on reservation-
based peoples. The movement itself addresses controversies in a way that
interweaves the economic, the ecological, the cultural, and the embodied aspects of
being and being well in the world; as a member of the Indigenous Environmental
Network (IEN) said to me:“The movement is really about health and people dying ...
people can't have an enjoyable life anymore. The work of the movement is never
about the power plant itself, but about how all the EJ (environmental justice) issues
come together and link up to affect people's lives ... its about having a good life (B
Shimek, 2004, personal communication).”Such an analysis resonates with Arturo
Escobar's emphasis on a framework of a 'political ecology of difference' and the need
to consider 'cultural distribution' conflicts in studies or other engagements with
natural resource issues (Escobar (2006) Introduction). Concerns of 'cultural
distribution' have become crucial work for the IEJM as it seeks to resignify
development as 'environmental justice' in the context of a particular history of illness
and disease, environmental contamination, poverty, and place-based worldviews. I
argue that the way in which the IEJM has coalesced around these alternative
development projects suggests that these projects are 'technologies of resistance'
(Hess, 1995) to dominant forms of economic development, but also – and perhaps
more significantly – imaginative technologies of existence, mediating a particular
discourse of natural resource controversies, including values of a 'good life'. As such,
renewable energy technologies are resignifying the politics of 'sustainability' through
the movement's concept of 'environmental justice', which cuts across reductive
interpretations of economy, ecology, and culture.
UTNIF 2008 23
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
SOLAR AND WIND POWER PROJECTS FUNCTION TO COUNTER

REDUCTIONIST, TECHNOLOGICAL, DEVELOPMENT-DRIVEN THINKING

In sum, thinking of the history of development as a biopolitical operation to manage

the life of populations of indigenous peoples in the Americas allows us to see the
regulatory operations of the state, sometimes glossed as integrationist policies, as
has been the trend in Latin America with the history of indigenismo (Sawyer, 2004),
and sometimes framed as patrimony and treaty responsibility, as in the United
States, with the 'Indian New Deal' in the 1930s (Collier, 1938). Moreover, it provides
a way of understanding the history of state-driven development models as regimes
of controlling, regulating, and organizing particular bodies and environments – the
antithesis of the liberal, humanitarian projects these regimes have often claimed to
be. Finally, as I move to discuss the IEJM and the emergence of wind and solar
power projects on reservations, these technologies of resistance and existence can
be thought of as counter-projects to the biopower of 20th century models of
development, which have exacted significant ecological and cultural costs from
tribes, in service of a reductive, disembedded view of economic growth.
EJ ACTIVISTS ARE UNITING OVER ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

Twenty years earlier and 1100 miles south, Hopi engineers, activists, and tribal
leaders began to install solar photovoltaic panels on rooftops of residential homes,
bringing electricity to families who had been living off the grid, without electricity.
Projects on the Hopi and Navajo reservations have proliferated over the past two
decades, with the Hopi solar business Native Sun and engineer Debby Tewa leading
the way. In recent years, these projects have connected with the emerging wind
power projects in the Plains region, through the work of the national Native NGOs,
HTE, and the IEN, and have become central to these groups' common visions and
overlapping strategies of environmental justice and sustainable development on
tribal lands. In the last two years, these two national networks have collaborated
with grassroots environmental and cultural protection organizations to install
additional technologies on Newe Segobia, or Western Shoshone territory, on the Pine
Ridge Lakota reservation, and on the Navajo reservation. These installations have
become intermeshed with ongoing indigenous environmental justice campaigns
focused on conflicts centring primarily on aspects of energy production, such as the
recent conflicts over the proposed mining of the sacred Zuni Salt Lake; the proposed
federal nuclear waste storage sites on the Skull Valley Goshute reservation and at
Yucca Mountain, Nevada; and uranium mining on the Navajo and Hopi reservations.
In several of these cases, the environmental justice activists are challenging tribal
governments' contracts with regional utilities and/or federal agencies.
UTNIF 2008 24
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
THE EJ/RENEWABLE ENERGY MOVEMENT IS TRANSFORMATIONAL –

RENEWABLE ENERGY WILL DEMOCRATIZE POWER PRODUCTION AND
CHALLENGE THE CENTRALIZATION OF DECISIONMAKING IN THE HANDS OF
OIL AND NUCLEAR INTERESTS
La Duke, Economist + Native American activist, ’05 (Winona, Honor the

Earth Annual Report 2005)
This is a transformational movement. In it, we not only use the

political rhetoric of social change, but we also make technological
choices about self determination, the future of Native
communities, and the United States economy. Renewable energy
technology is emerging as a social movement of the 21st
century; a movement which democratizes power production
and seeks energy justice. Our Energy Justice Campaign represents
strategies that work toward self-reliance, social justice, and
the development of a leadership that has the courage to choose
sun and wind over uranium, coal, oil and mega-dams. These
decisions and strategies directly challenge centralized power production
and increased industrialization as choices for America’s
future. This is our response to global climate destabilization
with the recognition that Native peoples possess vast renewable
energy potential and also possess up to one ninth of the remaining
world coal reserves. In transforming this economy, there
are three basic strategies we are using: l) conservation; 2) local
power production; and 3) large-scale commercial power
production. In addition, we are interested in joining with a
larger voice calling for a dramatic change in US energy policy
to address global climate destabilization issues.
UTNIF 2008 25
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
ESSENTIALISM KRITIK ANSWERS
WIND AND SOLAR PROJECTS PRESERVE TRADITIONAL CULTURE WHILE

ENABLING NEW WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING INDIAN IDENTITY AND ITS
RELATIONSHIP TO DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY – THE AFF IS A
CHALLENGE TO ESSENTIALIST REPRESENTATIONS

The significance of the relatively recent emergence of wind and solar technologies as
tribal development projects is that tribes are increasingly connecting into this
network of renewable energy activism as a means of economic growth, ecological
protection, and cultural preservation. Seemingly an oxymoron – to preserve
'tradition' with the use of high-tech machines – advocates of wind and solar power
emphasize that cultural preservation is itself about flexible practices, change, and
honouring worldviews in which the modernist distinction between nature and culture
is nonsensical. In other words, when some of the most important cultural resources
are the land itself (i.e., mountains for ceremonies, waters for fishing, soils for
growing indigenous foods), to protect nature is also to protect culture. As Bruno
Latour has also argued, this natures-cultures epistemology is also ontology – a
different way of knowing, inhabiting and engaging the world (Latour, 1993, 2005).
Wind turbines and solar photovoltaic panels are articulating with this worldview, and
at the same time articulating with many tribes' desires to move beyond fossil fuel
extraction as a primary means of economic development, and towards natural
resource practices that are more 'sustainable'. The wind and the sun introduce new
elements of common property to be harnessed for alternative development projects
and increased decentralization and ownership over the means of power production.
TURN – YOUR CLAIMS THAT WE ESSENTIALIZE INDIAN

IDENTITY FUNCTION TO DISABLE INDIGENOUS MOVEMENTS
FIGHING FOR SURVIVAL – THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THE ESSENTIALIZING RHETORIC OF THE COLONIZER AND THE
CLAIM TO AN IDENTITY MADE BY THOSE WHO’VE BEEN
COLONIZED
DIRLICK, Pf. @ Duke University, ’99 (Arif, Contemporary Native

American Politics, p. 77 )
UTNIF 2008 26
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF

(DIRLICK – FROM PREVIOUS PAGE)
UTNIF 2008 27
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
TURN - THE AFF IS NOT ABOUT PRESERVING A ROMANTIC PAST

– ITS ABOUT SECURING SELF-DETERMINATION FOR
INDIGENOUS ACTIVISTS TO DETERMINE THEIR OWN FUTURE –
THE AFF IS A NEGATION OF THE NEGATION OF COLONIAL
ESSENTIALISM
DIRLICK, Pf. @ Duke University, ’99 (Arif, Contemporary Native

American Politics, p. 77 )
UTNIF 2008 28
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
THE DREAM CATCHER: 1NC
A. THE AFF ADVANTAGE IS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE – CLAIMS OF

SELF DETERMINATION AND ECONOMIC INDEPENDENCE VIA
WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ARE A GOVERNMENT AND
INDUSTRY SMOKE SCREEN FOR CONTINUING THE EROSION OF
OF TRIBAL SOVEREIGNTY AND CAPITALIST EXPLOITATION OF
TRIBAL RESOURCES – THE 2005 ENERGY POLICY ACT SET THE
STAGE AND NOW THE PLAN WILL SEAL THE DEAL -
LINDGREN 11-16-06
(Suzanne, “Native Power Struggles: Energy profiteers may be creating an illusion of Native
American independence”, http://www.utne.com/2006-11-01/NativePowerStruggles.aspx)
None of us seem to know where our energy fix will come from after the oil wells run
dry. Solar, wind, and hydroelectric power are all options, and the government and
energy industry have cast an eye on Native American soil as ground to experiment
with alternative energy. But these lands are also flush with oil, coal, and natural gas,
causing some to wonder if space for turbines is all they want.According to a piece by
Brenda Norrell in Indian Country Today, the 2005 Energy Policy Act encourages
investment in renewable energy on reservations through 'incentives' and looser
federal restrictions on tribe's lands. And though supporters say business investments
will increase Native American sovereignty, economic development, and the
expansion of renewable energy sources, critics point out that the energy bill also
withdraws important government protections on the land, which could enable big
business to exploit native territories. In LiP Magazine, Brian Awehali writes that the
US government and energy industry may not mind erecting a few wind turbines on
tribal territory if it means they also get access to the other fuel sources locked up in
those lands. As Awehali notes, one section in Title V of the 2005 Energy Policy Act
gives the government 'power to grant rights of way through Indian lands without
permission from Indian tribes, if deemed to be in the strategic interests of an
energy-related project.' And Clayton Thomas-Muller, organizer of the Indigenous
Environment Network's Native Energy Campaign, claims that in addition to
eliminating the protections of the National Environmental Policy Act and the National
Historic Preservation Act, the new act promotes sending nuclear waste to Indian
lands and mining more uranium from them. ''As usual,' a former tribal chairman tells
Indian Country Today, 'energy companies will kill our pig, skin it, take the meat -
mostly at government expense - and leave us with bones and hooves.''’
UTNIF 2008 29
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
2. THE AFF WILL BECOME PART OF A CORPORATE

“GREENWASH” TO COVER UP FOR THE POISON OF FOSSIL FUEL
ADDICTION AND THE IMPERIALIST WARS BROUGHT WITH IT
AWEHALI 6-5-06
(Brian, LiP Magazine, http://www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featawehali_nativefutures.htm)
The editors at the Business Journal might have been a tad hyperbolic in their
assessment, but energy on Indian land is certainly big business. In 2004, some $400
million was split between 41 tribes for the sale of oil, gas, and coal on their lands.
According to the Indigenous Environmental Network, 35% of the fossil fuel resources
in the US are within Indian country; The Department of the Interior estimates that
Indian lands hold undiscovered reserves of almost 54 billion tons of coal, 38 trillion
cubic feet of natural gas, and 5.4 billion barrels of oil. Indian lands also contain
enormous amounts of alternative energy: “Wind blowing through Indian reservations
in just four northern Great Plains states could support almost 200,000 megawatts of
wind power,” Winona LaDuke told Indian Country Today in March 2005. “[And] tribal
landholdings in the southwestern US…could generate enough power to eradicate all
fossil fuel burning power plants in the US.”Now imagine, if you can, that you run a
US-based energy company at a time when increasing resistance to US imperialism,
coupled with rising business costs related to political instability, has made getting the
oil, coal, and gas from foreign sources more difficult. Imagine that you’re savvy
enough to know that your fossil fuel-based business model is about to get
dramatically less lucrative. If you didn’t already have them, you’d probably want to
start setting up operations in the more business-friendly, less regulated Wild West of
Indian Country. If you were really devious—or maybe just smart—you might want to
have your cake and eat it too, by getting tax subsidies and favorable terms for
developing your next business model while greenwashing your ongoing fossil fuel
operations. Wouldn’t you? “Consistent with the President’s National Energy Policy to
secure America’s energy future,” testified Theresa Rosier, Counselor to the Assistant
Secretary for Indian Affairs, “increased energy development in Indian and Alaska
Native communities could help the Nation have more reliable home-grown energy
supplies. [The Native American Energy Development and Self-Determination Act of
2003] promotes increased and efficient energy development and production in an
environmentally sound manner.” The bill did not ultimately pass, but the idea that
“America’s energy future” should be linked to having “more reliable home-grown
energy supplies” can be found in other native energy-specific legislation that has
passed into law. What this line of thinking fails to take into consideration is that
Native America is not actually USAmerica, and that the “supplies” in question belong
to sovereign nations, not to the United States or its energy sector.
B. THE IMPACT
1. CASE IS TURNED – ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES LIKE
THE AFF LEAD TO EVEN GREATER CULTURAL ASSIMILATION
UTNIF 2008 30
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
2. CAPITALIST EXPLOITATION OF INDIANS AND INDIAN

COUNTRY LEADS TO ETHNOCIDE
UTNIF 2008 31
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF

UTNIF 2008 32
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
THE DREAM CATCHER: LINK EXTENSIONS
THERE IS A PRECEDENT FOR CORPORATIONS USING JOINT VENTURES WITH INDIAN

TRIBES AS A COVER FOR PRIVATIZATION AND ALSO FOR PROFIT DRIVEN LAND
GRABS - IN THESE EARLY DAYS OF WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IT LOOKS LIKE
THE SAME THING IS HAPPENING – WE GIVE YOU THE CASE OF THE ROSEBUD SIOUX
AND THEIR NON-NATIVE PARTNER “NATIVE ENERGY LLC” -
AWEHALI 6-5-06
Rosier’s statement conveys quite a lot about how the government and the energy
sector intend to market the growing shift away from dependence on foreign energy,
and how they plan to deregulate (by using “efficiency” as a selling point) and step up
their exploitation (“development”) of “domestic” native energy resources: by
spinning it as a way to produce clean energy while helping Native Americans gain
greater economic and tribal sovereignty. Of course, if large companies can establish
lucrative partnerships with tribes, largely free of regulation and federal oversight,
then so much the better. In this regard, a look at the Alaska Native “communities”
Rosier mentioned is instructive. In 1971, Alaskan tribal companies were set up by
Congress with roughly $1 billion and 44 million acres of land to divide. Although the
real reason for establishing these companies had to do with breaking down largely
unified tribal opposition to the construction of an oil pipeline, they were pitched at
the time as a way to help stimulate tribal economies and mitigate the scale of
poverty on tribal lands. “Tribal companies [can] be considered small businesses even
after winning billions of dollars in contracts, and there is no limit to the size of the
no-bid awards they can win,” reported Michael Scherer in an excellent 2005 Mother
Jones article entitled “US: Little Big Companies.” The Alaska tribal companies have,
according to Scherer, “become a way for large corporations with no Native American
ownership to receive no-bid contracts, an avenue for federal officials to steer work to
favored companies, and a device for speeding privatization.” Evidence for this
assertion abounds. From 2002 through the end of 2004, the Olgoonik Corporation,
owned by the Inupiat Eskimo tribe, garnered revenues in excess of $225 million for
construction work on US military bases around the world. Because of its tribal status,
Olgoonik procured this work without having to bid against others for it. It then
subcontracted most of the work to the infamous multinational corporation
Halliburton. A November 2004 article in The News & Observer (UK) further reported
that “Procurement rules allow native American-owned company, Alutiiq, to provide
favored entrée to government contracts and then outsource them to British-owned
multinational, Wackenhut.” The article also went on to note that the Chugach Alaska
Corp., owned by 1,900 Alaska natives, “was ranked ahead of IBM, Motorola,
Goodrich, Goodyear and AT&T in total value of defense contracts in 2003.” Now jump
forward with me, to April 2003, and the completion of the first large-scale native-
owned wind turbine in history—the aforementioned Rosebud Sioux project, built in
partnership with NativeEnergy, LLC. During the preceding 21 years, reports ranging
from the cautionary to the apocalyptic about carbon emissions and global warming
have piled up, and all but the most pig-headed of carbon-emitting industrialists now
concede that a fossil fuel-based business model is soon going to be a lot less
lucrative.NativeEnergy, which wants to help consumers “enjoy a climate neutral
UTNIF 2008 33
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
lifestyle,” was founded in 2000 with a mission “to get more wind turbines and other
CARD CONTINUES….
renewable energy systems built.” There were no Native Americans present in the
management of NativeEnergy at the time of its founding. The multiphase wind
development initiative, which began in earnest with the completion of the first wind
turbine in 2003, was billed as a way to bring renewable energy–related jobs and
training opportunities to the citizens of this sovereign nation, who are among the
poorest in all of North America. NativeEnergy’s President and CEO Tom Boucher is
an energy industry vet who formerly worked at Green Mountain Energy, a subsidiary
of a company now controlled by oil industry giant BP and Nuon, a Netherlands-based
energy company. Boucher was convinced there was profit to be made in alternative
energy, and the Rosebud project was his test case. Boucher financed the project by
selling, of all things, air. More specifically, he took advantage of the new “flexible
emissions standards” created by the Kyoto Protocol. Essentially, the standards
created tax-deductible pollution credits (or “green tags”) for ecologically responsible
companies, which can then be sold to polluters wishing to “offset” their carbon
dioxide generation without actually reducing their emissions.As you might expect
from a company staffed largely by energy industry vets, NativeEnergy was fiscally
crafty. In a novel accounting move, they bought from the Rosebud Sioux, at deep
discount, all the green tag pollution credits that they speculated would be accrued
over the lifespan of the Rosebud wind project—a total of 50,000 tons of carbon
dioxide—then made a lump-sum, one-time funding commitment to the construction
of the project. In an April 2003 interview with the Business Journal, Boucher would
not divulge how deep the discount he got was, nor would he divulge the terms of
subsequent sales of green tags.
UTNIF 2008 34
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
FIRMS LIKE NATIVE ENERGY ARE READY TO LINE UP AND PROFIT FROM ABSENCE OF
FEDERAL REGULATIONS, NO BID CONTRACTS AND EASY SUBSIDY MONEY
AWEHALI 6-5-06
Since their first test case proved successful, NativeEnergy has moved forward with
plans to develop a larger “distributed wind project,” located on eight different
reservations. NativeEnergy also became a majority Indian-owned company in August
2005, when the pro-development Intertribal Council on Utility Policy (yes, Intertribal
COUP), purchased a majority stake in the company on behalf of its member
tribes.Pat Spears, the President of COUP and a member of the lower Brule Sioux
tribe, described the purchase as “a great day for Native American people
everywhere, because we are demonstrating that living in harmony with our Mother
Earth is not only good for the environment, it is also good business. We look
forward,” he added, “to bringing in more tribes as equity participants and taking
NativeEnergy to the next level.”It’s probably no coincidence that this purchase
coincided with that month’s passage of the 2005 Energy Policy Act, which contains
native energy–specific provisions in its Title V. Supporters like Tex Hall, president of
the National Congress of American Indians, touted the act as “one of the most
important tribal pieces of legislation to hit Indian country in the past 20 years. [It]
provides real incentives for energy companies to partner with Indian tribes in
developing tribal resources.” Keeping in mind that tribal-owned companies are
exempt from a great deal of the regulation, oversight, and competitive bidding
stipulations that apply to other businesses, and that the legislation increases
subsidies for wind energy in particular, the act leaves NativeEnergy ideally situated
to exploit its tribal status.
UTNIF 2008 35
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
ENERGY POLICY ACT OF ’05 IS A GOOD INDICATION OF THE WAY THE AFF PLAN WILL
BE USED – THAT LAW CREATED UNPRECEDENTED POWER FOR THE USFG TO GRANT
RIGHTS OF WAY THROUGH INDIAN LAND IF IT WAS IN THE INTEREST OF AN ENERGY
RELATED PROJECT – THE SEEMING BOON TO TRIBES WAS REALLY A GUTTING OF
ENVIRONMENTAL AND HISTORICAL PRESERVATION ACTS AND U.S. TRUST
OBLIGATIONS
AWEHALI 6-5-06
But there are a host of alarming provisions in the act. For starters, Section 1813 of
Title V gives the US the obviously dangerous power to grant rights of way through
Indian lands without permission from Indian tribes, if deemed to be in the strategic
interests of an energy-related project. Other critics have derided the act as a fire
sale on Indian energy, characterizing various incentives as a broad collection of
subsidies for US energy companies, particularly those in Texas. And, according to a
2005 Democracy Now! interview with Clayton Thomas-Muller, Native Energy
Organizer for the Indigenous Environmental Network, the act “rolls back the
protections of the National Environmental Policy Act and the protections of the
National Historic Preservation Act, both of which are critical pieces of legislation that
grassroots indigenous peoples utilize to protect our sacred sites.”Most importantly,
under the guise of promoting tribal sovereignty (leaving out those aspects of
sovereignty that have little or nothing to do with economics), the act also releases
the federal government from its traditional trust responsibility to tribes where
resource development is concerned. The trust relationship between the US and
native tribes has been a crucial way for Native Americans to hold the government
legally accountable, as evidenced by the many recent court losses suffered by the
Department of the Interior and Treasury during the years-long Indian Trust Case
filed by Eloise Cobell on behalf of more than 500,000 Native American landholders.
CORPORATIONS ARE CHOMPING AT THE BIT TO EXPLOIT NATIVE LANDS – THE

ENERGY POLICY ACT OF ’05 TRANSFERRED AUTHORITY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
REGULATION TO THE TRIBES – ENERGY COMPANIES SEE THIS AS A FREE FIRE ZONE
AND INTEND TO TWIST THIS NEW FOUND “SOVEREIGNTY” TO THEIR ADVANTAGE
AWEHALI 6-5-06
(Brian, LiP Magazine, http://www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featawehali_nativefutures.htm
The Energy Policy Act also shifts responsibility for environmental review and
regulation from the federal to tribal governments. This, too, was promoted under the
auspices of increasing tribal sovereignty, but it doesn’t take a genius to know that
Native Americans won’t be any more successful in regulating the energy industry
UTNIF 2008 36
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
than the US government, a host of well-funded environmental groups, and the UN

have been. In fact, it probably only takes a village-variety idiot to comprehend the
predictably disastrous outcome of this shift for Native Americans.It’s hard to believe,
in light of the relevant history, that an ever-avaricious energy industry—which has
been all too willing to play a game of planetary ecological brinksmanship in the name
of profit—places any value on tribal sovereignty unless there’s a way to exploit it. It’s
CARD CONTINUES…
AWEHALI 6-5-06
(Brian, LiP Magazine, http://www.lipmagazine.org/articles/featawehali_nativefutures.htm
hard to believe, after hundreds of years of plunder and unaccountability, that further
deregulation, coupled with economic incentives, and even with the participation of
some well-meaning “green” players on the field, is going to deliver anything but the
predictable domination of Native Americans by white European economic powers.In
fact, I’ll go out on a limb and say that the emerging Native American energy
infrastructure looks more like the beginnings of a new rush on Indian lands than it
does the advent of any kind of brave new sovereign era.But don’t take my word for
it. Take it from Billy Connelly, the senior advisor on marketing and communications
for NativeEnergy, the company, you’ll recall, that helped usher in the dawn of this
renewable energy rush. When asked during a March 2006 phone interview why the
demonstration of a potentially viable renewable energy economy on Native American
lands wasn’t simply an example of small businesses laying the groundwork for the
eventual control and megaprofits of major corporations, Connelly sighed and said
simply, “I’d be pleasantly surprised if this didn’t follow that age-old pattern.”Perhaps,
at a minimum, tribes can attain a modicum of energy independence from the
development of wind, solar, and other renewable energy infrastructure on their
lands. And there may well be a way to ride Native American renewable energy
resources to a future of true tribal sovereignty. But it won’t come from getting into
bed with, and becoming indebted to, the very industry currently driving the planet to
its doom.
EXHIBIT A – FROM BRIAN AWEHALI – ENERGY PROJECTS HAVE BEEN EMPIRICALLY

USED AS A FIRST STEP TOWARD ACCESS AND CONTROL OF INDIGENOUS LAND –
COLOMBIA IS AN EXAMPLE
AWEHALI 6-5-06
“Huge investments in electrical power grids, highways, and telecommunications

would help Colombia open up its vast gas and oil resources and its largely
undeveloped Amazonian territories; the projects, in turn, would generate the income
necessary to pay off the loans, plus interest. That was the theory. However, the
reality, consistent with our true intent around the world, was to subjugate Bogota, to
further the global empire. My job...was to present the case for exceedingly large
loans.”
UTNIF 2008 37
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 GOOD DISADVANTAGE
A. TRIBAL RENEWABLE ENERGY COULD BRING U.S. CO2 EMISSIONS IN

ACCORD WITH KYOTO TREATY MANDATES
LaDuke, economist and Native American activist, ’06 (Winona, Race,

Poverty, and the Environment: A Journal for Social and Environmental
Justice, “Indigenous Power: A New Energy Economy”)
Indigenous Peoples on a worldwide scale have been quite concerned about these impacts. The
Native Peoples/Native Homelands Climate Change Workshop (l998) and the Second
Indigenous Peoples Forum on Climate Change (2000), led to international dialogue on the
issue. The Indigenous representatives were unanimous in their recommendations contained in
the Hague Declaration. The series of procedural and substantive recommendations include:Full
participation in negotiations related to climate change, and decision-making with relevance to
Indigenous Peoples;Restoration of habitat previously devastated by national and international
development; n Creation of a fund to deal with climate impacts in accordance with traditional
cultures and lifestyles;Increased application of renewable energy technologies in the
developed and developing worlds. The Intertribal Council On Utility Policy (Intertribal COUP) is
taking the lead and plans to challenge the Bush administration on global climate change. By
not signing the Kyoto Protocol, the U.S. created a huge deficit in the international goal for
decreased carbon emissions. “Tribal wind energy production could entirely enable the U.S. to
reach the levels expected in the Kyoto Accords, and tribes could just do it,” suggests Gough.
Intertribal COUP is soon launching a “March Forth!” initiative aimed at matching cities seeking
partners in green house gas reduction with renewable energy producing tribes.
B. CO2 EMISSISIONS SAFEGUARD GLOBAL AGRICULTURE

PRODUCTIVITY
UTNIF 2008 38
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 GOOD DISADVANTAGE
2. IMPACT – MASS STARVATION. ONLY HIGH CO2

CONCENTRATION CAN INCREASE CROP YIELDS ENOUGH TO
AVERT DISASTER
UTNIF 2008 39
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
UTNIF 2008 40
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 DISADVANTAGE – EXTENSION CARDS
INCREASED CO2 EMISSIONS WILL AVERT FAMINE AND MASS

DEATH – ON BALANCE, CO2 INCREASES PLANT GROWTH
UTNIF 2008 41
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
CO2 DISADVANTAGE EXTENSION CARDS
RESP TO “WARMING INCREASE PLANT DISEASE” – INCREASED

CO2 INCREASES PLANT PATHOGEN RESISTANCE
CO2 BENEFITS OFFSET WARMING IMPACTS ON AGRICULTURE –

CO2 INCREASES PLANT WATER
EFFICIENCY
UTNIF 2008 42
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
ESSENTIALISM 1NC
A. THE AFF RELIES ON THE OLD COLONIALIST TROPE OF THE

INDIAN AS “CLOSE TO NATURE” THIS STEREOTYPE
ESSENTIALIZES INDIAN IDENTITY
UTNIF 2008 43
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
B. IMPACT – THE CASE IS TURNED – THE AFF’S

REPRESENTATIONS OF NATIVE AMERICANS ARE PART OF
A COLONIALIST NOSTALGIA THAT ALLOWS COLONIAL
SUBORDINATION TO CONTINUE
UTNIF 2008 44
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
UTNIF 2008 45
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
ESSENTIALISM KRITIK EXTENSIONS
ESSENTIALISM LINK EXT – THE IDEA THAT INDIGENOUS

CULTURE COULD “VANISH” PRESUMES IT IS STATIC, PRISTENE
AND UNCHANGING
UTNIF 2008 46
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
UTNIF 2008 47
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
WIND POWER NOT SOLVE INDIAN ECON WOES
RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IS SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE ‘DEPENDENCY’

CRITIQUE OF DEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS

Broadly, the idea of dependency is summarized in the common phrase “the

development of nderdevelopment.” Dependency is a critique of the idea of the
economic base in that underdeveloped regions become specialists in providing raw
materials and resources that are used in developed regions to create manufactured
goods. Substantial value is added to products in the latter stages of processing, but
very little of that value is transferred to the developing region. Furthermore, when
large multi-national companies control the extraction of the resources the
developing region often forgoes the opportunity to build capacity in the production of
the base resource. Instead, the local economy simply provides access to the
resource and unskilled or semiskilled laborers (See Palma 1989 and Kay 1991).
Beyond the lack of opportunity to capture value, the dependency critique argues that
the success of developing a base resource can distort the structure of the regional
economy. Instead of entrepreneurs developing a strong, diversified economy, the
businesses that do emerge in the regional economy are oriented toward providing
services to the large industrial companies that extract resources (Gunton 2003, 69).
The services provided by the government can become focused on increasing the
development of just one sector and income to the government becomes tied to the
production of the resource. The economy of the entire region and the services
provided by the government become linked to the price of the export resource.
Moreover, if the resource is depleteable, the economy contracts as the resource becomes more and more
difficult to extract in comparison to alternative resources.
One measure of the degree of specialization in the production of energy resources is called the “oil
dependency” metric. The “oil dependency” of the Navajo Nation is the ratio of the value of the energy
exports (oil, coal, and gas) to the gross regional product of the Navajo Nation (Ross 2001). A rough
approximation of the “oil dependency” for the Navajo Nation was found to be 1.1 using data available in
the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy of the Navajo Nation (Choudhary 2003) and energy
prices from the Energy Information Agency. The most oil dependent national economy in the world is
Angola (68.5). Norway, which exports a considerable amount of oil has an oil dependency of 13.5. The
25th of the top 25 most oil dependent nations has an oil dependency of 3.5 (Ross 2001).
Although the Navajo Nation would not be considered as “oil dependent” as these other countries, it is also
important to realize that 15- 20% of the Navajo Nation annual funds are from royalties on energy
resources. If the grants from external sources like the federal government are not included in the sources
of annual funds, then the share of energy resources increases to 25-50% of the Navajo Nation budget
(Choudhary 2003, 65 - Table 7). Furthermore, the second largest recipient of revenues from the Navajo
General Fund is the Division of Natural Resources (ibid, 64 –Table 6C). Overall these statistics indicate
that the Navajo Nation is oriented toward a heavyreliance and focus on energy
development.Discussions of the Navajo economy in the context of dependency often
focus on the importance of the tribe being in control of energy development. By
control, most authors are
referring to the right to dictate the pace and laws surrounding energy development
on their lands(Owens 1979, Ruffing 1980). However, gaining control of energy
development is only one part of the dependency critique. The second part is that
even with control over the pace and quality of energy development the Navajo
government needs to steer the economy in diverse directions so
UTNIF 2008 48
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
that the economy does not become specialized in providing services to energy
Mills – CONTINUED…
extraction companies. One could easily argue that the Navajo Nation is focusing significant efforts on
increasing the level of energy development at the expense of supporting alternative development
pathways (for example, the speech by Shirley and Trujillo to the World Bank, 2003). Many authors draw
from dependency theories to show why the Navajo Nation is locked into an energy development pathway.
One of the more important historical reasons for the orientation of the Navajo government toward energy
development was that the Navajo government was first formed in 1922 by the federal government to act
as a representative of the Navajo interests in signing oil leases on Navajo land. As part of organizing the
relationship between the federal government, the Navajo Business Council (as it was first called) and
energy developers, the Interior Department set policy such that the Navajo
government would own all of the mineral resources on tribal land, rather than individual Navajo owning
rights to the mineral resources (Wilkins 2002, 101-3).
At the end of World War II, the still fledgling tribal government turned to economic
development to improve the conditions in Navajoland in hopes that young people would not feel forced to
live elsewhere (Iverson and Roessel 2002, 189). In a process LaDuke and Churchill refer to as
“Radioactive Colonialism”, the driver of economic development became, with pressure from energy
companies and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), revenues from leasing land for large-scale
extraction of the Navajo’s mineral resources by private non-Navajo enterprises. The Vanadium
Corporation of America and Kerr-McGee provided $6.5 million in uranium mining revenues and jobs for
Navajo miners. The miners worked under dangerous and unhealthy conditions, but many of the jobs were
the only wage employment ever brought to the southeastern part of the reservation. An oil boom in
Navajoland between 1958-62 provided tens of millions of dollars in revenues to the
tribal government (Iverson and Roessel 2002, 218-20). The Tribal Council used the revenues to provide
services to many of the Navajo and increasingly employed Navajo in government related jobs. The
government officials and workers,
along with the few that obtained jobs in the capital-intensive extractive industries formed a class with
similar economic interests. Their wealth and power increased with increasing energy development.
LaDuke and Churchill explain: “With this reduction in self-sufficiency came the
transfer of economic power to a neo-colonial structure lodged in the US/tribal council
relationship: ‘development aid’ from the US, an ‘educational system’ geared to training the cruder
labor needs of industrialism, [and] employment contracts with mining and other resource extraction
concerns… for now dependent Indian citizens.”(LaDuke and Churchill 1985, 110)
The relationship between economic development and energy development was further extended in the
1960’s with the development of large coalmines and power plants on Navajo lands. The federal
government played numerous roles in support of connecting energy developers and the tribal government.
One example that illustrates the diverse ways in which the federal government encouraged energy
development with tribes was a stipulation in the contracts for cooling water for
the Mohave Generating Station in Nevada that specified that the owners of Mohave could only use the
Colorado River for cooling water as long as the power plant used “Indian Coal”6 (also see Wileyand
Gottlieb 1982, 41-53; and Wilkinson 1996, 1999 for more of the history of coal development in
the Western Navajo Nation).
Recommendations for economic development in initial stages of the self-determination era focused not on
how to build a diverse economy, but how to take control of energy development and ensure that the
Navajo Nation received the best deal for their resources. In describing the role of policy in energy
development on the Navajo Nation one author focuses on the capital-intensive
nature of energy development. Whereas one recommendation might be to shift the focus to other
development pathways, her recommendation was to take steps to ensure that the jobs that are created by
energy development go toward tribal members. She recommended that provisions should be included in
contracts for training and preference hire for tribal members with all energy development projects (Ruffing
1980, 56-7). A major transition point in the history of energy development on Navajo lands involved the
Chairman of the Navajo Nation, Peter McDonald, declaring that changes needed to take place before the
Navajo Nation would support continued development of energy resources on their land in the 1970’s. Two
major points he stressed included making sure that energy development was being carried out for the
benefit of the Navajo people and that the tribe should be given
opportunities to participate in and control energy development (Robbins 1979, 116). The main critique of
both these stances from dependency theory is that even with control over energy
development, it is still a capital-intensive, highly technical, and tightly controlled
UTNIF 2008 49
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF
industry (Owens 1979, 4). The Navajo Nation can participate in energy development,
Mills – CONTINUED…
but not without creating distortions in the orientation of the economy and
government.In this same vein, it is difficult to argue that wind energy is inherently
different that other forms of energy development from the dependency perspective.
While it is possible for the Navajo Nation to take steps to ensure that the tribe will
obtain the maximum benefit from wind development, such as ensuring that tribal
members and Navajo owned businesses have preference in
hiring, it is not likely that the tribe can become a self-sufficient wind developer
without severely distorting the priorities of the economy and Navajo government. The
alternative is to allow a specialized, large company from off the reservation to develop the wind farm, with
the possibility that a Navajo partner can take part in the ownership of the wind farm. While the
Navajo Nation may now have the institutional structure in place to control wind
energy development on their land, wind development is still subject to the
dependency critique.
ALTERNATIVE ENERGY IS NOT A PANACEA FOR TRIBES – NO GUARANTEE IT

WILL ADDRESS POVERTY AND UNEMPLOYMENT
Similarly, if the priority of development on the Navajo Nation is addressing the high
poverty and unemployment rates, then energy development is at best an indirect
route to addressing those needs, and at worst a diversion from the issues that are a
priority of the Navajo Nation. In assessing the impacts of the construction of a power
plant in the western region of the Navajo reservation, the Navajo Generating Station
near Page, AZ, researchers found that a primary selling point of the plant
by the power plant developers was the jobs that were promised to accompany the
development of the power plant. During the assessment, the researchers concluded
that only 2.2% of the skilled workers lived within 80 miles of the plant (Levy 1980).
Interviews with Navajo workers at the power plants found that the skilled workers
tended be much younger, they came from all over the reservation, and most
supported increased energy development. The unskilled workers were older,
local Navajo that were more interested in issues surrounding grazing and community
affairs than energy development (Henderson 1979). The assessment of the impacts
of the power plant supported the conclusion of earlier research that rural industrial
projects are not necessarily the solution to “the sagging economic fortunes of rural
America” (Little and Lovejoy 1979, 43).
UTNIF 2008 50
INDIAN COUNTRY
AFF

NO SOLVE POVERTY –

In the same way, wind projects may provide jobs for Navajo workers that are more mobile,
skilled, and less tied to the particular community where the wind farm will be built. In my personal
experience with a government official from the Cameron Chapter I found that there was very little
interest in the potential for a large wind energy project. The priority of the chapter was in providing
basic infrastructure to residents of the community such as water and electricity. While the revenue
to the tribe may help pay for such improvements, a development policy, according to the basic
needs critique, would be more effective if it focused on solutions that lead to development for those
in question. Indirectly addressing issues of poverty by focusing on energy development is likely to
be an ineffective approach. As Robert Wood pointed out in a critique of the World Bank’s
approach to basic needs, a top down approach to addressing the basic needs of rural communities is
not necessarily the best solution. Instead poverty alleviation would be more successful with
structural changes to provide access, assets, and information that the poor need to compete in
market place (Wood 1986). Creating economic opportunity for the impoverished may be more
effective than focusing efforts on energy development that may or may not eventually redirect funds
from the top down.
LIMITED JOB CREATION FROM WIND FARMS

The local impacts of a wind farm are expected to be modest, yet not insignificant. The
number of temporary construction jobs for an 80 MW wind farm is expected to be 100 full time
equivalents. The O&M jobs will be in the range of 4-10 jobs. While renewable energy may create
more jobs than fossil fuel, the fact that approximately 66% of the total number of jobs created by
wind power involve manufacturing outside of the local economy reduces the local benefits.
A wind farm can add to the economic base of the Navajo economy through taxes on the
wind farm project, a land lease fee, and through local spending of O&M costs. It is very important
that residents from within the Navajo economy fill the jobs that are created by the wind farm.
Ensuring that tribal members obtain jobs is particularly important for O&M jobs, which have the
most important impact on the local economy.The construction impacts may be short term and will not
add significantly to the economibase, but they will help build capacity with Navajo workers and Navajo
businesses that participate inbuilding the wind farm. The skills that are learned in building a wind farm
may be applied to otherwind projects on or near the Navajo Nation or to projects that require tasks
similar to building windfarms.Finally, the revenues that the tribal government earns through taxes and
the land lease feescan be used to support projects that are more closely tied to the economic
development goals of Navajo government. However, recalling the critiques of this energy development
model, it should be remembered that the effectiveness of turning these revenues into economic
development will greatly depend on the tribe’s institutional capacity to foster economic development.
Simplygenerating revenue for the tribal government is not enough to ensure economic development.

Indian Wind Aff

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indian Wind Aff

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UTNIF 2008 1

SOLVENCY EXT. 12-15

ANSW ERS TO CO2 DISAD 16-19

ANSW ERS TO CAP K 20-24

ANSW ERS TO ESSENTIALISM K 25-27

CAPITALISM KRITIK 1NC 28-31

CAP K LINK EXTENSIONS 32-35

CO2 GOOD DISAD 1NC 36-39

CO2 DISAD EXTENSIONS 40-41

ESSENTIALISM KRITIK 1NC 42-44

ESSENTIALISM K EXTENSIONS 45-46

SOLVENCY TAKEOUTS 47-50

OBSERVATION ONE: ENERGY GENOCIDE

THE AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY W AS FOUNDED ON THE

La Duke, Economist and Native American activist, ‘04

DESPITE THE GREAT POTENTIAL TRIBAL LANDS OFFER FOR W IND

Shahinian, Law student @ U. of M ichigan, ’07

THIS SYSTEM ATIC DENIAL OF NATIVE AMERICAN LIVLIHOOD IS

BULLARD, ENVIRONM ENTAL JUSTICE RESOURCE CENTER – CLARK

THE EXPLOITATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES BY U.S. BASED ENERGY +

Norrell, 7-24-06 (Brenda, Indian Country Today, “Energy genocide, backlash

WE THEREFORE PRESENT THE FOLLOWING PLAN:

THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE

0BSERVATION II. SOLVENCY

WIND POWER PROJECTS UNITE THE GOALS OF ENVIRONMENTAL

Powell, PhD. Candidate in Anthropology @ UNC Chapel Hill, ’06 (Dana,

DEVELOPM ENT OF W IND ENERGY RESOURCES OFFERS TRIBES AN

. LaDuke, economist and Native American activist, ’06 (Winona, Race,

THE DECIDING FACTOR WILL BE TRIBAL CONTROL – UNLESS TRIBES HAVE

LaDuke, Economist and Native American activist, ’07 (Winona, Yes!

BECAUSE OF HIGH START-UP COST, MOST W IND PROJECTS ARE

Shahinian, Law student @ U. of M ichigan, ’07

Shahinian, Law student @ U. of M ichigan, ’07

THE PTC IS THE KEY INCENTIVE FOR W IND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT

Shahinian, Law student @ U. of M ichigan, ’07

SOLVENCY: TRIBES CAN BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT

EVERY TRIBE IN INDIAN COUNTRY CAN BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT

Booth, 1-2-’08 (Terrence H., Reznet News, “Alternative Energy: Path to

EVERY TRIBE CAN BECOM E ENERGY INDEPENDENT

SOLVENCY – WIND = SELF DETERMINATION

WIND ENERGY = DEMOCRATIZATION OF ENERGY PRODUCTION – POWER IS

Indeed, it is a time of change, brought on by rising oil prices and crumbling

SOLVENCY – WIND = SELF DETERMINATION

LaDuke, Economist and Native American activist, ’07 (Winona, Yes!

ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CAN INCREASE TRIBAL CAPACITY FOR ECONOMIC

Mills, Master’s Thesis @ UC Berkeley in the Energy + Resources Group, ’06

Energy development can play and important role in economic development by

SOLVENCY:WIND SAVES TRIBES MILLIONS

ENERGY IS A HUGE ECONOMIC LEAKAGE FOR TRIBES – RENEWABLES SAVE

Booth, 1-2-’08 (Terrence H., Reznet News, “Alternative Energy: Path to

CO2 DISADVANTAGE ANSWERS

CARBON DIOXIDE NOT KEY TO INCREASING AG. YIELDS -

NO INCREASE IN CROP YIELD – GLOBAL WARMING WILL

(CARD ON NEXT PAGE)

CO2 DISADVANTAGE ANSWERS

CO2 CANT SOLVE – BENEFITS TAPER OFF AND ARE OFFSET BY

CO2 DISADVANTAGE ANSWERS

WARMING DECREASES PLANT WATER SUPPLY – NO AG

CAPITALISM KRITIK ANSWERS

THE NEGATIVE’S KRITIK OVERLY SIMPLISTIC – INDIGENOUS

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE MOVEMENT LED WIND ENERGY

RENEWABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION COUNTERS THE HISTORY

Powell, PhD. Candidate in Anthropology @ UNC Chapel Hill, ’06 (Dana,