Changes for page Warren Okunlola Aff

Last modified by Administrator on 2017/08/29 03:41

From version < 275.1 >
edited by Nelson Okunlola
on 2017/04/13 00:27
To version < 264.1 >
edited by Nelson Okunlola
on 2017/04/12 23:21
< >
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA District-Round1.docx
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.okunlolanelson@gmailcom
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -50.7 KB
Content
Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA District-Round5.docx
Author
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -XWiki.okunlolanelson@gmailcom
Size
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -56.9 KB
Content
Caselist.CitesClass[14]
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -2017-04-12 23:21:29.0
1 +2017-04-12 23:21:29.659
Caselist.CitesClass[15]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,112 +1,0 @@
1 -==1AC==
2 -
3 -===Framing===
4 -====The standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer====
5 -
6 -====1 States do and should act in a utilitarian manner.====
7 -**Woller 97** ~~Gary, Brigham Young University, "A Forum On The Role of Environmental Ethics in Restructuring Environmental Policy and Law for the Next Century", Policy Currents, 1997, WHS//NAO~~
8 -Moreover, virtually all public policies entail some redistribution of economic or political resources, such that one group's gains must come at another group's expense. Consequently, public policies in a democracy must be justified to the public, and especially to those who pay the costs of those policies. Such justification cannot simply be assumed by invoking some a priori higher-order moral principle. Appeals to a priori moral principles, such as environmental preservation, also often fail to acknowledge that public policies inevitably entail trade-offs among competing values. Thus since policymakers cannot justify inherent value conflicts to the public in any philosophical sense, and since public policies inherently imply winners and losers, the policymakers' duty to the public interest requires them to demonstrate that the redistributive effects and value trade-offs implied by their polices are somehow to the overall advantage of society. At the same time, deontologically based ~~other~~ ethical systems have severe practical limitations as a basis for public policy. It therefore follows that in a democracy, policymakers have an ethical duty to establish a plausible link between policy alternatives and the problems they address, and the public must be reasonably assured ~~reasonable assurance~~ that a policy will actually do something about an existing problem; this requires the means-end language and methodology of utilitarian ethics. Good intentions, lofty rhetoric, and moral piety are an insufficient, though perhaps at times a necessary, basis for public policy in a democracy.
9 -
10 -====2 You should default to util if I win defense on their standard—we naturally want to make the world better.====
11 -**Sinnott-Armstrong 14** ~~Walter, American philosopher. He specializes in ethics, epistemology, and more recently in neuroethics, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy of cognitive science, "Consequentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed), WHS//NAO~~
12 -Even if consequentialists can accommodate or explain away common moral intuitions, that might seem only to answer objections without yet giving any positive reason to accept consequentialism. However, most people begin with the presumption that we morally ought to make the world better when we can. The question then is only whether any moral constraints or moral options need to be added to the basic consequentialist factor in moral reasoning. (Kagan 1989, 1998) If no objection reveals any need for anything beyond consequences, then consequences alone seem to determine what is morally right or wrong, just as consequentialists claim.
13 -
14 -====3 The government has an obligation to guarantee everyone can exercise this right====
15 -**NESRI ’10** ~~National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, 2010. http://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing WHS//NAO~~
16 -Everyone has a fundamental human right to housing, which ensures access to a safe, secure, habitable, and affordable home with freedom from forced eviction. It is the government’s obligation to guarantee that everyone can exercise this right to live in security, peace, and dignity. This right must be provided to all persons irrespective of income or access to economic resources. There are seven principles that are fundamental to the right to housing and are of particular relevance to the right to housing in the United States: Security of Tenure: Residents should possess a degree of security of tenure that guarantees protection against forced evictions, harassment, and other threats, including predatory redevelopment and displacement. -Availability of Services, Materials, Facilities, and Infrastructure: Housing must provide certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort, and nutrition. For instance, residents must have access to safe drinking water, heating and lighting, washing facilities, means of food storage, and sanitation. -Affordability: Housing costs should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. For instance, one should not have to choose between paying rent and buying food. -Habitability/Decent and Safe Home: Housing must provide residents adequate space that protects them from cold, damp, heat, rain, wind, or other threats to health; structural hazards; and disease. -Accessibility: Housing must be accessible to all, and disadvantaged and vulnerable groups must be accorded full access to housing resources.-Location: Housing should not be built on polluted sites, or in immediate proximity to pollution sources that threaten the right to health of residents. The physical safety of residents must be guaranteed, as well. Additionally, housing must be in a location which allows access to employment options, health-care services, schools, child-care centers, and other social facilities.-Cultural Adequacy: Housing and housing policies must guarantee the expression of cultural identity and diversity, including the preservation of cultural landmarks and institutions. Redevelopment or modernization programs must ensure that the cultural significance of housing and communities is not sacrificed.
17 -
18 -===Inherency===
19 -====Current housing is too expensive. Lack of affordable housing leads to homelessness. ====
20 -**NLCHP ‘15** ~~National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, "HUMAN RIGHT TO HOUSING REPORT CARD" 2015 https://www.nlchp.org/documents/Right'to'Housing'Report'Card'2015 WHS//NAO~~
21 -Over half of all American renters pay more than 30 of their income for housing. For extremely low income (ELI) households, the percentage paying more than half of their income in rent jumps to 75. This problem is caused in part by the lack of available, affordable housing for low-income renters. Average rents have increased for 23 straight quarters, and were 15.2 higher in 2014 than in 2009. On top of the existing gap in availability of affordable units, the supply of low-cost rental units has declined since 2007.106 While ELI renter households may qualify for federal and local subsidy programs, demand for these programs far exceeds the supply: there is only enough funding for one in four eligible renters to receive assistance. 107 The remaining threefourths of eligible ELI households desperately in need of housing find themselves on multi-year waiting lists, or find that waiting lists for affordable housing in their area are closed altogether.108 While the affordable housing stock declines each year and more families and individuals are unstably housed, the rental market for higher-income households continues to grow, foreclosed homes stand vacant, and abandoned government-owned properties remain empty.109 Lack of affordable housing is a primary cause of homelessness, and the ongoing crisis has led to an increase in the numbers of homeless persons. While HUD’s point-in-time count of homeless persons living in shelters and public places has decreased over the past four years, this number is almost certainly a significant undercount of homelessness. It does not include people living doubled up with family or friends; this number increased by 9.4 to 7.4 million people in 2011, and remained stable during 2012. Moreover, close to 1.4 million school children were homeless during the 2013-2014 school year—and almost 2.5 million children overall were homeless in 2013. The school numbers represent an 8 increase since the previous year, and have almost doubled since the beginning of the economic crisis in 2007.
22 -
23 -===Advantage 1 is International Law===
24 -====US commitment to international law requires a right to housing- multiple contracts. ====
25 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
26 -The U.S. commitment to the human right to housing was reaffirmed in its signature to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1977. The ICESCR was submitted to the Senate for ratification in late 1978, with an ABA resolution endorsing ratification in early 1979.10 The ICESCR codifies the right to housing in Article 11, which states, "~~t~~he States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing... The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right."11 Although the Senate has yet to ratify the treaty, law professor David Weissbrodt notes signing a covenant indicates that "the United States accepts the responsibility to refrain from acts calculated to frustrate the objects of the treaty."12 The U.S. has also already ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (both with endorsement from the ABA), both of which recognize the right to be free from discrimination, including in housing.13
27 -
28 -====This is the make of break issue- the international community sees US commitment as necessarily key. ====
29 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
30 -Moreover, the international community has increasingly taken note of America’s failure to uphold the right to housing. In 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the disparate racial impact of homelessness in the U.S. and called for "adequate and adequately implemented policies, to ensure the cessation of this form of racial discrimination."17 In 2008, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination again recognized racial disparities in housing and ongoing segregation in the U.S.18 Since then, numerous U.N. experts, on official missions to the U.S., have addressed U.S. violations of the human right to housing and related rights.19
31 -
32 -====Domestic intervention key to shaping international norms- not affirming relinquishes power to other nations and makes America influence less important. ====
33 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
34 -The U.S. has a strong tradition of promoting affordable, accessible housing, but programs have been under-funded and under-implemented. Moreover, while the human rights framework demands progressive implementation of the right to housing, and prohibits retrogressive policies, over the past 30 years there has been a significant disinvestment in public and subsidized housing at the federal level.32 Recent years have seen innovations such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, which attempt to "do more with less" while preserving important rights and protections for lowincome residents, but these programs still fail to meet the need in communities.33 Furthermore, many long-term contracts for affordable housing built under the Section 8 program during the 1960’s are now coming to term, threatening a further loss of affordable units.34 The contours of the human right to adequate housing continue to be developed at the international level by the CESCR and other U.N. experts, and at the regional level by regional human rights bodies, in response to ever-changing conditions. The U.S. should always seek to be a leader in applying these developing standards to its policies.
35 -
36 -====Independently- following ilaw is key to international consensus and deliberation. ====
37 -**Thiele** ~~Bret Thiele. JD. May 2002. The Human Right to Adequate Housing: A Tool for Promoting and Protecting Individual and community Health. 92(5): 712-715. American Journal of Public Health. WHS//NAO~~
38 -There are other reasons to use international human rights law as a model for national legislation. For example, reliance on international law to inform domestic law will result in greater consistency across domestic legal systems with respect to universally recognized human rights. Furthermore, states that turn to international law for guidance benefit from the process by which international law is derived. This process often takes a "best practices" approach. International law is influenced by a variety of ideas stemming from diverse legal, political, economic, and cultural traditions. The process of codifying norms into international law reflects the acceptance of those ideas that have been deemed by the international community to be not only "best practices" but also universally applicable. It is therefore important for states to turn to international human rights law to inform their domestic legislation and policy, including legislation and policy designed to protect and improve the health of their respective populations. The international human right to adequate housing should thus be implemented through domestic law.
39 -
40 -
41 -====Effective international law solves every impact—US commitment uniquely key. ====
42 -**IEER 2:** ~~Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy. Rule of Power or Rule of Law? An Assessment of U.S. Policies and Actions Regarding Security-Related Treaties. May 2002. http://www.ieer.org/reports/treaties/execsumm.pdf WHS//NAO~~
43 -The evolution of international law since World War II is largely a response to the demands of states and individuals living within a global society with a deeply integrated world economy. In this global society, the repercussions of the actions of states, non-state actors, and individuals are not confined within borders, whether we look to greenhouse gas accumulations, nuclear testing, the danger of accidental nuclear war, or the vast massacres of civilians that have taken place over the course of the last hundred years and still continue. Multilateral agreements increasingly have been a primary instrument employed by states to meet extremely serious challenges of this kind, for several reasons. They clearly and publicly embody a set of universally applicable expectations, including prohibited and required practices and policies. In other words, they articulate global norms, such as the protection of human rights and the prohibitions of genocide and use of weapons of mass destruction. They establish predictability and accountability in addressing a given issue. States are able to accumulate expertise and confidence by participating in the structured system offered by a treaty. However, influential U.S. policymakers are resistant to the idea of a treaty-based international legal system because they fear infringement on U.S. sovereignty and they claim to lack confidence in compliance and enforcement mechanisms. This approach has dangerous practical27 implications for international cooperation and compliance with norms. U.S. treaty partners do not enter into treaties expecting that they are only political commitments by the United States that can be overridden based on U.S. interests. When a powerful and influential state like the United States is seen to treat~~s~~ its legal obligations as a matter of convenience or of national interest alone, other states will see this as a justification to relax or withdraw from their own commitments. If the United States wants to require another state to live up to its treaty obligations, it may find that the state has followed the U.S. example and opted out of compliance.
44 -
45 -**Johansen ‘6 elaborates** Johansen, Robert C. 2006. ~~Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame and Senior Fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies~~. The Impact of US Policy toward the International Criminal Court on the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, and Crimes Against Humanity. Human Rights Quarterly. ProjectMuse.
46 -Double standards undermine law enforcement and peoples’ willing compliance with the law, especially in a decentralized international legal system. A legal fabric torn by exemptions for a major actor is a weakened fabric, less able to deter future infractions and more likely to instill hatred and outrage against the inequities imposed by the United States. US denial of reciprocal rights for others also interferes with building a strong worldwide coalition to increase compliance with international norms against terrorism and to stop terrorist acts that are crimes against humanity
47 -
48 -====The only alternative to international law is genocide and nuclear war====
49 -**Shaw ‘1:** Shaw, Martin ~~Professor of International Relations and Politics at the University of Sussex~~. "The unfinished global revolution: intellectuals and the new politics of international relations." October 3, 2001. http://www.martinshaw.org/unfinished.pdf WHS/NAO
50 -The new politics of international relations require us, therefore, to go beyond the anti-imperialism of the intellectual left as well as of the semi-anarchist traditions of the academic discipline. We need to recognize three fundamental truths. First, in the twenty-first century people struggling for democratic liberties across the non- Western world are likely to make constant demands on our solidarity. Courageous academics, students and other intellectuals will be in the forefront of these movements. They deserve the unstinting support of intellectuals in the West. Second, the old international thinking in which democratic movements are seen as purely internal to states no longer carries conviction—despite the lingering nostalgia for it on both the American right and the anti-American left. The idea that global principles can and should be enforced worldwide is firmly established in the minds of hundreds of millions of people. This consciousness will become a powerful force in the coming decades. Third, global state-formation is a fact. International institutions are being extended, and (like it or not) they have a symbiotic relation with the major centre of state power, the increasingly internationalized Western conglomerate. The success of the global-democratic revolutionary wave depends first on how well it is consolidated in each national context—but second, on how thoroughly it is embedded in international networks of power, at the centre of which, inescapably, is the West. From these political fundamentals, strategic propositions can be derived. First, democratic movements cannot regard non-governmental organizations and civil society as ends in themselves. They must aim to civilize local states, rendering them open, accountable and pluralistic, and curtail the arbitrary and violent exercise of power. Second, democratizing local states is not a separate task from integrating them into global and often Western-centred networks. Reproducing isolated local centres of power carries with it classic dangers of states as centres of war. Embedding global norms and integrating new state centres with global institutional frameworks are essential to the control of violence. (To put this another way: the proliferation of purely national democracies is not a recipe for peace.) Third, while the global revolution cannot do without the West and the UN, neither can it rely on them unconditionally. We need these power networks, but we need to tame them too, to make their messy bureaucracies enormously more accountable and sensitive to the needs of society worldwide. This will involve the kind of ‘cosmopolitan democracy’ argued for by David Held. It will also require us to advance a global social-democratic agenda, to address the literally catastrophic scale of world social inequalities. This is not a separate problem: social and economic reform is an essential ingredient of alternatives to warlike and genocidal power; these feed off and reinforce corrupt and criminal political economies. Fourth, if we need the global-Western state, if we want to democratize it and make its institutions friendlier to global peace and justice, we cannot be indifferent to its strategic debates. It matters to develop international political interventions, legal institutions and robust peacekeeping as strategic alternatives to bombing our way through zones of crisis. It matters that international intervention supports pluralist structures, rather than ratifying Bosnia-style apartheid. As political intellectuals in the West, we need to have our eyes on the ball at our feet, but we also need to raise them to the horizon. We need to grasp the historic drama that is transforming worldwide relationships between people and state, as well as between state and state. We need to think about how the turbulence of the global revolution can be consolidated in democratic, pluralist, international networks of both social relations and state authority. We cannot be simply optimistic about this prospect. Sadly, it will require repeated violent political crises to push Western and other governments towards the required restructuring of world institutions. What I have outlined is a huge challenge; but the alternative is to see the global revolution splutter into partial defeat, or degenerate into new genocidal wars—perhaps even nuclear conflicts. The practical challenge for all concerned citizens, and the theoretical and analytical challenges
51 -
52 -===Advantage 2 is Crime===
53 -====Cities often have policies that criminalize the homeless; ====
54 -**Bauman et. al 15** ~~Bauman, Tristia, Jeremy Rosen, Eric Tars, Janelle Fernandez, Christian Robin, Eugene Sowa, Michael Maskin, Cheryl Cortemeglia, and Hannah Nicholes. "No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities." National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2015. Web. 18 July 2016. https://www.nlchp.org/documents/No'Safe'Place WHS//NAO~~
55 -Homelessness is caused by a severe shortage of affordable housing. Over 12.8 of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001, resulting in large part, from a decrease in funding for federally subsidized housing since the 1970s. The shortage of affordable housing is particularly difficult for extremely low-income renters who, in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, are competing for fewer and fewer affordable units. In many American cities there are fewer emergency shelter beds than homeless people. There are fewer available shelter beds than homeless people in major cities across the nation. In some places, the gap between available space and human need is significant, leaving hundreds or, in some cases, thousands of people with no choice but to struggle for survival in outdoor, public places. Despite a lack of affordable housing and shelter space, many cities have chosen to criminally punish people living on the street for doing what any human being must do to survive. The Law Center surveyed 187 cities and assessed the number and type of municipal codes that criminalize the life-sustaining behaviors of homeless people. The results of our research show that the criminalization of necessary human activities is all too common in cities across the country. Prevalence of laws that criminalize homelessness: • Laws prohibiting "camping"1 in public o 34 of cities impose city-wide bans on camping in public. o 57 of cities prohibit camping in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in public o 18 of cities impose city-wide bans on sleeping in public. o 27 of cities prohibit sleeping in particular public places, such as in public parks. 1 Laws that criminalize camping in public are written broadly to include an array of living arrangements, including simply sleeping outdoors. • Laws prohibiting begging in public o 24 of cities impose city-wide bans on begging in public. o 76 of cities prohibit begging in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, and vagrancy o 33 of cities make it illegal to loiter in public throughout an entire city. o 65 of cities prohibit the activity in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sitting or lying down in public o 53 of cities prohibit sitting or lying down in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in vehicles o 43 of cities prohibit sleeping in vehicles. • Laws prohibiting food sharing o 9 of cities prohibit sharing food with homeless people
56 -
57 -====Homelessness is directly correlated to increasing crime.====
58 -**Roberts 13** (CEO of PATH Partners "Could Housing the Homeless Solve Crime", August 13, 2013 WHS//NAO)
59 -In Britain, experts believe 20 of their "rough sleepers" (people who are homeless) have committed a crime. The conclusion, however, is that these crimes are usually acts of survival or ways for people to get off the streets. Prostitution, shoplifting, or theft are certainly illegal, but they are acts that some people on the streets perform to try and improve their situations. But there are certainly hardcore, violent criminals on the streets, too. The problem is that our communities have become so numb to homelessness that we allow homeless encampments to be scattered in the hills, beaches, rivers, and parks, so that these havens of homelessness become places where violent criminals can blend in and hide. Most of the time, homelessness is not the source of crime in an area, but the places where people experiencing homelessness gather could become havens of crime. Both crime against innocent people living on the streets and crime against innocent people who are already housed. The real solution is to eliminate these encampments of homelessness by helping people get housed. So, could ending homelessness reduce crime in our neighborhoods? Yes. When there is no more homelessness, there will be no more crimes against people who are homeless. When there is no more homelessness, people living on the streets will no longer have to break laws to try and get off the streets.
60 -
61 -====This creates a new ending cycle of incarceration ====
62 -**Roman 16 ** ~~Courtney S. Hardingcharding roman, Ph.D. in sociology and justice, law, and society from the American University. 11-29-2016, "Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services," No Publication, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854816680838~~
63 -Finally, although it is often individuals with mental illness who are most in need of housing when released from incarceration, these individuals have been labeled "hard to house" or "hard to serve" as the complexity of their problems (e.g., health, mental health, substance abuse, victimization) requires the resources of multiple agencies and comprehensive (expensive) solutions (Burt and Anderson, 2005; McNiel, Binder, and Robinson, 2005). Furthermore, there is little accountability across domains for providing housing to individuals recently released from jail (Roman and Travis, 2006). This leaves many vulnerable individuals homeless and in need of treatment during the time of reentry. Being homeless soon after release from jail has been shown to increase one’s chances of reincarceration, especially for those with a serious mental illness (Metraux and Culhane, 2004). The link between homelessness and incarceration is mediated by factors related to mental health and substance abuse, as well as socioeconomic disadvantage (Greenberg and Rosenheck, 2008). Preventing homelessness among individuals with complex health and mental issues at the time of release from jail is therefore a means of reducing repeat justice system involvement, poor health outcomes, and long-term housing instability. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating systems that address homelessness into the discussion of cross-system integration. They also implicate homelessness as a potentially important factor to incorporate into any comprehensive picture of complex patients in the criminal justice system.
64 -
65 -====Prison is the worst impact. It is dehumanizing and strips citizens of their subjectivity====
66 -**Rodriguez 7 bracketed for clarity** ~~Dylan Rodriguez, University of California, Riverside .AMERICAN GLOBALITY AND THE U. S. PRISON REGIME: STATE VIOLENCE AND WHITE SUPREMACY FROM ABU GHRAIB TO STOCKTON TO BAGONG DIWA. Kritika Kultura, Issue 9, November 2007 49 WHS//NAO~~
67 -We might imagine the U.S. prison, not as a discrete institution or reified place, but rather as ~~is~~ an abstracted site—a prototype—of organized punishment and (social, civil, and biological) death. I begin this section with two points of departure, in an attempt to initially provoke a conceptualization of the American prison regime that focuses on the intertwining of two structural logics: 1) white supremacy as a historical modality of social (dis)organization, and 2) the capacity of allegedly "local" or "domestic" U.S. social formations to circulate, militarize, and mobilize across global geographies. The emergence of the American prison industrial complex since the 1970s is generally addressed as a problem of the "American nation," and until recently has largely been situated by academic scholars, progressive activists, and imprisoned intellectuals within the domains of the domestic social formation. Yet, even the concise definition of the prison industrial complex penned in 2001 by U.S. political prisoner Linda Evans (released in 2001) and activist Eve Goldberg facilitates an inquiry that pushes past parochial geographies of the U.S. national form: "Like the military/industrial complex, the prison industrial complex is an interweaving of private business and government interests. Its twofold purpose is ~~for~~ profit and social control. Its public rationale is the fight against crime" (Evans and Goldberg). Beyond the strictures of conventional criminological approaches to the U.S. prison apparatus, Evans and Goldberg are suggesting ~~There is~~ an organic connection between the architecture of the prison industrial complex and the structuring forces of neoliberalism and globalization: the socioeconomic transformations of U.S. capital, alongside contemporary elaborations of the U.S. racist state in the post-Civil Rights moment, simultaneously a.) fabricate~~s~~ populations vulnerable to criminalization (black, brown, ~~and~~ poor, and generically redundant to the contemporary economic organization of the U.S.); b.) withdraw state social services for people most in need of resources for social and biological reproduction; c.) militarize and juridically empower the policing and criminal justice apparatuses in unprecedented ways while amplifying their fundamentally punitive institutional demeanours; and d.) generate a dynamic statecraft, public discourse, and popular culture of policing and imprisonment that organize a grammar of social necessity and ideological consent around the emergence and expansion of the prison industrial complex. Here we must remember that among the millions of people held captive by the U.S. state in prisons, jails, youth prisons, and immigration detention, people of African descent are imprisoned at rates astronomically high relative to their proportion of the national population (exceeding 400 of their national demographic proportion), and at rates dwarfing those of white Americans (see Gershowitz). Native Americans repeat this pattern, although their smaller demographic numbers often obscure their heightened criminalization by the U.S. state. Latinos, Latinas, and other racialized brown people are increasingly targeted in ways that directly derive from, and expand, the historical structures of white supremacist policing and imprisonment that target Black and indigenous people, in part through the specificities of migrant/immigrant policing and criminalization. Despite composing the national majority of the U.S. population, white Americans compose less than half of the incarcerated U.S. population. Black, Brown, and indigenous peoples constitute upwards of 60 held captive. For the unfamiliar, a few other facts assist in laying bare the accelerated nature of this massive state-sanctioned project: 1 Between 1972 and 2003, the imprisoned (jail and prison) population in the U.S. increased more than 600; for the five decades prior to the 1970s, the incarcerated population had remained relatively stable, hovering between 100,000-200,000. 2 The U.S. boasts of the highest rate of incarceration in the world, at 702 per 100,000 in the general population; this rate is between 500 and 800 that of comparable industrialized nations. 3 African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites (2,290 per 100,000 versus 412 per 100,000), while Hispanics are incarcerated at nearly double the rate of whites (742 per 100,000). 4 According to one of the most rigorous criminological studies to date (examining the period 1980-1996), the imprisonment increase does not derive from objective changes in the commission of crimes, but rather is almost entirely owed to politically formed changes in sentencing and criminal justice policy (see Gershowitz). Thus, as the U.S. prison, jail, INS/Homeland Security detainee and incarcerated youth population approaches and surpasses the 2.5 million mark (as of this writing), the quantitative evidence refracts the prison’s qualitative transformation into a fundamental organ of state reproduction and civic ordering. Variable, overlapping, and mutually constituting white supremacist regimes have in fact been fundamental to the formation and movements of the United States, from racial chattel slavery and frontier genocide to recent and current modes of neoliberal land displacement and (domestic-to-global) warfare. Without exception, these regimes have been differently entangled with the state’s changing paradigms, strategies, and technologies of human incarceration and punishment (to follow the prior examples: the plantation, the reservation, the neoliberal sweatshop, and the domestic-to-global prison). The historical nature of these entanglements is widely acknowledged, although explanations of the structuring relations of force tend to either isolate or historically compartmentalize the complexities of historical white supremacy. For the theoretical purposes of this essay, white supremacy may be understood as a logic of social organization that produces regimented, institutionalized, and militarized conceptions of hierarchized "human" difference, enforced through coercions and violences that are structured by genocidal possibility (including physical extermination and curtailment of people’s collective capacities to socially, culturally, or biologically reproduce). As a historical vernacular and philosophical apparatus of domination, white supremacy is simultaneously premised on and consistently innovating universalized conceptions of the white (European and euroamerican) "human" vis-à-vis the rigorous production, penal discipline, and frequent social, political, and biological neutralization or extermination of the (non-white) sub- or non-human. To consider white supremacy as essential to American social formation (rather than a freakish or extremist deviation from it) facilitates a discussion of the modalities through which this material logic of violence overdetermines the social, political, economic, and cultural structures that compose American globality and constitute the common sense that is organic to its ordering.
68 -
69 -===Advantage 3 is Sex Trafficking===
70 -====Homeless youth are at risk for sex trafficking.====
71 -**Clawson et al ’09** ~~Heather J. Clawson, Nicole Dutch, Amy Solomon, and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, 8-30-2009, "Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: A Review of the Literature," ASPE, https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/human-trafficking-and-within-united-states-review-literature~~#Other WHS//NAO~~
72 -According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (2006), across the United States 36,402 boys and 47,472 girls younger than age 18 were picked up by law enforcement and identified as runaways.  Girls who run from their homes, group homes, foster homes, or treatment centers, are at great risk of being targeted by a pimp (or trafficker) and becoming exploited.  Research consistently confirms the correlation between running away and becoming exploited through prostitution.  Researchers have found that the majority of prostituted women had been runaways; for example, 96 percent in San Francisco (Silbert and Pines, 1982), 72 percent in Boston (Norton-Hawk, 2002) and 56 percent in Chicago (Raphael and Shapiro, 2002).  Among prostituted youth (both boys and girls), up to 77 percent report having run away at least once (Seng, 1989). Experts have reported that within 48 hours of running away, an adolescent is likely to be approached to participate in prostitution or another form of commercial sexual exploitation (Spangenberg, 2001); however, no definitive published research substantiates this claim. Like girls, boys exploited through prostitution are most often runaways or throwaways (Flowers, 2001; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). For example, one study found that two-thirds of males exploited through prostitution had run away from home prior to becoming involved (Allen, 1980). While many of the factors leading to a young person leaving home are similar for boys and girls, it is estimated that between 40 and 50 percent of boys exploited through prostitution had been thrown out of their homes because of sexual identity issues (Earls and David, 1989; Seattle Commission on Children and Youth, 1986). Approximately 2535 percent of prostituted boys self-identify as gay, bisexual, or transgender/transsexual (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Further, regardless of the boys self-identification, at least 95 percent of all prostitution engaged in by boys is provided to adult men (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Regardless of their sex, when minors leave their homes, it is to protect themselves, often because they view living on the streets as either less dangerous or no more dangerous than staying at home (Hyde, 2005; Martinez, 2006). Once on the street, homeless youth are at risk for being victimized because they lack the funds, interpersonal and job skills, and support systems necessary to survive on their own (Martinez, 2006). Having often come from chaotic families, runaways tend to lack strategies for problem solving, conflict resolution, and meeting basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter (Martinez, 2006; Robertson and Toro, 1999; Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Yoder, 1999). Some minors turn to substance abuse, crime, and survival sex to meet their basic needs (Greene, Ennett, and Ringwald, 1999; Riley, Greif, Caplan, and MacAulay, 2004; Robertson and Toro, 1999). Furthermore, exposure to the dangers of the street makes them more visible and vulnerable to traffickers, and their risky lifestyles and routines put them at greater risk of being victimized (Kipke, Simon, Montgomery, Unger, and Iversen, 1997; MacLean, Embry, and Cauce, 1999; Tyler, Cauce, and Whitbeck, 2004). Most runaway/throwaway youth are likely to run to and congregate in urban areas, so it is not surprising that there is general consensus that a greater percentage of minors are exploited in the U.S. sex industry in urban areas, though they may be brought from suburban and rural areas (Flowers, 2001). However, an increase in minor arrests in suburban counties/areas and rural areas has experts speculating that the increase is indicative of an expansion of prostitution beyond city limits (Flowers, 2001). While these data are somewhat outdated, anecdotal evidence from service providers indicates that this trend continues (A. Adams, personal communication, March 2006; N. Hotaling, personal communication, June 2006). However, further research is needed to determine whether the increase in suburban arrests is due to better identification or an actual increase in incidence. WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING? NEEDS OF INTERNATIONAL VICTIMS An examination of the services provided to international victims of human trafficking (adults and children) reveals emergency, short-term, and long-term needs (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson, Small, Go, and Myles, 2004). Some victims initially may present to a service provider with basic needs for safety, housing, food, and clothing. In fact, the need for safe and secure housing and overall support and advocacy are primary needs for virtually all victims of trafficking. Needs of International Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Advocacy (emotional/moral support) Housing Medical care (including dental) Mental health services/trauma recovery Transportation Education Job training/employment Reunification/repatriation These basic needs often are accompanied by an immediate need for legal assistance/representation to handle issues related to immigration status, provide legal representation that may be required in an ongoing investigation and prosecution of the trafficking case, or provide counsel in a civil lawsuit against the trafficker or in a potential custody case (Caliber Associates, 2007; Florida University Center for Advancement of Human Rights, 2003). Interviews with service providers and NGOs reveal that beyond these common immediate needs, the needs of victims are as diverse as the countries from which the victims originate. Additionally, during the course of working with victims, their needs are likely to change (Caliber Associates, 2007). A needs assessment conducted with service providers working with victims of human trafficking identified a broad range of victims needs, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing; food/clothing; medical services (including dental care); advocacy (moral/emotional support), legal services; transportation; and information/referral services (e.g., rights as a victim of human trafficking, available services) (Clawson et al., 2004). For international victims, more often than not, there is a need for language assistance, often requiring an interpreter/translator to help the victim communicate with first responders and those trying to provide assistance. Only after these immediate needs have been met can a victim benefit from treatment for depression, trauma, re-traumatization, and other issues (Misra, Connolly, Klynman, and Majeed, 2006). Addressing the symptoms exhibited by victims of human trafficking is critical to their long-term recovery. Victims of human trafficking have been described as exhibiting symptoms and needs for service similar to torture victims, victims of domestic violence/sexual assault, battered immigrant women, migrant workers, refugees, and asylum seekers (Clawson et al., 2004). Like torture victims, victims of human trafficking (both sex and labor trafficking) often experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorder, other anxiety disorders, and substance abuse (De Jong, et al, 2001; Shrestha, Sharma, Van Ommeren, Regmi, Makaju, et al., 1998). Specific symptoms exhibited by victims can include nightmares, difficulty concentrating, becoming easily upset, and having difficulty relaxing. Victims can frequently feel sad or angry, have difficulty thinking, experience feelings of hopelessness, and demonstrate sleep disorders. The trauma itself also may manifest as physical symptoms, such as headaches, chest pain, shaking, sweating, and dizziness (Center for Victims of Torture). Beyond trauma-recovery services, long-term service needs include permanent housing, legal assistance, job training, job placement, education, family reunification (within the United States), and repatriation (in some cases). For some victims, in particular victims of labor trafficking, the victim may have a need for long-term medical care to address physical disabilities resulting from the abuse and/or harsh labor conditions under which the person was forced to work (Bales, 2004; Caliber Associates, 2007). Based on research on the needs of unaccompanied refugee minors, minor international trafficking victims may experience depression and feelings of isolation, but given their culture, they may not know how to express or describe what they are feeling. They may display psychosomatic symptoms; experience high levels of anxiety (especially if language obstacles and cultural differences exist between the minor and the caregiver); experience survivor guilt (victims feel they do not deserve to be alive and in a safe place when friends, siblings, or other family members are suffering); exhibit behavioral problems, including aggression; and question their ethnic identity (Ryan, 1997). Intensive case management and medical, mental health, and social services are important for responding to the needs of these children. Additionally, educating and training foster care families about the dynamics of human trafficking, the needs of victims, and the symptoms of trauma are also needed to ensure appropriate placement for children in need of homes. Given the complex needs of international victims of human trafficking, it is not surprising that providers report working with clients for more than a year and often for several years, frequently on an intermittent basis. This makes sustained progress challenging (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson et al., 2004). NEEDS OF DOMESTIC VICTIMS Information specifically documenting the needs of victims of human trafficking is limited and has focused primarily on international victims. However, research on prostitution and on homeless and runaway youth can provide some insights about the needs of domestic trafficking victims and can help increase understanding about the similarities and differences across the victim types. Needs of Minor Domestic Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Intensive case management Medical care Alcohol and substance abuse counseling/treatment Mental health counseling Life skills training Education Job training/employment Family reunification Girls and women escaping prostitution report housing (both transitional and long-term) as an urgent need (Commercial Sexual Exploitation Resource Institute, 1998). Substance abuse treatment and mental health counseling are also common needs among this population. The use of substances and subsequent drug addiction is well documented among homeless youth exploited through prostitution. One study found that more than 75 percent of these youth abuse alcohol or drugs, while virtually all admit to some level of use (Yates, Mackenzie, Pennbridge, and Swofford, 1991). These rates were notably higher than among homeless youth not exploited through prostitution (R. Lloyd, personal communication, May 2007). While it is important to note that a significant percentage of girls enter prostitution with no history of drug or alcohol abuse (Farley and Kelly, 2000), some studies suggest that girls who become exploited through prostitution are likely to have begun using substances at an earlier age than their at-risk peers who do not become exploited in this way (Inciardi, Pottieger, Forney, Chitwood, and McBride. 1991; Nadon, Koverola, and Schludermann, 1998). Substance abuse is also a rampant problem among the male population. For example, one study found that 77 percent of the boys exploited through prostitution were regular users of marijuana (Harlan et al., 1981). Another study found that 42 percent of the prostituted boys could be classified as heavy drinkers or alcoholics and 29 percent were regular users of hard drugs (Allen, 1980). In 1989, the County of Los Angeles found that of all the runaway youth, both boys and girls, seeking medical assistance, 75 percent of those exploited through prostitution had a substance abuse problem compared with 36 percent of those youth not being prostituted (Klain, 1999). Both girls and boys also present with medical needs. Females trafficked in the sex trade have increased risk of cervical cancer and chronic hepatitis as well as HIV (Farley et al., 2003), thus requiring immediate and potentially long-term medical care. Boys are at particularly high risk of contracting HIV due to high rates of unprotected anal sex with adult men as well as frequent intravenous drug use (Flowers, 2001). Rates of mental health problems are similar between girls and boys, though girls have been studied far more extensively (Flowers, 2001; Klain, 1999; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). Adolescent girls suffer severe emotional and physical consequences as a result of domestic trafficking. Survivors of prostitution demonstrate a high rate of dissociative disorders, self-destructive behaviors (including cutting), suicide attempts, and clinical depression (Farley, 2003; Farley and Kelly, 2000; Giobbe, 1993; Lloyd, 2005; Nixon et al., 2002). Additionally, as a result of the chronic trauma, prostituted girls often develop symptoms congruent with PTSD. One international study of prostituted children and adults, including male prostitutes, in five countries found that almost three-fourths met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD (Farley, Barel, Kiremire, and Sezquin, 1998; Silbert and Pines, 1981). The clinical manifestations of PTSD can limit an individuals ability to function effectively, decreasing the likelihood that he or she can take advantage of available resources and possibly minimizing any likelihood of leaving prostitution (Valera, Sawyer, and Schiraldi, 2001). As with all victims of human trafficking, adolescent girls may display symptoms of Stockholm syndrome, otherwise most frequently seen among prisoners of war and torture victims (Graham and Wish, 1994). As a means of emotional and physical survival, the captive (the girl) identifies with her captor. She expresses extreme gratitude over the smallest acts of kindness or mercy (e.g., he does not beat her today), denial over the extent of violence and injury, rooting for her pimp, hypervigilence regarding his needs, and the perception that anyone trying to persecute him or help her escape is the enemy. She may lash out at law enforcement or anyone else attempting to help her exit, and insist that she is fine and happy in her current situation. Further, the manifestations of her trauma may make her reticent to trust those outside the Life who state they are trying to help her (Friedman, 2005; Raphael, 2004). While presented here as separate needs or conditions, recognition of co-occurring disorders among adolescent victims of trafficking and the need for integrated treatment approaches, specifically for trauma, substance abuse, and mental health disorders, has gained momentum over the past 510 years (Austin, Macgowan, and Wagner, 2005; Battjes et al., 2004; Dasinger, Shane, and Martinovich, 2004; Dennis et al., 2002, 2004; Godley, Jones, Funk, Ives, and Passetti, 2004; Robbins, Bachrach, and Scapocznik, 2002). A number of studies indicate high rates of co-occurring disorders among adolescents. In one clinical study of youth in the mental health system, for example, about half had a co-occurring substance abuse disorder (Greenbaum, Foster-Johnson, and Petrilla, 1996). In the substance abuse system, estimates are even higher that as many as 7590 percent of drug abusing adolescents having a co-morbid mental health disorder (Eisen, Youngman, Grob, and Dill, 1992; Grella, Hser, Joshia, and Rounds-Bryant, 2001). Mood disorders (especially depression and anxiety), conduct disorders, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are most often cited as co-occurring with substance abuse disorders in adolescents (Crowley and Riggs, 1995; Wise, Cuffe, and Fischer, 2001). Given the high documented rates of co-morbidity in substance abusing clinical populations, Grella et al. (2001, p. 391) concluded that adolescent drug treatment programs should assume that co-morbidity among their patients is the norm, rather than the exception.** **The needs of homeless and runaway youth parallel the needs of victims of human trafficking (international and domestic). These include the need for food, clothing, and housing; medical care; alcohol and substance abuse counseling and treatment; mental health services; education and employment assistance; and legal assistance (Robertson and Toro, 1999). In two studies, homeless youth reported wanting assistance with life skills training (Aviles and Helfrich, 2004; DeRosa et al., 1999). Other important service needs are assessment and treatment for exposure to trauma (Dalton and Pakenham, 2002; Steele and OKeefe, 2001) and risk of suicide (Martinez, 2006).
73 -
74 -====Human trafficking is dehumanizing to its victims.====
75 -**Rocha ’12 **~~Priscila Rocha, 2012, "OUR BACKYARD SLAVE TRADE: THE RESULT OF OHIO'S FAILURE TO ENACT COMPREHENSIVE STATE-LEVEL HUMAN-SEX-TRAFFICKING LEGISLATION", Cleveland State University Journal of Law and Health, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ WHS//NAO~~
76 -Human trafficking is a lucrative business in which traffickers reap substantial profits from the dehumanization of victims. It ranks as the second largest illegal enterprise in the world, following the illegal sale of drugs. n63 The figures help explain why traffickers are compelled to continue treating human beings as commodities. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that global profits from ~~*391~~ forced commercial sex exploitation generate $ 33.9 billion U.S. dollars per year. n64 Profits from global commercial sex exploitation, in which victims are trafficked, generate approximately $ 27.8 billion U.S. dollars per year. n65 Industrialized nations account for forty-nine percent of annual global profits derived from human trafficking. n66 Traffickers in industrialized nations receive approximately $ 67,200 of profits per victim (or $ 5600 per month). n67 The figures indicate that human trafficking is currently a business opportunity that is simply too profitable to for traffickers to ignore. Until the law imposes penalties for human trafficking substantial enough to hurt traffickers' bottom line profits, they will continue to enslave victims, viewing penalties as a mere business cost.
77 -
78 -====Providing a safe place to stay for homeless youth would solve for sex trafficking.====
79 -Jayne **Bigelsen ’13** ~~Director Anti-Human Trafficking Initiatives, Covenant House New York~~, 5-2013, "Homelessness, Survival Sex and Human Trafficking: As Experienced by the Youth of Covenant House New York", http://www.endhomelessness.org/page/-/files/Covenant20House20Fordham20University20Trafficking20Report.pdf WHS//NAO~~
80 -For those who are committed to eradicating domestic trafficking, the contributing factors outlined in this report offer a roadmap to trafficking prevention. As stated above, 48 of the participants who reported engaging in commercial sex activity explained that a lack of a safe place to sleep was a main reason for their initial entry into prostitution or other commercial sex. The participants described how pimps in New York City are well aware that the youth shelters are full and use that to their advantage by alerting homeless young people to the no vacancy status and offering them a place to stay in lieu of sleeping on the streets. Therefore, every time a shelter bed for a homeless youth is lost to budget cuts, pimps are able to operate with greater success. Advocates, policy makers and the public at large must work collaboratively to make sure that pimps and other traffickers have no such advantage by working toward the goal of ensuring that every homeless youth who wants a safe place to sleep has access to shelter and services.
81 -
82 -====A combination of homelessness and sex trafficking culminates in massive substance abuse====
83 -**Leal et al. 09** ~~Leal, Daniel, Marc Galanter, Helen Dermatis, and Laurence Westreich. "Correlates of Protracted Homelessness in a Sample of Dually Diagnosed Psychiatric Inpatients." Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 16.2 (1999): 143-47. National Coalition for the Homeless. National Coalition for the Homeless, July 2009. Web. 18 July 2016. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/addiction.pdf WHS//NAO~~
84 -Although obtaining an accurate, recent count is difficult, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003) estimates, 38 of homeless people were dependent on alcohol and 26 abused other drugs. Alcohol abuse is more common in older generations, while drug abuse is more common in homeless youth and young adults (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Substance abuse is much more common among homeless people than in the general population. According to the 2006 National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 15 of people above the age of 12 reported using drugs within the past year and only 8 reported using drugs within the past month. RELATIONSHIP TO HOMELESSNESS Substance abuse is often a cause of homelessness. Addictive disorders disrupt relationships with family and friends and often cause people to lose their jobs. For people who are already struggling to pay their bills, the onset or exacerbation of an addiction may cause them to lose their housing. A 2008 survey by the United States Conference of Mayors asked 25 cities for their top three causes of homelessness. Substance abuse was the single largest cause of homelessness for single adults (reported by 68 of cities). Substance abuse was also mentioned by 12 of cities as one of the top three causes of homelessness for families. According to Didenko and Pankratz (2007), two-thirds of homeless people report that drugs and/or alcohol were a major reason for their becoming homeless. In many situations, however, substance abuse is a result of homelessness rather than a cause. People who are homeless often turn to drugs and alcohol to cope with their situations. They use substances in an attempt to attain temporary relief from their problems. In reality, however, substance dependence only exacerbates their problems and decreases their ability to achieve employment stability and get off the streets. Additionally, some people may view drug and alcohol use as necessary to be accepted among the homeless community (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Breaking an addiction is difficult for anyone, especially for substance abusers who are homeless. To begin with, motivation to stop using substances may be poor. For many homeless people, survival is more important than personal growth and development, and finding food and shelter take a higher priority than drug counseling. Many homeless people have also become estranged from their families and friends. Without a social support network, recovering from a substance addiction is very difficult. Even if they do break their addictions, homeless people may have difficulty remaining sober while living on the str eets where substances are so widely used (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Unfortunately, many treatment programs focus on abstinence only programming, which is less effective than harm-reduction strategies and does not address the possibility of relapse (National Health Care for the Homeless Council, 2007). For many homeless people, substance abuse co-occurs with mental illness. Often, people with untreated mental illnesses use street drugs as an inappropriate form of self-medication. Homeless people with both substance disorders and mental illness experience additional obstacles to recovery, such as increased risk for violence and victimization and frequent cycling between the streets, jails, and emergency rooms (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Sadly, these people are often unable to find treatment facilities that will help them. Many programs for homeless people with mental illnesses do not accept people with substance abuse disorders, and many programs for homeless substance abusers do not treat people with mental illnesses
85 -
86 -
87 -===Plan===
88 -====Resolved: The United States ought to guarantee the right to housing. I reserve the right to clarify in Cross ex. ====
89 -**Fasanelli 5 is the solvency advocate** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
90 -Implementing the human right to adequate housing In implementing the human right to adequate housing, the American Bar Association calls upon federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to (1) Implement policies promoting the human right to adequate housing for all including veterans, people with disabilities, older persons, families, single individuals, and unaccompanied youth, which, at minimum, includes: a. Affordability, habitability, and accessibility; b. Provision of security of tenure, access to services, materials, facilities, and infrastructure; c. Location proximate to employment, health care, schools, and other social facilities; d. Provision of housing in areas that do not threaten occupants’ health; and e. Protection of cultural identity or diversity The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), which oversees implementation of the ICESCR, lists seven elements required for housing to be considered adequate including legal security of tenure; availability of services, materials, facilities, and infrastructure; affordability; habitability; accessibility; location near employment options, healthcare facilities, schools, child care centers, and other social facilities; and cultural adequacy in housing design.21 This framework recognizes that each of these elements is interdependent with each other. Adequate housing requires more than four walls and a roof; it requires adequate community resources, supportive legal and policy frameworks, effective access to justice, and a participatory and transparent democratic system to maintain all aspects of the right. It also recognizes that enjoyment of the right to housing is a standard relative to the availability of resources in a given country; here in the U.S., in what remains the wealthiest country in the world, we can and must do more.22
91 -
92 -===Solvency===
93 -====Plan is feasible and saves more money in the long run====
94 -**Fasanelli 6** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
95 -In addition to viewing housing expenditures as obligatory, legislators must also consider the fiscal benefits of adequately meeting low-income housing needs. In a 2004 study by the Lewin Group on the costs of serving homeless individuals in nine cities across the U.S., several cities found supportive housing to be cheaper than housing homeless individuals in shelters.51 That same year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of a Section 8 Housing Certificate to be $7,028, approximately $8,000 less than the cost of an emergency shelter bed funded by HUD’s Emergency Shelter Grants program.52 A collaborative effort of service and medical providers in San Diego, Project 25, has documented a $7 million dollar savings to tax payers through reduced emergency care and jail costs by providing permanent housing to 35 homeless individuals, a 70 reduction.53 Scotland, France, and South Africa all show that the progressive implementation of the right to housing through legislation and case law is possible where the political will exists. Scotland’s Homeless Act of 2003 progressively expanded the right to be immediately housed and the right to long-term, supportive housing for as long as it is needed, starting with target populations, but available to all in need as of 2012. The law also includes a private right of action and requires jurisdictions to plan for development of adequate affordable housing supplies.54 France created similar legislation in 2007 in response to public pressure and a decision of the European Committee on Social Rights under the European Social Charter.55 South Africa’s constitutional right to housing protects even those squatting in informal settlements, requiring the provision of adequate alternative housing before families and individuals can be evicted.56 This law has been enforced in local communities to even require rebuilding housing that has been torn down.57 While not yet perfect, these countries are proving that progressively implementing the right to housing is both economically feasible and judicially manageable
96 -
97 -====Any skepticism should be discounted- it’s a question of spending money properly.====
98 -**Hartman** ~~Chester Hartman. The Case for a Right to Housing. Housing Policy Debate. Volume 9, Issue 2. Poverty and Race Research Action Council. WHS//NAO~~
99 -But given that government budgetary outlays must be far higher than current levels if the National Housing Goal is to become a reality, is the money there? That, I submit, is not a fiscal question but a political one. We do not have any wholly reliable estimates of what realizing a right to decent, affordable housing would cost, but a recent approach can offer an order-of-magnitude estimate. For example, the detailed 10-year program put forth by the Institute for Policy Studies’ Working Group on Housing (1989) has a first-year price tag of between $29 and $88 billion (in 1989 dollars), depending on what mixture of its differently priced elements is chosen; over its life, required outlays are reduced annually. While the figure sounds high, such expenditures represent a tiny percentage of the current federal budget. Funding B-2 bombers (‘‘that notorious lemon’’ ~~Lewis 1995~~ unrequested by the Pentagon), at $1.4 billion each, at a time when the possibility of large-scale wars is at its lowest in the century, is but one illustration of politicized budgetary choices that reveal no shortage of financial resources. The above figure appears to be in line with the amount of subsidy the government grants under the mortgage interest deduction. According to U.S. Congress (1997) Joint Committee on Taxation estimates, the mortgage interest deduction alone will amount to $232.6 billion over the period between fiscal years 1998 and 2002. For the same five-year period, the deduction of property taxes on owner-occupied residences is estimated to cost $89.9 billion, and exclusion of capital gains on the sale of principal residences is estimated at $29.6 billion. In sum, it’s not that we don’t have the money to fund a right to housing; rather, it’s how we choose to spend it.
100 -
101 -====The plan solves empirics prove====
102 -~~Carol **Off and Jeff** Douglas, 5-14-20**15**, "Medicine Hat becomes the first city in Canada to eliminate homelessness," CBC News, http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3074402/medicine-hat-becomes-the-first-city-in-canada-to-eliminate-homelessness-1.3074742 WHS//NAO~~
103 -Medicine Hat, a city in southern Alberta, pledged in 2009 to put an end to homelessness. Now they say they've fulfilled their promise. No one in the city spends more than 10 days in an emergency shelter or on the streets. If you've got no place to go, they'll simply provide you with housing. "We're pretty much able to meet that standard today. Even quicker, actually, sometimes," Mayor Ted Clugston tells As It Happens host Carol Off. Housing is tight in Medicine Hat. Frequent flooding in the past few years didn't help matters. With money chipped in by the province, the city built many new homes. Ted Clugston is the mayor of Medicine Hat, Alberta. Clugston admits that when the project began in 2009, when he was an alderman, he was an active opponent of the plan. "I even said some dumb things like, 'Why should they have granite countertops when I don't,'" he says. "However, I've come around to realize that this makes financial sense."
104 -
105 -====Housing is widely available in the United States.====
106 -**Loha 11** (Leader of Amnesty International "How Bad is The Homeless Problem?" 2011 WHS//NAO)
107 -Since 2007, banks have foreclosed around eight million homes. It is estimated that another eight to ten million homes will be foreclosed before the financial crisis is over. This approach to resolving one part of the financial crisis means many, many families are living without adequate and secure housing. In addition, approximately 3.5 million people in the U.S. are homeless, many of them veterans. It is worth noting that, at the same time, there are 18.5 million vacant homes in the country.
108 -
109 -===Underview===
110 -====Root cause explanations of international politics don’t exist – methodological pluralism is necessary to reclaim IR as emancipatory praxis and avoid endless political violence.====
111 -**Bleiker 14** – ~~6/17, Roland, Professor of International Relations at the University of Queensland, "International Theory Between Reification and Self-Reflective Critique," International Studies Review, Volume 16, Issue 2, pages 325–327 WHS//NAO~~
112 -This book is part of an increasing trend of scholarly works that have embraced poststructural critique but want to ground it in more positive political foundations, while retaining a reluctance to return to the positivist tendencies that implicitly underpin much of constructivist research. The path that Daniel Levine has carved out is innovative, sophisticated, and convincing. A superb scholarly achievement. For Levine, the key challenge in international relations (IR) scholarship is what he calls "unchecked reification": the widespread and dangerous process of forgetting "the distinction between theoretical concepts and the real-world things they mean to describe or to which they refer" (p. 15). The dangers are real, Levine stresses, because IR deals with some of the most difficult issues, from genocides to war. Upholding one subjective position without critical scrutiny can thus have far-reaching consequences. Following Theodor Adorno—who is the key theoretical influence on this book—Levine takes a post-positive position and assumes that the world cannot be known outside of our human perceptions and the values that are inevitably intertwined with them. His ultimate goal is to overcome reification, or, to be more precise, to recognize it as an inevitable aspect of thought so that its dangerous consequences can be mitigated. Levine proceeds in three stages: First he reviews several decades of IR theories to resurrect critical moments when scholars displayed an acute awareness of the dangers of reification. He refreshingly breaks down distinctions between conventional and progressive scholarship, for he detects self-reflective and critical moments in scholars that are usually associated with straightforward positivist positions (such as E.H. Carr, Hans Morgenthau, or Graham Allison). But Levine also shows how these moments of self-reflexivity never lasted long and were driven out by the compulsion to offer systematic and scientific knowledge. The second stage of Levine's inquiry outlines why IR scholars regularly closed down critique. Here, he points to a range of factors and phenomena, from peer review processes to the speed at which academics are meant to publish. And here too, he eschews conventional wisdom, showing that work conducted in the wake of the third debate, while explicitly post-positivist and critiquing the reifying tendencies of existing IR scholarship, often lacked critical self-awareness. As a result, Levine believes that many of the respective authors failed to appreciate sufficiently that "reification is a consequence of all thinking including itself" (p. 68). The third objective of Levine's book is also the most interesting one. Here, he outlines the path toward what he calls "sustainable critique": a form of self-reflection that can counter the dangers of reification. Critique, for him, is not just something that is directed outwards, against particular theories or theorists. It is also inward-oriented, ongoing, and sensitive to the "limitations of thought itself" (p. 12). The challenges that such a sustainable critique faces are formidable. Two stand out: First, if the natural tendency to forget the origins and values of our concepts are as strong as Levine and other Adorno-inspired theorists believe they are, then how can we actually recognize our own reifying tendencies? Are we not all inevitably and subconsciously caught in a web of meanings from which we cannot escape? Second, if one constantly questions one's own perspective, does one not fall into a relativism that loses the ability to establish the kind of stable foundations that are necessary for political action? Adorno has, of course, been critiqued as relentlessly negative, even by his second-generation Frankfurt School successors (from Jürgen Habermas to his IR interpreters, such as Andrew Linklater and Ken Booth). The response that Levine has to these two sets of legitimate criticisms are, in my view, both convincing and useful at a practical level. He starts off with depicting reification not as a flaw that is meant to be expunged, but as an a priori condition for scholarship. The challenge then is not to let it go unchecked. Methodological pluralism lies at the heart of Levine's sustainable critique. He borrows from what Adorno calls a "constellation": an attempt to juxtapose, rather than integrate, different perspectives. It is in this spirit that Levine advocates multiple methods to understand the same event or phenomena. He writes of the need to validate "multiple and mutually incompatible ways of seeing" (p. 63, see also pp. 101–102). In this model, a scholar oscillates back and forth between different methods and paradigms, trying to understand the event in question from multiple perspectives. No single method can ever adequately represent the event or should gain the upper hand. But each should, in a way, recognize and capture details or perspectives that the others cannot (p. 102). In practical terms, this means combining a range of methods even when—or, rather, precisely when—they are deemed incompatible. They can range from poststructual deconstruction to the tools pioneered and championed by positivist social sciences. The benefit of such a methodological polyphony is not just the opportunity to bring out nuances and new perspectives. Once the false hope of a smooth synthesis has been abandoned, the very incompatibility of the respective perspectives can then be used to identify the reifying tendencies in each of them. For Levine, this is how reification may be "checked at the source" and this is how a "critically reflexive moment might thus be rendered sustainable" (p. 103). It is in this sense that Levine's approach is not really post-foundational but, rather, an attempt to "balance foundationalisms against one another" (p. 14). There are strong parallels here with arguments advanced by assemblage thinking and complexity theory—links that could have been explored in more detail.
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-04-13 00:22:16.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Matthew Chandler
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Winston Churchill BR
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -43
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Warren Okunlola Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -12 - Util Affirmative - 1AC - NSDA District Round 5
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -NSDA District
Caselist.CitesClass[16]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,83 +1,0 @@
1 -==1AC==
2 -
3 -===Framing===
4 -====The standard is maximizing expected well-being. Prefer====
5 -
6 -====1 States do and should act in a utilitarian manner.====
7 -**Woller 97** ~~Gary, Brigham Young University, "A Forum On The Role of Environmental Ethics in Restructuring Environmental Policy and Law for the Next Century", Policy Currents, 1997, WHS//NAO~~
8 -Moreover, virtually all public policies entail some redistribution of economic or political resources, such that one group's gains must come at another group's expense. Consequently, public policies in a democracy must be justified to the public, and especially to those who pay the costs of those policies. Such justification cannot simply be assumed by invoking some a priori higher-order moral principle. Appeals to a priori moral principles, such as environmental preservation, also often fail to acknowledge that public policies inevitably entail trade-offs among competing values. Thus since policymakers cannot justify inherent value conflicts to the public in any philosophical sense, and since public policies inherently imply winners and losers, the policymakers' duty to the public interest requires them to demonstrate that the redistributive effects and value trade-offs implied by their polices are somehow to the overall advantage of society. At the same time, deontologically based ~~other~~ ethical systems have severe practical limitations as a basis for public policy. It therefore follows that in a democracy, policymakers have an ethical duty to establish a plausible link between policy alternatives and the problems they address, and the public must be reasonably assured ~~reasonable assurance~~ that a policy will actually do something about an existing problem; this requires the means-end language and methodology of utilitarian ethics. Good intentions, lofty rhetoric, and moral piety are an insufficient, though perhaps at times a necessary, basis for public policy in a democracy.
9 -
10 -====2 You should default to util if I win defense on their standard—we naturally want to make the world better.====
11 -**Sinnott-Armstrong 14** ~~Walter, American philosopher. He specializes in ethics, epistemology, and more recently in neuroethics, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy of cognitive science, "Consequentialism", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed), WHS//NAO~~
12 -Even if consequentialists can accommodate or explain away common moral intuitions, that might seem only to answer objections without yet giving any positive reason to accept consequentialism. However, most people begin with the presumption that we morally ought to make the world better when we can. The question then is only whether any moral constraints or moral options need to be added to the basic consequentialist factor in moral reasoning. (Kagan 1989, 1998) If no objection reveals any need for anything beyond consequences, then consequences alone seem to determine what is morally right or wrong, just as consequentialists claim.
13 -
14 -====3 The government has an obligation to guarantee everyone can exercise this right====
15 -**NESRI ’10** ~~National Economic and Social Rights Initiative, 2010. http://www.nesri.org/programs/what-is-the-human-right-to-housing WHS//NAO~~
16 -Everyone has a fundamental human right to housing, which ensures access to a safe, secure, habitable, and affordable home with freedom from forced eviction. It is the government’s obligation to guarantee that everyone can exercise this right to live in security, peace, and dignity. This right must be provided to all persons irrespective of income or access to economic resources. There are seven principles that are fundamental to the right to housing and are of particular relevance to the right to housing in the United States: Security of Tenure: Residents should possess a degree of security of tenure that guarantees protection against forced evictions, harassment, and other threats, including predatory redevelopment and displacement. -Availability of Services, Materials, Facilities, and Infrastructure: Housing must provide certain facilities essential for health, security, comfort, and nutrition. For instance, residents must have access to safe drinking water, heating and lighting, washing facilities, means of food storage, and sanitation. -Affordability: Housing costs should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. For instance, one should not have to choose between paying rent and buying food. -Habitability/Decent and Safe Home: Housing must provide residents adequate space that protects them from cold, damp, heat, rain, wind, or other threats to health; structural hazards; and disease. -Accessibility: Housing must be accessible to all, and disadvantaged and vulnerable groups must be accorded full access to housing resources.-Location: Housing should not be built on polluted sites, or in immediate proximity to pollution sources that threaten the right to health of residents. The physical safety of residents must be guaranteed, as well. Additionally, housing must be in a location which allows access to employment options, health-care services, schools, child-care centers, and other social facilities.-Cultural Adequacy: Housing and housing policies must guarantee the expression of cultural identity and diversity, including the preservation of cultural landmarks and institutions. Redevelopment or modernization programs must ensure that the cultural significance of housing and communities is not sacrificed.
17 -
18 -===Contention 1 is International Law===
19 -====US commitment to international law requires a right to housing- multiple contracts. ====
20 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
21 -The U.S. commitment to the human right to housing was reaffirmed in its signature to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) in 1977. The ICESCR was submitted to the Senate for ratification in late 1978, with an ABA resolution endorsing ratification in early 1979.10 The ICESCR codifies the right to housing in Article 11, which states, "~~t~~he States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing... The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the realization of this right."11 Although the Senate has yet to ratify the treaty, law professor David Weissbrodt notes signing a covenant indicates that "the United States accepts the responsibility to refrain from acts calculated to frustrate the objects of the treaty."12 The U.S. has also already ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (both with endorsement from the ABA), both of which recognize the right to be free from discrimination, including in housing.13
22 -
23 -====This is the make of break issue- the international community sees US commitment as necessarily key. ====
24 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
25 -Moreover, the international community has increasingly taken note of America’s failure to uphold the right to housing. In 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern about the disparate racial impact of homelessness in the U.S. and called for "adequate and adequately implemented policies, to ensure the cessation of this form of racial discrimination."17 In 2008, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination again recognized racial disparities in housing and ongoing segregation in the U.S.18 Since then, numerous U.N. experts, on official missions to the U.S., have addressed U.S. violations of the human right to housing and related rights.19
26 -
27 -====Domestic intervention key to shaping international norms- not affirming relinquishes power to other nations and makes America influence less important. ====
28 -**Fasanelli 1** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
29 -The U.S. has a strong tradition of promoting affordable, accessible housing, but programs have been under-funded and under-implemented. Moreover, while the human rights framework demands progressive implementation of the right to housing, and prohibits retrogressive policies, over the past 30 years there has been a significant disinvestment in public and subsidized housing at the federal level.32 Recent years have seen innovations such as the Rental Assistance Demonstration and Choice Neighborhoods Initiative, which attempt to "do more with less" while preserving important rights and protections for lowincome residents, but these programs still fail to meet the need in communities.33 Furthermore, many long-term contracts for affordable housing built under the Section 8 program during the 1960’s are now coming to term, threatening a further loss of affordable units.34 The contours of the human right to adequate housing continue to be developed at the international level by the CESCR and other U.N. experts, and at the regional level by regional human rights bodies, in response to ever-changing conditions. The U.S. should always seek to be a leader in applying these developing standards to its policies.
30 -
31 -====Independently- following ilaw is key to international consensus and deliberation. ====
32 -**Thiele** ~~Bret Thiele. JD. May 2002. The Human Right to Adequate Housing: A Tool for Promoting and Protecting Individual and community Health. 92(5): 712-715. American Journal of Public Health. WHS//NAO~~
33 -There are other reasons to use international human rights law as a model for national legislation. For example, reliance on international law to inform domestic law will result in greater consistency across domestic legal systems with respect to universally recognized human rights. Furthermore, states that turn to international law for guidance benefit from the process by which international law is derived. This process often takes a "best practices" approach. International law is influenced by a variety of ideas stemming from diverse legal, political, economic, and cultural traditions. The process of codifying norms into international law reflects the acceptance of those ideas that have been deemed by the international community to be not only "best practices" but also universally applicable. It is therefore important for states to turn to international human rights law to inform their domestic legislation and policy, including legislation and policy designed to protect and improve the health of their respective populations. The international human right to adequate housing should thus be implemented through domestic law.
34 -
35 -
36 -====Effective international law solves every impact—US commitment uniquely key. ====
37 -**IEER 2:** ~~Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy. Rule of Power or Rule of Law? An Assessment of U.S. Policies and Actions Regarding Security-Related Treaties. May 2002. http://www.ieer.org/reports/treaties/execsumm.pdf WHS//NAO~~
38 -The evolution of international law since World War II is largely a response to the demands of states and individuals living within a global society with a deeply integrated world economy. In this global society, the repercussions of the actions of states, non-state actors, and individuals are not confined within borders, whether we look to greenhouse gas accumulations, nuclear testing, the danger of accidental nuclear war, or the vast massacres of civilians that have taken place over the course of the last hundred years and still continue. Multilateral agreements increasingly have been a primary instrument employed by states to meet extremely serious challenges of this kind, for several reasons. They clearly and publicly embody a set of universally applicable expectations, including prohibited and required practices and policies. In other words, they articulate global norms, such as the protection of human rights and the prohibitions of genocide and use of weapons of mass destruction. They establish predictability and accountability in addressing a given issue. States are able to accumulate expertise and confidence by participating in the structured system offered by a treaty. However, influential U.S. policymakers are resistant to the idea of a treaty-based international legal system because they fear infringement on U.S. sovereignty and they claim to lack confidence in compliance and enforcement mechanisms. This approach has dangerous practical27 implications for international cooperation and compliance with norms. U.S. treaty partners do not enter into treaties expecting that they are only political commitments by the United States that can be overridden based on U.S. interests. When a powerful and influential state like the United States is seen to treat~~s~~ its legal obligations as a matter of convenience or of national interest alone, other states will see this as a justification to relax or withdraw from their own commitments. If the United States wants to require another state to live up to its treaty obligations, it may find that the state has followed the U.S. example and opted out of compliance.
39 -
40 -**Johansen ‘6 elaborates** Johansen, Robert C. 2006. ~~Professor of Political Science at the University of Notre Dame and Senior Fellow at the Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies~~. The Impact of US Policy toward the International Criminal Court on the Prevention of Genocide, War Crimes, and Crimes Against Humanity. Human Rights Quarterly. ProjectMuse.
41 -Double standards undermine law enforcement and peoples’ willing compliance with the law, especially in a decentralized international legal system. A legal fabric torn by exemptions for a major actor is a weakened fabric, less able to deter future infractions and more likely to instill hatred and outrage against the inequities imposed by the United States. US denial of reciprocal rights for others also interferes with building a strong worldwide coalition to increase compliance with international norms against terrorism and to stop terrorist acts that are crimes against humanity
42 -
43 -====The only alternative to international law is genocide and nuclear war====
44 -**Shaw ‘1:** Shaw, Martin ~~Professor of International Relations and Politics at the University of Sussex~~. "The unfinished global revolution: intellectuals and the new politics of international relations." October 3, 2001. http://www.martinshaw.org/unfinished.pdf WHS/NAO
45 -The new politics of international relations require us, therefore, to go beyond the anti-imperialism of the intellectual left as well as of the semi-anarchist traditions of the academic discipline. We need to recognize three fundamental truths. First, in the twenty-first century people struggling for democratic liberties across the non- Western world are likely to make constant demands on our solidarity. Courageous academics, students and other intellectuals will be in the forefront of these movements. They deserve the unstinting support of intellectuals in the West. Second, the old international thinking in which democratic movements are seen as purely internal to states no longer carries conviction—despite the lingering nostalgia for it on both the American right and the anti-American left. The idea that global principles can and should be enforced worldwide is firmly established in the minds of hundreds of millions of people. This consciousness will become a powerful force in the coming decades. Third, global state-formation is a fact. International institutions are being extended, and (like it or not) they have a symbiotic relation with the major centre of state power, the increasingly internationalized Western conglomerate. The success of the global-democratic revolutionary wave depends first on how well it is consolidated in each national context—but second, on how thoroughly it is embedded in international networks of power, at the centre of which, inescapably, is the West. From these political fundamentals, strategic propositions can be derived. First, democratic movements cannot regard non-governmental organizations and civil society as ends in themselves. They must aim to civilize local states, rendering them open, accountable and pluralistic, and curtail the arbitrary and violent exercise of power. Second, democratizing local states is not a separate task from integrating them into global and often Western-centred networks. Reproducing isolated local centres of power carries with it classic dangers of states as centres of war. Embedding global norms and integrating new state centres with global institutional frameworks are essential to the control of violence. (To put this another way: the proliferation of purely national democracies is not a recipe for peace.) Third, while the global revolution cannot do without the West and the UN, neither can it rely on them unconditionally. We need these power networks, but we need to tame them too, to make their messy bureaucracies enormously more accountable and sensitive to the needs of society worldwide. This will involve the kind of ‘cosmopolitan democracy’ argued for by David Held. It will also require us to advance a global social-democratic agenda, to address the literally catastrophic scale of world social inequalities. This is not a separate problem: social and economic reform is an essential ingredient of alternatives to warlike and genocidal power; these feed off and reinforce corrupt and criminal political economies. Fourth, if we need the global-Western state, if we want to democratize it and make its institutions friendlier to global peace and justice, we cannot be indifferent to its strategic debates. It matters to develop international political interventions, legal institutions and robust peacekeeping as strategic alternatives to bombing our way through zones of crisis. It matters that international intervention supports pluralist structures, rather than ratifying Bosnia-style apartheid. As political intellectuals in the West, we need to have our eyes on the ball at our feet, but we also need to raise them to the horizon. We need to grasp the historic drama that is transforming worldwide relationships between people and state, as well as between state and state. We need to think about how the turbulence of the global revolution can be consolidated in democratic, pluralist, international networks of both social relations and state authority. We cannot be simply optimistic about this prospect. Sadly, it will require repeated violent political crises to push Western and other governments towards the required restructuring of world institutions. What I have outlined is a huge challenge; but the alternative is to see the global revolution splutter into partial defeat, or degenerate into new genocidal wars—perhaps even nuclear conflicts. The practical challenge for all concerned citizens, and the theoretical and analytical challenges
46 -
47 -===Contention 2 is Crime===
48 -====Cities often have policies that criminalize the homeless; ====
49 -**Bauman et. al 15** ~~Bauman, Tristia, Jeremy Rosen, Eric Tars, Janelle Fernandez, Christian Robin, Eugene Sowa, Michael Maskin, Cheryl Cortemeglia, and Hannah Nicholes. "No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities." National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty. National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, 2015. Web. 18 July 2016. https://www.nlchp.org/documents/No'Safe'Place WHS//NAO~~
50 -Homelessness is caused by a severe shortage of affordable housing. Over 12.8 of the nation’s supply of low income housing has been permanently lost since 2001, resulting in large part, from a decrease in funding for federally subsidized housing since the 1970s. The shortage of affordable housing is particularly difficult for extremely low-income renters who, in the wake of the foreclosure crisis, are competing for fewer and fewer affordable units. In many American cities there are fewer emergency shelter beds than homeless people. There are fewer available shelter beds than homeless people in major cities across the nation. In some places, the gap between available space and human need is significant, leaving hundreds or, in some cases, thousands of people with no choice but to struggle for survival in outdoor, public places. Despite a lack of affordable housing and shelter space, many cities have chosen to criminally punish people living on the street for doing what any human being must do to survive. The Law Center surveyed 187 cities and assessed the number and type of municipal codes that criminalize the life-sustaining behaviors of homeless people. The results of our research show that the criminalization of necessary human activities is all too common in cities across the country. Prevalence of laws that criminalize homelessness: • Laws prohibiting "camping"1 in public o 34 of cities impose city-wide bans on camping in public. o 57 of cities prohibit camping in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in public o 18 of cities impose city-wide bans on sleeping in public. o 27 of cities prohibit sleeping in particular public places, such as in public parks. 1 Laws that criminalize camping in public are written broadly to include an array of living arrangements, including simply sleeping outdoors. • Laws prohibiting begging in public o 24 of cities impose city-wide bans on begging in public. o 76 of cities prohibit begging in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting loitering, loafing, and vagrancy o 33 of cities make it illegal to loiter in public throughout an entire city. o 65 of cities prohibit the activity in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sitting or lying down in public o 53 of cities prohibit sitting or lying down in particular public places. • Laws prohibiting sleeping in vehicles o 43 of cities prohibit sleeping in vehicles. • Laws prohibiting food sharing o 9 of cities prohibit sharing food with homeless people
51 -
52 -====Homelessness is directly correlated to increasing crime.====
53 -**Roberts 13** (CEO of PATH Partners "Could Housing the Homeless Solve Crime", August 13, 2013 WHS//NAO)
54 -In Britain, experts believe 20 of their "rough sleepers" (people who are homeless) have committed a crime. The conclusion, however, is that these crimes are usually acts of survival or ways for people to get off the streets. Prostitution, shoplifting, or theft are certainly illegal, but they are acts that some people on the streets perform to try and improve their situations. But there are certainly hardcore, violent criminals on the streets, too. The problem is that our communities have become so numb to homelessness that we allow homeless encampments to be scattered in the hills, beaches, rivers, and parks, so that these havens of homelessness become places where violent criminals can blend in and hide. Most of the time, homelessness is not the source of crime in an area, but the places where people experiencing homelessness gather could become havens of crime. Both crime against innocent people living on the streets and crime against innocent people who are already housed. The real solution is to eliminate these encampments of homelessness by helping people get housed. So, could ending homelessness reduce crime in our neighborhoods? Yes. When there is no more homelessness, there will be no more crimes against people who are homeless. When there is no more homelessness, people living on the streets will no longer have to break laws to try and get off the streets.
55 -
56 -====This creates a new ending cycle of incarceration ====
57 -**Roman 16 ** ~~Courtney S. Hardingcharding roman, Ph.D. in sociology and justice, law, and society from the American University. 11-29-2016, "Identifying Discrete Subgroups of Chronically Homeless Frequent Utilizers of Jail and Public Mental Health Services," No Publication, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0093854816680838~~
58 -Finally, although it is often individuals with mental illness who are most in need of housing when released from incarceration, these individuals have been labeled "hard to house" or "hard to serve" as the complexity of their problems (e.g., health, mental health, substance abuse, victimization) requires the resources of multiple agencies and comprehensive (expensive) solutions (Burt and Anderson, 2005; McNiel, Binder, and Robinson, 2005). Furthermore, there is little accountability across domains for providing housing to individuals recently released from jail (Roman and Travis, 2006). This leaves many vulnerable individuals homeless and in need of treatment during the time of reentry. Being homeless soon after release from jail has been shown to increase one’s chances of reincarceration, especially for those with a serious mental illness (Metraux and Culhane, 2004). The link between homelessness and incarceration is mediated by factors related to mental health and substance abuse, as well as socioeconomic disadvantage (Greenberg and Rosenheck, 2008). Preventing homelessness among individuals with complex health and mental issues at the time of release from jail is therefore a means of reducing repeat justice system involvement, poor health outcomes, and long-term housing instability. These findings highlight the importance of incorporating systems that address homelessness into the discussion of cross-system integration. They also implicate homelessness as a potentially important factor to incorporate into any comprehensive picture of complex patients in the criminal justice system.
59 -
60 -====Prison is the worst impact. It is dehumanizing and strips citizens of their subjectivity====
61 -**Rodriguez 7 bracketed for clarity** ~~Dylan Rodriguez, University of California, Riverside .AMERICAN GLOBALITY AND THE U. S. PRISON REGIME: STATE VIOLENCE AND WHITE SUPREMACY FROM ABU GHRAIB TO STOCKTON TO BAGONG DIWA. Kritika Kultura, Issue 9, November 2007 49 WHS//NAO~~
62 -We might imagine the U.S. prison, not as a discrete institution or reified place, but rather as ~~is~~ an abstracted site—a prototype—of organized punishment and (social, civil, and biological) death. I begin this section with two points of departure, in an attempt to initially provoke a conceptualization of the American prison regime that focuses on the intertwining of two structural logics: 1) white supremacy as a historical modality of social (dis)organization, and 2) the capacity of allegedly "local" or "domestic" U.S. social formations to circulate, militarize, and mobilize across global geographies. The emergence of the American prison industrial complex since the 1970s is generally addressed as a problem of the "American nation," and until recently has largely been situated by academic scholars, progressive activists, and imprisoned intellectuals within the domains of the domestic social formation. Yet, even the concise definition of the prison industrial complex penned in 2001 by U.S. political prisoner Linda Evans (released in 2001) and activist Eve Goldberg facilitates an inquiry that pushes past parochial geographies of the U.S. national form: "Like the military/industrial complex, the prison industrial complex is an interweaving of private business and government interests. Its twofold purpose is ~~for~~ profit and social control. Its public rationale is the fight against crime" (Evans and Goldberg). Beyond the strictures of conventional criminological approaches to the U.S. prison apparatus, Evans and Goldberg are suggesting ~~There is~~ an organic connection between the architecture of the prison industrial complex and the structuring forces of neoliberalism and globalization: the socioeconomic transformations of U.S. capital, alongside contemporary elaborations of the U.S. racist state in the post-Civil Rights moment, simultaneously a.) fabricate~~s~~ populations vulnerable to criminalization (black, brown, ~~and~~ poor, and generically redundant to the contemporary economic organization of the U.S.); b.) withdraw state social services for people most in need of resources for social and biological reproduction; c.) militarize and juridically empower the policing and criminal justice apparatuses in unprecedented ways while amplifying their fundamentally punitive institutional demeanours; and d.) generate a dynamic statecraft, public discourse, and popular culture of policing and imprisonment that organize a grammar of social necessity and ideological consent around the emergence and expansion of the prison industrial complex. Here we must remember that among the millions of people held captive by the U.S. state in prisons, jails, youth prisons, and immigration detention, people of African descent are imprisoned at rates astronomically high relative to their proportion of the national population (exceeding 400 of their national demographic proportion), and at rates dwarfing those of white Americans (see Gershowitz). Native Americans repeat this pattern, although their smaller demographic numbers often obscure their heightened criminalization by the U.S. state. Latinos, Latinas, and other racialized brown people are increasingly targeted in ways that directly derive from, and expand, the historical structures of white supremacist policing and imprisonment that target Black and indigenous people, in part through the specificities of migrant/immigrant policing and criminalization. Despite composing the national majority of the U.S. population, white Americans compose less than half of the incarcerated U.S. population. Black, Brown, and indigenous peoples constitute upwards of 60 held captive. For the unfamiliar, a few other facts assist in laying bare the accelerated nature of this massive state-sanctioned project: 1 Between 1972 and 2003, the imprisoned (jail and prison) population in the U.S. increased more than 600; for the five decades prior to the 1970s, the incarcerated population had remained relatively stable, hovering between 100,000-200,000. 2 The U.S. boasts of the highest rate of incarceration in the world, at 702 per 100,000 in the general population; this rate is between 500 and 800 that of comparable industrialized nations. 3 African Americans are incarcerated at nearly six times the rate of whites (2,290 per 100,000 versus 412 per 100,000), while Hispanics are incarcerated at nearly double the rate of whites (742 per 100,000). 4 According to one of the most rigorous criminological studies to date (examining the period 1980-1996), the imprisonment increase does not derive from objective changes in the commission of crimes, but rather is almost entirely owed to politically formed changes in sentencing and criminal justice policy (see Gershowitz). Thus, as the U.S. prison, jail, INS/Homeland Security detainee and incarcerated youth population approaches and surpasses the 2.5 million mark (as of this writing), the quantitative evidence refracts the prison’s qualitative transformation into a fundamental organ of state reproduction and civic ordering. Variable, overlapping, and mutually constituting white supremacist regimes have in fact been fundamental to the formation and movements of the United States, from racial chattel slavery and frontier genocide to recent and current modes of neoliberal land displacement and (domestic-to-global) warfare. Without exception, these regimes have been differently entangled with the state’s changing paradigms, strategies, and technologies of human incarceration and punishment (to follow the prior examples: the plantation, the reservation, the neoliberal sweatshop, and the domestic-to-global prison). The historical nature of these entanglements is widely acknowledged, although explanations of the structuring relations of force tend to either isolate or historically compartmentalize the complexities of historical white supremacy. For the theoretical purposes of this essay, white supremacy may be understood as a logic of social organization that produces regimented, institutionalized, and militarized conceptions of hierarchized "human" difference, enforced through coercions and violences that are structured by genocidal possibility (including physical extermination and curtailment of people’s collective capacities to socially, culturally, or biologically reproduce). As a historical vernacular and philosophical apparatus of domination, white supremacy is simultaneously premised on and consistently innovating universalized conceptions of the white (European and euroamerican) "human" vis-à-vis the rigorous production, penal discipline, and frequent social, political, and biological neutralization or extermination of the (non-white) sub- or non-human. To consider white supremacy as essential to American social formation (rather than a freakish or extremist deviation from it) facilitates a discussion of the modalities through which this material logic of violence overdetermines the social, political, economic, and cultural structures that compose American globality and constitute the common sense that is organic to its ordering.
63 -
64 -===Contention 3 is Sex Trafficking===
65 -====Homeless youth are at risk for sex trafficking.====
66 -**Clawson et al ’09** ~~Heather J. Clawson, Nicole Dutch, Amy Solomon, and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, 8-30-2009, "Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: A Review of the Literature," ASPE, https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/human-trafficking-and-within-united-states-review-literature~~#Other WHS//NAO~~
67 -According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports (2006), across the United States 36,402 boys and 47,472 girls younger than age 18 were picked up by law enforcement and identified as runaways.  Girls who run from their homes, group homes, foster homes, or treatment centers, are at great risk of being targeted by a pimp (or trafficker) and becoming exploited.  Research consistently confirms the correlation between running away and becoming exploited through prostitution.  Researchers have found that the majority of prostituted women had been runaways; for example, 96 percent in San Francisco (Silbert and Pines, 1982), 72 percent in Boston (Norton-Hawk, 2002) and 56 percent in Chicago (Raphael and Shapiro, 2002).  Among prostituted youth (both boys and girls), up to 77 percent report having run away at least once (Seng, 1989). Experts have reported that within 48 hours of running away, an adolescent is likely to be approached to participate in prostitution or another form of commercial sexual exploitation (Spangenberg, 2001); however, no definitive published research substantiates this claim. Like girls, boys exploited through prostitution are most often runaways or throwaways (Flowers, 2001; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). For example, one study found that two-thirds of males exploited through prostitution had run away from home prior to becoming involved (Allen, 1980). While many of the factors leading to a young person leaving home are similar for boys and girls, it is estimated that between 40 and 50 percent of boys exploited through prostitution had been thrown out of their homes because of sexual identity issues (Earls and David, 1989; Seattle Commission on Children and Youth, 1986). Approximately 2535 percent of prostituted boys self-identify as gay, bisexual, or transgender/transsexual (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Further, regardless of the boys self-identification, at least 95 percent of all prostitution engaged in by boys is provided to adult men (Estes and Weiner, 2001). Regardless of their sex, when minors leave their homes, it is to protect themselves, often because they view living on the streets as either less dangerous or no more dangerous than staying at home (Hyde, 2005; Martinez, 2006). Once on the street, homeless youth are at risk for being victimized because they lack the funds, interpersonal and job skills, and support systems necessary to survive on their own (Martinez, 2006). Having often come from chaotic families, runaways tend to lack strategies for problem solving, conflict resolution, and meeting basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter (Martinez, 2006; Robertson and Toro, 1999; Whitbeck, Hoyt, and Yoder, 1999). Some minors turn to substance abuse, crime, and survival sex to meet their basic needs (Greene, Ennett, and Ringwald, 1999; Riley, Greif, Caplan, and MacAulay, 2004; Robertson and Toro, 1999). Furthermore, exposure to the dangers of the street makes them more visible and vulnerable to traffickers, and their risky lifestyles and routines put them at greater risk of being victimized (Kipke, Simon, Montgomery, Unger, and Iversen, 1997; MacLean, Embry, and Cauce, 1999; Tyler, Cauce, and Whitbeck, 2004). Most runaway/throwaway youth are likely to run to and congregate in urban areas, so it is not surprising that there is general consensus that a greater percentage of minors are exploited in the U.S. sex industry in urban areas, though they may be brought from suburban and rural areas (Flowers, 2001). However, an increase in minor arrests in suburban counties/areas and rural areas has experts speculating that the increase is indicative of an expansion of prostitution beyond city limits (Flowers, 2001). While these data are somewhat outdated, anecdotal evidence from service providers indicates that this trend continues (A. Adams, personal communication, March 2006; N. Hotaling, personal communication, June 2006). However, further research is needed to determine whether the increase in suburban arrests is due to better identification or an actual increase in incidence. WHAT ARE THE NEEDS OF VICTIMS OF HUMAN TRAFFICKING? NEEDS OF INTERNATIONAL VICTIMS An examination of the services provided to international victims of human trafficking (adults and children) reveals emergency, short-term, and long-term needs (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson, Small, Go, and Myles, 2004). Some victims initially may present to a service provider with basic needs for safety, housing, food, and clothing. In fact, the need for safe and secure housing and overall support and advocacy are primary needs for virtually all victims of trafficking. Needs of International Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Advocacy (emotional/moral support) Housing Medical care (including dental) Mental health services/trauma recovery Transportation Education Job training/employment Reunification/repatriation These basic needs often are accompanied by an immediate need for legal assistance/representation to handle issues related to immigration status, provide legal representation that may be required in an ongoing investigation and prosecution of the trafficking case, or provide counsel in a civil lawsuit against the trafficker or in a potential custody case (Caliber Associates, 2007; Florida University Center for Advancement of Human Rights, 2003). Interviews with service providers and NGOs reveal that beyond these common immediate needs, the needs of victims are as diverse as the countries from which the victims originate. Additionally, during the course of working with victims, their needs are likely to change (Caliber Associates, 2007). A needs assessment conducted with service providers working with victims of human trafficking identified a broad range of victims needs, including emergency, transitional, and permanent housing; food/clothing; medical services (including dental care); advocacy (moral/emotional support), legal services; transportation; and information/referral services (e.g., rights as a victim of human trafficking, available services) (Clawson et al., 2004). For international victims, more often than not, there is a need for language assistance, often requiring an interpreter/translator to help the victim communicate with first responders and those trying to provide assistance. Only after these immediate needs have been met can a victim benefit from treatment for depression, trauma, re-traumatization, and other issues (Misra, Connolly, Klynman, and Majeed, 2006). Addressing the symptoms exhibited by victims of human trafficking is critical to their long-term recovery. Victims of human trafficking have been described as exhibiting symptoms and needs for service similar to torture victims, victims of domestic violence/sexual assault, battered immigrant women, migrant workers, refugees, and asylum seekers (Clawson et al., 2004). Like torture victims, victims of human trafficking (both sex and labor trafficking) often experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive disorder, other anxiety disorders, and substance abuse (De Jong, et al, 2001; Shrestha, Sharma, Van Ommeren, Regmi, Makaju, et al., 1998). Specific symptoms exhibited by victims can include nightmares, difficulty concentrating, becoming easily upset, and having difficulty relaxing. Victims can frequently feel sad or angry, have difficulty thinking, experience feelings of hopelessness, and demonstrate sleep disorders. The trauma itself also may manifest as physical symptoms, such as headaches, chest pain, shaking, sweating, and dizziness (Center for Victims of Torture). Beyond trauma-recovery services, long-term service needs include permanent housing, legal assistance, job training, job placement, education, family reunification (within the United States), and repatriation (in some cases). For some victims, in particular victims of labor trafficking, the victim may have a need for long-term medical care to address physical disabilities resulting from the abuse and/or harsh labor conditions under which the person was forced to work (Bales, 2004; Caliber Associates, 2007). Based on research on the needs of unaccompanied refugee minors, minor international trafficking victims may experience depression and feelings of isolation, but given their culture, they may not know how to express or describe what they are feeling. They may display psychosomatic symptoms; experience high levels of anxiety (especially if language obstacles and cultural differences exist between the minor and the caregiver); experience survivor guilt (victims feel they do not deserve to be alive and in a safe place when friends, siblings, or other family members are suffering); exhibit behavioral problems, including aggression; and question their ethnic identity (Ryan, 1997). Intensive case management and medical, mental health, and social services are important for responding to the needs of these children. Additionally, educating and training foster care families about the dynamics of human trafficking, the needs of victims, and the symptoms of trauma are also needed to ensure appropriate placement for children in need of homes. Given the complex needs of international victims of human trafficking, it is not surprising that providers report working with clients for more than a year and often for several years, frequently on an intermittent basis. This makes sustained progress challenging (Caliber Associates, 2007; Clawson et al., 2004). NEEDS OF DOMESTIC VICTIMS Information specifically documenting the needs of victims of human trafficking is limited and has focused primarily on international victims. However, research on prostitution and on homeless and runaway youth can provide some insights about the needs of domestic trafficking victims and can help increase understanding about the similarities and differences across the victim types. Needs of Minor Domestic Victims Emergency Safety, housing, food/clothing Short-term/Long-term Legal assistance Intensive case management Medical care Alcohol and substance abuse counseling/treatment Mental health counseling Life skills training Education Job training/employment Family reunification Girls and women escaping prostitution report housing (both transitional and long-term) as an urgent need (Commercial Sexual Exploitation Resource Institute, 1998). Substance abuse treatment and mental health counseling are also common needs among this population. The use of substances and subsequent drug addiction is well documented among homeless youth exploited through prostitution. One study found that more than 75 percent of these youth abuse alcohol or drugs, while virtually all admit to some level of use (Yates, Mackenzie, Pennbridge, and Swofford, 1991). These rates were notably higher than among homeless youth not exploited through prostitution (R. Lloyd, personal communication, May 2007). While it is important to note that a significant percentage of girls enter prostitution with no history of drug or alcohol abuse (Farley and Kelly, 2000), some studies suggest that girls who become exploited through prostitution are likely to have begun using substances at an earlier age than their at-risk peers who do not become exploited in this way (Inciardi, Pottieger, Forney, Chitwood, and McBride. 1991; Nadon, Koverola, and Schludermann, 1998). Substance abuse is also a rampant problem among the male population. For example, one study found that 77 percent of the boys exploited through prostitution were regular users of marijuana (Harlan et al., 1981). Another study found that 42 percent of the prostituted boys could be classified as heavy drinkers or alcoholics and 29 percent were regular users of hard drugs (Allen, 1980). In 1989, the County of Los Angeles found that of all the runaway youth, both boys and girls, seeking medical assistance, 75 percent of those exploited through prostitution had a substance abuse problem compared with 36 percent of those youth not being prostituted (Klain, 1999). Both girls and boys also present with medical needs. Females trafficked in the sex trade have increased risk of cervical cancer and chronic hepatitis as well as HIV (Farley et al., 2003), thus requiring immediate and potentially long-term medical care. Boys are at particularly high risk of contracting HIV due to high rates of unprotected anal sex with adult men as well as frequent intravenous drug use (Flowers, 2001). Rates of mental health problems are similar between girls and boys, though girls have been studied far more extensively (Flowers, 2001; Klain, 1999; Lankenau et al., 2005; Moxley-Goldsmith, 2005). Adolescent girls suffer severe emotional and physical consequences as a result of domestic trafficking. Survivors of prostitution demonstrate a high rate of dissociative disorders, self-destructive behaviors (including cutting), suicide attempts, and clinical depression (Farley, 2003; Farley and Kelly, 2000; Giobbe, 1993; Lloyd, 2005; Nixon et al., 2002). Additionally, as a result of the chronic trauma, prostituted girls often develop symptoms congruent with PTSD. One international study of prostituted children and adults, including male prostitutes, in five countries found that almost three-fourths met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD (Farley, Barel, Kiremire, and Sezquin, 1998; Silbert and Pines, 1981). The clinical manifestations of PTSD can limit an individuals ability to function effectively, decreasing the likelihood that he or she can take advantage of available resources and possibly minimizing any likelihood of leaving prostitution (Valera, Sawyer, and Schiraldi, 2001). As with all victims of human trafficking, adolescent girls may display symptoms of Stockholm syndrome, otherwise most frequently seen among prisoners of war and torture victims (Graham and Wish, 1994). As a means of emotional and physical survival, the captive (the girl) identifies with her captor. She expresses extreme gratitude over the smallest acts of kindness or mercy (e.g., he does not beat her today), denial over the extent of violence and injury, rooting for her pimp, hypervigilence regarding his needs, and the perception that anyone trying to persecute him or help her escape is the enemy. She may lash out at law enforcement or anyone else attempting to help her exit, and insist that she is fine and happy in her current situation. Further, the manifestations of her trauma may make her reticent to trust those outside the Life who state they are trying to help her (Friedman, 2005; Raphael, 2004). While presented here as separate needs or conditions, recognition of co-occurring disorders among adolescent victims of trafficking and the need for integrated treatment approaches, specifically for trauma, substance abuse, and mental health disorders, has gained momentum over the past 510 years (Austin, Macgowan, and Wagner, 2005; Battjes et al., 2004; Dasinger, Shane, and Martinovich, 2004; Dennis et al., 2002, 2004; Godley, Jones, Funk, Ives, and Passetti, 2004; Robbins, Bachrach, and Scapocznik, 2002). A number of studies indicate high rates of co-occurring disorders among adolescents. In one clinical study of youth in the mental health system, for example, about half had a co-occurring substance abuse disorder (Greenbaum, Foster-Johnson, and Petrilla, 1996). In the substance abuse system, estimates are even higher that as many as 7590 percent of drug abusing adolescents having a co-morbid mental health disorder (Eisen, Youngman, Grob, and Dill, 1992; Grella, Hser, Joshia, and Rounds-Bryant, 2001). Mood disorders (especially depression and anxiety), conduct disorders, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder are most often cited as co-occurring with substance abuse disorders in adolescents (Crowley and Riggs, 1995; Wise, Cuffe, and Fischer, 2001). Given the high documented rates of co-morbidity in substance abusing clinical populations, Grella et al. (2001, p. 391) concluded that adolescent drug treatment programs should assume that co-morbidity among their patients is the norm, rather than the exception.** **The needs of homeless and runaway youth parallel the needs of victims of human trafficking (international and domestic). These include the need for food, clothing, and housing; medical care; alcohol and substance abuse counseling and treatment; mental health services; education and employment assistance; and legal assistance (Robertson and Toro, 1999). In two studies, homeless youth reported wanting assistance with life skills training (Aviles and Helfrich, 2004; DeRosa et al., 1999). Other important service needs are assessment and treatment for exposure to trauma (Dalton and Pakenham, 2002; Steele and OKeefe, 2001) and risk of suicide (Martinez, 2006).
68 -
69 -====Human trafficking is dehumanizing to its victims.====
70 -**Rocha ’12 **~~Priscila Rocha, 2012, "OUR BACKYARD SLAVE TRADE: THE RESULT OF OHIO'S FAILURE TO ENACT COMPREHENSIVE STATE-LEVEL HUMAN-SEX-TRAFFICKING LEGISLATION", Cleveland State University Journal of Law and Health, http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic/ WHS//NAO~~
71 -Human trafficking is a lucrative business in which traffickers reap substantial profits from the dehumanization of victims. It ranks as the second largest illegal enterprise in the world, following the illegal sale of drugs. n63 The figures help explain why traffickers are compelled to continue treating human beings as commodities. The International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that global profits from ~~*391~~ forced commercial sex exploitation generate $ 33.9 billion U.S. dollars per year. n64 Profits from global commercial sex exploitation, in which victims are trafficked, generate approximately $ 27.8 billion U.S. dollars per year. n65 Industrialized nations account for forty-nine percent of annual global profits derived from human trafficking. n66 Traffickers in industrialized nations receive approximately $ 67,200 of profits per victim (or $ 5600 per month). n67 The figures indicate that human trafficking is currently a business opportunity that is simply too profitable to for traffickers to ignore. Until the law imposes penalties for human trafficking substantial enough to hurt traffickers' bottom line profits, they will continue to enslave victims, viewing penalties as a mere business cost.
72 -
73 -====Providing a safe place to stay for homeless youth would solve for sex trafficking.====
74 -Jayne **Bigelsen ’13** ~~Director Anti-Human Trafficking Initiatives, Covenant House New York~~, 5-2013, "Homelessness, Survival Sex and Human Trafficking: As Experienced by the Youth of Covenant House New York", http://www.endhomelessness.org/page/-/files/Covenant20House20Fordham20University20Trafficking20Report.pdf WHS//NAO~~
75 -For those who are committed to eradicating domestic trafficking, the contributing factors outlined in this report offer a roadmap to trafficking prevention. As stated above, 48 of the participants who reported engaging in commercial sex activity explained that a lack of a safe place to sleep was a main reason for their initial entry into prostitution or other commercial sex. The participants described how pimps in New York City are well aware that the youth shelters are full and use that to their advantage by alerting homeless young people to the no vacancy status and offering them a place to stay in lieu of sleeping on the streets. Therefore, every time a shelter bed for a homeless youth is lost to budget cuts, pimps are able to operate with greater success. Advocates, policy makers and the public at large must work collaboratively to make sure that pimps and other traffickers have no such advantage by working toward the goal of ensuring that every homeless youth who wants a safe place to sleep has access to shelter and services.
76 -
77 -====A combination of homelessness and sex trafficking culminates in massive substance abuse====
78 -**Leal et al. 09** ~~Leal, Daniel, Marc Galanter, Helen Dermatis, and Laurence Westreich. "Correlates of Protracted Homelessness in a Sample of Dually Diagnosed Psychiatric Inpatients." Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 16.2 (1999): 143-47. National Coalition for the Homeless. National Coalition for the Homeless, July 2009. Web. 18 July 2016. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/addiction.pdf WHS//NAO~~
79 -Although obtaining an accurate, recent count is difficult, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003) estimates, 38 of homeless people were dependent on alcohol and 26 abused other drugs. Alcohol abuse is more common in older generations, while drug abuse is more common in homeless youth and young adults (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Substance abuse is much more common among homeless people than in the general population. According to the 2006 National Household Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 15 of people above the age of 12 reported using drugs within the past year and only 8 reported using drugs within the past month. RELATIONSHIP TO HOMELESSNESS Substance abuse is often a cause of homelessness. Addictive disorders disrupt relationships with family and friends and often cause people to lose their jobs. For people who are already struggling to pay their bills, the onset or exacerbation of an addiction may cause them to lose their housing. A 2008 survey by the United States Conference of Mayors asked 25 cities for their top three causes of homelessness. Substance abuse was the single largest cause of homelessness for single adults (reported by 68 of cities). Substance abuse was also mentioned by 12 of cities as one of the top three causes of homelessness for families. According to Didenko and Pankratz (2007), two-thirds of homeless people report that drugs and/or alcohol were a major reason for their becoming homeless. In many situations, however, substance abuse is a result of homelessness rather than a cause. People who are homeless often turn to drugs and alcohol to cope with their situations. They use substances in an attempt to attain temporary relief from their problems. In reality, however, substance dependence only exacerbates their problems and decreases their ability to achieve employment stability and get off the streets. Additionally, some people may view drug and alcohol use as necessary to be accepted among the homeless community (Didenko and Pankratz, 2007). Breaking an addiction is difficult for anyone, especially for substance abusers who are homeless. To begin with, motivation to stop using substances may be poor. For many homeless people, survival is more important than personal growth and development, and finding food and shelter take a higher priority than drug counseling. Many homeless people have also become estranged from their families and friends. Without a social support network, recovering from a substance addiction is very difficult. Even if they do break their addictions, homeless people may have difficulty remaining sober while living on the str eets where substances are so widely used (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Unfortunately, many treatment programs focus on abstinence only programming, which is less effective than harm-reduction strategies and does not address the possibility of relapse (National Health Care for the Homeless Council, 2007). For many homeless people, substance abuse co-occurs with mental illness. Often, people with untreated mental illnesses use street drugs as an inappropriate form of self-medication. Homeless people with both substance disorders and mental illness experience additional obstacles to recovery, such as increased risk for violence and victimization and frequent cycling between the streets, jails, and emergency rooms (Fisher and Roget, 2009). Sadly, these people are often unable to find treatment facilities that will help them. Many programs for homeless people with mental illnesses do not accept people with substance abuse disorders, and many programs for homeless substance abusers do not treat people with mental illnesses
80 -
81 -====The aff is feasible and saves more money in the long run====
82 -**Fasanelli 6** ~~Antonia Fasanelli ~~Chair Commission on Homelessness and Poverty~~ August 2013. American Bar Association Adopted by the House of Delegates. August 12-13. WHS//NAO~~
83 -In addition to viewing housing expenditures as obligatory, legislators must also consider the fiscal benefits of adequately meeting low-income housing needs. In a 2004 study by the Lewin Group on the costs of serving homeless individuals in nine cities across the U.S., several cities found supportive housing to be cheaper than housing homeless individuals in shelters.51 That same year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the cost of a Section 8 Housing Certificate to be $7,028, approximately $8,000 less than the cost of an emergency shelter bed funded by HUD’s Emergency Shelter Grants program.52 A collaborative effort of service and medical providers in San Diego, Project 25, has documented a $7 million dollar savings to tax payers through reduced emergency care and jail costs by providing permanent housing to 35 homeless individuals, a 70 reduction.53 Scotland, France, and South Africa all show that the progressive implementation of the right to housing through legislation and case law is possible where the political will exists. Scotland’s Homeless Act of 2003 progressively expanded the right to be immediately housed and the right to long-term, supportive housing for as long as it is needed, starting with target populations, but available to all in need as of 2012. The law also includes a private right of action and requires jurisdictions to plan for development of adequate affordable housing supplies.54 France created similar legislation in 2007 in response to public pressure and a decision of the European Committee on Social Rights under the European Social Charter.55 South Africa’s constitutional right to housing protects even those squatting in informal settlements, requiring the provision of adequate alternative housing before families and individuals can be evicted.56 This law has been enforced in local communities to even require rebuilding housing that has been torn down.57 While not yet perfect, these countries are proving that progressively implementing the right to housing is both economically feasible and judicially manageable
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-04-13 00:27:07.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Yesenia Robles
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -James Madison JM
ParentRound
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -44
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Team
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Warren Okunlola Aff
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -10 - Util Affirmative - 1AC - NSDA District Round 1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -NSDA District
Caselist.RoundClass[42]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -14
Caselist.RoundClass[43]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -15
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-04-13 00:22:14.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Matthew Chandler
OpenSource
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/download/Warren/Okunlola+Aff/Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA%20District-Round5.docx
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Winston Churchill BR
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -5
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -NSDA District
Caselist.RoundClass[44]
Cites
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -16
EntryDate
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -2017-04-13 00:27:04.0
Judge
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -Yesenia Robles
OpenSource
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/download/Warren/Okunlola+Aff/Warren-Okunlola-Aff-NSDA%20District-Round1.docx
Opponent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -James Madison JM
Round
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -1
Tournament
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1 -NSDA District

Schools

Aberdeen Central (SD)
Acton-Boxborough (MA)
Albany (CA)
Albuquerque Academy (NM)
Alief Taylor (TX)
American Heritage Boca Delray (FL)
American Heritage Plantation (FL)
Anderson (TX)
Annie Wright (WA)
Apple Valley (MN)
Appleton East (WI)
Arbor View (NV)
Arcadia (CA)
Archbishop Mitty (CA)
Ardrey Kell (NC)
Ashland (OR)
Athens (TX)
Bainbridge (WA)
Bakersfield (CA)
Barbers Hill (TX)
Barrington (IL)
BASIS Mesa (AZ)
BASIS Scottsdale (AZ)
BASIS Silicon (CA)
Beckman (CA)
Bellarmine (CA)
Benjamin Franklin (LA)
Benjamin N Cardozo (NY)
Bentonville (AR)
Bergen County (NJ)
Bettendorf (IA)
Bingham (UT)
Blue Valley Southwest (KS)
Brentwood (CA)
Brentwood Middle (CA)
Bridgewater-Raritan (NJ)
Bronx Science (NY)
Brophy College Prep (AZ)
Brown (KY)
Byram Hills (NY)
Byron Nelson (TX)
Cabot (AR)
Calhoun Homeschool (TX)
Cambridge Rindge (MA)
Canyon Crest (CA)
Canyon Springs (NV)
Cape Fear Academy (NC)
Carmel Valley Independent (CA)
Carpe Diem (NJ)
Cedar Park (TX)
Cedar Ridge (TX)
Centennial (ID)
Centennial (TX)
Center For Talented Youth (MD)
Cerritos (CA)
Chaminade (CA)
Chandler (AZ)
Chandler Prep (AZ)
Chaparral (AZ)
Charles E Smith (MD)
Cherokee (OK)
Christ Episcopal (LA)
Christopher Columbus (FL)
Cinco Ranch (TX)
Citrus Valley (CA)
Claremont (CA)
Clark (NV)
Clark (TX)
Clear Brook (TX)
Clements (TX)
Clovis North (CA)
College Prep (CA)
Collegiate (NY)
Colleyville Heritage (TX)
Concord Carlisle (MA)
Concordia Lutheran (TX)
Connally (TX)
Coral Glades (FL)
Coral Science (NV)
Coral Springs (FL)
Coppell (TX)
Copper Hills (UT)
Corona Del Sol (AZ)
Crandall (TX)
Crossroads (CA)
Cupertino (CA)
Cy-Fair (TX)
Cypress Bay (FL)
Cypress Falls (TX)
Cypress Lakes (TX)
Cypress Ridge (TX)
Cypress Springs (TX)
Cypress Woods (TX)
Dallastown (PA)
Davis (CA)
Delbarton (NJ)
Derby (KS)
Des Moines Roosevelt (IA)
Desert Vista (AZ)
Diamond Bar (CA)
Dobson (AZ)
Dougherty Valley (CA)
Dowling Catholic (IA)
Dripping Springs (TX)
Dulles (TX)
duPont Manual (KY)
Dwyer (FL)
Eagle (ID)
Eastside Catholic (WA)
Edgemont (NY)
Edina (MN)
Edmond North (OK)
Edmond Santa Fe (OK)
El Cerrito (CA)
Elkins (TX)
Enloe (NC)
Episcopal (TX)
Evanston (IL)
Evergreen Valley (CA)
Ferris (TX)
Flintridge Sacred Heart (CA)
Flower Mound (TX)
Fordham Prep (NY)
Fort Lauderdale (FL)
Fort Walton Beach (FL)
Freehold Township (NJ)
Fremont (NE)
Frontier (MO)
Gabrielino (CA)
Garland (TX)
George Ranch (TX)
Georgetown Day (DC)
Gig Harbor (WA)
Gilmour (OH)
Glenbrook South (IL)
Gonzaga Prep (WA)
Grand Junction (CO)
Grapevine (TX)
Green Valley (NV)
Greenhill (TX)
Guyer (TX)
Hamilton (AZ)
Hamilton (MT)
Harker (CA)
Harmony (TX)
Harrison (NY)
Harvard Westlake (CA)
Hawken (OH)
Head Royce (CA)
Hebron (TX)
Heights (MD)
Hendrick Hudson (NY)
Henry Grady (GA)
Highland (UT)
Highland (ID)
Hockaday (TX)
Holy Cross (LA)
Homewood Flossmoor (IL)
Hopkins (MN)
Houston Homeschool (TX)
Hunter College (NY)
Hutchinson (KS)
Immaculate Heart (CA)
Independent (All)
Interlake (WA)
Isidore Newman (LA)
Jack C Hays (TX)
James Bowie (TX)
Jefferson City (MO)
Jersey Village (TX)
John Marshall (CA)
Juan Diego (UT)
Jupiter (FL)
Kapaun Mount Carmel (KS)
Kamiak (WA)
Katy Taylor (TX)
Keller (TX)
Kempner (TX)
Kent Denver (CO)
King (FL)
Kingwood (TX)
Kinkaid (TX)
Klein (TX)
Klein Oak (TX)
Kudos College (CA)
La Canada (CA)
La Costa Canyon (CA)
La Jolla (CA)
La Reina (CA)
Lafayette (MO)
Lake Highland (FL)
Lake Travis (TX)
Lakeville North (MN)
Lakeville South (MN)
Lamar (TX)
LAMP (AL)
Law Magnet (TX)
Langham Creek (TX)
Lansing (KS)
LaSalle College (PA)
Lawrence Free State (KS)
Layton (UT)
Leland (CA)
Leucadia Independent (CA)
Lexington (MA)
Liberty Christian (TX)
Lincoln (OR)
Lincoln (NE)
Lincoln East (NE)
Lindale (TX)
Livingston (NJ)
Logan (UT)
Lone Peak (UT)
Los Altos (CA)
Los Osos (CA)
Lovejoy (TX)
Loyola (CA)
Loyola Blakefield (MA)
Lynbrook (CA)
Maeser Prep (UT)
Mannford (OK)
Marcus (TX)
Marlborough (CA)
McClintock (AZ)
McDowell (PA)
McNeil (TX)
Meadows (NV)
Memorial (TX)
Millard North (NE)
Millard South (NE)
Millard West (NE)
Millburn (NJ)
Milpitas (CA)
Miramonte (CA)
Mission San Jose (CA)
Monsignor Kelly (TX)
Monta Vista (CA)
Montclair Kimberley (NJ)
Montgomery (TX)
Monticello (NY)
Montville Township (NJ)
Morris Hills (NJ)
Mountain Brook (AL)
Mountain Pointe (AZ)
Mountain View (CA)
Mountain View (AZ)
Murphy Middle (TX)
NCSSM (NC)
New Orleans Jesuit (LA)
New Trier (IL)
Newark Science (NJ)
Newburgh Free Academy (NY)
Newport (WA)
North Allegheny (PA)
North Crowley (TX)
North Hollywood (CA)
Northland Christian (TX)
Northwood (CA)
Notre Dame (CA)
Nueva (CA)
Oak Hall (FL)
Oakwood (CA)
Okoboji (IA)
Oxbridge (FL)
Oxford (CA)
Pacific Ridge (CA)
Palm Beach Gardens (FL)
Palo Alto Independent (CA)
Palos Verdes Peninsula (CA)
Park Crossing (AL)
Peak to Peak (CO)
Pembroke Pines (FL)
Pennsbury (PA)
Phillips Academy Andover (MA)
Phoenix Country Day (AZ)
Pine Crest (FL)
Pingry (NJ)
Pittsburgh Central Catholic (PA)
Plano East (TX)
Polytechnic (CA)
Presentation (CA)
Princeton (NJ)
Prosper (TX)
Quarry Lane (CA)
Raisbeck-Aviation (WA)
Rancho Bernardo (CA)
Randolph (NJ)
Reagan (TX)
Richardson (TX)
Ridge (NJ)
Ridge Point (TX)
Riverside (SC)
Robert Vela (TX)
Rosemount (MN)
Roseville (MN)
Round Rock (TX)
Rowland Hall (UT)
Royse City (TX)
Ruston (LA)
Sacred Heart (MA)
Sacred Heart (MS)
Sage Hill (CA)
Sage Ridge (NV)
Salado (TX)
Salpointe Catholic (AZ)
Sammamish (WA)
San Dieguito (CA)
San Marino (CA)
SandHoke (NC)
Santa Monica (CA)
Sarasota (FL)
Saratoga (CA)
Scarsdale (NY)
Servite (CA)
Seven Lakes (TX)
Shawnee Mission East (KS)
Shawnee Mission Northwest (KS)
Shawnee Mission South (KS)
Shawnee Mission West (KS)
Sky View (UT)
Skyline (UT)
Smithson Valley (TX)
Southlake Carroll (TX)
Sprague (OR)
St Agnes (TX)
St Andrews (MS)
St Francis (CA)
St James (AL)
St Johns (TX)
St Louis Park (MN)
St Margarets (CA)
St Marys Hall (TX)
St Thomas (MN)
St Thomas (TX)
Stephen F Austin (TX)
Stoneman Douglas (FL)
Stony Point (TX)
Strake Jesuit (TX)
Stratford (TX)
Stratford Independent (CA)
Stuyvesant (NY)
Success Academy (NY)
Sunnyslope (AZ)
Sunset (OR)
Syosset (NY)
Tahoma (WA)
Talley (AZ)
Texas Academy of Math and Science (TX)
Thomas Jefferson (VA)
Thompkins (TX)
Timber Creek (FL)
Timothy Christian (NJ)
Tom C Clark (TX)
Tompkins (TX)
Torrey Pines (CA)
Travis (TX)
Trinity (KY)
Trinity Prep (FL)
Trinity Valley (TX)
Truman (PA)
Turlock (CA)
Union (OK)
Unionville (PA)
University High (CA)
University School (OH)
University (FL)
Upper Arlington (OH)
Upper Dublin (PA)
Valley (IA)
Valor Christian (CO)
Vashon (WA)
Ventura (CA)
Veritas Prep (AZ)
Vestavia Hills (AL)
Vincentian (PA)
Walla Walla (WA)
Walt Whitman (MD)
Warren (TX)
Wenatchee (WA)
West (UT)
West Ranch (CA)
Westford (MA)
Westlake (TX)
Westview (OR)
Westwood (TX)
Whitefish Bay (WI)
Whitney (CA)
Wilson (DC)
Winston Churchill (TX)
Winter Springs (FL)
Woodlands (TX)
Woodlands College Park (TX)
Wren (SC)
Yucca Valley (CA)