Changes for page Lake Travis Ehresman Aff

Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:37

From version < 59.1 >

edited by katya ehresman
on 2017/03/10 22:59

To version < 60.1 >

edited by katya ehresman
on 2017/03/10 22:59

< >

Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
- Caselist.RoundClass[14]
- Caselist.CitesClass[10]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[14]

EntryDate

@@ -1,1
          +1,1 @@
--2017-03-10 22:59:21.837
++2017-03-10 22:59:21.0

Caselist.CitesClass[10]

Cites

@@ -1,0
          +1,86 @@
++==1 – framework ==
++
++====First, the purpose of debate education should be to train youth to challenge oppressive structures, not perpetuate them,====
++**Bohmer 91 **"Teaching Privileged Students about Gender, Race, and Class Oppression." Teaching Sociology, Vol. 19, No. 2 (April, 1991) pp. 154-163.
++,,Our ~~a~~ strong emphasis on institutional oppression is not only due to our sociological approach to social psychology; it is also an outcome of our interactions with students. Let us repeat that most~~ly~~ of our students are white and middle class ~~students~~, with limited exposure to group diversity. Much of the material we present is new to them and often difficult to absorb. One of their major problems lies in moving from individualistic explanations to a sociological analysis.,, ,,Teaching in this setting, we have found that,, a focus on micro-level processes is fruitful only after we have addressed the concept of institutional oppression. Without an understanding of institutional aspects students decontextualize social interactions; they equate prejudice with oppression and argue that members of privileged groups are also oppressed. ,,This position, of course, is untenable if we want the concept to remain useful for an analysis of class, race, and gender relations,, in,,our society. Even while we emphasize institutional barriers for members of oppressed groups, we do not deny human agency by portraying oppressed individuals as trapped entirely by the confines of society. Balancing the two perspectives, however, is difficult, and the outcome depends strongly on our audience. With primarily white, middle-class students, who tend to advance individualistic explanations and who seem largely unaware of the institutional nature of oppression, we believe it is appropriate to stress barriers and limitations. If we taught a more diverse population we are certain that our discussion of oppression would focus more sharply on human agency as a potential for change. It can be both trying and challenging to integrate considerations of race, gender, and class into an introductory course on social psychology. We have experienced resistance, guilt, anger, and denial from many of our privileged students. Our greatest frustration is that students are reinforced in their resistance and denial because they experience little follow-up in other classes and have little ongoing exposure to the concepts we have introduced. We believe, however, that,, exposure to the concept of oppression ,,in ou r classes,, helps ,,at least,, ,,some,, students ,,to,, gain a greater understanding and appreciation for those who are different from themselves,,.,,Such exposure also leads ,,some,, students to raise questions in other courses ,,that do not take race, gender, and class into account.,, ,,These students, who we hope will,, apply their knowledge to their everyday interactions with members of other groups,,, ~~and~~ encourage us to find new ways of introducing race, gender, and class into the sociology curriculum.,,
++
++====We must engage in real world discussions but those discussions mean nothing unless they change the values to the people they affect,====
++**Curry 14** Dr. Tommy J. Curry 1 The Cost of a Thing: A Kingian Reformulation of a Living Wage Argument in the 21st Century. 2014
++Despite the pronouncement of debate as an activity and intellectual exercise pointing to,,the,, real world consequences ,,of dialogue, thinking, and (personal) politics when addressing issues of racism, sexism, economic disparity, global conflicts, and death,,,many of the discussions ,,concerning these ongoing challenges to humanity,,are fixed to a paradigm which sees the adjudication of material disparities ,,and sociological realities,,as the conquest of one ideal theory over the other. ,,In "Ideal Theory as Ideology," Charles Mills outlines the problem contemporary theoretical-performance styles in policy debate and value-weighing in Lincoln-Douglass are confronted with in their attempts to get at the concrete problems in our societies. At the outset, Mills concedes that "ideal theory applies to moral theory as a whole (at least to normative ethics as against metaethics); ~~s~~ince ethics deals by definition with normative/prescriptive/evaluative issues, ~~it is set~~ against factual/descriptive issues." ~~i~~ At the most general level, the conceptual chasm between what emerges as ,,actual,, problems in the world (e.g.: racism, sexism, poverty, disease, etc.) and how we frame such problems,,theoretically,,—the assumptions and shared ideologies we depend upon for our problems to be heard and accepted as a worthy "problem" by an audience—is the most obvious call for an anti-ethical paradigm, since such a paradigm insists on the actual as the basis of what can be considered normatively. Mills, however, describes this chasm as a problem of an ideal-as-descriptive model which argues that for any actual-empirical-observable social phenomenon (P), an ideal of (P) is necessarily a representation of that phenomenon. In the idealization of a social phenomenon (P), one "necessarily has to abstract away from certain features" of (P) that is observed before abstraction occurs.,, This gap between what is actual,, ,,(in the world), and what is represented by theories and politics of debaters ,,proposed in rounds,,threatens any real discussions about the concrete nature of oppression and the racist economic structures which necessitate tangible policies and reorienting changes in our value orientations. ,,As Mills states: "What distinguishes ideal theory is the reliance on idealization to the exclusion, or at least marginalization, of the actual,"~~i~~ so what we are seeking to resolve on the basis of "thought" is in fact incomplete, incorrect, or ultimately irrelevant to the actual problems which our "theories" seek to address.,,Our attempts to situate social disparity cannot ,,simply appeal to the ontologization of social phenomenon—meaning we cannot,,suggest that the various complexities of social problems ,,(which are constantly emerging and undisclosed beyond the effects we observe),, are totalizable by any one set of theories within an ideological frame ,,be it our most cherished notions of Afro-pessimism, feminism, Marxism, or the like. At best, theoretical endorsements make us aware of sets of actions to address ever developing problems in our empirical world, but even this awareness does not command us to ,,only,, do X, but rather do X and the other ideas which compliment the material conditions addressed by the action X. As a whole, debate (policy and LD) neglects the need to do X in order to remedy our cast-away-ness among our ideological tendencies and politics. How then do we pull ourselves from this seeming ir-recoverability of thought in general and in our endorsement of socially actualizable values like that of the living wage? It is my position that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s thinking about the need for a living wage was a unique, and remains an underappreciated, resource in our attempts to impose value reorientation (be it through critique or normative gestures) upon the actual world. In other words, King aims to reformulate the values which deny the legitimacy of the living wage, and those values predicated on the flawed views of the worker, Blacks, and the colonized (dignity, justice, fairness, rights, etc.) used to currently justify the living wages in under our contemporary moral parameters.,,
++
++====The 1AC acknowledges the state is bad in many ways. However, the aff uses state as heuristic which doesn’t affirm its legitimacy but allows enhanced governmental resistance.====
++**Zanotti ’14** Dr. Laura Zanotti is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Virginia Tech.  Her research and teaching include critical political theory as well as international organizations, UN peacekeeping, democratization and the role of NGOs in post-conflict governance." Governmentality, Ontology, Methodology: Re-thinking Political Agency in the Global World" – Alternatives: Global, Local, Political – vol 38(4):p. 288-304,. A little unclear if this is late 2013 or early 2014 – The Stated "Version of Record" is Feb 20, 2014, but was originally published online on December 30th, 2013. Obtained via Sage Database.  KAE bracketed for grammar
++By questioning substantialist representations of power and subjects, inquiries on the possibilities of political agency are reframed in a way that focuses on power and subjects’ relational character and the contingent processes of their (trans)formation in the context of agonic relations. Options for resistance to governmental scripts are not limited to ‘‘rejection,’’ ‘‘revolution,’’ or ‘‘dispossession’’ to regain a pristine ‘‘freedom from all constraints’’ or an immanent ideal social order. ~~Resistance to governmental scripts~~ is found instead in multifarious and contingent struggles that are constituted within the scripts of governmental rationalities and at the same time exceed and transform them. This approach questions oversimplifications of the complexities of liberal political rationalities and of their interactions with non-liberal political players and nurtures a radical skepticism about identifying universally good or bad actors or abstract solutions to political problems. International power interacts in complex ways with diverse political spaces and within these spaces it is appropriated, hybridized, redescribed, hijacked, and tinkered with. Governmentality as a heuristic focuses on performing complex diagnostics of events. It invites historically situated explorations and careful differentiations rather than overarching demonizations of ‘‘power,’’ romanticizations of the ‘‘rebel’’ or the ‘‘the local.’’ More broadly, theoretical formulations that conceive the subject in non-substantialist terms and focus on processes of subjectification, on the ambiguity of power discourses, and on hybridization as the terrain for political transformation, open ways for reconsidering political agency beyond the dichotomy of oppression/rebellion. These alternative formulations also foster an ethics of political engagement, to be continuously taken up through plural and uncertain practices, that demand continuous attention to ‘‘what happens’’ instead of fixations on ‘‘what ought to be." Such ethics of engagement would not await the revolution to come or hope for a pristine ‘‘freedom’’ to be regained. Instead, it would constantly attempt to twist the working of power by playing with whatever cards are available and would require intense processes of reflexivity on the consequences of political choices. To conclude with a famous phrase by Michel Foucault ‘‘my point is not that everything is bad, but that everything is dangerous, which is not exactly the same as bad. If everything is dangerous, then we always have something to do. So my position leads not to apathy but to hyper- and pessimistic activism.
++
++====Thus I affirm the resolution: The United States ought to guarantee the right to housing. We defend the resolution through normal means and will grant you links if asked in CX. ====
++
++==2 – offense ==
++
++===Refugees===
++
++====Refugees need to be included in housing practice to mitigate their rights abuses- solvency advocate for the aff====
++Al Hussein 14, Human Rights The Right to Adequate Housing Fact Sheet No. 21/Rev.1 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/FS21'rev'1'Housing'en.pdf
++ In the context of durable solutions, an emerging norm of housing and property restitution guarantees rights for refugees and IDPs who have decided voluntarily to return to their original homes. Voluntary repatriation/ return has in recent years been expanded to mean more than the mere return to one’s country for refugees or one’s city or region for IDPs. It is increasingly taken to mean the return to and reassertion of control over 26 one’s original home, land or property. Refugees and IDPs who choose not to return to their homes must be protected against forced return in all circumstances, and should be enabled to resettle in conditions that respect, inter alia, their right to adequate housing. Under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, State parties are obliged to provide refugees with treatment as favourable as possible, and not less favourable than that accorded to aliens generally in the same circumstances, with regard to housing (art. 21).
++
++
++====Adequate housing works to solve for the global refugee crisis by providing homes that keep refugees off the streets and employed.====
++**Salvini 16**, Francesco Salvini, 11-5-2016, ""We don’t have a refugee crisis. We have a housing crisis."," openDemocracy, https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/eleanor-penny/we-don-t-have-refugee-crisis-we-have-housing-crisis
++At Eleonas camp on the outskirts of Athens, some of the residents echoed this pattern. One man from Syria is aiming to get to Berlin, where he’s told there will be doctors who can help his eight year old niece walk again. A young man from Afghanistan tells me he wants to get to Copenhagen or Stockholm, because like him, they speak English there. But common to all of them is the desire to make it out of the camps, and find a permanent home. This challenge is one of the greatest facing the cities of Europe. From the conversations at the conference, one thing becomes abundantly clear. Though in scale, this crisis might be unprecedented, in character it is familiar territory for those trying navigate the hurdles of how to provide a vast number of people with adequate housing, in a situation where affordable, livable housing is already hard to come by. Many cities across europe have housing crises caused by a heady cocktail of property speculation, industry deregulation, and a dearth of social housing that predates by decades this recent influx of new arrivals. According to a recent report by Housing Europe, "There are not enough affordable homes available in most European countries to meet the increasing demand." It seems that the arrival of thousands of migrants would be less of a problem were cities not already struggling to house residents. As Mayor of Leipzig Thomas Fabian put it: "I don’t like to use the term refugee crisis. We don’t have a refugee crisis. We have a housing crisis."
++
++====2 impacts ====
++
++====1. Guaranteeing housing to refugees works to employ refugees and improve their economic conditions====
++**IRC 17,** "Refugees and resettlement," International Rescue Committee (IRC), https://www.rescue.org/frequently-asked-questions-about-refugees-and-resettlement
++Refugees must rebuild their lives from traumatic and tragic circumstances. The majority embrace their newly adopted homeland with tremendous energy and success. They go on to work, attend universities, build professions, purchase homes, raise children and contribute to their communities. Ultimately refugees obtain citizenship and become fully participating members of society. They become Americans. Many refugees come to the United States without any possessions and without knowing anyone. Other refugees come here to be reunited with family members. All refugees receive limited assistance from the U.S. government and non-profit organizations like the IRC. We help refugees find housing, learn about life and customs in America, secure jobs, learn English, and become citizens. We provide most of the basic things they need to restart their lives here and we help them overcome cultural barriers so that their adjustment is as easy as possible. The circumstances under which refugees leave their country are different from those of other immigrants. Often in fleeing persecution, they are without the luxury of bringing personal possessions or preparing themselves for life in a new culture. Recognizing this fact, the federal government should provide transitional resettlement assistance to newly arrived refugees. In the first 90 days, agencies such as the IRC contract with the Department of State to provide for refugee's food, housing, employment, medical care, counseling and other services to help the refugee make a rapid transition to economic self-sufficiency.
++
++
++====2. The right to housing for refugees promotes inclusivity and acceptance- thus decreasing the otherization of the refugees in American culture====
++**Aubert 17,** Emma Aubert, 1-24-2017, "Integration of refugees: a pressing issue that needs to be tackled in a holistic and pragmatic manner," EU-Logos, https://eulogos.blogactiv.eu/2017/01/24/integration-of-refugees-a-pressing-issue-that-needs-to-be-tackled-in-a-holistic-and-pragmatic-manner/
++For Caritas, the housing situation for refugees today is extremely worrying. In many states, refugees living in overcrowded accommodation have become the norm; while in others, refugees’ homelessness has become the norm (Caritas, 2016: 9). This issue needs to be tackled urgently as refugees need to move out of the reception centers and settle in more permanent homes in order to integrate. There are different ways to tackle the issue at the national and local level. Germany for example, allocates asylum seekers across the country to ensure distribution, fight discrimination and increase opportunities for the refugees to find jobs. Germany allocates refugees to federal states according the state’s population and financial means. Refugees tend to arrive and stay in the big cities, yet the price of living is higher there than in more rural areas. Refugees hence need to be allocated evenly across regions in order to avoid concentration and segregation. This would notably avoid the creation of "ghettos". Housing issues have more often been tackled by charities so far. Likewise, "A refugee in my home" program has been very successfully implemented throughout Italy. Italian families and individuals can welcome a refugee or asylum seeker for 6 to 9 months at a time. This project has been successful as it has helped tackling socio-cultural, language and housing issues at the same time and could be recreated in many states (Caritas, 2016). Governments need to set an example and fight all types of discrimination. They need to do so by creating safe spaces for refugees and citizens to meet. They also need to look at integration in a holistic manner as all parts of the process need to be tackled in order to integrate refugees fully. Governments have to prepare host societies to receive this new population, while adapting their education system to give comprehensive language classes for all, adapted classes for children, make higher education and diploma/competences recognition available. In the meantime, they will need to find a way to adapt their health system to the short term needs of this new crowd, notably regarding their mental health needs. They will also have to work with regional and local partners to ensure that refugees are evenly distributed within the host country and have a decent accommodation, whether they live with a host family or in their own flat. Finally, efforts will have to be made to help refugees enter the labour market, first with "entry level" jobs and later with longer term employment.
++
++===IPV===
++
++====Law enforcement systems fail to help battered women ====
++**Baker et al 03 **VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, Vol. 9 No. 7, July 2003 754-783 DOI: 10.1177/1077801203253402 © 2003 Sage Publications
++A majority of battered women seek help from formal support systems (Gondolf and Fisher, 1988). In fact, in a sample of 419 women, less than 2 of the women had not sought any help (Hutchison and Hirschel, 1998). Rather, 39 had used two to three different sources, and 26 had used four to five different sources. In a review of 12 studies, the criminal justice system was the most widely used service, whereas women’s shelters were among the least often used service (Gordon, 1996). Although law enforcement is among the most frequently contacted formal support system, battered women also report them to be ~~but they’re~~ the least helpful (Hamilton and Coates, 1993). Thus, the act of seeking help does not always guarantee women’s safety. Indeed, some types of responses by formal support systems may actually exacerbate the violence in women’s lives (Ellis, 1992). In fact, there is evidence to suggest that women may be ~~are~~ more likely to experience postseparation violence from their partners if systems fail to help women to become economically independent of their partners, to live separately from their partners, and to hold their partners accountable for the violence (also known as the dependence- availability-deterrence model; see Ellis, 1992, for a complete description). This model can also be used as a framework to consider how formal support systems (specifically welfare, shelters, and the justice system) affect women’s housing and risks for homelessness after separating from their partners. Furthermore, in addition to documenting the effects of specific actions taken by formal support systems, it is important to note how these systems treat women who seek help (Grigsby and Hartman, 1997).
++
++====Shelters fail to help homeless survivors of intimate partner violence====
++**Baker et al 2 **VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, Vol. 9 No. 7, July 2003 754-783 DOI: 10.1177/1077801203253402 © 2003 Sage Publications
++Shelters can also provide a safety net to battered women after separation. Most offer temporary shelter, support groups, legal assistance, and children’s programs. Recent legislation (Violence Against Women Act, 1994, 2000) increased funding for battered women’s shelters (Brooks, 1997); however, many still operate with inadequate funding. To augment governmental support, shelter directors frequently seek funding from outside sources, but accompanying restrictions limit how shelters expend these funds (Roberts, 1997). For example, some funds do not allow shelters to provide services to women who plan to return to their batterers, have addictions, or belong to minority groups (Don- nelly, Cook, and Wilson, 1999; Loseke, 1992).In addition, shelters typically turn away homeless women if they are not currently abused but have been in the past (Donnelly et al., 1999; West, 1999). This situation is ironic, as many women cannot be housed at a battered women’s shelter when they leave their abusive partners because many shelters consistently operate at capacity. Yet if these same women become homeless while gaining safety, they may become ineligible for shelter housing and community-based services.
++
++====Efforts must be made to develop and ensure housing access for survivors of intimate partner violence – its try or die for the aff ====
++**Baker et al 3 **VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, Vol. 9 No. 7, July 2003 754-783 DOI: 10.1177/1077801203253402 © 2003 Sage Publications
++Efforts must continue to develop more housing options that respond to the reality that domestic violence survivors are a broad and diverse group of women with varying family compositions, cultural considerations, and ability to live in community while in crisis. The expansion and innovation of existing models of service delivery to provide a broader range of options for survivors can decrease the likelihood that women may choose to stay in an abusive home or devise other makeshift living arrangements not conducive to their safety. A second practice recommendation is for programs ~~should~~ to assess whether eligibility criteria and/or staffing levels may either purposely or inadvertently exclude some populations of women and children from accessing shelter or other housing or victim services. Some program directors report the use of these criteria to meet funding requirements; others believe in the merits of using the criteria (Baker et al., 2009). While no program can serve all the needs of all survivors, we strongly encourage programs to examine service criteria with an eye to who is turned away and why, and to engage in critical thinking about what may be done to better respond to those typically excluded from services.While it is important to examine housing programs for their ability to promote clients' housing stability (the end) it is also imperative to consider how this outcome is achieved (the means), with particular scrutiny to the approach and underlying philosophy of different programs. One theme discussed throughout the current paper is the barriers posed by practices/policies that require women to participate in specific services (e.g., attending weekly support groups) as a condition of receiving housing (Baker et al., 2009; Melbin et al., 2003). Using housing as leverage to promote treatment adherence has had mixed results when applied to homeless populations (Robbins, Petrila, LeMelle and Monahan, 2006; Tsemberis et al., 2004). Given the experience of domestic violence survivors, whose lives have been marked by the controlling and coercive behaviors by their abusive partners, an emphasis on respect for client autonomy has special significance. Program models that minimize mandatory services and are driven by individual survivors' goals and circumstances may better ensure that they are both accessible to diverse populations of survivors and respectful of the unique needs of survivors for self-determination and choice.The fourth recommendation is that housing and homeless systems work proactively to better serve the needs of domestic violence survivors. Service providers in these systems need to: 1) become educated about the dynamics of domestic violence and the issues faced by survivors, 2) screen for domestic violence; and 3) be prepared to address the range of issues presented by their clients. At the most basic level, this preparation could include the development of protocols for safety planning and referral, and cultivation of relationships with domestic violence providers.Conversely, it is recommended that domestic violence providers become knowledgeable about the housing options in their community, and ~~should~~ become trained on local, state, and federal housing policies so that they can inform women more effectively as they transition from emergency shelter to long-term housing. Cross-trainings could be offered as a way to promote information sharing and collaboration between the two systems (Menard, 2001). These relationship-building and cross-training efforts should take place at all levels (i.e., national, state, and local), as each system has much to learn from the other. A final recommendation is the need for careful evaluation of any new housing policy or program, with evaluation efforts having ~~should have~~ a dual focus toward: 1) Unintended consequences that may disadvantage or endanger victims of domestic violence. Changes in service delivery and/or in types of services funded may create unforeseen burdens on those seeking services. Questions that need to be answered in such an evaluation include: As we expand housing options to include longer-term or permanent housing models for survivors of domestic violence, what are the consequences for women in crisis? Are they excluded from permanent housing because of assumptions about success based on the stage of crisis they are in? Are we shifting resources to expand longer-term housing services at the expense of funding for emergency shelter/housing options for women in crisis? By taking the time to analyze these questions using rigorous methods, we reduce the likelihood that the impact of policy and programmatic changes is different from the intent that fueled the change. 2) The efficacy of policies and practices on meeting women's needs. As important as avoiding policy and programmatic changes that result in negative unintended consequences is the evaluation of new and existing policies and practices on whether they effectively address barriers and improve housing-related as well as other health outcomes for women. HUD's new Rapid Re-Housing for Families Demonstration project, for example, includes an evaluation phase in which grantees will be required to gather data to determine whether households are able to independently sustain housing after receiving short-term leasing assistance. Evaluation studies should also examine the effect that different types of housing has on women's level of risk for revictimization, as well as the effect on children, including school attendance and achievement, and emotional and behavioral out- comes. With both types of evaluation it will be important to involve multiple voices, including survivors, advocates, providers, landlords, etc. Results from these studies will be important as we continue to refine policies and programs to respond to the complex set of issues faced by survivors in their attempts to end the abuse.
++
++====Stable housing is integral to give victims tangible resources to gain their independence back====
++**Baker et al 4 **VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN, Vol. 9 No. 7, July 2003 754-783 DOI: 10.1177/1077801203253402 © 2003 Sage Publications
++Although previous research suggests a link, the relationship between domestic violence and housing instability is not necessarily a direct one. Rather, there is a complex interplay of issues that may affect women's risk of housing instability or homelessness after separating from their partners. These issues may result in significant barriers for women in obtaining and maintaining stable housing for themselves and their children, and range from insufficient income to live independently, limited availability of affordable housing, potential housing discrimination against them as domestic violence survivors, histories of credit or rental problems, a criminal history, or ongoing harassment and assaults by the ex-intimate partner. As women attempt to secure housing away from their abusers they face economic barriers that may be related to difficulties in finding living wage jobs or that result from limited job experience. Past exposure to domestic violence has been shown to be linked to future unemployment and poverty for women (Byrne et al., 1999). Even for women who are working, staying employed may be difficult, as dealing with the violence and its aftermath can compromise steady attendance and work performance. Research shows that abusers frequently stalk or harass women in their workplace, and sabotage women's ability to keep their jobs. In a sample of women with abusive partners, approximately 50 of those who worked reported los~~e~~ing a job because of the actions of the abuser (Riger, Ahrens, and Blickenstaff, 2000). In addition, female victims of domestic violence worked fewer hours than women who did not experience such abuse (Browne, Salomon, and Bassuk, 1999); and one in six women who reported domestic violence also reported time lost from paid work (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2003). Achieving stable housing is further challenged by a lack of affordable housing stock. One report documents that there has been no funding for new public housing since 1996, even though over 100,000 units of existing public housing have been lost to demolition, sale, or other removal (Western Regional Advocacy Project, 2006). Even in cases where women have the economic resources to find housing they can afford, they may be denied housing by landlords concerned about the potential risk to other tenants or property damage if the abuser continues to pose a threat on those premises (National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2007). Additional difficulties may stem from poor rental history, which may result from women's multiple moves to elude a persistent abuser or because of evictions that arise from the abuser's actions (Martin and Stern, 2005; National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2007). In other cases, women may have difficulty paying rent on their own which may lead to evictions and subsequent credit problems, thus reducing their ability to access alternate housing. As well, some domestic violence survivors may have a criminal history. This is not uncommon because of arrests that are related to the abuse or to surviving the abuse. For example, women may be forced to participate in illegal activities by their abusive partners (Richie, 1996). Such a criminal history excludes women from public housing (Martin and Stern, 2005). Further, separation from the abuser is a known "trigger" for severe violence and is a risk factor for intimate partner femicide (murder of women) (Campbell et al., 2003); this means that just at the time she is seeking safety through relocation and separation, she is most at risk from the abuser. Finally, women may still be dealing with their own or their children's mental and physical health needs resulting from the abuse, which may impair their ability to work and to seek out housing solutions (Campbell, 2002; Evans, Davies, and DiLillo, 2008; Kitzmann, Gaylord, Holt and Kenny, 2003; Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyre-Smith, and Jaffe, 2003). This confluence of barriers to permanent stable housing coupled with the increased risk further interferes with women's ability to obtain the stability needed to access additional services that can increase their safety and promote their ability to maintain the separation. What is clear from these examples is that women, especially poor women, who are trying to escape abusive partners need an array of services to meet their needs. These services include immediate crisis intervention such as food and shelter, longer-term assistance in overcoming the emotional or psychological impact of domestic violence on themselves and their children, and assistance related to economic security and housing stability. In particular, recent research has emphasized the critical importance of tangible resources for women during this post-separation period (Glass, Perrin, Campbell, and Soeken, 2007; Goodman, Bennett, and Dutton, 1999); stable housing may be one of ~~is~~ the most important of these tangible resources.
++
++===LGBTQ+ Youth ===
++
++====Two links: 1 LGBTQ individuals have disproportionately higher chances of ending up homeless when compared to the national average due to unsupportive family members and housing discrimination evicting them from their homes.====
++**NHCH 14 **National Health Care for the Homeless Council. (August 2014). Gender Minority and Homelessness: Transgender Population. In Focus: A Quarterly Research Review of the National HCH Council, 3:1. ~~Author: Claudia Davidson, Research Associate~~ Nashville, TN: Available at: www.nhchc.org.
++Relative to others, transgender individuals have an increased risk for experiences of homelessness. A number of contextual factors can thrust transgender youth and adults into homelessness including: family rejection and/or conflict, running away from or aging out of the foster care system, violence/victimization, and institutional discrimination (e.g., in schools, housing, and workplaces). As with other populations, substance use disorders and psychiatric illnesses also precipitate homelessness for some transgender individuals. Family rejection and/or conflict, are the most common causes of homelessness amongst transgender youth (5, 11, 12), demonstrating the family’s role as a primary protective network for youth.(13, 14) Transgender individuals are increasingly ‘coming out’ at an early age as transgender and sexual minority role models become more publicly visible and accepted. (5, 13) Prior to publicly ‘coming out,’ individuals may display signs of gender non-conformity. (12) Familial relationships can become strained and injurious if family members are not supportive. Reactions may manifest in avoidance, financial and emotional rejection, neglect, and abuse. (15) Transgender youth may opt to run away from home or be pushed out/expelled from the home because of non-affirming or abusive behaviors from their families. Some transgender youth who leave home become a part of the foster care system. (12, 16) Once placed in foster care, youth may run away or simply age out of the system. (16,17) Young adults who age out of the system are suddenly faced with difficulties in acquiring financial support, maintaining relationships, and accessing social resources needed to survive on their own. (18, 19) In a study of 381 LBGT youth service providers, three of the top reported reasons for LBGT youth becoming homeless were: running away due to family rejection (46 of respondents), being forced out or expelled from the home by their parents (43 of respondents), and aging out of the foster care system (17 of respondents).(20) In a National Transgender Discrimination Survey (NTDS) of 6,450 transgender and gender non-conforming adults, 19 of participants became homeless at some point in their lives due to family rejection and discrimination, 2.5 times the rate of the general population. (21) Violence/victimization is both a consequence and a contributing factor of homelessness amongst LGBT youth. Domestic violence by family members was found to be the second most common type of violence reported by unstably housed LGBT youth in a study conducted by Marsiglia, et al.(22) In the NTDS study mentioned above, 48 of transgender individuals who experienced some form of domestic violence also had a history of homelessness.(21) Both of these studies demonstrate that a large portion of transgender individuals experiencing emotional, physical, and/or sexual abuse, do so in their homes at the hands of people whom they know (23), resulting in many choosing homelessness or seeking shelters as a safer alternative. Substance abuse and psychiatric illnesses are also both a consequence and contributing factor to homelessness. According to the United States Conference of Mayors, both substance abuse and mental health issues were reported as contributing factors to unaccompanied individual experiences with homelessness. (24) Numerous studies have shown that there is a high prevalence and heightened risk of substance abuse and other mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation within the transgender population (25, 26), putting them at greater risks of becoming unstably housed. Violence/victimization and psychiatric illnesses will be discussed below as prevalent health issues in the transgender community. Lastly, research suggests that housing discrimination and economic insecurity, attributable to workplace discrimination, increases the risk of adult transgender homelessness. (27) In the NTDS study, participants reported being denied (19) or evicted (11) from housing at some point in their lives because of gender non-conformity. In addition, a large portion of respondents reported adverse employment outcomes (47) and some form of mistreatment or harassment on the job (90). Adverse outcomes included being fired, denied a promotion, or not being hired because of gender non-conformity. Forty percent of those who reported job loss due to discrimination also had experiences of homelessness. (21)
++
++====2 - LGBTQ individuals often struggle to find housing because the federal government does not explicitly prevent discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity.====
++**Espinoza 14 **Robert Espinoza (Vice President of Policy at PHI), "LGBT People: Our Longing for Home, Our Right to Housing", The Huffington Post, 02/28/2014, Robert Espinoza (Vice President of Policy at PHI), "LGBT People: Our Longing for Home, Our Right to Housing", The Huffington Post, 02/28/2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-espinoza/lgbt-people-our-longing-f'b'4858491.html
++The relationship between aging and housing discrimination forms the subject of a new report from the Equal Rights Center, in partnership with SAGE (Services and Advocacy for GLBT Elders). Based on an investigation conducted in 10 states, the report finds that 48 percent of older adult testers in same-sex relationships experienced at least one form of differential treatment when seeking housing. Same-sex couples were provided fewer rental options, higher fees, more extensive application requirements and less information regarding financial incentives than opposite-sex couples—barriers likely faced, though insufficiently studied, among the larger, more diverse spectrum of LGBT people. For example, a 2011 national study of nearly 6,500 transgender and gender-nonconforming people found that 19 percent of respondents were denied housing and 11 percent were evicted because they were transgender or gender-nonconforming. For the same reasons, 29 percent were turned away from homeless shelters, and 25 percent and 22 percent were physically and sexually assaulted, respectively, while in a homeless shelter. Queer people too often wager with risk, danger and personal compromise to survive the night—and if achieved, the years that follow. This hardship of finding both home and housing reverberates as a theme across LGBT-rights struggles. The federal government does not explicitly protect against discrimination in housing based on sexual orientation or gender identity, though recent rules, some legal interpretations and a growing number of states and cities are moving toward more protections. Homelessness among queer youth and transgender people remains disproportionately high. Harsh immigration law keeps many queer immigrants from their loved ones abroad. Housing for low-income people with HIV receives scant attention and government support, with some exceptions. And for queer people raised in towns, states and regions that are politically hostile, or which lose their relevance as we mature and evolve, leaving home can leave psychological scars that we’re left to construe in private.
++
++
++==3 - Underview==
++
++====Housing is a normative human right absent any social solvency ====
++**Iglesias **OUR PLURALIST HOUSING ETHICS AND THE STRUGGLE FOR AFFORDABILITY Tim Iglesias* Professor of Law, University of San Francisco School of Law. Thanks to Fred Bosselman, Josh Davis, Alice Kaswan, Jim Kushner, Mike Rawson, and Josh Rosenberg for helpful comments on an earlier draft. Thanks also to the USF law faculty for comments and suggestions during a work-in-progress presentation. Finally, thanks to Paul Gruwell for research assistance.
++Natural disasters, e.g., fires, floods, and hurricanes, that leave large numbers of previously housed people homeless often evoke humanitarian responses that amount to a collective expectation that "people should be housed!"140 The "housing as a human right" ethic141 focuses attention on the fact that decent, safe, and affordable housing is critical to proper human development. Its normative thrust is the conclusion that all people should have legal rights to housing. This ethic focuses on legal rights in the provision of housing itself, e.g., rights concerning access to housing, its quality, and its terms.142 The term "right" is used in the sense that implies a correlative duty on the part of another party, usually the state, to recognize and provide for what the right entails. The focus is on individual rights as general entitlements that will be available to all persons, including those currently without housing or who are poorly housed.143 The question this ethic poses to any proposed rule or policy is: Will this proposal help ensure access to and tenure in safe, decent housing for all those who need it? All rights claims require social justification. Many different voices have clamored for rights to housing based upon our common humanity, among them civil rights advocates,144 religious traditions,145 and the United Nations.146 Religious traditions typically ground the claim in the common dignity of humans before the divine.147 Some right-to-housing arguments depend upon a claim that housing is "special."148 For example, longstanding right-to- housing advocate Chester Hartman partially grounds the right in a "housing as home" ethic, characterizing housing as the foundation for life and a launching pad which is fundamental to human development.149 Often the justification for the housing right sounds in traditional liberal discourse,150 emphasizing the costs and benefits to those affected,151 or the social costs and benefits to society of providing such a right.152 The substance (or scope) of a right to housing is a critical issue in the housing as a human right discourse. Sometimes, only a minimal right to shelter is advocated, e.g., some campaigns that would require emergency shelter for homeless people.153 Such claims sometimes seek only temporary shelter (without any tenurial rights) and usually only minimum quality standards with few amenities.154 In contrast, other advocates have articulated full-blown versions of a right to housing.155 Hartman includes affordability, physical quality of the unit, non-discriminatory access, secure tenure, and social and physical characteristics of the neighborhood environment156 as the components of a complete right to housing.157 The late housing advocate David Bryson articulates similar elements158 and notes the value of guaranteed legal representation for adequate enforcement of the right.159 The full-blown version raises numerous hard policy questions, which are rarely answered to the satisfaction of critics and skeptics.160 Thus, the proposal regularly evokes strong opposition.161
++
++====Right to housing is key to recognizing and eliminating social disparities ====
++**Iglesias **OUR PLURALIST HOUSING ETHICS AND THE STRUGGLE FOR AFFORDABILITY Tim Iglesias* Professor of Law, University of San Francisco School of Law. Thanks to Fred Bosselman, Josh Davis, Alice Kaswan, Jim Kushner, Mike Rawson, and Josh Rosenberg for helpful comments on an earlier draft. Thanks also to the USF law faculty for comments and suggestions during a work-in-progress presentation. Finally, thanks to Paul Gruwell for research assistance.
++The core idea of the "housing as providing social order" ethic is the deliberate use of housing as a means to establish and maintain a specific social order that embodies a certain view of "the good life."211 This ethic focuses attention on the fact that our housing settlement patterns—the relative location of housing and the types of housing in an area and who lives in them—create a particular social order. Where and among whom we live structures important parts of our lives. Therefore, under this view, our housing law and policy should respect and promote "good communities" by respecting whom people want to associate with in their neighborhoods. This ethic poses the following question to any new housing policy or rule: How will this proposal affect who will live in "my community"?212 In this ethic, housing is always considered and analyzed in relationship to other housing and, in particular, who lives in the other housing. Some versions of this ethic seek distinctions to provide a relative ranking of social status with the relevant comparison group.213 This ethic is widely socially understood and incorporates broadly shared social meanings.214 One consequence of such ordering is common social perceptions or stereotypes—all else being equal, where you live (e.g., city, neighborhood) is generally taken to provide significant information about "who you are" relative to other people who live in other cities or neighborhoods. The social meaning of where one lives is "given" even if not intended or "merited" by a person living in the subject area. This dynamic functions at the city and neighborhood levels and in fact at any geographical level in which it plausibly can be claimed, "we have a community here." Certain cities and neighborhoods have national reputations, e.g., Chevy Chase, Maryland; Beverly Hills, California; Oakland, California. At least at the regional level, the reputations of neighborhoods are well- known or easily discovered. Many argue that the desire to live among people that one perceives as "similar" to oneself in some relevant way is a natural, inevitable, and useful or wholesome, or at least understandable, human tendency.215 Many people feel that they have earned the right to exclusive housing with the aesthetic and safety benefits they feel it provides. Certainly, the actual and apparent "ordering" of neighborhoods by income appears to validate a perception that when one earns enough money to live in such a neighborhood, one deserves the amenities such a neighborhood offers. This same tendency to want to associate by virtue of the location of one’s housing with people considered similar to oneself can be criticized as morally or legally blameworthy "discrimination" or "exclusion." On the normative question of whether or not housing law and policy should be used to create or support a particular social order, Professor Alexander urges that "if there is to be a social and cultural judgment enforced by laws about the relationships that count in deciding who lives in our neighborhoods, then let us present these moral convictions openly for debate and not hide them in the varieties of housing laws."216 America has a deep and long tradition of using housing as a means of providing for a particular social order. 217 Public law, including planning, zoning, subdivision law, and funding programs, provides some of the legal means of establishing and preserving social order.218 Private ordering schemes are also used.219 Historically, one form of organization has been by "race" and ethnicity.220 Organization of housing by the government and private owners by race to establish and maintain a racial hierarchy was explicit from the time of slavery221 through the adoption of Jim Crow laws after the enactment of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.222 After Buchanan v. Warley223 was decided in 1917, it was no longer constitutionally permissible for governments to discriminate explicitly by race in setting housing settlement patterns.224 However, it was still legal and socially acceptable (among some) for private parties to do so using racially restrictive covenants.225 In the wake of the Corrigan226 decision (which appeared to give a green light to private ordering schemes based explicitly on race), there were widespread organizing drives by private parties to expand their use broadly.227 In Shelley v. Kraemer,228 the U.S. Supreme Court found that state court enforcement of racially restrictive covenants violated the Fourteenth Amendment, but the discriminatory covenants themselves did not violate the Constitution.229 After Shelley was decided, governments withdrew from these schemes, yet private parties continued to enforce them through private social means, e.g., by putting various kinds of social pressure on their neighbors to enforce the covenants.230 It is also now widely recognized that the siting of many public housing developments was racially directed.231 In 1968, such explicit racial organization of housing was made illegal when, in the immediate aftermath of the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Congress enacted the federal Fair Housing Act232 and the U.S. Supreme Court held in Jones v. Alfred H. Mayer Co.233 that private discrimination against constitutionally protected roperty rights violated the Thirteenth Amendment.234 However, by that time, the segregated housing patterns were deeply etched in cities and towns all over the United States.235 The intuitions and fears that maintain this order have not completely dissipated.236 Much discrimination has gone underground, making it harder to prove. Some case law, notably Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.,237 added to the legal difficulty in challenging racist social ordering using housing by requiring plaintiffs to prove defendants had an intent to discriminate in order to find a constitutional violation. And, court decisions after Brown v. Board of Education238 have explicitly refused to interfere with the private housing market to prevent resegregation of public schools.239 This refusal to find "social discrimination" actionable in effect deters to these well- established forces. These decisions enable the established patterns of residential segregation to determine likely public school attendance, which is traditionally a defining characteristic of a neighborhood or community. Professor Richard Ford has argued that, given the legacy of patterns of racially identifiable neighborhoods and communities, further intentional enforcement or reinforcement of those patterns is not necessary to maintain them because they are to some degree self-replicating via the market economy.240
++
++====Those who lack an accessible space in neoliberal society are seen as a threat to the hegemonic and patriarchal structure of the American home, making them the ‘other’====
++**Sloss 14 **Eric J. Sloss . ("HOMELESS ABJECTION AND THE UNCANNY "PLACE" OF THE NATIONAL IMAGINATION", http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc500028/m2/1/high'res'd/thesis.pdf)
++family at the center of the American home, locating the patriarchal structure within this place that must be protected from external threat. While these conditions are necessary for the hegemonic "stability" of the normalized home, this overlooks the process through which home becomes the ideological place par excellence in public and political discourse. Thus, I want to turn attention not to the contents of the "home," but the process of producing this intimate place, or stitching the home into discourses that animate subjectivity and citizenship. That is, rather than attempting to locate homelessness as a marginal position of "invisibility," this essay highlights what is at stake when an event tries place homelessness at the center of discourses about home. Quickly, even the idea of homelessness (sans homeless persons) becomes an invisible presence that haunts the location of normalized subjectivity, calling for protections against this placeless threat. If, as Althusser suggests, the only goal of ideology "is to reproduce the conditions of production,"3 then homelessness becomes the impossible Real, the antagonism that reproduces location as an ideological assumption of subjectivity. Visions of the American home place only become possible through the invisible (yet quite provoking) symbolic threat of homelessness, calling for a need to repair this "hole" in a hegemonic order. In this figuration, "home" then becomes the image of a symbolic placing or interpolation of the locatable neoliberal citizen-subject. However, homelessness is figured in an incongruous relationship, whose symbolic position is unlocatable by definition and its imaginary representations become dependent upon a place of dwelling. Homelessness is displaced as an impossibility of legal and social discourse, writing place as the defining characteristic of their recognition. For this reason, I want to turn attention to the imaginary representations of homelessness that attempt symbolic placement, examining the effect of the homeless box city as 24 one representation of place that stands in for the individual persons experiencing homelessness. In this chapter, I will examine images and media discourse about homeless box city fundraisers and awareness events to propose that the "box city" functions as what Althusser calls "the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence. The importance of "place" in rhetorical studies has somewhat recently been garnered as an important agent in the production of both individual and group identity. Danielle Endres and Samantha Senda-Cook put it simply when they say, "location matters," arguing that rhetoric not only invokes "place-based arguments," but specifically can also turn to "place-as-rhetoric."8 Generally speaking, place is often defined as a specific locale, created and bordered through material, imaginary, and discursive identification.9 Place is not free from space, but is dependent upon it as a material instantiation of located signifiers and objects. Greg Dickinson, Carole Blair, and Brian Ott offer space and place as a mutual contradiction: From the security and stability of place we are aware of the openness, freedom, and threat of space, and vice versa. Furthermore, if we think of space as that which allows movement, then place is pause; each pause in movement makes it possible for location to be transformed into place.10 26 Further, places act to invoke an external identification, either object or symbol, to help constitute those who inhabit this place as an "imagined community."11 This external identification helps form a constitutive outside, or an "Other than" group that does not exist within a given community. In this way, the cultural discourse of place often works as a "container"12 of sorts that assumes the character of the community that claims it.
++
++====The homeless are seen as nonparticipants in capitalism, therefore making them objects that are always threatening the safe environment of consumption, stripping them of identity.====
++**Sloss 14 **Eric J. Sloss . ("HOMELESS ABJECTION AND THE UNCANNY "PLACE" OF THE NATIONAL IMAGINATION", http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc500028/m2/1/high'res'd/thesis.pdf)
++Homeless persons’ visibility in this environment becomes the very motivation that calls for their eradication from the field of public images. In short, homeless persons are not viewed as participants in capitalist exchange, but ejected objects that constantly threaten the pristine environment of consumption. The image of homelessness becomes abject (unnamable excess) in the sense that its nominal value becomes impossible, in excess to a tamed inscription from the signifier. The homeless perso begging on the street corner often creates discomfort for passing persons, many of whom refuse to even acknowledge his or her presence. His or her presence becomes a threat of the Real, in the Lacanian sense, as a nameless return of the excluded bodies of public participation. As this act of exclusion is symbolic effect, homelessness becomes the grotesque excess of capitalist citizenship, presented as those who cannot possess a certifiable location. It is the threat of the homeless that becomes the catalyst for the box city fundraisers, functioning as an attempt to locate a condition that is, by definition, specifically un-locatable in space and time. To locate, in this sense, works to capture homelessness in the symbolic as placed subjectivity through the production of "experience" in a philanthropic key. However, this experience becomes one of taming, making homeless living palatable by attempting to place homelessness through the box cities and the community practice created by the philanthropy event. To get at the production of this experience I turn to both documents from representative events as well as media releases from local organizations hosting the events, highlighting how they stress the importance of local communities as a part of this experience. As box city fundraisers do not have 35 a single unifying national affiliate, existing rather as a form that repeats itself through different local projects, place and community is extremely important in the reading of these events

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-03-10 22:59:23.988

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+any

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+any

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+14

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lake Travis Ehresman Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+JANFEB - Stock 1AC

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+TFA

Changes for page Lake Travis Ehresman Aff

Summary

Details

Quick Links

Schools