kq friesen-johnson daszkiewicz 1nc v ss attiyeh yamasaki rd 1

8/11/2019 KQ Friesen-Johnson Daszkiewicz 1NC v SS Attiyeh Yamasaki Rd 1

1/20

Off CaseTopicalityNeoliberalismPolitics


2/20

TA. Interpretation POEs funded by US are exclusively US Word net (http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=port%20of%20entry) S: (n) port of entry, point of entry (a port in the United States where customs officials are stationed tooversee the entry and exit of people and merchandise )

B. Toward indicates the object of actionOED 13 Oxford English Dictonary onlinehttp://www.oed.com/view/Entry/204005?rskey=JVzAhI&result=2#eid

Toward , prep Of motion (or action figured as motion): In the direction of; so as to approach (but not necessarily reach: thus differing fromto prep. 1). b. pred. after to be: On the way to. Obs. c. With implication of reaching; to. Obs. 2. a. Of position: In the direction of; on the sidenext to; turned or directed to, facing. b. Beside, near; about, in attendance upon; in the possession of; with. Obs. 3. In the direction of (in fig.

senses). a. gen.: esp. with words expressing tendency or aim, and followed by an abstract noun expressing state, condition, etc. b. With anoun or pronoun denoting the object of action or feeling: To; against. c. With regard to, in reference to, respecting,concerning, about. Also as toward (cf. as to at as adv. and conj. Phrases 3a). Obs. d. In comparison with: = to prep. 18. Now dial. 4. Of time: Soas to approach; at the approach of, nearly as late or as far on as, shortly before, near. a. Of condition or quality: Verging upon, near;somewhat like, nearly, as if; toward blackness, somewhat or nearly black. Obs. b. Of quantity: Nearly as much as, nearly. 6.a. In prospect of; inthe imminence of; (as predicate) in preparation for. Obs. or arch. b. Coming upon, in store for; usually of evil: ready to fall upon,threatening. Obs. 7. In the way of contribution to; as a help to; for the purpose of making up, promoting, assisting, or the like; for. 8. For to -ward, separated by the n. or pron., as in to us-ward, to God-ward, see -ward suffix, and cf. to prep. 2e.

C. B. Violation improving border efficiency does not increase economicengagement with Mexico because they only fund US investment

D. Topicality is a voter for

1. limits- if we explode the topic to much then anything becomes topical which meanswe dont actually get to understand the topic, their aff justifies things like port efficiency since Mexican goods enter at the port- completely explodes the topic andmakes it harder to be neg because the aff can read things like port security and makethem topical
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=port%20of%20entryhttp://www.oed.com/view/Entry/204005?rskey=JVzAhI&result=2#eidhttp://www.oed.com/view/Entry/204005?rskey=JVzAhI&result=2#eidhttp://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=port%20of%20entry


3/20

Neolib KMovements in Latin America are successfully producing alternatives to globalneoliberalism the plans economic imposition crushes these spaces of resistance,reducing the globe to a single, monocultural economic modelVattimo & Zabala 11(Gianni, Prof. of Theoretical Philosophy @ U of Turin, Santiago, Prof. of Philosophy @ U of Barcelona,Hermeneutic Communism , pgs. 124-131)

The Bolivarian Revolution is Chavezs commitment to twenty first - century socialism. Named afterSimon Bolivar, the early eighteenth-century Latin American revolutionary leader in the South Americanwars of independence, the Bolivarian Revolution names the desire to bring about Bolivars dream ofa united Latin America . While for Bolivar the union of Latin America was against the Spanish oppressors,for Chavez the unification is against the U.S. neoliberal and military impositions that , together with

the dictatorship of the Monetary Fund, have reduced the region to a great slum , that is, thedischarge of capitalism. As we can predict, it is just from these slums that Chavez receives most of hiselectoral support , as his political initiatives are all directed toward the weakest population. WhenChavez finally managed to secure control over the oil resources after the coup against him in 2002, heobliged Venezuelas largest oil company PdVSA, to distribute oil wealth throughout the country Thisweak communist plan is called the Oil Sowing Plan,3 and it invites communities to design their owndevelopment projects, for which PdVSA provides the funding . In 2005, social programs such as Barrio Adentro (for community health),Sucre (for university scholarships), and others received more than 6.9 billion dollars from PdVSA. Perhaps the most famous social program is Mision Milagro, which performed free eye surgeryon thousands of Venezuelans. This program is part of the greater Cuban-Venezuelan agreement where, in exchange for subsidized petroleum, 14,000 Cuban doctors were sent to help the

country transform the situation of the poor districts, where 11,000 neighborhood clinics have been established and the health budget has tripled. As a consequence ofthis weak communist political program, extreme poverty has been reduced by 72 percent since 2003,

infant mortality has dropped by more than one-third, and Venezuela has now become a territory freeof illiteracy " This cooperation with Cuba is also a defense against common enemies: the United Statesand the IMF. As we have said, Chavezs Bolivarian Revolution is not limited to his country" but takesinterest in the whole region . Together with Castr o (who quickly also became his mentor), Chavezbegan to support other politicians who shared these common enemies and were also interested infavoring the weakest citizens of their countries. Inspired by Chavezs democratic election and socialrevolt against neoliberalism in 2002, Lula was (democratically) elected president of Brazil , Kirchner inArgentina in zoo3, Bachelet in Chile in 2005, Morales in Bolivia in 2005, Correa in Ecuador in zoo6,Ortega in Nicaragua in 2006, Lugo in Paraguay in 2008, Funes in El Salvador in 2009, and Mujica inUruguay in 2009.43 While most of these politicians enacted, in different ways, weak communistprograms , the most representative politician and closest ally of Chavez is Evo Morales,* who only three months after tak ing office withdrew from the IMF and World Bank because oftheir tendencies to settle disputes in favor of international corporations and against governments.*5 As Forest Hylton and Sinclair Thomson point out, although Latin America has been the

site of the most radical opposition to neoliberal restructuring over the past five years, Bolivia has been its insurrectionary fron tline.* Morales not only has become the first president ofBolivia from the countrys ethnic majority (Aymaras) but also is amon g the first in the region to undertake a radical nationalization of his countrys resources (oil, natural gas, and almost half ofthe worlds reserves of lithium), against exploitation by foreign corporations (BR General Motors, Bechtel) and in favor of c ontrol by native Indians." But in order to recover control overBolivias natural resources, Morales was obliged (through a referendum held on January 25, 2009) to change the constitution, which had been written by the descendants of the Spanishcolonizers. These colonizers, who today as then, represent the ethnic minority live in the eastern provinces of Bolivia, which contain mo st of the countrys resources. As we can predict,Moraless greatest obstacle came from these white minorities, who, as Richard Gott of the Gua rdian explains, still have a racist and fascist mentality and, a fter centuries in control, dislike theprospect of their future being dominated by the formerly suppressed indigenous majority Nevertheless, the referendum passed with 61.43 percent of the vote, enabling a reform of the landand judiciary systems for the benefit of the people. Yet more important - and at the heart of the new constitutional charter- are the clauses that strengthen the rights of the countrysindigenous peoples.*9 Unfortunately to win approval, the new constitution needed more than popular democratic support, because the eastern provinces of Santa Cruz, Tarija, Beni, andPando not only tried to boycott it but also violently threatened to declare their independence from Bolivia. Although the European Union deployed a group of observers during the election, 5it was UNASUR (Union of South American Nations) that managed, after an emergency summit held in the Chilean capital, to obtain respect from the eastern provinces for their democratically

elected president and receive assurances of their peaceful participation in the referendum. After the summit, which allowed the referendum totake place, Morales declared that this was the first time in the history of the region that the countries


4/20

have decided to resolve the problems of South America themselves . In the past, even to deal with

some internal or bilateral . . . Latin American issues , they were discussed in the U nited S tates." Insum, both Chavezs initiatives and Moraless nationalizations are paradigmatic examples of weakcommunism . They decentralize the state bureaucratic system , which was so counterproductive in theSoviet Union: while the independent counsels increase community involvement, nationalizationreturned land, dignity and rights to the weakest segments of the population . But if Chavez andMorales managed to enact these progressive policies in their own countries, it is also because thewhole region has been able to resist some of capitalisms most e xtreme characteristics and even setup innovative arrangements outside of formal market structures . Most of these arrangements aremonitored by organizations such as ALBA (Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas), Mercosur (SouthernCommon Market), Banco del Sur (Bank of the South), and UNASUR, among others. With theseorganizations, South America is providing an alternative not only for the weak among its population

but also for other continents searching for a different political, economical, and ecological system .This is why Banco del Sur was recently endorsed by Stiglitz against the IMF impositions and why UNASURwas praised by Chomsky as an alternative to U.S. dominance in the region. Weak communism is thepolitical alternative to the neoliberal impositions of framed democracies . After years of submission tocapitalist market policies that obliged South American countries , among other entities, to removeobstacles to foreign investments, weak communism has began to take control . This is why in 2009 Lulapreferred to skip the Davos meeting in order to participate again, together with Chavez, Morales, andother South American leaders, in the World Social Forum in Belem. Over the past ten years, this forumhas become both an effective alternative to the Swiss meeting and the driving engine of those socialmovements without which Lula, Chavez, and other politicians would not have been elected. Althoughthese social movements differ in many respects from country to country they all share antipathy

towards US political, economic , and military control ," an opposition that is at the essence of weakcommunisms economic programs . 'This is why Lula, discussing the recent economic 2008 crisis at the social forum, felt compelled to emphasize how it was no tcaused by the socialism of Chavez or by the s truggles of Morales but by the bankrupt policies and lack of financial control of wealthy s tates outside the continent.5 Given that

neoliberal methods created the third world ,5 South American citizens will probably continue tovote for these communist leaders . As Mark Weisbrot has pointed out, they have succeeded where their neoliberal predecessors failed and changed their economic policies in ways that increasedeconomic growth. Argentinas economy grew more than 60% in six years and Venezuelas by 95%. These are enormous growth rates even taking into account these countries prior recessions, andallowed for large reductions in poverty. Left governments have also taken greater control over theirnatural resources (Ecuador, Bolivia, Venezuela) and delivered on their promises to share the income from these resources with the poor. This is the way democracy is supposed to work: people voted forchange and got quite a bit of what they voted for, with reasonable expectations of more to come . Weshould not be surprised if most Latin American voters stick with the left through hard times. Who else isgoing to defend their interests ? South American governments manage to defend their citizenseconomic interests because they have been detaching themselves not only from neoliberalimpositions but also from the attendant military presence , that is, armed capitalism . UNASUR, whichwas modeled after the European Union (prior to the creation of a common parliament, currency andpassport for all of its member states), has tried, through its member states, to evict the remaining U.S.military bases present in the region . While there are U.S. military bases throughout Europe, in South America only Peru, Paraguay Hondur as, and Colombia,which has the sole remaining conservative government in the region, recently agreed to an increase in U.S. military presence, in exchange for billions of dollars and privileged access to militarysupplies. Regardless of Colombias poor h uman-rights record, the United States continues to sponsor President Uribe not only in exchange for these bases (which also house nuclear weapons)but also for general political support, given the prevailing antipathy toward the United States in the region . But this is not the only indication that the United States is trying to regain controlover South America. ln zoo8, the Fourth Fleet was reestablished in the regions waters, and in zoo9 a military coup against t he democratically elected president of Ho nduras was allowed.While this coup could have been easily avoided, considering that the United States still has a base in the country; the United States instead supported the newly imposed president, because

the constitutional reform process that Zelaya hoped to set in motion could easily lead to voters rejection of foreign troops on their soil.4 All these are examples of U.S. interest


5/20

in the region , an interest that goes far beyond its natural resources, even considering that the US getshalf its oi l from Latin America. 5 Nevertheless, instead of a military response to these provocations, UNASUR instructed its Defense Council to investigate thedanger that these bases in Colombia pose for the region and declared (after the summit held in Bariloche, Argentina, on August 29, 2009) that South America must be kept as a land of

peace, and that foreign military forces must not threaten the sovereignty or integrity of any nation of the region. If the regions prevailing communistgovernments lose electoral support one day it will not be because of the impositions of armedcapitalism but rather because its own social movements have ceased to support them . After all, weak

communism was chosen because of the overwhelming poverty that dominates the region afterdecades of neoliberal impositions-the same poverty that now is also starting to appear in Westernstates. In sum, the U nited States feels the need to regain control over South America not only becauseof its vital natural resources but also, and most of all, because its social, economic, and democratic

model is again summoning the specter of communism throughout the world ."

The impact is extinction neoliberalism reduces existence itself to property to beexchanged, producing a drive to a single way of knowing and being that causesmassive structural violence and environmental destructionLander 2 ,

(Edgardo, Prof. of Sociology and Latin American studies at the Venezuelan Central University in Caracas,Eurocentrism, Modern Knowledges , and the Natural Order of Global Capital, Nepantla: Views fromSouth , 3.2, muse)

Just as resources formerly considered to be commons , or of communal use, were privatelyappropriated through the enclosure and private appropriation of fields , rivers, lakes, and forests,leading to the expulsion of European peasants from their land and their forced conversion into factoryworkers during the Industrial Revolution, through biopiracy, legalized by the agreements protectingintellectual property, the ancestral collective knowledge of peoples in all parts of the world is beingexpropriated and converted into private property , for whose use its own creators must pay. Thisrepresents the dispossession or private appropriation of intellectual commons (Shiva 1997, 10). Thepotential but also real impact of these ways of defining and imposing the defense of so-calledintellectual property are multiple, yet another expression of the tendency , in the current process ofglobalization, to concentrate power in Northern businesses and countries, to the detriment of thepoor majorities in the South . At stake are matters as critical as the survival of life-forms and choices

that do not completely fit within the universal logic of the market , as well as rural nutritional self-sufficiency and access to food and health services for the planets underprivileged majorities . As aconsequence of the establishment of patents on varieties of life-forms, and theappropriation /expropriation of rural/communal knowledge, by transnational seed and agrochemicalcompanies, the patterns of rural production are changing ever more quickly , on a global scale.Peasants become less and less autonomous, and they depend more and more on expensiveconsumables they must purchase from transnational companies (Gaia Foundation and GRAIN 1998).

These companies have also developed a terminator technology deliberately designed so thatharvested seeds cannot germinate, forcing peasants to buy new seeds for each planting cycle (Ho andTraavik n.d.; Raghavan n.d.). All of this has had a profound impact , as much on the living conditions ofmillions of people as on genetic diversity on the planet Earth . The freedom of commerce that theinterests of these transnational companies increasingly impose on peasants throughout the world isleading to a reduction in the genetic variety of many staple food crops . This reduction in genetic

diversity , associated with a engineering view of agriculture and based on an extreme, industrial type ofcontrol over each phase of the productive process with genetically modified seeds and the intensive


6/20

use of agrochemicals drastically reduces the auto-adaptive and regenerative ability of ecological

systems . And nevertheless, the conservation of biodiversity requires the existence of diversecommunities with diverse agricultural and medical systems that utilize diverse species in situ.Economic decentralization and diversification are necessary conditions for biodiversity conservation .(Shiva 1997, 88) Agricultural biodiversity has been conserved only when farmers have total control overtheir seeds. Monopoly rights regimens for seeds, either in the form of breeders rights or patents, willhave the same impact on in situ conservation of plant genetic resources as the alienation of rights oflocal communities has had on the erosion of tree cover and grasslands in Ethiopia, India and otherbiodiversity-rich regions. (99)12 As much as for preserving genetic diversity an indispensable

condition of life as for the survival of rural and indigenous peoples and cultures all over the

planet a plurality of ways of knowing must coexist, democratically . Current colonial trends toward

an intensified, totalitarian monoculture of Eurocentric knowledge only lead to destruction and death.

The alternative the judge should vote negative to reject neoliberal knowledgeproduction and endorse globalization from below

Refusing neoliberalisms hegemonic control over knowledge production is essentialwithin the space of this debate the alternative aligns the ballot with Latin Americanresistance movementsChoi, Murphy, and Caro 4Jung Min, John W, Manuel J, Professor of Sociology SDSU, Professor of Sociology University of Miami,Professor of Sociology Barry University, Globalization with a Human Face, pg. 6-9

Many critics have begun to wonder why hamburgers and jeans can be globalized, but the spread ofthemes such as peace or justice is thought by many politicians to be impossible to generalize . What

many persons are calling for, especially in the Third World, is an alternative approach to globalization. Along with justice, they want to globalize resistance to current historical trends. They want to call a halt,for example, to the economic hardships and rape of the environment that have accompanied the rise ofneoliberalism. This new strategy is referred to in many circles as "globalization from below." The pointis that current policies have been driven from above from the capitalist centers around the world andreflect the economic and cultural interests of these powerful classes. Most other persons , accordingly,are viewed as simply a cheap source of labor or a possible market for cheap goods. And because of thisrole in the world capitalist system, their opportunities are severely restricted. Even if they conform tothe cultural mandates of the market, the likelihood of economic advancement is not very great. Thissort of mobility is simply not a part of the role persons play on the economic periphery. What actuallyoccurs, indeed, is that the system of controls, which are found in the economic centers, arereproduced on the periphery, but with more immediate devastation. The imposition of consumerismand materialism, for example, undermine the local economy and community supports, therebyincreasing strife and reinforcing local elites and their ties to foreign investors. The old oligarchies arethus strengthened, while local institutions become more dependent on outside intervention. Theresulting hierarchy, accordingly, is more powerful than ever before. As might be imagined, globalizationfrom below has a very different agenda. Different values guide economic development, in short, whilenew ways of organizing society are sought. Instead of profit, for example, the general improvement of acommunity may be of prime importance. Likewise, emphasis may be placed on strengthening civilsociety, and thus ,advancing democracy, rather than identifying markets and potential investors. In


7/20

general, globalization from below is driven by local concerns and the masses of persons who have littleinfluence in corporate boardrooms. These are the people- -the majority of the world's inhabitants-- whoare ignored unless their labor is suddenly profitable. At the core of this new globalization is often thecall for a postcapitalist logic. Novel ways of looking at, for example, production and consumption areregularly a part of this project, in addition to new definitions of work and personal and group identity.Central to this scenario is that persons can remake themselves entirely, and nothing is exempt fromrevision. What proponents of globalization from below have done, in effect, is to seize control of theirhistory and invent a new future. They have decided that history can be made, rather than merelyexperienced, and that there is no inherent telos to this process. The past is nothing, therefore, otherthan a point of departure of a new course of action. In the truest sense of the term, these activists areutopian thinkers. They are not enamored by reality and are convinced that new social arrangements,which have never existed and may be very difficult to create, are possible. As many students chantedduring the 1960s, they are demanding the impossible and do not want to settle for more pragmaticsubstitutes. They are simply asking that persons strive to fulfill their dreams. But these demands are notbased on fantasy. Instead, proponents of globalization from below are trying to emphasize an ideaadvanced by Marx: that is, nothing that humans imagine is foreign to them. Consequently, utopianideals or practices are simply inventions that have not , yet been realized. Through effort and

determination, and the absence foreign subversion, an economic system that is founded on justicemight eventually be enacted. Merely because this vision has not been actualized, does not necessarilysignal that such an aim contravenes human nature or is hopelessly flawed. The problem may simplybe that persons have been unwilling or unable to purge themselves of certain biases orpredispositions, and thus have never embarked on the creation of a new reality. Those who championglobalization from below, however, are not politically naive. They understand that powerful intereststhat benefit from injustice and inequality have intervened in the past to undermine various utopianprojects. The proper dream is important, but so is the ability to implement this vision. These newutopians are thus trying to convince the public to restrain those who want to destroy these projects.What they are saying, in short, is that justice should be given the opportunity to thrive. THERESTORATION OF COMMUNITY Various critics are saying that only the restoration of a strong sense of

community can guarantee the success of globalization. What is meant by community, however, is indispute. After all, even neoliberals lament the current loss of community that has ensued in the worldeconomy. From their perspective, a community of effective traders would strengthen everyone'sposition at the marketplace. Advocates of globalization from below, as might be expected, havesomething very different in mind. They are not calling for the general assimilation of persons to acosmopolitan ideal, which is thought to instill civility and enforce rationality. Persons who want to join the world market, as was noted earlier, are thought to need a good dose of these traits.Nonetheless, there is a high price for entry into this community cultural or personal uniquenessmust be sacrificed to promote effective economic discourse. Such reductionism, however, is simplyunacceptable in a large part of the globe that is beginning to appreciate local customs and theresulting diversity. What these new activists want, therefore, is a community predicated on humansolidarity. This sort of community, as Emmanuel Levinas describes, is focused on ethics rather thanmetaphysics." His point is that establishing order does not require the internalization of a single idealby all persons, but simply their mutual recognition. The recognition of others as different, butconnected to a common fate, is a powerful and unifying principle. Persons are basically unitedthrough the recognition and appreciation of their uniqueness. As should be noted, this image isencompassing but not abstract. Uniformity, in other words, is replaced by the juxtaposition of diversityas the cement that binds a community together. Like a montage, a community based on humansolidarity is engendered at the boundaries of its various and diverse elements. The genius of thisrendition of community is that no one is by nature an outsider, and thus deserving of special treatment.


8/20

Many of the problems that exist today, in fact, result from persons sitting idly while their neighbors aresingled out as different and discriminated against or exploited. When persons view themselves to befundamentally united, on the other hand, such mistreatment is unlikely, because community membersprotect and encourage one another. Indeed, this sort of obligation is neither selective nor optionalamong those who belong to a true community. Basically the idea is that if no one is an outsider, thereare no persons or groups to exploit. Such a community, moreover, does not require extraordinaryactions on the part of its members to end racism, sexism, or economic exploitation. All that isrequired is persons refuse to turn away and say nothing when such discrimination is witnessed. Byrefusing to go along with these practices, any system that survives because of discrimination orexploitation will eventually grind to a halt. Clearly, there is an implicit threat behind current trends ofglobalization. Because globalization as it is currently defined is inevitable, anyone who expects to betreated as rational and civilized must accept some temporary pain. Old cultural ways will simply haveto be abandoned, and a transition to the new economic realities. Those who cannot tolerate themistreatment of fellow community members any longer appear to be a part of this change, however,they are obligated to bare witness to these abuses. And by refusing to be complicit these actions,business as usual cannot continu e. A globalization of can be mounted, therefore, that might be able tocreate a more humane world. In the face of mounting darkness increasing economic hardship and

degradation why not seriously entertain the possibility that social life can be organized in lessalienating ways? With little left to why not pursue alternative visions?


9/20

Politics

CIR will pass nowRosenberg, 7/18/ 13 President and Founder of NDN, a leading progressive think tank and advocacyorganization (Simon, Immigr ation Reform Is Very Much Alive. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simon-rosenberg/immigration-reform-is-ver_b_3617406.html)

Contrary to recent news accounts, we are closer to passing a meaningful immigration reform bill thanat any point since J ohn McCain and Ted Kennedy introduced their bill in 2005 . Consider: The Senatepassed a bill with 68 votes , the most any immigrant reform bill has received since this process began.The last time an immigration bill passed the Senate it was in 2006, and it received just 62 votes. TheHouse , whose last major vote on immigration reform was in 2005 and called for the deportation of the11 million unauthorized migrants in the U.S., has already passed five immigration and border related

bills out of committee . Last week Speaker John Boehner said he believed the House needed to dosomething on immigration reform this Congress, and next week Republicans are having a publichearing on the DREAM Act. While much has been written about the need Republicans have to supportimmigration reform to get back in the game with Latino voters, I think an equally compelling reason whythe House is already taking significant strides towards passing an immigration reform bill is thepressure they feel to meet the very high bar set by the Senate "Gang of Eight" framework . Theirframework will give the country a better legal immigration system, one more based on bringing growthproducing skilled labor. It will close some of the holes in our interior enforcement system, build on thesignificant gains made in border security in recent years and make the border region even safer. It willmake needed investments in 47 ports of entry with Mexico, facilitating more trade and tourism, creatingmore jobs on both sides of the border. It creates an arduous but achievable path to citizenship for the

11 million unauthorized immigrants already in the country. And remarkably, it will grow the economy,create jobs and lower the deficit by a $1 trillion over 20 years. In a time where Americans have so littlefaith in their government to meet the emerging challenges of our time, the Gang of Eight framework isa bit of a political miracle: incredibly thoughtful public policy, broad bi-partisan support, a deep anddiverse political coalition backing it. It just is very hard for the House Republicans to walk away fromall that too.

Obamas political capital is key Pace 5/1Julie Pace, 5/1/13, Obama Eyes Higher Profile Role on Immigration,http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/05/01/obama_eyes_higher_profile_role_on_immigration_118204.html , MKB

Many immigration advocates say they support Obama getting more involved in the debate as the draft bill weavesits way through the Senate Judiciary Committee, and likely to the Senate floor. "He needs to be an advocate and push for the bill inthe Senate to make sure this gets done," Eliseo Medina of the Service Employees International Union said of the president. " We need continued sustained pressure from all facets." McCain also welcomed the prospect of a more proactiveObama, saying the president is committed to being heavily engaged . But the Arizona Republican, who has spokenwith Obama about the immigration negotiations several times in recent weeks, added that the president "doesn't want to harmthe passage of the bill either. And I believe him." But some Republicans remain suspicious of the president's efforts and say he's


10/20

trying to sink the b ill in order to use the legislative failure for political gain. "I think the president wants to campaign on immigration reform in2014 and 2016," Texas Sen. Ted Cruz said in an interview with CBS News. "I think the reason the White House is insisting on a path to citizenship

for those who are here illegally is because the White House knows that insisting on that is very likely to scuttle the bill." Obama advisersinsist he would rather be able to claim victory on the immigration overhaul that has eluded him than use a failureas leverage in the midterm elections - a proposition that has no guarantee of working in his favor.

Prioritizing economic ties with Mexico over drugs and security derails immigrationreform key players hate itNYT, 5/15 (The New York Times, Michael Shear, 5/15. In Latin America, US Shifts Focus from DrugWar to Economy. Lexis.)

Last week, Mr. Obama returned to capitals in Latin America with a vastly different message.Relationships with countries racked by drug violence and organized crime should focus more oneconomic development and less on the endless battles against drug traffickers and organized crimecapos that have left few clear victors. The countries, Mexico in particular, need to set their own courseon security, with the United States playing more of a backing role. That approach runs the risk of being

seen as kowtowing to governments more concerned about their public image than the underlyingproblems tarnishing it. Mexico, which is eager to play up its economic growth, has mounted anaggressive effort to play down its crime problems, going as far as to encourage the news media to avoidcertain slang words in r eports. The problem will not just go away, said Michael Shifter, president ofthe Inter-American Dialogue . It needs to be tackled head -on, with a comprehensive strategy thatincludes but goes beyond stimulating economic growth and alleviating poverty. Obama becomesvulnerable to the charge of downplaying the regions overriding issue, and the chief obstacle toeconomic progress , he added. It is fine to change the narrative from security to economics as long asthe reality on the ground reflects and fi ts with the new story line. Administration officials insist that Mr.Obama remains cleareyed about the security challenges, but the new emphasis corresponds with achange in focus by the Mexican government. The new Mexican president, Enrique Pea Nieto, tookoffice in December vowing to reduce the violence that exploded under the militarized approach to thedrug war adopted by his predecessor, Felipe Caldern. That effort left about 60,000 Mexicans dead andappears not to have significantly damaged the drug-trafficking industry. In addition to a focus onreducing violence, which some critics have interpreted as taking a softer line on the drug gangs, Mr.Pea Nieto has also moved to reduce American involvement in law enforcement south of the border.With friction and mistrust between American and Mexican law enforcement agencies growing, Mr.Obama suggested that the United States would no longer seek to dominate the security agenda. It isobviously up to the Mexican people to determine their security structures and how it engages withother nations, including the United States, he said, standing next to Mr. Pea Nieto on Thursday inMexico City. But the main point I made to the president is that we support the Mexican governmentsfocus on reducing violence, and we look forward to continuing our good cooperation in any way that theMexican government deems appropriate. In some ways, conceding leadership of the drug fight to

Mexico hews to a guiding principle of Mr. Obamas foreign policy, in which American supremacy isplayed down, at least publicly, in favor of a multilateral approach. But that philosophy could collide withthe concerns of lawmakers in Washington, who have expressed frustration with what they see as alack of clarity in Mexicos security p lans . And security analysts say the entrenched corruption inMexican law enforcement has long clouded the partnership with their American counterparts. PuttingMexico in the drivers seat on security marks a shift in a balance of power that has always tipped to theUnited States and, analysts said, will carry political risk as Congress negotiates an immigration bill thatis expected to include provisions for tighter border security . If there is a perception in the U.S.


11/20

Congress that security cooperation is weakening, that could play into the hands of those who opposeimmigration reform, said Vanda Felbab -Brown, a counternarcotics expert at the Brookings Institutionin Washington. Realistically, the border is as tight as could be and there have been few spillovers of theviolence from Mexico into the U.S., she added, but perceptions count in Washington and can beeasily distorted . Drugs today are not very important to the U.S. public over all, she added, but theyare important to committed drug warriors who are politically powerful. Representative Michael T.McCaul, a Texas Republican who is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, has warned againstthe danger of drug cartels forming alliances with terrorist groups. While these threats exist, you wouldbe surprised to find that the administration thinks its work here is done, he wrote in an opinion articlefor Roll Call last month, pressing for more border controls in the bill. The Obama administration has saidany evidence of such cooperation is very thin, but even without terrorist connections, drug gangs posethreats to peace and security. Human rights advocates said they feared the United States would easepressure on Mexico to investigate disappearances and other abuses at the hands of the police andmilitary, who have received substantial American support. The shift in approach suggests that theObama administrati on either doesnt object to these abusive practices or is only willing to raise suchconcerns when its politically convenient, said Jos Miguel Vivanco, director of Human Rights WatchsAmericas division. Still, administration officials have said there may have been an overemphasis on the

bellicose language and high-profile hunts for cartel leaders while the real problem of lawlessnessworsens. American antidrug aid is shifting more toward training police and shoring up judicial systemsthat have allowed criminals to kill with impunity in Mexico and Central America. United States officialssaid Mr. Obama remains well aware of the regions problems with security, even as he is determinedthat they not overshadow the economic opportunities. It is clear Mr. Obama, whatever his words fouryears ago, now believes there has been too much security talk. In a speech to Mexican students onFriday, Mr. Obama urged people in the two countries to look beyond a one-dimensional focus on whathe called real security conce rns, saying it is time for us to put the old mind -sets aside. And he repeatedthe theme later in the day in Costa Rica, lamenting that when it comes to the United States and CentralAmerica, so much of the focus ends up being on security. We also have to recognize that problemslike narco-trafficking arise in part when a country is vulnerable because of poverty, because of

institutions that are not working for the people, because young people dont see a brighter futureahead, Mr. Obama said in a news conference with Laura Chinchilla, the president of Costa Rica.

Comprehensive reform key to US economic recovery

Garcia and Fitz 12/10 (Ann Garcia is a Research and Policy Associate for the Center for American Progress. Marshall Fitz is the Director of Immigration Policy at the Center,Progressive Immigration Policies Will Strengthen the American Economy, 2012,http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2012/12/10/47406/progressive-immigration-policies-will-strengthen-the-american-economy/, immigrants have been a critical part of the American economy since the foundingof our nation, but they are even more important today as we look to the future ofour economic recovery and our economy. While Congress debates the economic strategy to restore ournations fiscal health, an opportunity is on the horizon that would maximize the human capital and talent of the nearly 40 mi llionimmigrants who call America home. In order to reap the rewards of this talented and diverse labor pool, we must developa legislative solution to fix our nations broken immigration system. Immigrationreform that creates a pathway to earned legal status and eventually to citizenship for the undocumented immigrants living inour country while at the same time updating our legal immigration system will unleash the potential of immigrant workers andstudents to work, innovate, and add hundreds of billions of dollars to the U.S. economy . Letsreview how progressive immigration policies can help make this happen. Legalizing our nations undocumented immigrants Legalizing the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States would add a cumulative $1.5 trillion to the U.S. gross


12/20

domestic product the largest measure of economic growth over 10 years. Thats becaus e immigration reform that puts all workerson a level playing field would create a virtuous cycle in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on the wages of both American and immigrant workers. Higher wages and even better jobs would translate into increased consumer purchasingpower, which would benefit the U.S. economy as a whole. The federal government would accrue $4.5 billion to $5.4 billion inadditional net tax revenue over just three years i f the 11 million undocumented immigrants were legalized. The national advantageof legalizing the undocumented immigrants is obvious in the previous figures, but gains are also evident at the state level. The stateof Texas, for example, would see a $4.1 billion gain in tax revenue and the creation of 193,000 new jobs if its approximately 1.6million undocumented immigrants were legalized. States that have passed stringent immigration measures in an effort to curb the

number of undocumented immigrants living in the state have hurt some of their key industries, which are held back due toinadequate access to qualified workers. A farmer in Alabama, where the state legislature passed the anti-immigration law H.B. 56 in2011, for example, estimated that he lost up to $300,000 in produce in 2011 because the undocumented farmworkers who hadskillfully picked tomatoes from his vines in years prior had been forced to flee the state. With nearly half of agricultural workers, 17percent of construction workers, and 12 percent of food preparation workers n ationwide lacking legal immigration status, it isnthard to see why a legalization program would benefit a wide range of industries. Business owners from farmers to hotel chainowners benefit from reliable and skilled laborers. A legalization program would ensure that they have them. Passing the DREAM Act Passing the DREAM Act legislation that proposes to create a roadmap to citizenship for immigrants who came to the UnitedStates as children would put 2.1 million young people on a pathway to legal status, adding $329 billion to the American economyover the next two decades. Legal status and the pursuit of higher education would create an aggregate 19 percent increase inearnings for DREAMers young people who would benefit from passage of the DREAM Act by 2030. The ripple effects of theseincreased wages would create $181 billion in induced economic impact, 1.4 million new jobs, and $10 billion in increased federalrevenue. Reforming the high-skilled immigration system Creating a 21st century high-skilled immigration system a system thataccepts highly qualified immigrant workers when there is a demand that cannot be filled by American workers would stimulateinnovation, enhance competitiveness, and help cultivate a flexible, highly skilled U.S. workforce, while protecting American workersfrom globalizations destabilizing effects. The United States has always been and continues to be the nation where creative andtalented individuals from around the world can come to realize their dreams, and our economy has significantly benefited from their

innovation. In 2011 immigrant entrepreneurs were responsible for more than one in four new U.S. businesses, and immigrant businesses employ 1 in every 10 people working for private companies. Immigrants and their children founded forty percent ofFortune 500 companies. These Fortune 500 companies collectively generated $4.2 trillion in revenue in 2010 more than the GDPof every country in the world except the United States, China, and Japan. Reforms that enhance legal immigration channels for high-skilled immigrants and entrepreneurs while protecting American workers and placing all high-skilled workers on a level playing field will promote economic growth, innovation, and workforce stability in the United States. Our economy has benefited enormouslyfrom the talented immigrants who come here to study. Upon graduation, however, immigrant students face the tough choice between returning home and finding an employer to sponsor their entry into a visa lottery that may allow them to stay and work.Reforming the high-skilled immigration system would allow us to reap the benefits of having subsidized the education and trainingof these future job creators as immigrant students graduate and go on to work at our nations com panies, contributing directly andimmediately to our nations competitiveness in the global market. Significant reform of the high-skilled immigration system would benefit certain industries that require high-skilled workers, such as the high-tech manufacturing and information technologyindustries. Immigrants make up 23 percent of the labor force in both of these industries and are more highly educated, on average,than the native-born Americans working in these industries. Still, immigrants working in sc ience, technology, engineering, and mathfields in the United States complement, rather than compete with, American workers. For every immigrant who earns an advanceddegree in one of these fields at a U.S. university, 2.62 American jobs are created. By focusing on drawing human capital to ourcountry and retaining it, Congress can help ensure that key sectors of our economy have an adequate labor pool to draw from andcan boost our collective economic potential. Our economy has much to gain from reforming our broken immigration system. Butthe biggest rewards will only be realized if Congress approaches immigrationreform as an economic opportunity to be seized rather than an enforcement problem to be solved.Legislation that deals comprehensively with the issue by putting the nations undocumentedimmigrants, including DREAMers, on a path to citizenship while also reforming the high-skilled immigration system willstrengthen the nations economy while increasing prosperity for all Americans.

US economic collapse emboldens adversaries ensures global warfare \

Lieberthal and O'Hanlon, Director of the China center and Director of research atBrookings, 12 (7/10, The Real National Security Threat: America's Debt, www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2012/07/10-economy-foreign-policy-lieberthal-ohanlon) Lastly, American economic weakness undercuts U.S. leadership abroad.Other countries sense our weakness and wonder about our purported decline. Ifthis perception becomes more widespread , and the case that we are in decline becomes more persuasive, countries

will begin to take actions that reflect their skepticism about America's future. Allies and friends will doubt our commitment and may pursue nuclear weapons for their own security, for example;adversaries will sense opportunity and be less restrained in throwing around their

weight in their own neighborhoods. The crucial Persian Gulf and Western Pacific regions will likely becomeless stable. Major war will become more likely. When running for president last time, Obama eloquentlyarticulated big foreign policy visions : healing America's breach with the Muslim world, controlling global climate change, dramatically


13/20

curbing global poverty through development aid, moving toward a world free of nuclear weapons. These were, and remain, worthy if elusive goals. However, forObama or his successor , there is now a much more urgent big-picture issue: restoring U.S.economic strength . Nothing else is really possible if that fundamental prerequisiteto effective foreign policy is not reestablished.


14/20

Case


15/20

Relations

Relations high structural issues and immigration reform solvesAndrs Rozental , former deputy foreign minister of Mexico, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Foreign Policy,

Latin America Initiative, Brookings Institution, February 1, 20 13 , Have Prospects for U.S. -MexicanRelations Improved? http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/01-us-mexico-rozental//BWThe Mexico-U.S. relationship won't substantially change; there are too many ongoing issues to

expect any major shift in what has become a very close and cooperative bilateral partnership ineconomic, security and social aspects. There will be a change of emphasis from the Mexican side as faras the security relationship goes, with Pea Nieto's declared intention to focus much more on theeconomy and public safety. He has already moved away from the constant statements made by hispredecessor extolling the number of criminals apprehended and 'successes' in the fight againstorganized crime. The change of message comes as a relief to many Mexicans tired of hearing aboutviolence and crime on a daily basis. There are two issues on the bilateral agenda, however, thatportend significant changes if President Obama is able to fulfill his latest commitments : gun controland immigration reform . The latter seems to be headed toward a bipartisan agreement that mightfundamentally change the situation for the thousands of Mexicans who are in the United Stateswithout proper documents. If Congress passes a comprehensive reform that allows them to normalizetheir situation and have a path to legal residency and eventual citizenship, it would have a huge

positive impact on the relationship . As for gun control, Mexico would obviously favor a total ban onthe sale and possession of assault weapons as the best way to prevent them from crossing the border,but even universal background checks and limits on the number and type of weapons an individual canpurchase would be a welcome development. On trade ties, Mexico reached a quarter trillion dollars oftotal exports and imports in 2012 a hefty portion of that unprecedented amount was with the United

States. As Mexico becomes an increasingly important part of the global supply chain and U.S. companiescontinue to invest heavily south of the border, the economic relationship has nowhere to go but up. Andif Pea Nieto is able to fundamentally reform the country's energy sector, there promises to be evenmore investment.

Relations high meetings proves past tensions erased by new economic focusAdam Thomson , Financial Times, May 2, 20 13 , A new dawn for US -Mexico relations? http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2013/05/02/a-new-dawn-for-us-mexico-relations/ //BWOn Thursday, as he greeted the press in the company of US President Barack Obama , Enrique PeaNieto of Mexico characterised the bilateral relationship as having reached a new level ofunderstanding. That is probably an exaggeration. But several important things may have come from

Obamas visit to Mexico City , the first to Mexico since his re-election. The first is winning apparentacceptance for his change of tack on the drugs wa r. With Felipe Calder n, Pea Nietos predecessor,the two countries worked closely on the pursuit of drug lords. US authorities shared information withtheir Mexican counterparts, in many cases leading to the arrest of high-profile drug lords. Pea Nieto,who took power in December, has made no secret of his desire to get the drugs war off the front pages.He has also said that he wants to prioritise Mexicans safety over the capture of cartel leaders, makingMexico a safer place to live for its 112m inhabitants. In that sense, he got what he wanted on Thursdaywhen Obama sai d, though unresoundingly, that he supported Mexicos efforts to reduce the homicide
http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/01-us-mexico-rozentalhttp://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/01-us-mexico-rozentalhttp://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2013/05/02/a-new-dawn-for-us-mexico-relations/http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2013/05/02/a-new-dawn-for-us-mexico-relations/http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/01-us-mexico-rozental


16/20

rate. That was an important vote of confidence for Pea Nieto, and should go a long way todownplaying analysts speculation that the change in strategy would go down badly in the White House.The second, and arguably more important victory, was packing more issues into the bilateral agendaother than security . Pea Nieto, who has wowed international investors thanks to his apparentdetermination to push through an ambitious economic reform agenda, wants to promote trade andinvestment as the two guiding missions of his countrys relationship with its n orthern neighbour.Mexico-US trade is already about $1.4bn a day almost US$1m a minute for the nerds out there butthere is little doubt that it could grow significantly in the coming years. Thursdays announcement of a joint working group to be populated by Mexican cabinet secretaries and their US counterparts was aclear step in the direction of refocusing the agenda. The idea , apparently, is to make it easier forprivate companies to invest and grow on both sides of the border , creating jobs in both countries andmaking North America a more competitive region vis-- vis the rest of the world. Its early days, andtherefore hard to know just how effective and active this working group, to convene for the first time inthe autumn, will be. But by its mere announcement, the bilateral relationship has taken on an

additional dimension.

Turn further trade increases inequality, which leads to Mexican instabilityTom Barry , director of the TransBorder Project at CIP, May 2, 20 13 , Changing Perspectives on U.S. -Mexico Relations, https://nacla.org/news/2013/5/2/changing-perspectives-us-mexico-relations //BWBoth governments will surely point to fundamental importance of the two nations as trading partners.Yet the trade and investment numbers fall far short in defining the identity, advantages, and challengesof the U.S.-Mexico relationship. More than economic partners, the United States and Mexico are next-door neighbors and all that this proximity implies for the future welfare of both nations. Governancemeasures on such issues as energy, environmental standards, immigration flows, weapons, illegaldrugs, and labor standards need to follow and shape economic integration . If there is to be asustainable North American community , the framework of economic integration must necessarilyaddress the stark regional imbalances in Mexicos economic growth and development with

Mexicos southern states left further and further behind . Similarly, cheaper consumer goods madepossible by liberalized trade and investment do not compensate for stagnation of Mexican wages averaging just over $2 an hour. Not to be missed is the growing militancy of teachers, students, and

agricultural workers in southern Mexico , which was the defining theme of the May 1 marches inMexico City and elsewhere. Casting a long shadow over the summit will be the intensifying teacher-ledprotests over the federal reforms of labor and education policy. Centered in Mexicos poorestsouthern states , especially Guerrero, the anti-government opposition is protesting the labor, energy,and education reforms of the Pea Nieto government and the Pact for Mexico, which has broughttogether Mexic os leading political parties over a package of long -overdue reforms.

Alt cause the War on Drugs is responsible for bad US-Mexico relationsGautreau, School of International Development and Global Studies, University ofOttawa, 2012 (Ginette La, To Rid the World of the Drug Scourge: A Human Security Perspective on the War onDrugs in Colombia and Mexico, Paterson Review of International Affairs (2012) 12: 61 83,http://diplomatonline.com/mag/pdf/Gautreau_-Human_Security_and_War_on_Drugs.pdf) Like corruption , drug trafficking permeates national borders and impacts Colombia and Mexicosrelations with other countries . As Seccombe (1997, 292 93) argues, in addition to the harm done by conflict, U.S. anti-drug policies can have international ramifications through impacts on economic,
https://nacla.org/news/2013/5/2/changing-perspectives-us-mexico-relationshttps://nacla.org/news/2013/5/2/changing-perspectives-us-mexico-relationshttps://nacla.org/news/2013/5/2/changing-perspectives-us-mexico-relations


17/20

political, and strategic affairs . For instance, Roderic Ai Camp (2010) and Carpenter (2003) discuss theformidable challenge of reconciling U.S. demands with Mexican interests in the War on Drugs due tothe complex and tense history between the two countries. The authors note that this history, distinguished by the supremacy of U.S. interests over Mexican interests, results in mistrust andanimosity between the Mexican and U.S. militaries, and that many Mexicans perceive the War onDrugs to be an American war against drug consumption being fought in Mexico with Mexican resources and against the Mexican people . The same can be argued about Colombians (ibid., 22). Ineffect, the War on Drugs also has severe domestic policy implications by eroding state funds andshifting focus away from social services and programs , including rural development policies, toward increased militarization of the country. This constitutes one of the main paradoxes of current anti-drugpolicies: they demand sacrifices to the human component, including human rights, when theseproblems are at the root of the drug war. The human security approach, on the other hand,complements national security policies with social policies by taking into account the humancomponent of the drug war . The War on Drugs is compromising economic security through its crop eradication campaigns, high security costs , and underfunded alternative development programs. Inaddition, corruption, national and international political tensions, and the neglect of larger social andpolitical condition s are eroding political security in both Colombia and Mexico. It is crucial for the

government s of both countries to collaborate with the United States to address their weaknesses bystrengthening institutions and re-evaluating the alternative development component of their drugpolicies. In doing so, they could better target deeper issues that allow the drug trade to succeedwithin their borders.

Alt cause Mexico hates NAFTAFaux 04 Founder of the Economic Policy Institute, worked as an economist in the Departments of State Queens College, GeorgeWashington University, and Harvard University Honorary Degree, University of New England (Faux, Jeff. "The Economic Policy Institute."Economic Policy Institute. N.p., 9 Feb. 2004. Web. 22 July 2013..) JO

But as soon as the ink was dry on NAFTA, US factories began to shift production to maquiladora

factories along the border , where the Mexican government assures a docile labor force and virtually noenvironmental restrictions. The US trade surplus with Mexico quickly turned into a deficit, and sincethen at least a half-million jobs have been lost, many of them in small towns and rural areas wherethere are no job alternatives. Meanwhile, Mexicos overall growth rate has been half of what it needs tobe just to generate enough jobs for its growing labor force. The NAFTA-inspired strategy of export-ledgrowth undermined Mexican industries that sold to the domestic market as well as the sixty-year-oldsocial bargain in which workers and peasant farmers shared the benefits of growth in exchange fortheir support for a privileged oligarchy. NAFTA provided the oligarchs with new partners themultinational corporations allowing them to abandon their obligations to their fellow Mexicans.Average real wages in Mexican manufacturing are actually lower than they were ten years ago. Twoand a half million farmers and their families have been driven out of their local markets and off their

land by heavily subsidized US and Canadian agribusiness. For most Mexicans, half of whom live inpoverty, basic food has gotten even more expensive : Today the Mexican minimum wage buys less thanhalf the tortillas it bought in 1994. As a result, hundreds of thousands of Mexicans continue to risk theirlives crossing the border to get lowwage jobs in the United States.


18/20

Manufacturing

Manufacturing decline is from outsourcing their author concludes thisNash-Hoff 12 (1AC author) [Michele Nash- Hoff, Founder and President at ElectroFab Sales, author of Can AmericanManufacturing be Saved? Why we should and how we can; American Manufacturing Has Declined More Than Most Experts Have Thought03/28/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-nashhoff/manufacturing-jobs_b_1382704.html]//DLiI can substantiate this conclusion from my experience as a manufacturers' representative for American companies who perform fabricationservices, such as plastic and rubber molding, metal stamping and casting, machining, and sheet metal fabrication for other American

manufacturers. While many of the manufacturers in my sales territory of southern California may still beassembling their products in the U.S., many of the components and subassemblies they are using havebeen produced offshore . Obviously, it takes fewer American workers to produce the end productbecause part of the work was actually done by foreign workers . The problem is that there is no way for thegovernment to track the value of the components and subassemblies that have been produced elsewhere fromthe value of the product that is sold by the American company . Therefore, the value of the whole product is countedas American productivity without deducting the value of the parts produced outside of the U.S. You can see how American productivity

becomes inflated. I hope this report will convince the majority of economists, experts, and government officials recognize thatmanufacturing is truly in serious decline so that they will look at what are the main reasons:outsourcing manufacturing offshore and the economic warfare being waged by China against the U.S.

Delays and congestion inevitable long distance to border, Mexico internalinspections, and lack of drivers with US visasJuan Carlos Villa, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M and Jorge Lus Leyva Vzquez , Ph. D.,Servicio Nacional de Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria, SAGARPA, 5/200 8, OPTIONS FOR REDUCINGCONGESTION AT THE MEXICAN BORDER, http://naamic.tamu.edu/austin/villa.pdf //BWAdding to the complexity of the typical northbound truck movement from Mexico into the U.S.,agricultural products undergo additional inspections from the origin to the border. As mentionedearlier, close to 50 percent of Mexican exports into the U.S. cross the border through the Nogales port

of entry. Most of these produce originate in the Mexican states of Sinaloa and Sonora . The journeybetween the origin in Sinaloa and Sonora and Nogales is approximately 12 hours and trucks aresubject to inspections by military personnel searching for drugs and arms . There are at least in 3

inspection points before reaching Nogales that produce delays that could double the transit time .These inspections are performed by military personnel that are not trained to inspect produce andthey can contaminate the cargo. Inspections also break the cold chain (temperature- controlled supplychain) damaging the product. In order to open the containers, the military personnel break seals thathave been placed at origin and are required by CBP to be able to be considered a FAST shipment. 11Once a produce shipment reaches the border region, it can cross using the typical drayage system.However, some products are required to go through a mandatory quality inspection by USDA officials .This process could be done either in Mexico or once products are in the U.S. Commodities that requireUSDA inspections include tomatoes, grapes, onions, and oranges. At the Nogales crossing, thistransaction could be carried out at the Mexican growers' organization for the state of Sinaloa(Confederaci6n de Asociaciones Agricolas del Estado de Sinaloa - CAADES), or other similar facilities thatprovide space for Agricultural Marketing Inspections These facilities are used to perform the inspectionas well as cross-dock some products to make sure that trucks crossing into the U.S. comply withvehicle weight requirements. Mexican truck weight and size regulations allow for heavier trucks andmost of the shipments take advantage of this to load trucks to the maximum capacity. However, trucks
http://naamic.tamu.edu/austin/villa.pdfhttp://naamic.tamu.edu/austin/villa.pdfhttp://naamic.tamu.edu/austin/villa.pdf


19/20

in the U.S. are limited to a maximum of 80,000 pounds of gross vehicle weight. Truck drivers thatcross into the U.S are required to have U.S. issued visas and most of the long-haul drivers coming fromthe interior of Mexico do not have these valid visas. Trucks drivers with visas are in high demandduring the peak season and sometimes there is a shortage of drivers. This creates additional delaysfor truck movements that have been graded and reloaded to comply with truck weight and size . Asmentioned earlier, for a shipment to qualify as FAST shipment, the driv er needs to be certified andthe load has to be sealed from origin. The process described in this section, in which seals are brokenby military inspections, shipments are cross-docked and 12 inspected y agricultural officials beforereaching the CBP inspection makes almost impossible for an agricultural Mexican export to qualify

for a FAST shipment . The process for an agricultural export from southern Mexico into the U.S. iseven more complicated , as shown in the following diagram. Adding to the 3 inspection steps at theborder crossing itself, trucks with Mexican exports of fruits and vegetables are subject to twoadditional inspection processes-several military roadside inspections and the quality inspection.

New border infrastructure now three new crossingsChristopher E. Wilson , Mexico institute, Woodrow Wilson international Center for Scholars, 11/20 11 ,Working Together: Economic Ties between the United States and Mexico,http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdf //BWMany argue the border has become more difficult and costly to cross as a result 21 of inadequateinfrastructure investment and the increased security measures put in place after September 11, 2001.Extended and unpredictable wait times at the border create a disincentive to bilateral trade andproduction sharing, disrupting production chains and disproportionately hurting small and medium sizedbusinesses. Nearly 80% of trade with Mexico is land trade, meaning it enters or exits the U.S. throughone of the ports of entry along the Southwest border. The enhanced use of techniques, such as pre-inspection clearance , that facilitate the secure flow of goods across the border can help lower the costsof trade and encourage production sharing . Recognizing the need to prioritize both security and theeconomy, the U.S. and Mexican governments developed the 21 Century Border Initiative to expeditesecure, legal traffic by trusted parties and thereby free up capacity for border security personnel toinvestigate potentially dangerous goods and individuals. Strong cooperation at the border allowed theUnited States and Mexico to open three new border crossings in 2010 , two in Texas and one inArizona.l.

Root cause of delays and congestion is post 9/11 security measuresChristopher E. Wilson , Mexico institute, Woodrow Wilson international Center for Scholars, 11/20 11 ,Working Together: Economic Ties between the United States and Mexico,http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdf //BWUnfortunately, in the past decade increased attention to border security appears to have come at acost. Analysts have identified what they describe as a thickening of the border since the terroristattacks of September 11 , 2001. After experiencing a significant increase in the 1990s, the number ofindividuals crossing the Southwest Border has plummeted. Legal crossings reached a record-setting295 million entries from Mexico in 2000, but since then they have steadily declined to only 190 millionentries in 2009 . While the complete causes and effects of this change are unclear, it seems thatMexicans living in border cities , who make up the vast majority of the daily cross-border traffic, havereduced the number of trips they make into the U.S. for shopping, education, business and recreation.Thankfully, the number of trucks crossing the border to deliver goods has not experienced the same
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdfhttp://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdfhttp://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdfhttp://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Working%20Together%20Full%20Document.pdf


20/20

level of decline, although many of the same pressures that deter and disrupt the crossing of individualsalso apply to commercial flows . Cross-border production sharing operations have come to depend onwhat is known as just-in-time delivery, a technique that allows nimble production and minimizes theamount of capital invested in inventory. If the delivery of a part from a Mexican subsidiary or partner isunexpectedly delayed, a U.S. manufacturer may be forced to temporarily shut down production to waitfor parts. Or, if such delays are common, manufacturers may simply be forced to maintain moreinventory than would otherwise be necessary. The benefits of just-in-time supply chain management,production sharing, and even U.S. Mexico trade more generally, are therefore put at risk byunpredictable and long wait times at the border.

kq friesen-johnson daszkiewicz 1nc v ss attiyeh yamasaki rd 1

Documents