Download Wake SW 2nc v Rochester Harvard R4

Shortages Tiebreaker 2NC
Their ev is tech industry propaganda – the numbers all point to stable labor levels now.
Norman Matloff, prof. of computer science at UC Davis, “H-1Bs: Still Not the Best and the Brightest,” May 2008,
http://www.cis.org/articles/2008/back508.html
The lobbyists for the tech industry and the American Immigration Lawyers Association know that crying
educational doom-and-gloom sells. Even though it was people born and educated in the United States who were primarily responsible for
developing the computer industry, and even though all major East Asian governments have lamented their educational systems' stifling of creativity,
the lobbyists have convinced Congress that the industry needs foreign workers from Asia in order to innovate.
The data show otherwise. Most foreign tech workers, particularly those from Asia, are in fact of only average
talent. Moreover, they are hired for low-level jobs of limited responsibility, not positions that generate innovation.
This is true both overall and in the key tech occupations, and most importantly, in the firms most stridently
demanding that Congress admit more foreign workers.
Note again that the analyses presented here confirm and provide much sharper quantitative insight into previous work showing that the H-1Bs are of just
average talent. It has been shown for instance that foreign students in the U.S. tend to be concentrated in the less-selective
universities, and that they receive a lower percentage of research awards relative to their numbers in the
student population. In the workforce, the foreign nationals in the U.S. participate in teams applying for patents
at the same percentage as do the U.S. citizens, and so on.
To be sure, the author is a strong supporter of facilitating the immigration of the world's best and brightest. He has acted on that belief, by championing
the hiring of extraordinarily talented researchers, mostly from India and China, into his department faculty. But as seen here, very few of the foreign
workers are of that caliber.
Expansion of the guest worker programs - both H-1B visas and green cards - is unwarranted.
econ
Economy is resilient – Zakaria evidence provides three warrants
d. As the globe becomes more technologically interconnected, decoupling occurs – this
guarantees economic resiliency
Zakaria, CFR board-member , 9—Editor of Newsweek, BA from Yale, PhD in pol sci, Harvard. He serves on
the board of Yale University, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Trilateral Commission, and Shakespeare
and Company. Named "one of the 21 most important people of the 21st Century" (Fareed, The Secrets of
Stability, 12 December 2009, http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/articles.html)
Clear-thinking citizens around the world are determined not to lose these gains by falling for some ideological
chimera, or searching for a worker’s utopia. They are even cautious about the appeals of hypernationalism and
war. Most have been there, done that. And they know the price. In fact, the most remarkable development in
the last few years has been the way China, India, Brazil, and other emerging markets have managed their
affairs prudently, taming growth by keeping interest rates up and restricting credit in the middle of the
bubble—just as an economics textbook (and common sense) would advise. Instead it was the advanced
industrial world, which had always lectured everyone else about good political and economic management, that
handled its affairs poorly, fueling bubble after bubble, being undisciplined in the boom, and now suffering most
during the bust. The data reflect this new reality. By 2014 the debt of the rich countries in the G20 will be 120
percent of GDP, three times the level of debt in the big emerging-market countries. The students of the global
system are now doing better than their teachers. Among the many realities that have become apparent in the
last year, this is perhaps the most consequential. People in the West were quick to write off the developing
nations after the crash, sure that they could not survive a recession in the centers of the global economy. But
the strongest of the emerging markets have actually emerged. They have become large, mature, and connected
enough that while affected by the West, their fortunes are not entirely dependent on it. There is now significant
domestic demand in countries like India. The government has massive resources in China. And these nations
now trade a great deal with each other. China has overtaken the United States as India’s largest trading
partner. This power shift may prove the longest-lasting legacy of the crisis of 2008. How the established
countries deal with it, and how they handle their own economic woes in the midst of many competing economic
centers, will be their primary challenge in the next decade. If they cannot adjust, then the world might not
remain so stable after all.
US not key to the global economy
VOA News 9 (“Global Economic Recovery Underway – IMF,” 8 July 2009, http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-07-08-voa32.cfm) //khirn
The International Monetary Fund updated
its outlook on the global economy Wednesday, saying financial conditions around the
world are improving faster than it expected.
IMF economists say global economic output will still shrink this year by 1.4 percent because of the slowdown in global trade. But their forecast now calls for
the world economy to grow by 2.5 percent in 2010, more than the 1.9 percent it predicted in April.
The IMF report warns an economic recovery still depends on government intervention. It says governments need to continue pushing stimulus measures, including increased
spending or greater tax cuts, through 2010.
The IMF also warned many banks are still in trouble because of bad loans and that home prices around the world have yet to bottom out.
Many economists blame a decline in housing prices for helping to trigger the global financial crisis, especially in the United States where many banks had invested in bad home
loans.
The revised IMF forecast says the U.S. economy, the world's largest, will shrink 2.6 percent this year and grow eight-tenths of a percent in
2010. Both predictions are slightly better than what the IMF foresaw in its April report.
The new forecast calls for China and India, two prominent emerging economies, to grow faster than it initially
estimated. China's economy is now forecast to grow 7.5 percent this year while India is expected to grow at a 5.4
percent pace.
The IMF says other emerging Asian economies are likely to grow faster than expected . But the report cautions economic growth in
these countries could slow if the economic recovery fails to take hold in advanced economies.
Econ collapse saps resources from military aggression
Bennett 2k – PolSci Prof, Penn State (Scott and Timothy Nordstrom, Foreign Policy Substitutability and Internal Economic Problems in Enduring
Rivalries, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Ebsco)
Conflict settlement is also a distinct route to dealing with internal problems that leaders in rivalries may pursue when faced with internal problems.
Military competition between states requires large amounts of resources, and rivals require even more attention. Leaders may choose to negotiate
a settlement that ends a rivalry to free up important resources that may be reallocated to the domestic economy. In a “guns versus
butter” world of economic trade-offs, when a state can no longer afford to pay the expenses associated with competition in a rivalry, it is quite rational for
leaders to reduce costs by ending a rivalry. This gain (a peace dividend) could be achieved at any time by ending a rivalry. However, such a gain is likely
to be most important and attractive to leaders when internal conditions are bad and the leader is seeking ways to alleviate active problems. Support
for policy change away from continued rivalry is more likely to develop when the economic situation sours and
elites and masses are looking for ways to improve a worsening situation. It is at these times that the pressure to cut
military investment will be greatest and that state leaders will be forced to recognize the difficulty of continuing to pay for a rivalry. Among
other things, this argument also encompasses the view that the cold war ended because the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics could no
longer compete economically with the United States.
2NC CP Overview
Paroles solve instead of Congress----USCISC has more control over immigration than congress
Endelman and Mehta ‘9 (Gary Endelman, practices immigration law at BP America Inc, serves on the
Editorial Advisory Board of Immigration Daily, and Cyrus D. Mehta, nationally
recognized in the field of immigration law. He represents corporations and
individuals from around the world in business and employment immigration, family
immigration, consular matters, naturalization, federal court litigation and asylum. He
also advises lawyers on ethical issues. Based on 18 years of experience in
immigration law, He is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School
where he teaches a course, Immigration and Work, Chair of the American
Immigration Lawyers Association’s (AILA) National Pro Bono Committee and CoChair of the AILA-NY Chapter Pro Bono Committee, The Path Less Taken: Is There
An Alternative To Waiting For Comprehensive Immigration Reform?, February 25
2009, http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0225-endelman.shtm)
Editor's note: The central assumption of immigration advocates is that only Congress can ameliorate the immigration
crisis. Whether it is inadequate quota numbers - both family and employment, or the absence of options for "other
worker" temporary visas, or anything else, it has long been presumed that only Congress can remedy the situation. This
article by Gary Endelman and Cyrus Mehta questions the "only Congress can solve this" supposition. The article argues
that there is ample room in the Immigration and Nationality Act, for the Executive Branch, acting alone and
without Congress, to take decisive curative action. The key is to separate permanent residency from
the two critical benefits that flow therefrom - legal work authorization and ability to travel.
Both of these benefits can be made available, by Executive fiat, to millions of immigrants - both
present and future, immediately, without any act of Congress. Once these benefits are in hand, Congress
can grant permanent residency and citizenship, when the time is propitious, without being held hostage by the
anti-immigrationists. This article explores how the once-unthinkable can be achieved lawfully through the enlightened
use of President Obama's and Secretary Napolitano's inherent discretionary authority under the current statutory regime.
We urge all those involved in immigration advocacy to take a close look at the intellectual ammunition in this article to
chart a new path to the promised land of immigration benefits. [Ed. note ends here]
Advance parole allows for employment and H-1B
Endelman and Mehta ‘10 (Gary Endelman, practices immigration law at BP America Inc, serves on the
Editorial Advisory Board of Immigration Daily, and Cyrus D. Mehta, nationally
recognized in the field of immigration law. He represents corporations and
individuals from around the world in business and employment immigration, family
immigration, consular matters, naturalization, federal court litigation and asylum. He
also advises lawyers on ethical issues. Based on 18 years of experience in
immigration law, He is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School
where he teaches a course, Immigration and Work, Chair of the American
Immigration Lawyers Association’s (AILA) National Pro Bono Committee and CoChair of the AILA-NY Chapter Pro Bono Committe COMPREHENSIVE
IMMIGRATION REFORM THROUGH EXECUTIVE FIAT, April 25, 2010,
http://cyrusmehta.blogspot.com/2010/04/comprehensive-immigrationreform.html)
A Service memorandum dated August 5, 1997, stated that an ‘adjustment applicant’s otherwise valid and
unexpired nonimmigrant employment authorization…is not terminated by his or her temporary departure
from the United States, if prior to such departure the applicant obtained advance parole in accordance with 8
CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii).’ The Service intends to clarify this issue in the final rule. Until then, if the alien’s H-1B or L-1
employment authorization would not have expired, had the alien not left and returned under advance parole, the Service
will not consider a paroled adjustment applicant’s failure to obtain a separate employment authorization
document to mean that the paroled adjustment applicant engaged in unauthorized employment by working for
the H-1 or L-1 employer between the date of his or her parole and the date to be specified in the final rule. A close
examination of this astonishingly creative policy reveals that the Executive presumably allowed such an
individual to continue working without any formal work document. Admitting an H-1B on advance parole (and
thus presumably as a parolee rather than as an H-1B nonimmigrant), and allowing him or her to extend H-1B status
subsequently, while permitting this individual to continue working for the employer without an EAD, required
creative thinking on the part of the government. These are a few examples of how the Executive has creatively found
ameliorative solutions within the four corners of the INA.
Perm do both
Mutually exclusive--- both congress and agencies can’t have control over inaction of the
plan
And links to ptx--- Independent justifications during debate links politicians to backlash. Only
CP avoids publicity and floor fight.
Schoenbrod ‘99 David, Professor of Law, New York Law School, Adjunct Scholar, Cato Institute, Former Staff Attorney and Co-director, Project on Urban
Transportation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Former Director of Program Development, Bedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation, Former Staff
Attorney, Association of the Bar, City of New York Committee on Electric Power and the Environment, Former Professor, Yale Law School, and Member,
American Tree Farmers’ Association, (“Delegation and Democracy: A Reply to My Critics” – Cardozo Law Review)
http://www.constitution.org/ad_state/schoenbrod.htm
Mashaw is wrong anyway because the fulcrum of legislative responsibility is not the statute, but the floor fight . With delegation, the
floor fight is avoided because almost all legislators can vote for a bill that calls for clean air and jobs too . That is why the 1970 Clean
Air Act passed almost unanimously. Without delegation, the bill would have to contain clauses like , “widget plants shall emit no more
than X pounds of sulfur per ton of widgets produced.” Such a clause is open to an amendment to delete it from the bill or substitute “Y
pounds” for “X pounds.” Legislators have to stand up and be held accountable on the hard choices. That is why one of the only contested
provisions of the 1970 Clean Air Act was on the amendments to the one true law in the statute — limiting emissions from new cars by
ninety percent. Floor fights are newsworthy and attract public interest . The local papers will point out how the local representatives
voted. By the next election, legislators will have made many controversial choices. They will be known for how they act on hard choices
and not just for what they say. Unlike Mashaw, members of Congress understand that delegation lets them avoid responsibility. That is
why they go to great lengths to use delegation to avoid blame not only for regulation, but also for raising their own salaries. If, as
Mashaw argues, legislators do not truly avoid blame through delegation, they would not be so reluctant to invoke the Congressional
Review Act to try to repeal agency laws with which they disagree.
Prez powers
Strong presidential power is key to unified and consistent leadership—this is key to effective US
foreign policy
O’Donnell ‘02
(Joshua, JD Candidate @ Vanderbilt, November, 35 Vand. J. Transnat'l L. 1601, lexis)
A functional analysis of this debate reveals that the President should have the power to terminate treaties unilaterally. Therefore, this Note concludes that the Senate's tacit
acknowledgment of such power should be formally recognized. Before going further , a cursory look at the political theories behind international relations
helps demonstrate the structural advantages the President has in the area of foreign affairs. There are two competing schools of international
relations theory - realism and institutionalism. n288 The basic argument behind realism is that "international politics is shaped by states' pursuit of power and by the
distribution ... of power among states." n289 According to the realist school of thought, the international political scene is anarchy and states seek to maximize their power in
this anarchy. n290 Institutionalism, on the other hand, argues that "states can cooperate in a wide variety of ways that allow them to escape the prisoner's dilemmas created by
international anarchy." n291 Both of these schools of thought operate under the presumption that , for the international system to work, states must be
headed by rational, unitary actors. n292 These actors "identify threats, develop responses, and evaluate the costs and benefits that arise
from different policy options." n293 There are, naturally, limitations to these theories. Political and bureaucratic aspects of the U.S.
system will constrain foreign policy, and pressing domestic issues may "overtake national interests" at times. n294 Nevertheless, the
ideal of unitary national action on the international front that should guide a state's approach to developing effective foreign policy,
whether one is a realist or an institutionalist. n295 In 1961, William Fulbright published an article calling for greater presidential authority in the area of foreign
affairs. n296 While [*1632] he did not explicitly rely on realism or institutionalism to support his arguments, he did agree that there is a need for unified foreign policy. n297
While the world has changed dramatically since his time, much of his theory still has application today. n298 When Fulbright wrote his article, the concerns were
"communism, fascism, aggressive nationalism, and the explosive awakening of long quiescent peoples." n299 While the concerns are different today, the need for a unified
policy is not. n300 The concerns of the modern world are different because the world is more international, more than two powers hold nuclear
weapons, and terrorism may be the largest threat. However, this type of world demands, just as in the past, a consistent, unified
foreign policy. n301 Fulbright argued that the President's effectiveness is "principally a function of his own knowledge, wisdom, vision, and authority." n302 It is "not
within our powers to confer wisdom or perception on the Presidential person. It is within our power to grant or deny him authority." n303 Excessive limits on the
President in the area of foreign affairs limit such authority. n304 In articulating this point, Fulbright said, It is exceedingly difficult - if
not impossible - to devise unified policies oriented to a clear and definite conception of the national interest through a system in which
power and responsibility for foreign policy are "shared and overlapping." Policies thus evolved are likely to be ill-co-ordinated, shortranged, and often unsuccessful, while the responsibility for failure is placed squarely on the President, neither "shared" nor "overlapping." n305 Similar sentiments
existed at the time of the constitutional framers as well. n306 In The Federalist No. 70, Alexander Hamilton said , "Decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch will
generally characterize the proceedings of one man in a much more eminent degree than the proceedings of any greater number; and in
proportion as the number is increased, these qualities will be diminished." n307 From Fulbright's and Hamilton's arguments, it
follows that the President is best situated to be in charge of foreign affairs.
Independent agency autonomy is key to FRB – prevents runaway inflation or recessions
Miller ‘93
(Geoffrey P., Prof Law – U Chicago, Cardozo Law Review, October, Lexis)
Examples of cases in which Congress could appropriately vest interpretive powers in an administrative agency, free of most forms of
presidential oversight and control, might be the power of an agency such as the Federal Reserve Board to interpret a congressional
directive regarding the conduct of monetary policy. 42 Formulation and implementation of monetary policy falls within the purview of
the Federal Reserve Board, and, although the consequence of the Fed's monetary policy decisions are widely felt throughout the
government (and the economy generally) the instructions about the conduct of monetary policy that might be contained in legislation
are unlikely, in themselves, to have cross-cutting implications for other agencies as far as interpretation is concerned. Moreover, the
concerns for avoiding faction militate in favor of vesting control over monetary policy in an agency with substantial independence from
the President, since if the President controlled the money supply directly, there would be a serious danger of manipulation of this
fundamental economic power for short-term political gain: the President could flood the economy with money in the months before an
election in order to spark a temporary boom, at the cost of subsequent recession or inflation. The Federal Reserve should enjoy the
power to interpret its mandate with respect to monetary policy, and the President should not enjoy the power, even in theory, to trump
the Fed's interpretation.
AT: Lame Duck
1. Our interpretation is that the plan must pass immediately –
2. It’s real world – special sessions happen, for instance this past summer.
Fox News, “Obama Signs $26 Billion Bailout for Cash-Strapped States,” 8/10/2010, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/08/10/houseapproves-billion-teacher-bailout/
Representatives scattered around the country and world for the August break were summoned back to
Washington for the one-day session as Democrats stressed the need to act before children return to classrooms
missing teachers laid off because of budgetary crises in the states.
Republicans saw it differently, calling the bill a giveaway to teachers' unions and another example of profligate
Washington spending that Democrats would pay for in the coming election.
The Senate narrowly passed the measure last Thursday, after the House had begun its summer break, necessitating the
special session.
Midterms
2NC Uniqueness Wall
Republicans will win the house now – 1NC Silver ev.
Prefer Nate Silver – he’s a statistical mastermind.
Leigh Bureau, the world’s preeminent lecture bureau, “Nate Silver,” 2010, http://www.leighbureau.com/speaker.asp?id=498
Nate Silver has been called a "spreadsheet psychic" and "number-crunching prodigy" by New York Magazine.
Nate comes out of the world of baseball statistics, but during the 2008 presidential election primaries, he turned his sights
and his amazing predictive abilities and forecasting models to the game of politics and current events — with
incredible results.
He began by predicting 2008 primary election results with stunning accuracy — and often in opposition to the
better-known political pollsters. He then moved on to the general election, where he correctly predicted the
presidential winner in 49 states and the District of Columbia.
And, Crystal Ball predicts GOP takeover.
Larry Sabato, Director, U.Va. Center for Politics, “The Crystal Ball’s Final Calls,” 10/28/2010,
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/ljs2010102801/
The Crystal Ball was the first nonpartisan ratings service to call the House for the Republicans this year. Before
Labor Day we issued a projection of +47 net gains for the Republicans. We based this both on a district-bydistrict analysis and also a careful review of the underlying election variables, from the generic ballot to
presidential job approval to likely statewide coattail.
We believe +47 was the right call, though at the time the number was considered startling to most. The likely switch of the House to the GOP was fiercely
disputed by Democrats at that time. Many other nonpartisan prognosticators had estimated Republican gains as being below the 39 net required for a
GOP takeover.
Even at this late date, we see no need to do anything but tweak the total R gains, based on more complete information now available to all. Thus, we
are raising the total to +55 net R seats. We consider 47 to be in the ballpark still, but more of a floor than a
ceiling. In fact, if you’ll go back to our pre-Labor Day analysis, that’s exactly what we suggested +47 would end
up being.
Crystal ball is more accurate than their sources.
Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, “At the Moment, Crystal Ball Sees a GOP House,” 9/12/2010,
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2010/sep/12/ed-saba12-ar-499738/
As always, the Crystal Ball will make a guess in every contest before Election Day. Some will be moved sooner,
and a few head-scratchers will only be categorized at the very last minute.
We're proud of our record, with more than 98 percent of the contests called correctly over the
decade-long life of the Crystal Ball. In some years, our overall seat changes in each category have been on
the button. But we fully admit here and now that, as always, we'll get some of them wrong.
*Crystal Ball is the political prediction organization managed by Mr. Sabato.
Predictions markets show GOP takeover.
Electoral Map.net, “2010 Congress - House Seats Based on data from the Intrade prediction market,” 10/30/2010,
http://electoralmap.net/2010/house_seats.php
This chart depicts a prediction of the outcome of the 2010 US Congressional races based on betting data from
Intrade.com
Each bar represents an individual Intrade contract where wagers are placed on the likelihood that the Republican party will pick up that number of seats.
*See note below.
Republican gain: 55 seats
Contracts which are trading below the 50/50 mark are shaded a lighter red. Contracts above that mark are shaded dark red. This shading helps visualize
the threshold between events that are not forecasted to happen and events that are. Historically the party in power loses seats during mid-term elections,
and 2010 looks to be no exception. Intrade is in concurrence with major polls which forecast a Republican gain in seats,
but with in a prediction market, traders aren't just answering a pollster's questions -- they are putting their
money where their mouth is.
*Note: There is no market for a forecasted gain in seats for the Democratic party. There is, however, a contract for "no gain" in seats for the Republicans.
That contract is trading near zero.
Prediction markets are the most accurate assessor.
Joyce E. Berg, Associate Professor of Accounting and Pioneer Hibred Research Fellow at the Tippie College of Business, director of the Iowa Electronic Markets,
Forrest D. Nelson, Professor of Economics and Tippie Research Fellow at the Tippie College of Business, and Thomas A. Rietz, Associate Professor of
Finance and Hershberger Faculty Research Fellow at the Tippie College of Business, April-June, 2008, Prediction Market Accuracy in the Long Run, International
Journal of Forecasting, Volume 24, Issue 2, p. 298
The results above suggest that predictions
from markets dominate those from polls about 75% of the time, whether the
prediction is made on election eve or several months in advance of the election. To assess the size of the advantage, in addition to its
frequency, we computed the average absolute error for both polls and markets on each day a poll was released. The mean error for polls across all
964 polls in the sample was 3.37 percentage points, while the corresponding mean error for market predictions
was 1.82 percentage points.19 This advantage persisted for both long term and short term forecasts. Using only those dates
more than 100 days prior to the election, the poll error averaged 4.49 percentage points and the market error averaged 2.65 percentage points. Polls conducted within 5
days of the election had an average error of 1.62 percentage points, while the corresponding market prediction error average was 1.11 percentage points.20 5.
Concluding remarks Previous
research has shown the absolute and relative accuracy of prediction markets at very
short horizons (1 day to 1 week). The evidence we present in this paper shows that the markets are also accurate months in advance, and
do a markedly better job than polls at these longer horizons. In making our comparisons, we compare unadjusted market prices to
unadjusted polls, demonstrating that market prices aggregate data better than simple surveys where the results are interpreted using sampling theory. Thus, our
evidence not only speaks in predicting U.S. Presidential election outcomes, but also offers insight into the likely
predictive accuracy of markets in settings where there is not a long history of similar events or a clear model for adjusting
survey results.
Large enthusiasm gap means GOP win.
Oliver Knox, AP, “One week from US vote, Republicans fired up,” 10/26/2010, http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20101026/ts_alt_afp/usvote
One week before US elections, President Barack Obama's
fired-up Republican foes seemed on track Tuesday to ride a wave
of voter anger at the sour economy to big gains in Congress.
Analysts predicted Republicans would retake the House of Representatives and cut deeply into the Democrats' Senate majority, winning a solid base
from which to assail Obama's agenda two years before his 2012 reelection bid.
Democrats hoped their get-out-the-vote efforts would make the difference in scores of nail-biter races and help
contain a Republican tide that was also expected to give the president's opponents control of key governorships.
Obama, who warned supporters in Rhode Island late Monday to "run scared" of losing their congressional majorities, was scheduled to mount an 11thhour coast-to-coast blitz through crucial battlegrounds.
"I've got to have you come out in droves and vote in this election. You've got to come out and vote. And, look, if everybody who voted in 2008 votes in
2010, we are confident we will win this election," he said.
But a new poll released by the USA Today newspaper Monday gave Republicans an unprecedented 63 percent37 percent edge over Democrats in supporters who said they were more excited than usual about casting a
ballot on November 2.
In 1994, Republicans held a nine-point advantage in the same poll and went on to swamp Democrats in a historic
rout -- something they hope to do again in the November 2 election that will shape the fate of the president's agenda.
The survey, carried out by the respected Gallup organization, had an error margin of plus or minus four
percentage points. It seemed to buttress repeated US media reports of a potentially devastating "enthusiasm
gap" for Democrats.
2NC Link Wall
Latino voter enthusiasm is still lagging – tangible action is key.
Gary Younge, Guardian, “Latino voters could swing the midterms,” 10/26/2010,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/26/us-midterm-elections-2010-us-politics
The problem with the ad is that while it is both crude and crass, it identifies a definite disaffection that Latinos have with the Obama administration.
The Democrats' inability to introduce immigration reform or pass the Dream Act, which would allow young Latinos to
achieve citizenship through military service or college, despite
their promise to do so and their super majorities has left many
Latinos wary.
“Many of us are novices at the political game, and when a promise is made, you keep your promise ," Fernando
Romero, the president of Hispanics in Politics, a wing of the Latin Chamber of Commerce, told the Wall Street Journal.
There was an uptick nationally in Latino voter turnout in 2008, but a Pew survey shows they are still far less
likely to vote than
blacks or whites, and their participation rate remains just under 50%. For reasons more related to economics than ethnicity –
Latinos tend to be poorer – they are still far more likely to support the Democrats than Republicans. The trouble is, as a
Pew Hispanic survey reveals, they are less motivated to vote.
Even a small step like the plan would garner massive Latino support.
CQ Politics, “Hope Exists for Immigration 'Down Payment',” 7/29/2010,
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20100730/pl_cq_politics/politics3714092
Still, it's worth the effort. "A small, good deal is better than no deal at all," says Antonio Gonzalez, president of the Southwest
Voter Registration Education Project and a convenor of the National Latino Congreso, a coalition of major Hispanic groups.
"We want comprehensive reform, but right now we need a lifeboat ," he told me. "We need to take care of the people
we can."
The National Latino Congreso includes the League of United Latin American Citizens and the Mexican
American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
The "down payment" strategy also has been endorsed by a huge coalition of groups organized as Reform
Immigration for America, which includes the National Council of La Raza and the National Immigration Forum.
Action on skilled immigration splits the GOP.
Dallas Morning News, “Skilled immigrants push for visa reform,” 1/11/2008,
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/bus/stories/DN-immigration_11bus.ART0.State.Edition2.37b4ce6.html
Raising the number of high-skilled worker permits, known as H1B visas, has bipartisan support in Washington.
But many members of Congress, alternately skittish and brash about the hot-potato subject of immigration,
disavow any bill that doesn't tackle illegal immigration and border security.
"H1B is only for people with specialized knowledge, who bring intellectual knowledge to the country," said Ms. Aragolam, 26. "Putting them in the same
frame as illegal immigrants is totally wrong."
A growing chorus of immigration advocates and businesses agrees with her. Yet their voice has been drowned out as presidential candidates, particularly
Republicans, hustle for votes with proclamations to expel illegal immigrants and seal porous borders.
"The more candidates inflame their anxieties, the harder it's going to be to eventually get back to a conversation about solutions," said Tamar Jacoby, a
senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute who has studied public attitudes toward immigration.
Within just a few years, immigration seems to have replaced Social Security as the third rail of American politics. The subject ranks among the top
several concerns of GOP voters in presidential primaries – even in states with overwhelmingly white populations, such as New Hampshire.
Some lawmakers, such as Texas Sen. John Cornyn, have argued against passing employer-specific immigration bills, saying those popular measures are
needed to leverage support for a comprehensive immigration bill.
Stalemate in Congress The past year's failed legislation included an attempt to raise the number of seasonal-worker
visas and to provide legal status to children of illegal immigrants who attended college or entered the military. Since then, Republican
candidates have rarely missed an opportunity to attack each other for past positions that look
like amnesty for illegal immigrants.
"The anti-immigrant fervor that is spawned by some in the political arena is spilling over to
everything," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., chairwoman of a House subcommittee on immigration and border security. "Americans think the
immigration system or lack thereof is a problem. But they didn't ask the Congress to do nothing."
GOP unity is key to their midterm victory.
CBS News, “GOP Strategist: Election to Be Won in the Middle,” 8/9/2010,
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/09/earlyshow/main6756273.shtml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
It would seem to be the Republicans' race to lose. But they can't win it alone.
On "Face the Nation yesterday, Washington Post columnist Dan Balz said the
Republican base is highly motivated, and that the
party is focusing on issues - the economy, the size and scope of government, and the deficit - that can unify their coalition and
also reach out to independent voters.
2NC IL ext.
GOP win derails Obama’s agenda.
Jim McTague, Barron’s Observer, “Standoff on the Hill,” 7/5/2010,
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB50001424052970203296004575339363082472400.html#articleTabs_panel_article%3D1
OBAMA CAN SCARCELY afford to lose any support in Congress. The president already has problems enlisting
the help of the more conservative members of his own party. His universal health-care package narrowly made it through the
House. The financial reform bill that he wanted on his desk by July 4 may get there sometime this month if he's lucky—minus some controversial
Democratic provisions. Think how unpalatable it will become for Democrats seeking reelection in 2012 to go along
with Obama's Big Government policies if the party gets its wings clipped in November.
Democrats may well have to compromise on a raft of tax increases expected next year, when cuts initiated by George W.
Bush expire. Even a widely assumed rise in the capital-gains tax, from 15% to 20% for the wealthy, could get tempered by the new Congress.
Government spending could be reined, as the Republicans use the their increased strength to promote greater
austerity.
"This two-year period of activist government greatly will subside," says Greg Valliere, chief political strategist for Potomac
Research Group in Washington, an investment-advisory firm. "Obama isn't going to have the numbers." Allegiance to the president among
Democrats will be seriously eroded by the realization that Republican Sen. Scott Brown's election to the late Ted Kennedy's seat in Massachusetts was no
fluke -- Americans want government to slow down, says Valliere.