Commissions CP

Neg

1NC Shell

1NC – Commissions CP

CP Text: The President of the United States should issue an executive order mandating the rejoining of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, tasked with recommending Congressional or Executive solutions to ocean policy problems in the area of <insert AFF area>

The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative should recommend <the plan> as an essential component of the National Ocean Policy.

JOCI’s recommendations become policy—solves the AFF Howe 11—Managing Attorney of the Surfrider Foundation (Angela T., “THE U.S. NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: ONE SMALL STEP FOR NATIONAL WATERS, BUT WILL IT BE THE GIANT LEAP NEEDED FOR OUR BLUE PLANET?,” Ocean and Coastal Law Journel, LexisNexis)//FJThe Joint Ocean Commission Initiative (JOCI) resulted from a collaboration between members of the Pew Oceans Commission and [*77] USCOP. n85 JOCI is a bipartisan, collaborative group that aims to "encourage action and monitor progress toward meaningful ocean policy reform." n86 Today, the JOCI Leadership Council is made up of representatives from prominent universities and environmental groups, independent scientists, national security leaders, and representatives from a variety of ocean industries, including fisheries, shipping and energy. n87 JOCI is meant to serve as a resource for policy makers at all levels of government who are interested in pursuing ocean policy reforms consistent with JOCI's recommendations . n88 JOCI leadership is now focused specifically on promoting the establishment and effective implementation of a comprehensive U.S. national ocean policy . n89 In sum, the history of efforts in the United States to reform ocean governance and inform ocean planning, from the work of the

Stratton Commission to the recent policy work of the JOCI , has shaped the NOP and continue to influence the future of ocean governance . Specifically, the Pew Oceans Commission's America's Living Oceans: Charting a Course for Sea Change report, n90 as well as JOCI's 2007 An Agenda for Action: Moving Regional Ocean Governance from Theory to Practice, n91 point out the deficiencies in the existing regulatory system, including the lack of mandatory coordination and integration between agencies and across resources. n92 A sector-by-sector approach to ocean governance undermines the siting of potential new and emerging activities. It also fails to provide for special protections of areas that may be found to be biologically significant or have significant value as cultural or recreational resources. Between anticipated uses of ocean and coastal areas for aquaculture, coastal development, liquefied natural gas terminals, desalination plants, wave or wind farm energy facilities, and new unknown developing technologies, there will be a need for regulatory approvals based on a deep understanding of the most apropos [*78] ocean use. n93 Each of these ocean uses "poses the potential to adversely impact both existing uses and ecosystem function[s]." n94 Therefore, it is critical to heed historical knowledge and the analyses of ocean governance issues while planning to manage resources for centuries into the future.

Solvency

2NC – Solvency [Generic]

Joint Ocean Commission solves best -- provides specific recommendations that strengthen the National Ocean Policy and has credibility.Joint Ocean Commission 14 (Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, Reports, http://www.jointoceancommission.org/rc-reports.html)//FJOne of the primary goals of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative is to provide unbiased, expert advice on coastal and ocean policy and legislation. One mechanism employed by the Joint Initiative is to issue reports that provide insight and practical action-oriented recommendations on specific approaches and reforms needed to promote ocean health . The following reports and white papers address the Joint Initiative’s priority areas: national ocean governance reform (Charting the Course; America's Ocean Future; Changing Oceans, Changing World; From Sea to Shining Sea), regional and state ocean governance reform (One Coast, One Future; An Agenda for Action), and the links between oceans and climate change (Addressing Oceans and Climate Change in Federal Legislation). Charting the Course: Securing America’s Ocean Future On June 20, 2013, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative released a report and executive summary entitled

Charting the Course: Securing the Future of America’s Oceans, that calls on President Obama and Congress to improve the management of our ocean resources . The report describes specific recommendations for the Administration and Congress that prioritize areas where short-term progress can be readily achieved. The report outlines measures for immediate implementation that focus on four action areas: Enhance the resiliency of coastal communities and ocean ecosystems to dramatic changes underway in our oceans and on our coasts Promote ocean renewable energy development and reinvest in our oceans Support state and regional ocean and coastal priorities Improve Arctic research and management If implemented, these measures will

strengthen ocean-dependent economies, protect coastal communities and provide new opportunities for growth in thriving oceans. The Joint Initiative also urges that the Administration and Congress build off of the blueprint set by the National Ocean Policy and make oceans a priority . These recommendations set the stage for a future assessment by the Joint Initiative of progress in implementing actions that will ensure our oceans and coasts are healthy and vibrant to support our future.JOC key to effective ocean policy JOC 13 – Joint Ocean Commission, (JOC, “Charting the Course¶ Securing the Future of America’s Oceans”, 2013, http://www.virginia.edu/colp/pdf/joint-ocean-commission-initiative-2013.pdf)//HK

The various elements of ocean and coastal ecosystems are closely interconnected , as are the ¶ management authorities governing those elements. For this reason, implementing any of the ¶ recommendations presented in this report would provide benefits to all ocean and coastal ¶ ecosystems and to the many Americans who rely on them for health, wealth, and well-being. ¶ These recommendations present a powerful opportunity to shape the future of our oceans ¶ and secure the future of our ocean nation. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative urges our ¶ leaders in the Administration and Congress to seize this opportunity. ¶ The challenges we face in managing our oceans effectively also present opportunities for ¶ innovation, collaboration, and action. Our oceans are held in the public trust, and we must ¶ act together to secure the future of our oceans and the health and wealth of our ocean nation. ¶ This report describes the following recommendations, which are focused on four action areas ¶ the Obama Administration and Congress should implement in the next two to four years: action 1: enhance the resiliency of coastal communities and ¶ ocean ecosystems to dramatic changes underway in our oceans ¶ and on our coasts ¶ recOmmendatiOn 1.1: The Administration and Congress should boost funding and ¶ support for programs that protect and restore critical coastal features, such as wetlands, ¶ dune systems, mangroves, salt marshes, seagrass beds, and coral reefs, all of which provide ¶ valuable services, including buffering against storm surges, purifying water, providing ¶ habitat for important species, and offering recreational opportunities. ¶ recOmmendatiOn 1.2: The Administration and Congress should provide the support ¶ necessary for states and communities to upgrade critical coastal infrastructure, including ¶ wastewater and transportation systems, so they are more resilient and able to withstand and ¶ adapt to the impacts of coastal hazards, including extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and ¶ other changes along our coasts.¶ recOmmendatiOn 1.3: The Administration and Congress should provide increased ¶ funding and support for ocean

science infrastructure and research programs needed to ¶ understand the complex and dynamic relationship between the oceans and climate and ¶ improve our forecasting capabilities . ¶ recOmmendatiOn 1.4: The Administration and Congress should take actions to ¶ measure and assess the emerging threat of ocean acidification, better understand the ¶ complex dynamics causing and exacerbating it, work to determine its impact, and develop ¶ mechanisms to address the problem. CP solves best – empirical solvency with the NOPMigliaccio 14—legal extern at the Vermont Supreme Court; editor of Vermal Journal of Environmental Law; chairman of the Environmental Law Society (Emily, “THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE POLLUTION AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN BUREAUCRACY?,” Vermont Journal of Environmental Law) Prior to the release of the Final Implementation Plan, many local and regional leaders, stakeholders, industries and state and

federal agencies initiated action in line with the NOP. The Joint Ocean Commission ("JOC") n159 released two "Report Cards, " one published in 2011 and one in 2012, assessing the United States' progress since the inception of the NOP . n160 In the most recent Report Card, the JOC grades the progress made on earlier recommendations and on certain areas of implementation, which are divided into five categories: (1) National leadership and support; (2) regional, state, and local leadership and implementation; (3) research, science, and education; (4) funding; and (5) Law of the Sea Convention. n161 This Note only discusses the information in the first four categories because those are relevant for determining the NOP's progress in the marine pollution context. Each is discussed in turn below.

2NC – Solvency [Renewables]

JOC recommendations are best for renewable energy – already recommended offshore wind to ObamaBrooks 13—editor and founder of CapeCodToday.com (Walter, “Joint Ocean Commission Initiative calls on U.S. to promote offshore wind development,” Cape Cod Today, 6/22, http://www.capecodtoday.com/article/2013/06/22/20134-joint-ocean-commission-initiative-calls-us-promote-offshore-wind-developmen)//FJCommission urges Obama Administration, Congress to make a "national investment" in offshore wind The bipartisan Joint Ocean Commission Initiative is calling on the Obama Administration and Congress to make a "national investment" in offshore wind "through adequate and stable financial and tax incentives" to "position us as leaders in an emerging global industry". Their new report, 'Charting The Course, Securing the Future of America's Oceans', states: "The Administration's principles guiding domestic energy development include creating clean energy jobs and technologies, making America more energy independent, and reducing carbon emissions. Renewable energy -- particularly offshore wind energy -- has great potential for pursuing expansion." The context for this policy recommendation the report focuses on is the significant stresses now placed on the ocean ecosystem by pollution, especially climate change, and the urgent need to mitigate those threats. The commission states in part, "Our nation must also promote renewable energy development and return more of the revenues generated by activities on the Outer Continental Shelf to ocean science and management activities."

2NC – Solvency – Commissions

Commissions solve best – expertise Glassman and Straus 13—*analyst at the Congressional Research Service AND **analyst at the Congressional Research Service (*Matthew Eric AND **Jacob R., “Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations,” Congressional Research Service, 1/22, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40076.pdf)//FJCongress may choose to establish a commission when legislators and their staffs do not currently have sufficient knowledge or expertise in a complex policy area.22 By assembling experts with backgrounds in particular policy areas to focus on a specific mission, legislators might efficiently obtain insight into complex public policy problems.23 Commissions solve best – consensus buildingGlassman and Straus 13—*analyst at the Congressional Research Service AND **analyst at the Congressional Research Service (*Matthew Eric AND **Jacob R., “Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations,” Congressional Research Service, 1/22, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40076.pdf)//FJLegislators seeking policy changes may be confronted by an array of political interests, some in favor of proposed changes and some against. When these interests clash, the resulting legislation may encounter gridlock in the highly structured political institution of the modern Congress. 28 By creating a commission, Congress can place policy debates in a potentially more flexible environment, where congressional and public attention can be developed over time .29

Commissioners agree that we need a new framework for ocean policiesUSA Today 4 – “Commission urges new ocean protections and trust fund”, 4/20/2004, http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-20-oceans_x.htmCommissioners spent 2 1/2 years studying coastal areas, the Great Lakes and 4.4 million square miles of ocean — an area nearly a quarter larger than all 50 states combined, because it includes the exclusive economic zone stretching about 200 miles from the continent and Pacific and Atlantic islands.¶ The panel urged new "ecosystem-based" ways of managing that put the needs of nature ahead of political boundaries, while emphasizing that people's needs must also be considered.¶ The commission estimated the cost of all its recommended actions at $1.3 billion the first year, $2.4 billion the second year and $3.2 billion each year after that. But it pointed to annual ocean-related economic activity of $700 billion in goods that ports handle, $50 billion from fishing and trade, $11 billion from cruise ships and passengers — and $25 billion to $40 billion from offshore oil and gas production.¶ "If our report is adopted, the payoff will be great," Watkins said in a video accompanying the report. "It's now obvious that ocean resources are not limitless, nor are ocean waters capable of continual self-cleansing. The point is this: It's up to us to find ways to use and enjoy the oceans in a sustainable way."¶ The commission found overexploited fish stocks and other depleted marine resources; the loss or declining resilience of habitat; and pervasive water contamination. It recommends more ocean-related education for schoolchildren, doubled federal research and increased emphasis on scientific-based decision-making.

2NC – Solvency – Say YesObama will pass the JOCI’s recommendations –credibilityPackard 09—the executive director of the Monterey Bay Aquarium (Julie, “Obama’s Big Blue Commitment,” Huffington Post, 6/29, )//FJFor five years, I and the other members of two national ocean commissions have been calling on the president and Congress to address the grave threats facing our oceans. Two months ago, the members of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative sent them a set of ambitious but achievable recommendations, including a call for a national ocean policy. The recommendations represent years of work and the best thinking of a diverse, bipartisan coalition committed to ocean policy reform. They offer specific, practical steps to protect and restore our oceans , improve human well-being, create national wealth and provide

responsible stewardship of our resources. By his action, President Obama has set the executive branch on course toward a new era of effective ocean management. In Congress, members of both parties are taking up the challenge as well. But time is short.

Political cover: Since the commission’s recommendation is final, no one in Congress has to take the blameThe Telegraph 10 (“Deficit-cutting panel a missed opportunity,” The Telegraph, 2/14, http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/opinion/editorials/612140-263/deficit-cutting-panel-a-missed-opportunity.html)//FJAt one time, closing a military base in this country seemed as unlikely as meaningful efforts toward deficit reduction. Any proposal by the Pentagon for base closure was met by congressional resistance, until the creation of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission gave Congress political cover . The commission and its staff conducted extensive research, held public hearings and managed to get three rounds of base closures through Congress. Hundreds of out-of-date military installations of all sorts were closed, many of which had long since lost their strategic

value and were little more than local jobs programs. The base closure process was a great success, largely because Congress did not have the power to nitpick its recommendations. The entire list had to be accepted or rejected.

This model may now be the only practical way for our government to tackle any issue with negative political fallout.Empirics prove – commissions have created effective reform in times of tight Congressional gridlock.Andrews 10—economics reporter for The New York Times (Edmund, “Deficit Panel Faces Obstacles in Poisonous Political Atmosphere,” The Fiscal Times, 2/18, http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2010/02/18/Fiscal-Commission-Faces-Big-Obstacles?page=0%2C1)//FJSupporters of a bipartisan deficit commission note that at least two previous presidential commissions succeeded at breaking through intractable political problems when Congress was paralyzed . The 1983 Greenspan commission, headed by Alan Greenspan, who later became chairman of the Federal Reserve, reached an historic agreement to gradually raise Social Security taxes and gradually increase the minimum age at which workers qualify for Social Security retirement benefits. Those recommendations passed both the House and Senate, and averted a potentially catastrophic financial crisis with Social Security.

Commission solves – creates compromise by shielding both parties from taking the blame.Brookings Fiscal Seminar 09—a group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, to discuss federal budget and fiscal policy issues (Brookings Fiscal Seminar, “THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF ENTITLEMENT OR BUDGET

COMMISSIONS IN ADDRESSING LONG-TERM BUDGET PROBLEMS,” June 2009, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2009/6/commissions%20sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill)//FJ In contrast, the Greenspan Commission provided a forum for developing a political compromise on a set of politically unsavory changes. In this case, the political parties shared a deep concern about the impending insolvency of the Social Security system but feared the exposure of promoting their own solutions. The commission created political cover for the serious background negotiations that resulted in the ultimate compromise . The structure of the commission reflected these concerns and was composed of fifteen members, with the President, the Senate Majority Leader, and the Speaker of the House each appointing five members to the panel.

Perceived immediacy and magnitude of the aff means that the recommendation will pass.Brookings Fiscal Seminar 09—a group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, to discuss federal budget and fiscal policy issues (Brookings Fiscal Seminar, “THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF ENTITLEMENT OR BUDGET COMMISSIONS IN ADDRESSING LONG-TERM BUDGET PROBLEMS,” June 2009, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2009/6/commissions%20sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill)//FJ The success of the Greenspan Commission seems to have been due to three things: 1) the problem that the

commission had been set up to deal with, the insolvency of Social Security, was real, imminent and well-defined ; 2) the costs of failing to resolve the problem would have been too great for either party; and 3) the membership of the commission included trusted representatives of the leaders of the two political parties as well as enough pragmatic panelists to offer a high likelihood of eventual compromise . But despite this consensus amongst the panel members about the imminence and seriousness of the problem, the panel came close to reporting without recommendations. It was only because of the work of a subgroup of the commissioners working with high-ranking officials in the Administration that a set of recommendations finally emerged.4

Recommendations get implemented – bipartisan natures of commission makes recommendations less politically abrasiveGlassman and Straus 13—*analyst at the Congressional Research Service AND **analyst at the Congressional Research Service (*Matthew Eric AND **Jacob R., “Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations,” Congressional Research Service, 1/22, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40076.pdf)//FJThroughout American history, Congress has found commissions to be useful entities in the legislative process. By establishing a commission, Congress can potentially provide a highly visible forum for important issues and assemble greater expertise than may be readily available within the legislature. Complex policy issues can be examined over a longer time period and in greater depth than may be practical for legislators.

Finally, the non-partisan or bipartisan character of most congressional commissions may make their findings and recommendations more politically acceptable , both in Congress and among the public . Critics argue that many congressional commissions are expensive, often formed to take difficult decisions out of the hands of Congress, and are mostly ignored when they report their findings and recommendations.

Commission recommendations get passed by Congress – reduce partisanshipGlassman and Straus 13—*analyst at the Congressional Research Service AND **analyst at the Congressional Research Service (*Matthew Eric AND **Jacob R., “Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations,” Congressional Research Service, 1/22, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40076.pdf)//FJSolutions to policy problems produced within the normal legislative process may also suffer politically from charges of partisanship.30 Similar charges may be made against investigations conducted by Congress.31 The non-partisan or bipartisan character of most congressional commissions may make their findings and recommendations less susceptible to such charges and more politically acceptable to a diverse viewpoints . The bipartisan or nonpartisan arrangement can potentially give their recommendations strong

credibility, both in Congress and among the public, even when dealing with divisive issues of public policy.32 Commissions may also give political factions space to negotiate compromises in good faith, bypassing the short-term tactical political maneuvers that accompany public negotiations.33 Similarly, because commission members are not elected, they may be better suited to suggesting unpopular, but necessary, policy solutions.34 Congress will implement the JOC’s recommendations – past cooperation provesUpton and Buck 10—*analyst in Natural Resources Policy for the Congressional Research Service AND **specialist in Natural Resources Policy for the Congressional Research Service (*Harold E AND *Eugene H., “Ocean Commissions: Ocean Policy Review and Outlook,” Congressional Research Service, 7/20, http://www.cnie.org/nle/crsreports/10Apr/RL33603.pdf)//FJOn March 16. 2006. a bipartisan group of 10 Senators requested that the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative report on the top 10 steps Congress should take to address the most pressing challenges, the highest funding priorities, and the most important changes to federal laws and the budget process to establish a more effective and integrated ocean policy. In response on June 13. 2006. a national ocean policy action plan for Congress. From Sea lo Shining

Sea: Priorities for Ocean Policy Reform—A Report to the United States Senate, was delivered to Congress by the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative and was intended to serve as a guide for developing legislation and funding high-priority programs.30 This action plan responded to the Senators* request to identify the most urgent priorities for congressional action to protect, restore, and maintain the marine ecosystem . According to the plan. the 10 steps are: • adopt a statement of national ocean policy; pass an organic act lo establish NOAA in law and work with (he Administration to identify and act upon opportunities to improve federal agency coordination on ocean and coastal issues; foster ecosystem-based regional governance; reauthorize an improved Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act; enact legislation to support innovation and competition in ocean-related research and education consistent with key initiatives in the Rush Administration's Ocean Research Priorities Plan and Implementation Strategy (discussed in the following section on "Administration Response and Implementation"); enact legislation to authorize and fund the Integrated Ocean Observing System (I0OS); accede to the U,N. Convention on the Law of the Sea; establish an Ocean Trust Fund in the U.S. Treasury as a dedicated source of funds for improved management and understanding of ocean and coastal resources by federal and state governments; increase base funding for core ocean and coastal programs and direct development of an integrated

ocean budget; and enact ocean and coastal legislation that progressed significantly in the IfW1 Congress. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative remains active in promoting ocean policy reform through reports, press releases, letters to and testimony before Congress, and public speaking engagements. In April 2009. it released its most recent report, tilled Changing Oceans. Changing World: Ocean Priorities for the Obama Administration and Congress. The Joint Ocean Commission has expressed support and provided comments for the two IOPTF reports.

2NC AT: Congress will block funding

Even if Congress blocks funding, widespread support from both the public and the states will ensure its implementationStauffer 14—Senior Manager of the Ocean Program at Surfrider Foundation (Pete, “Texas Lawmaker Leads Attack on our National Ocean Policy,” Surfrider Foundation 6/1, http://www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog/entry/congress-takes-aim-at-our-national-ocean-policy)//FJWhen the National Ocean Policy was established by President Obama in 2010 it signaled a serious attempt to address the many shortcomings of our nation’s piecemeal approach to ocean management. Taking its cue from the recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy - a bipartisan body established by President George W. Bush - the policy emphasizes improved collaboration across all levels of government to address priorities such as water quality, marine debris, and renewable energy A cornerstone of the policy is the establishment of regional ocean parterships (ROPs) that empower states to work with federal agencies, stakeholders, tribes, and the public to plan for the future of the ocean. In just three years, important progress has been made,

despite a glaring lack of support from Congress . An Implementation Plan has been released with hundreds of actions that

federal agencies are taking to protect marine ecosystems and coastal economies. Collaborative projects are moving forward to restore habitats, advance ocean science, and engage stakeholders. And finally, the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and West Coast regions have begun ocean planning to enusure that future development will mimize impacts to the environment and existing users. Of course, such success stories do not resonate well in Washington D.C., where controversy rules the day and political parties instinctively oppose each other’s proposals. As an initiative of the Obama Presidency, the policy has suffered from partisan attacks, despite the collaborative framework it is based upon. Yet, such political gamesmanship by our federal leaders is obscuring an important truth - the principles of the National Ocean Policy are taking hold in states and regions across the country, even without the meaningful support of Congress . That is why Congress needs to hear from people who care about (and depend upon) the ocean. Our ocean ecoystems are too important to the nation's well-being to be subject to the usual politics. It's time for Congress to provide a level of support and funding that's commensurate with efforts being made on the ground. Let's elevate support for our National Ocean Policy across the political spectrum!

Efforts to halt funding for the NOP have been firmly rejected by the Senate – opponents of the NOP have lost all momentumMerwin 14—Director of Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning at Ocean Conservancy (Anne, “Attack on National Ocean Policy Defeated; Lost Opportunity to Create a National Endowment for the Ocean,” Ocean Conservancy, 5/16, http://blog.oceanconservancy.org/2014/05/16/attack-on-national-ocean-policy-defeated-lost-opportunity-to-create-a-national-endowment-for-the-ocean/)//FJThis week, after nearly 6 months of negotiation, a final deal was announced. Thanks to your help , the threat to the National Ocean Policy was resoundingly rejected . Champions in the Senate and White House heard you, and

successfully negotiated to remove the “Flores rider”—inserted by Rep. Bill Flores who represents a landlocked district in central Texas— from the final bill. If it had been successful, this misguided attempted to undermine the National Ocean Policy would have prohibited the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a key coastal and ocean management agency, from coordinating with coastal states, other federal agencies and the public as they engage in smart ocean planning. With this threat removed, the multiple states that are already working on smart ocean planning can move forward unimpeded with the full cooperation and participation of the federal government.

2NC AT: Certainty Key – Investment NOP key to create the certainty and coordination for ocean investment – solves the economy.Center for American Progress 11—an independent educational, public policy research, and advocacy organization (“National Ocean Policy Ensures Economic Growth, Security, and Resilience,” Center for American Progress, 10/24, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/24/10485/national-ocean-policy-ensures-economic-growth-security-and-resilience/)//FJAmerica’s oceans are effectively our last frontier. And while they comprise federally managed space, the bulk of their users live and work in adjacent coastal areas. Thus our exclusive economic zone presents a unique regulatory challenge. We have seen how the policies of the past—a first-come, first-served race to plant a flag—lead to chaos and delay . Lack of certainty means a lack of financing. A lack of financing means a lack of economic growth. And a lack of growth means a lack of jobs. Until we can create a process that brings all stakeholders to the table to air grievances and share solutions, we will continue to stagger along in a series of fits, starts, and lawsuits that will leave America’s ocean industries falling farther and farther behind our international counterparts. Support for the National Ocean Policy is support for the future of America’s ocean industries.

NOP solves economic collapse – helps local communitiesConathan 11 - Michael Conathan is the Director of Ocean Policy at American Progress, (Michael Conathan) “National Ocean Policy: A Path to America’s Ocean Future”, October 26, 2011, http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/26/10451/national-ocean-policy-a-path-to-americas-ocean-future/

In addition to supporting comprehensive ocean planning, the National Ocean Policy contains eight other national priority objectives, including the establishment of a science-based strategy to align conservation and restoration goals at federal, state, tribal, local, and regional levels and the strengthening and integration of federal and nonfederal ocean observing systems and data management into one national system, to then be integrated into international observation efforts.¶ According to the National Ocean Economics Program, our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are critical components of our nation’s economy. U.S. coastal counties are home to more than half of all Americans, generate an estimated $8 trillion per year, and support 69 million jobs.¶ In Florida, for example, a report prepared by the National Ocean Economics Program for Florida’s Ocean and Coastal Council showed that tourism, recreation, and fishing contributed $18.9 billion to Florida’s GDP in 2005. In addition to the benefits the entire nation will reap from implementation of the nine priority objectives in the National Ocean Policy, Florida’s coast is particularly vulnerable to sea level rise as a result of global climate change, and its reefs are at significant risk from ocean warming and acidification. The NOP’s goals include strengthening resiliency of coastal communities to these threats.¶ The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative found that in California, as of 2007, more than 85 percent of gross domestic product and nearly 12 million jobs came from economic activity in these coastal estuarine areas. California’s state government has prioritized ocean conservation and has used the concept of NOP in implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act, which used stakeholder input to develop the boundaries of marine protected areas within its state waters.¶ And in Michigan, a state deeply affected by the economic downturn, 15 percent of all jobs are associated with the Great Lakes, and they make up 23 percent of the total payroll, according to Michigan’s Sea Grant program. While some would imply that the administration is over-reaching its authority by extending ocean policy to the Great Lakes, the core missions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, BOEMRE, and other federal agencies with oversight of ocean activities already encompass the Great Lakes. This is appropriate as activities on the Lakes, including fishing, boating, shipping, and energy development, are equivalent to their maritime counterparts.¶ Comprehensive ocean planning will further ensure the stability of the nation’s seaports as additional uses of ocean space evolve. This is of utmost importance to the entire country. Again, according to the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, the value of imports through U.S. ports was almost $2 trillion in 2010, and in 2008 commercial ports supported 13 million U.S. jobs. Ports that accommodate oceangoing vessels move 99.5 percent of U.S. overseas trade by volume and 64 percent by value, and compared to 2001 total freight moving through U.S. ports is expected to increase by more than 50 percent by 2020.¶ Declining ocean health and a lack of effective coordination among regional groups, states, and federal bodies is putting this great economic engine at risk. Wise investment in the future of our oceans will provide a tune-up for our marine economic engine that will keep it running smoothly for future generations. On the other hand, failing to address these inadequacies will lead to increasing inefficiencies and systemic breakdowns.

Perm/Theory

Theory Neg Ground—the topic is massive and energy/environment AFFs make it bidirectional—the counterplan is key to check unpredictable nature of the topic. Risk/Reward—the AFF gets to avoid roll back arguments through durable fiat, they should have to incur the strategic cost of uncertain counterplans to maintain the balance

Policy Making--Commissions are a well established alternative to traditional policymaking—proves the CP is predicable and germane Campbell 2 – Colton C. Campbell, Associate Professor of Political Science at Florida International University, visiting Professor of Political Science at American University, 2002, Discharging Congress: Government by Commission, p. 129

Ad hoc commissions as instruments of government have a long history. They are used by almost all units and levels of government for almost every conceivable task . Ironically, the use which Congress makes of commissions— preparing the groundwork for legislation, bringing public issues into the spotlight, whipping legislation into shape, and giving priority to the consideration of complex, technical, and critical developments—receives relatively little attention from political scientists. As noted in earlier chapters, following the logic of rational choice theory, individual decisions to delegate are occasioned by imperfect information; legislators who want to develop effective policies, but who lack the necessary expertise, often delegate fact-finding and policy development. Others contend that some commissions are set up to shift blame in order to maximize benefits and minimize losses.

Implementation key –it’s the most important aspect of policy—just because the AFF has a bad defense of theirs doesn’t mean the CP is unfair Schuck 99—Peter, Professor, Yale Law School, and Visiting Professor, New York Law School, “Delegation and Democracy” http://www.constitution.org/ad_state/schuck.htm

God and the devil are in the details of policymaking, as they are in most other important things—and the details are to be found at the agency level. This would remain true, moreover, even if the nondelegation doctrine were revived and statutes were written with somewhat greater specificity, for many of the most significant impacts on members of the public would still be indeterminate until the agency grappled with and defined them. Finally, the agency is often the site in which public participation is most effective. This is not only because the details of the regulatory impacts are hammered out there. It is also because the agency is where the public can best educate the government about the true nature of the problem that Congress has tried to address. Only the interested parties, reacting to specific agency proposals for rules or other actions, possess (or have the incentives to ac-quire) the information necessary to identify, explicate, quantify, and evaluate the real-world consequences of these and alternative proposals. Even when Congress can identify the first-order effects of the laws that it enacts, these direct impacts seldom exhaust the laws’ policy consequences. Indeed, first-order effects of policies usually are less significant than the aggregate of more remote effects that ripple through a complex, interrelated, opaque society. When policies fail, it is usually not because the congressional purpose was misunderstood. More commonly, they fail because Congress did not fully appreciate how the details of policy implementation would confound its purpose . Often, however, this knowledge can only be gained through active public participation in the policymaking process at the agency level where these implementation issues are most clearly focused and the stakes in their correct resolution are highest.

Reject the argument not the team – the punishment does not fit the crime—making the debate hard for the AFF is the NEGs job—have a high threshold to avoid substance crowd out.

2NC---AT: Perm---Do Both Doing both links to politics and doesn’t solve---

a) Congressional debates---the CP means Congress won’t debate the merits of the plan---they give an up-or-down vote to a commission report. The perm forces debate on the substance of the plan now---electoral pressure and fights over the plan trigger the link---that’s all our politics net-benefit ev.

b) Secrecy---the commission’s deliberations aren’t public, but the plan forces the issue onto Congress’s radar immediately---ensures backlashCampbell 2 – Colton C. Campbell, Associate Professor of Political Science at Florida International University, visiting Professor of Political Science at American University, 2002, Discharging Congress: Government by Commission, p. 13-14

Life on Capitol Hill has frequently become acrimonious because of escalating partisanship between parties.48 Increasing polarization in Congress49 has led to gridlock50 and stimulated the use of message politics,51 thereby limiting both the flexibility and the creativity of congressional action through normal legislative channels.The logic of commissions is that leaders of both parties , or their designated representatives, can meet to negotiate a deal without the media, the public, or interest groups present . When deliberations are private, parties can make offers without being denounced either by their opponents or by affected constituency groups; there is less chance to use an offer from the other side to curry favor with constituents. Agreement to bipartisan commissions and adherence to their logic are consequential because they represent a tacit promise not to attack the opponent . On some issues, for instance, the promise might imply letting the commission pick the solution and relying on party discipline to encourage lawmakers to go along even if their districts are disadvantaged by the solution; on others it might involve nothing more than a bipartisan admission that a commission is the next step Congress should take, without any understanding that all the players are bound ex ante by the commission’s resolution.52 Commissions also mean eschewing partisan attacks and suggest a strong preference for reaching an agreement.53

Doing both links to politics---only giving the commission time generates political support---the perm’s not a genuine recommendation and doesn’t allow any time for negotiation Biggs 9 [Andrew Biggs is a Social Security analyst and assistant director of the Cato Institute's Project on Social Security Privatization, “Rumors Of Obama Social Security Reform Commission,” Feb 17 http://www.frumforum.com/rumors-of-obama-social-security-reform-commission]

One problem with President Bush’s 2001 Commission was that it didn’t represent the reasonable spectrum of beliefs on Social Security reform. This didn’t make it a dishonest commission; like President Roosevelt’s Committee on Economic Security, it was designed to put flesh on the bones laid out by the President. In this case, the Commission was tasked with designing a reform plan that included personal accounts and excluded tax increases. That said, a commission only builds political capital toward enacting reform if it’s seen as building a consensus through a process in which all views have been heard . In both the 2001 Commission and the later 2005 reform drive, Democrats didn’t feel they were part of the process. They clearly will be a central part of the process this time, but the goal will now be to include Republicans . Just as Republicans shouldn’t reflexively oppose any Obama administration reform plans for political reasons, so Democrats shouldn’t seek to exclude Republicans from the process. Second, a reform task force should include a variety of different players, including members of government, both legislative and executive, representatives of outside interest groups, and experts who can provide technical advice and help ensure the integrity of the reforms decided upon. The 2001 Bush Commission didn’t include any sitting Members of Congress and only a small fraction of commissioners had the technical expertise needed to make the plans the best they could be. A broader group

would be helpful. Third, any task force or commission needs time. The 2001 Commission ran roughly from May through December of that year and had to conduct a number of public hearings. This was simply too much to do in too little time , and as a result the plans were fairly bare bones . There is plenty else on the policy agenda at the moment , so there’s no reason not to give a working group a year or more to put things together.

Only the CP gets perceived as considering options from both sides before recommending one action---the perm looks like the commission favoring one side from the beginning---triggers politics and turns the case

Hoyer 10 [Steny, Senator, “Building Momentum for Fiscal Responsibility,” 3/1 http://www.brookings.edu/events/2010/0301_fiscal_responsibility.aspx]

I hope congressional Republicans will take the work as sincerely and seriously as the chairmen take it—that they

will come to the table without preconditions, ready to contribute their ideas and not just their criticism from the sideline. The commission has a bipartisan pedigree, and it won the votes of 16 Republicans in the Senate . But I was disappointed to see that seven Republican supporters of the commission bill, including Minority Leader McConnell, decided they were against it as soon as President Obama said he was for it.President Reagan and Speaker O’Neill’s work on Social Security reform in the ‘80s, and the Republican reaction to the Medicare changes in the health care bill, both teach the same lesson: the real work of cutting deficits is so easy to demagogue that it rarely succeeds without support from both sides . That’s one of the reasons why the fiscal commission must not take any option off of the table, from raising revenues to cutting entitlement spending. And that’s why both parties have a duty to appoint members who are willing to compromise and make tough decisions.It’s also clear to me that if the commission takes a one-handed approach , it will fail, both politically and substantively. Congressman Ryan’s thoughtful budget proposal shows what an approach looks like when it relies entirely on cutting spending. He should be commended for putting together a serious and detailed plan to tackle the deficit. It doesn’t raise a single tax. But as a consequence, it significantly changes Medicare.

Presumption stays neg---the CP’s less change than the plan because it’s indefinite---tie goes to the runner, and use an offense/defense frame because if the CP solves the case there’s no offensive reason to risk the DA.

2NC---AT: Perm---Plan Through Process The perm’s illegitimate:a) Intrinsic---adds an element of delay that’s not in the counterplan---[the CP only fiats the creation of the commission and the recommendation] b) Severance---if the commission process is genuine and independent then the plan isn’t certain to be done until the end of the process---severs ‘should’ which requires immediacy Summers 94 - Justice, Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 11-8-1994, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant,” online: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn14

Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as more than merely indicating preference or desirability . Brown, supra at 1080-81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in

proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure

requiring that a party "should devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the requested segment); State v. Rack, 318 S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used in an instruction to the jury which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony").

c) No offense---if the CP fiated that the plan happens in the future their perm would be legit---this excludes abusive delay and condition CPs. It’s key to test the necessity of doing the plan---if only recommending it is better, then the aff should lose.

The perm doesn’t solve politics---the commission process has to be independent---perm means Congress has its mind made up from the beginning, the decision to do the plan is made immediately even if it’s not implemented until after the commission makes its recommendations.

The perception that the commission is a congressional proxy causes political battles Brookings Fiscal Seminar 9 – The Brookings Institution Fiscal Seminar, group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, to discuss federal budget and fiscal policy issues, June 2009, “The Potential Role of Entitlement or Budget Commissions in Addressing Long-Term Budget Problems,” online: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_commissions_sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill.pdf

The use of commissions or advisory councils has a long history in the United States. In the early 1900s, the National Monetary Commission examined the nation’s distressed financial system and recommended establishing a central banking structure, a recommendation that was soon translated into the Federal Reserve System. From 1937 to 1996, Social Security policy-making was heavily influenced by the findings and recommendations of periodic advisory councils, including the National Commission on Social Security Reform (the Greenspan Commission) which helped to rescue the program from insolvency in 1983. The 1960s saw the Warren Commission investigate the assassination of President Kennedy and the Kerner Commission examine the causes of civil disorders. The Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC) provided an effective mechanism over the past two decades for overcoming the political hurdles inhibiting the restructuring of U.S. defense facilities across the country. And the recent National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States (the 9/11 Commission) delved into the numerous facets of the 2001 terrorist attacks and potential changes in homeland security.Commissions can be used for a variety of purposes that suit the needs of the President or the Congress. The role of some commissions is to develop a knowledge base about certain policies or problems free from the political machinations that are an unavoidable part of the legislative process . They can also develop policy options that members of Congress and their staff have too little time or expertise to formulate. They can serve as consensus-building vehicles from which members of Congress may garner political protection while addressing contentious issues. At other times, commissions appear simply to serve as delaying measures that can be employed to defuse a political issue until a more opportune time for action develops.

2NC---AT: Perm---Do Counterplan Doing the CP alone severs:

a) ‘Resolved’ means the plan has to be certain to pass Kernerman Dictionary 6 - Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary, 2006, “Resolve,” online: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/resolution

1 to make a firm decision (to do something) I've resolved to stop smoking. 2 to pass (a resolution) It was resolved that women should be allowed to join the society.

b) It severs the requirement that the plan should happen:“Should” means immediateSummers 94 - Justice, Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 11-8-1994, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant,” online: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn14

The legal question to be resolved by the court is whether the word "should"13 in the May 18 order connotes futurity or may be deemed a ruling in praesenti .14 ***TO FOOTNOTESIn praesenti means literally "at the present time." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 792 (6th Ed. 1990). In legal parlance the phrase denotes that which in law is presently or immediately effective , as opposed to something that will or would become effective in the future [in futurol]. See Van Wyck v. Knevals, 106 U.S. 360, 365, 1 S.Ct. 336, 337, 27 L.Ed. 201 (1882).

***END FOOTNOTESThe answer to this query is not to be divined from rules of grammar;15 it must be governed by the age-old practice culture of legal professionals and its immemorial language usage. To determine if the omission (from the critical May 18 entry) of the turgid phrase, "and the same hereby is", (1) makes it an in futuro ruling - i.e., an expression of what the judge will or would do at a later stage - or (2) constitutes an in in praesenti resolution of a disputed law issue, the trial judge's intent must be garnered from the four corners of the entire record.Nisi prius orders should be so construed as to give effect to every words and every part of the text, with a view to carrying out the evident intent of the judge's direction.17 The order's language ought not to be considered abstractly. The actual meaning intended by the document's signatory should be derived

from the context in which the phrase to be interpreted is used.18 When applied to the May 18 memorial, these told canons impel my conclusion that the judge doubtless intended his ruling as an in praesenti resolution of Dollarsaver's quest for judgment n.o.v. Approval of all counsel plainly appears on the face of the critical May 18 entry which is [885 P.2d 1358] signed by the judge.19 True minutes20 of a court neither call for nor bear the approval of the parties' counsel nor the judge's signature. To reject out of hand the view that in this context "should" is impliedly followed by the customary, "and the same hereby is", makes the court once again revert to medieval notions of ritualistic formalism now so thoroughly condemned in national jurisprudence and long abandoned by the statutory policy of this State.

b) It also means mandatory---introducing uncertainty severs Summers 94 - Justice, Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 11-8-1994, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant,” online: http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn14

Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as more than merely indicating preference or desirability . Brown, supra at 1080-81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring that a party "should devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the requested segment); State v. Rack, 318 S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used in an instruction to the jury which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony").

c) This is true of the CP---it’s a non-binding recommendation Oram 13—Cherise, is a partner in the Environment, Land Use and Natural Resources practice group, “Ocean Law Alert: Obama Administration Releases National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan,” 4/24http://www.stoel.com/ocean-law-alert-obama-administration-releases-national-ocean

The Implementation Plan is an extension of the N ational O cean P olicy , which "does not create any new regulations, supersede current regulations, or modify any agency's established mission, jurisdiction, or authority . . . [and] does not redirect congressionally-appropriated funds, or direct agencies to

divert funds from existing programs." Thus, the Implementation Plan does not create new law . Rather, it describes specific actions that the federal agencies involved in ocean management will take to coordinate with tribal, state, and local governments; marine industries; and other stakeholders to streamline management of the nation's ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes waters. Although the Implementation Plan does not create new law, it provides detailed directions for agencies tasked with navigating interagency cooperation and again calls on the United States Senate to ratify the United Nations ("U.N.") Convention on the Law of the Sea,[2] stating that accession is "critical to protecting our navigational rights and freedoms" and would "advance our national interests by protecting and enhancing our access to the ocean and important natural resources."

The CP’s fundamentally distinct from the normal legislative process---it’s not USFG action Campbell 2 – Colton C. Campbell, Associate Professor of Political Science at Florida International University, visiting Professor of Political Science at American University, 2002, Discharging Congress: Government by Commission, p. xv

So why and when does Congress formulate policy by commissions rather than by the normal legislative process? Lawmakers have historically delegated authority to others who could accomplish ends they could not. Does this form of congressional delegation thus reflect the particularities of an issue area? Or does it mirror deeper structural reasons such as legislative organization, time, or manageability? In the end, what is the impact on representation versus the effectiveness of delegating discretionary authority to temporary entities composed largely of unelected officials, or are both attainable together?

Net Benefits

2NC AT: Links to Politics

Commissions reduce partisanship – they are bipartisan and thus not attached to a specific political party.Glassman and Straus 13—*analyst at the Congressional Research Service AND **analyst at the Congressional Research Service (*Matthew Eric AND **Jacob R., “Congressional Commissions: Overview, Structure, and Legislative Considerations,” Congressional Research Service, 1/22, http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40076.pdf)//FJSolutions to policy problems produced within the normal legislative process may also suffer politically from charges of partisanship.30 Similar charges may be made against investigations conducted by Congress.31 The non-partisan or bipartisan character of most congressional commissions may make their findings and recommendations less susceptible to such charges and more politically acceptable to a diverse viewpoints . The bipartisan or nonpartisan arrangement can potentially give their recommendations strong credibility, both in Congress and among the public, even when dealing with divisive issues of public policy.32 Commissions may also give political factions space to negotiate compromises in good faith, bypassing the short-term tactical political maneuvers that accompany public negotiations.33 Similarly, because commission members are not elected, they may be better suited to suggesting unpopular, but necessary, policy solutions.34 Congress uses commissions – shields them from political backlash Brookings Fiscal Seminar 9 – The Brookings Institution Fiscal Seminar, group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, June 2009, “The Potential Role of Entitlement or Budget Commissions in Addressing Long-Term Budget Problems,” online: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_commissions_sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill.pdf¶ Commissions can be used for a variety of purposes that suit the needs of the President or ¶ the Congress. The role of some commissions is to develop a knowledge base about ¶ certain policies or problems free from the political machinations that are an unavoidable ¶ part of the legislative process. They can also develop policy options that members of ¶ Congress and their

staff have too little time or expertise to formulate. They can serve as ¶ consensus-building vehicles from which members of Congress may garner political ¶ protection while addressing contentious issues. At other times, commissions appear ¶ simply to serve as delaying measures that

can be employed to defuse a political issue ¶ until a more opportune time for action develops. The best structure for a commission – i.e. its membership, duties, duration, voting rules, ¶ etc. –

will often vary depending on that commission’s purpose, and therefore on the ¶ nature of the problem that the commission is addressing, the state of scientific or ¶ analytical development of the topic, and the political sensitivity of the subject matter. ¶ Those factors may also influence the nature and the standing

of the commission’s ¶ recommendations. ¶ ¶ For example, in 1988, Congress established the National Commission on Acquired ¶ Immune Deficiency

Syndrome (AIDS) to determine the dimensions of a new and rapidly ¶ spreading communicable disease, assess the degree

of understanding about the disease, ¶ and lay out steps toward ultimately controlling and treating the disease. The commission ¶ focused on the science and largely ignored the potential politics surrounding the issue.

Commissions shield the link to politics – Congress and the president defers the decision to the commission to avoid making difficult decisionsSchwalbe 13 – Program Director, Department of Political Science at the¶ American Public University System, (Steve Schwalbe, Independent Commissions: ¶ Their History, Utilization and Effectiveness”, 2013, https://weathercoalition.org/sites/default/files/documents/2013/independent_commissions.pdf

Campbell noted that commissions perform several other functions besides providing ¶ recommendations to the President and Congress. The most common reason provided by analysts ¶ is that members of Congress generally want to avoid making difficult decisions that may adversely affect their chances for reelection .

As he noted, “Incentives to avoid blame lead members of Congress to adopt a distinctive set of political strategies, such as ‘passing the buck’ or ‘deflection’….” 21 Another technique legislators use to avoid incurring the wrath of the voters is to schedule any controversial indpenedent commissions for after the next election. Establishing a commission to research the issue and come up with recommendations after a preset period of time is an effective way to do that. The most clear-cut example demonstrating this technique is the timing of the BRAC commissions in the 1990s — all three made their base closure recommendations in non-election years (1991, 1993, and 1995). Even the next BRAC commission, established by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal year 2002, is not required to submit its base closure recommendations until 2005.

Congress delegates authority to commissions – less costly and more efficient Schwalbe 13 – Program Director, Department of Political Science at the¶ American Public University System, (Steve Schwalbe, Independent Commissions: ¶ Their History, Utilization and Effectiveness”, 2013, https://weathercoalition.org/sites/default/files/documents/2013/independent_commissions.pdf

Congress certainly is not the most efficient organization in the U.S.; hence, there are times when an independent commission is the more efficient and effective way to go. Lawmakers are almost always short on time and information, which makes the option of delegating authority to a commission very appealing. Ofentimes, the expertise and necessary information is very costly for Congress to acquire. Commissions are generally the most inexpensive way for Congress to solve complex problems. From 1993-1997, Cambell found that 92 congressional officers introduced legislation that included proposals to establish ad hoc commissions

Commissions are non-partisan which solves problems between executive and legislative branches Schwalbe 13 – Program Director, Department of Political Science at the¶ American Public University System, (Steve Schwalbe, Independent Commissions: ¶ Their History, Utilization and Effectiveness”, 2013, https://weathercoalition.org/sites/default/files/documents/2013/independent_commissions.pdf

Commissions are a relatively impartial way to help resolve problems between the executive and legislative branches of government, especially during periods of congressional gridlock. Wolanin also noted that commissions are “particularly useful for problems and in circumstances marked by federal executive branch incapacity.” Federal bureaucracies suffer from many of the same shortcomings attributed to Congress when considering commissions. They often lack the expertise, information, and the time to conduct the research and make recommendations to resolve internal problems. They can be afflicted by groupthink, not being able to think outside the box, or not being able to see the big picture.

Commissions offer a non-partisan, neutral option to address bureaucratic policy problems. 24 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has decided to implement the recommendations of the congressionally chartered Commission on Space, which he chaired prior to being appointed Secretary of Defense! 25

Commissions shield the link to politics – reports from the commission cites statistics and data that the public can’t disagree with Schwalbe 13 – Program Director, Department of Political Science at the¶ American Public University System, (Steve Schwalbe, Independent Commissions: ¶ Their History, Utilization and Effectiveness”, 2013, https://weathercoalition.org/sites/default/files/documents/2013/independent_commissions.pdf

One of the more important functions of independent commissions is education and persuading. Due to the high visibility of most appointed commissioners, a policy issue will automatically tend to gain public attention. According to Wolanin, the prestige and visibility of commissions give them the capability to focus attention on a problem, and to see that thinking about it permeates more rapidly. A recent example of a high-visibility commission chair appointment was Henry Kissinger, selected to chair the commission to look into the perceived intelligence failure regarding the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S. .26 Wolanin cited four educational impacts of commissions: 1)education the general public; 2) educating government officials; 3) serving as intellectual milestones; and, 4) educating the commission members themselves. Regarding education of the general public, he stated that, “Commissions have helped to place broad new issues on the national agenda, to elevate them to a level of legitimate and pressing matters about which government should take affirmative action. “Regarding educating government officials, he noted that, “The educational impact of commissions within government… make it safer for congressmen and federal executives to openly discuss or advocate a proposal that has been sanctioned by such an ‘august group’. ”Commission reports have often been so influential that they serve as milestones in affected fields. Such reports have become source material for analysts, commentators, and even students, particularly when commission reports are widely published and disseminated . Finally, by serving on a commission, members also learn much about the issue, and about the process of analyzing a problem and coming up with viable recommendations. Commissioners also learn from one another. 27

Kerry agrees to a national ocean policy Al Jazeera 14 - “Kerry: Global strategy needed to protect oceans”, June 16, 2014, http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/16/obama-kerry-oceans.html

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday opened a two-day Our Ocean summit by calling for a global regimen to protect the oceans, which he said were under threat from too much fishing, marine pollution and acidification from climate change.¶ He called on nations to move beyond talks and studies to taking specific steps toward a global agreement to protect the oceans.¶ "We are not going to meet this challenge unless the community of nations comes together around a single comprehensive global ocean strategy," he said at the summit at the U.S. State Department.¶ Kerry, long an advocate of measures to address climate change when he was in the U.S. Senate, said current piecemeal national policies to protect the world's oceans have failed to address problems that will affect the entire planet.¶ "If we are going to be able to honor our shared responsibility to protect the ocean, the ad hoc approach we have today, with each nation and community pursuing its own independent policy, simply will not suffice," he said. "That is not how the ocean works."¶

Kerry also said that President Barack Obama on Tuesday will announce his intention to use executive powers to declare additional ocean protections.Consensus proves that the public think warming is anthropogenic and real Examiner 14 – The Examiner, “Jerry Plantz: Polls show consensus on climate change”, June 30, 2014, http://www.examiner.net/article/20140630/Opinion/140639879More and more moderate Republicans, outside of Washington, D.C., are starting to believe what they see- climate change around the globe.¶ Last month, former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson of the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld administration publicly acknowledged in a New York Times op-ed that there is a genuine crisis on par with the one that threatened the global economy in 2008.¶ Further, the heads of the Environmental

Protection Agency for Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and Bush 41 and 43 now agree: Global warming is real, humans are causing it, and politicians must react and act.¶ One of the first Republican leaders to foresee the dismal future was President H.W. George Bush, when he

signed the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendment. Congress would compromise back then.¶ Scientific America magazine cites “an assessment of 21 surveys encompassing almost 20,000 people in 46 states, which found ample agreement about global warming and what to do about it. In each

state, a majority believe that temperatures are rising and that human actions are part of the cause – and this consensus holds for residents of states that voted strongly Republican in the 2012 presidential election (red). More than 60 percent of Americans in every state favor government-imposed limits on greenhouse gas emissions from businesses and power plants.”¶ President Obama will not back down with his fight with Republicans in Congress, who continue to ignore the scientific world consensus on climate change. People generally “don’t just say, ‘No, I don’t believe anything scientists say” – except in Congress, Obama said, where “folks will tell you climate change is a hoax, a fad or a plot – it’s a liberal plot.”¶ Meanwhile, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports that, “Earth set a new record for heat in May and is likely to keep on breaking high temperature marks. May’s average temperature on Earth of

59.93 degrees Fahrenheit (15.54 degrees Celsius) beat the old record set four years ago. In April, the globe tied the 2010 record for that month. Records go back to 1880. While the United States was not close to a record, just 1 degree warmer than the 20th century average. However, California is having a record hot first five months of the year, a full 5 degrees above normal.”

Kerry agrees to take action on the ocean Hartt 14 - Editorial Intern at Global Animal, (Rebecca Hartt, “DOES OBAMA’S PLAN TO PROTECT THE PACIFIC HOLD WATER?”, June 18, 2014, http://www.globalanimal.org/2014/06/18/does-obamas-plan-to-protect-the-pacific-hold-water/

Kerry said Monday that the United States and other nations need to take bolder steps to protect marine habitat and combat other threats.¶ “If this group can’t create a serious plan to protect the ocean for future generations, then who can and who will?” he asked during an appearance at a State Department oceans conference.¶ On Capitol Hill, some Republicans have sought to limit the administration’s ability to influence offshore activities, viewing it as another attempt by the president to test the limits of White House power.¶ “It’s another example of this imperial presidency,” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) said in an interview, noting that Obama established a National Ocean Policy during his first term to coordinate competing interests at sea.¶ “If there are marine sanctuaries that should be put in place, that should go through Congress.”¶ For the past 51 / 2 years, the administration has focused on the nuts and bolts of marine issues, aiming to end overfishing in federally managed fisheries and establishing a new planning process for maritime activities. This week’s State Department ocean summit launches what officials there call a broader “global campaign” to address the problems of overfishing, pollution and ocean acidification.

Kerry supports environmental protection Cama 14 - Staff Writer at The Hill, (Timothy Cama,” Kerry calls for global research, action to protect oceans”, 6/16/14, http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/209503-kerry-calls-for-global-research-action-to-protect-oceans

Secretary of State John Kerry opened a State Department conference on problems with ocean ecosystems Monday by calling for international efforts toward research and laws to protect oceans from overfishing, pollution and climate change.¶ Kerry applauded regional and national actions to protection oceans, such as encouraging sustainable fishing and cutting down on trash, but said it is not enough. “If we are going to be able to honor our shared responsibility to protect the ocean, the ad hoc approach we have today with each nation and community pursuing its own independent policy simply will not suffice,” Kerry said. “We’re not going to meet this challenge unless the community of nations comes together around a single, comprehensive, global ocean strategy.”¶ Kerry called ocean protect a “vital international security issue,” since oceans support movement, livelihood and a large portion of the world’s population. Biologically, the oceans also serve to recycle water, carbon and nutrients for the planet.¶ Kerry that the two-day conference of scientists, world leaders, development officials and others to end with proposals that could help protect the world’s oceans.¶ Specifically, he called for a plan that requires fisheries to use technology that reduces the number of fish that are caught accidentally, designates more of the ocean as protected areas, reduces trash and pollution runoff and researches the effects of carbon pollution on oceans, among other factors.¶ “All of us can come together and each can help the other to ensure that every solution that we discuss is directly tied to the best science available,” Kerry said.¶

NOP is vital to efficient policiesAWC 12, Atlantic Wind Connection, “AWC supports the National Ocean Policy”, 2012, http://atlanticwindconnection.com/AWC-Newsletter-July-2012/AWC-supports-the-National-Ocean-Policy

The National Ocean Policy was formalized in July of 2010 with an Executive Order from the Obama Administration. We see this initiative as vital to serving the interests of the many stakeholders involved in the use of our marine resources, representing interests as diverse as fishing, shipping, national security, energy development, conservation and tourism. ¶ Currently more than 20 federal agencies manage the nation's waterways,

subject to more than 140 laws and regulations. This sector-by-sector approach stifles economic development without achieving the environmental protections critical for long-term stewardship. The National Ocean Policy creates a way for federal agencies to coordinate their actions and thereby reduce regulatory uncertainty . Rather than adding another layer of bureaucracy or imposing new laws or regulations, the National Ocean Policy can help cut through bureaucracy and reduce regulatory uncertainty, while better protecting the marine environment. ¶ The National Ocean Policy will bring together regulators, project developers, the environmental community, and other stakeholders to create

five-year plans tailored to meet the differing needs and priorities of each of the nine designated regions . ¶ Markian Melnyk, one of AWC's principals, has been actively supporting the development of the National Ocean Policy by talking with members of Congress and urging them to dedicate funding to it. "The increased coordination, collaboration and streamlining among agencies will support the creation of a whole new offshore wind industry and hundreds of thousands of American jobs, while still protecting our treasured marine resources," said Markian. "We see the National Ocean Policy as a win for all stakeholders."

NOP Good

NOP Net Benefit -- 1NC The counterplan improves overall ocean policy planning – strengthens the NOPFlorida Ocean Alliance 13 (Florida Ocean Alliance, “JOINT INITIATIVE APPLAUDS NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN,” April 2013, http://www.floridaoceanalliance.org/documents/OceansDay2013/Joint%20Initiative%20Applauds%20National%20Ocean%20Policy%20Implementation%20Plan.pdf)//FJOn April 16, the National Ocean Council released the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan provides a solid foundation for coordination and improved management of ocean resources. The Joint Initiative Co-Chairs Bill Ruckelshaus and Norm Mineta released the following statement on

behalf of the Leadership Council. The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council applauds the National Ocean Council’s release of its National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan . Executing this plan will improve management of our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes and help ensure our vital ocean resources are

able to support the communities, businesses and ecosystems that rely on them now and into the future. By incorporating the most advanced scientific knowledge in the field and focusing on increasing efficiency and effectiveness of governmental decision making, the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan offers a stronger, simpler path to healthy, well-managed oceans. We appreciate the thoughtful work the National Ocean Council has done to include feedback from all sectors and we look forward to continuing to work together to improve our economy, our environment and our national security.

National ocean policy strengthens the navy – ocean planning ensures the stability of seaports Center for American Progress 11—an independent educational, public policy research, and advocacy organization (“National Ocean Policy Ensures Economic Growth, Security, and Resilience,” Center for American Progress, 10/24, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/24/10485/national-ocean-policy-ensures-economic-growth-security-and-resilience/)//FJNational Ocean Policy answers a national security and economic imperative Voicing U.S. Navy support for the president’s Ocean Policy Task Force, Rear Adm. Herman Shelanski emphasized, "The U.S. Navy is committed to being responsible stewards of the environment. As such, we understand the importance of developing a new national ocean policy—one that includes ecosystem-based coastal and marine spatial planning and management in the United States. … we also believe such management should be balanced to maintain and enhance multiple ocean uses, including those that contribute to our nation’s security and global stability." Comprehensive ocean planning will ensure the stability of the nation’s seaports as additional uses of ocean space evolve . This is of utmost importance to the entire country. The value of imports through U.S. ports was almost $2 trillion in 2010, and in 2008 commercial ports supported 13 million U.S. jobs. Ports that accommodate oceangoing vessels move 99.5 percent of U.S. overseas trade by volume and 64 percent by value, and compared to 2001 total freight moving through U.S. ports is expected to increase by more than 50 percent by 2020.

Naval power solves great power war Conway, retired United States Marine Corps general, 2008 (James, “A Cooperative Strategy For 21st Century Seapower”, Naval War College Review, Winter, http://www.navy.mil/maritime/Maritimestrategy.pdf, ldg)States seapower will be globally postured to secure our homeland and citizens from direct attack and to advance our interests around the world. As our security and prosperity are inextricably linked with those of others, U.S. maritime forces will be deployed to protect and sustain the peaceful global system comprised of interdependent networks of trade, finance, information, law, people and governance. We will employ the global reach, persistent presence, and operational flexibility inherent in U.S. seapower to accomplish six key tasks, or strategic imperatives. Where tensions are high or where we wish to demonstrate to our friends and allies our commitment to security and stability, U.S. maritime forces will be characterized by regionally concentrated, forward-

deployed task forces with the combat power to limit regional conflict, deter major power war, and should deterrence fail, win our Nation’s wars as part of a joint or combined campaign. In addition, persistent, mission-tailored maritime forces will be globally distributed in order to contribute to homeland defense-in-depth, foster and sustain cooperative relationships with an expanding set of international partners, and prevent or mitigate disruptions and crises. a cooporative strategy for a 21st century seapower 7 Regionally Concentrated, Credible Combat Power Credible combat power will be continuously postured in the Western Pacific and the Arabian Gulf/Indian Ocean to protect our vital interests, assure our friends and allies of our continuing commitment to regional security, and deter and dissuade potential adversaries and peer competitors. This combat power can be selectively and rapidly repositioned to meet contingencies that may arise elsewhere. These forces will be sized and postured to fulfill the following strategic imperatives: Limit regional conflict with forward deployed, decisive maritime power. Today regional conflict has ramifications far beyond the area of conflict.

Humanitarian crises, violence spreading across borders, pandemics, and the interruption of vital resources are all possible when regional crises erupt. While this strategy advocates a wide dispersal of networked maritime forces, we cannot be everywhere, and we cannot act to mitigate all regional conflict. Where conflict threatens the global system and our national interests, maritime forces will be ready to respond alongside other elements of national and multi-national power , to give political leaders a range of options for deterrence, escalation and de-escalation . Maritime forces that are persistently present and combat-ready provide the Nation’s primary forcible entry option in an era of declining access, even as they provide the means for this Nation to respond quickly to other crises. Whether over the horizon or powerfully arrayed in plain sight, maritime forces can deter the ambitions of regional aggressors, assure friends and allies, gain and maintain access, and protect our citizens while working to sustain the global order . Critical to this notion is the maintenance of a powerful fleet—ships, aircraft, Marine forces, and shore-based fleet activities—capable of selectively controlling the seas, projecting power ashore, and protecting friendly forces and civilian populations from attack. Deter major power war. No other disruption is as potentially disastrous to global stability as war among major powers . Maintenance and extension of this Nation’s comparative seapower advantage is a key component of deterring major power war . While war with another great power strikes many as improbable, the near-certainty of its ruinous effects demands that it be actively deterred using all elements of national power. The expeditionary character of maritime forces—our lethality, global reach, speed, endurance, ability to overcome barriers to access, and operational agility—provide the joint commander with a range of deterrent options. We will pursue an approach to deterrence that includes a credible and scalable ability to retaliate against aggressors conventionally, unconventionally, and with nuclear forces.

2NC AT: Doesn’t Strengthen NOP/Prez Powers

Commission recommendations strengthen Obama’s national ocean policy – provides credibility and reduces partisanship.Sulzner 71—Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts Amherst (George T., “The Policy Process and the Uses of National Governmental Study Commissions,” JSTOR, pp. 443-445)//FJThe consensus-building possibilities of national governmental study commis- sions have not gone unnoticed.20 David Brown has observed that they might be seen by an administrator as "a means of support, a way of 'selling' his program to the country 21 Harlan Cleveland pointed out that ''Commissions can ... help the President build support for what he has already decided to do ."33 Daniel Bell, seeing the negative side of this function, has argued that the consensus-building implications of the work of governmental study commissions have become so domi- nant that there is a danger commissions may be used primarily to manipulate public opinion.-a There are four characteristics of governmental study commissions that greatly facilitate their use as consensus mechanisms. First, the official nature of govern- mental commissions lends an objective aura to their operations which tends to enhance the credibility ot their observations. 1 his in turn makes it more appro- priate and easier for public officials, as well as formal and informal opinion leaders, to respond positively to commission initiatives.*4 Second, the authenticity accorded the work of study commissions might be further enhanced by the presence of "blue ribbon" members on the commission. Typically, such commissions are composed of notables, men and women prominent in their vocations .25 Elizabeth Drew, for example, has composed an informal set of guidelines for selecting commission members, rule two of which states, "Com- missioners should be bipartisan and otherwise representative of constituent groups, as long as they are respectable."26 The personal prestige of commission members commonly transfers to the particular study commission on which they serve. Charles Hanscr's trenchant comments illustrate the potential importance of the prestige factor in securing public support. "Because it [the Royal Commission] has prestige its findings of fact and its conclusions are normally accepted by the body politic."27 Tom Wicker observed of the recent Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, "That kind of recommendation gets little attention when it comes from 'liberals' and 'radicals" and "intellectual bleeding hearts*; but when it comes from men like Thorton and McCulloch and Abel and Jenkins, it is not easy to doubt the urgency of the case, the shock of the findings, the truth of the need."28 Amitai Etzioni noted with respect to the composition of the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, "If 10 wise men drawn from such a cross-section of the nation support a set of conclusions, the country is more likely to go along with them than if these conclusions are advocated by 10 experts." 29 Third, study commissions encourage consensus in government and public responses by the kinds of suggestions that they ordinarily make. Traditionally, in this culture, popular acclaim is withheld from individuals who challenge dominant norms too vigorously. Study commissions, therefore, will not consist of radicals and their subsequent policy advice is unlikely to depart far from established values. much less be revolutionary. Rather, their proposals will tend to be moderate and marginal with respect to any measure of deviation from the status quo.30 Finally, the proposals of a national governmental study commission can act as "trial balloons," as tests of public response. This is a political technique for public education and, in the long run, promotes the acceptability of certain policy pro- posals.31 For instance, the initial shock of protest directed toward unusual propo- sitions can be absorbed by the commission. Later, when public officials suggest similar courses of action, their recommendations may appear somewhat less novel and thus more acceptable. In sum, governmental study commissions through their proposal-publication and action-legitimation services promote public confidence in policy positions. In these ways, they can be vital factors in the support-mobilization process that is intimately connected with the development of incremental policy and is basic to conflict-man agemen t.

JOC actions are focused specifically on the goal plans stated in the National Ocean Policy. Krajewski 11—Development and Communications Coordinator of the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation (Kari, “Major Announcements Released at Capitol Hill Ocean Week Press Conference,” National Marine Sanctuary Foundation, 6/8, http://www.nmsfocean.org/article/2011/06/07/major-announcements-released-capitol-hill-ocean-week-press-conference)//FJThe Joint Ocean Commission Initiative called on national, state and local officials to support effective implementation of our nation’s first National Ocean Policy to better protect local economies, national industries and encourage innovation. The Honorable William Ruckelshaus and the Honorable Norman Mineta, co-chairs of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council(JOCI) presented a report, entitled America’s Ocean Future , offering

recommendations to help protect ocean health, coastal communities and the many jobs that depend on them . “Our oceans, coasts and Great Lake are an engine of the United States economy,” said The Honorable Norman Mineta, JOCI Co-Chair. “While some may consider ocean health trivial in a time when our economy is struggling to recover and our government is in crisis, the fact is we need to invest in healthy oceans so that they can continue to support the many jobs that rely on them.” Solutions, such as increased coordination among federal agencies to effectively support the priorities of coastal regions, states and tribes and establishment of an ocean investment fund, were presented. In 2012, the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative will publicly assess progress toward implementing the National Ocean Policy, focused specifically on the actions recommended in this report.

2NC Prez Powers Good

A strong presidency solves a laundry list of warsSouth China Morning Post 2K (South China Morning Post, 12/11/2000, ProQuest | <MODIFIED FOR GENDERED LANGUAGE>A weak president   with an unclear mandate is bad news for the rest of the world. For better or worse, the person who rules the United States influences events far beyond the shores of his [or her] own country. Both the global economy and international politics will feel the effect of political instability in the US. The first impact will be on American financial markets, which will have a ripple effect on markets and growth across the world. A weakened US presidency will also be felt in global hotspots   across the world. The Middle East, the

conflict between India and Pakistan, peace on the Korean peninsula, and even the way relations between China and Taiwan   play out, will be influenced by the authority the next US president brings to his [or her] job. There are those who would welcome a weakening of US global influence. Many Palestinians, for example, feel they would benefit from a less interventionist

American policy in the Middle East. Even within the Western alliance, there are those who would probably see opportunities in a weakened US presidency. France, for example, might feel that a less assertive US might force the European Union to be more outward looking. But the dangers of having a weak, insecure US presidency outweigh any benefits that it might

bring. US global economic and military power cannot be wished   away . A president with a shaky mandate will   still command great power and influence, only he [or she] will be constrained by his domestic weakness and less certain about how to use his authority.   This brings   with it the risks ofmiscalculation and the use of US power in a way that heightens conflict. There are very few conflicts in the world today which can be solved without US influence. The rest of the world needs the United States to use its power deftly and decisively. Unfortunately, as the election saga continues, it seems increasingly unlikely that the next US president will be in a position to do so.

A strong executive is vital to a successful American foreign policyMallaby 2K (Sebastian Mallaby, member of The Washington Post's Editorial Board, “The Bullied Pulpit: A Weak Chief Executive Makes Worse Foreign Policy”, Foreign Affairs Jan/Feb 2000 Edition, JSTORFinally, some will object that the weakness of the presidency   as an institution   is not the main explanation for the inadequacies of American diplomacy, even if it is a secondary one. The ad hominem school of thought argues instead that Bill

Clinton and his advisers have simply been incompetent.Others make various sociological claims that isolationism or multiculturalism lies at the root of America's diplomatic troubles. All of these arguments may have merit. But the evidence cited by both camps can be better explained by the structural weakness of the presidency . Take, for example, one celebrated error: President Clinton's declaration at the start of the Kosovo war that the Serbs need not fear NATO ground troops. This announcement almost certainly cost lives by encouraging the Serbs to believe that America was not serious about stopping ethnic cleansing. The ad hominem school sees in this example proof of Clinton's incompetence; the sociological school sees in it proof of isolationist pressure, which made the option of ground troops untenable. But a third explanation, offered privately by a top architect of the Kosovo policy, is more plausible. According to this official, the president knew that pundits and Congress would criticize whichever policy he chose. Clinton therefore preemptively took ground troops off the table, aware that his critics would then urge him on to a ground war -- and also aware that these urgings would convince Belgrade that Washington's resolve would stiffen with time, rather than weaken. The president's stand against ground troops was therefore the logical, tactical move

of a leader feeling vulnerable to his critics. Other failings of American diplomacy can likewise be accounted for by the advent of the nonexecutive presidency. Several commentators, notably Samuel Huntington and Garry Wills in these pages, have attacked the arrogance of America's presumption to offer moral leadership to the world. But American leaders resort to moral rhetoric largely out of weakness. They fear that their policy will be blocked unless they generate moral momentum powerful enough to overcome domestic opponents. Likewise, critics point to the hypocrisy of the United States on the world stage. America seeks U.N. endorsement when convenient but is slow to pay its U.N. dues; America practices legal abortion at home but denies funds to organizations that do the same abroad. Again, this hypocrisy has everything to

do with the weak executive. The president has a favored policy but is powerless to make Congress follow it. Still other critics decry American diplomacy as a rag-bag of narrow agendas: Boeing lobbies for China trade while Cuban-Americans demand sanctions on

Cuba. Here, too,presidential power is the issue. A strong presidency might see to it that America pursues its broader national interest, but a weak one cannot. This is why Clinton signed the Helms-Burton sanctions on Cuba even though he

knew that these would do disproportionate harm to U.S. relations with Canada and Europe. What if America's nonexecutive presidency is indeed at the root of its diplomatic inadequacy? First, it follows that it is too optimistic to blame America's foreign policy drift on the weak character of the current president. The institution of the presidency itself is weak, and we would be unwise to assume that a President Gore

or Bradley or Bush will perform much better. But it also follows that it is too pessimistic to blame America's foreign policy drift on cultural forces that nobody can change, such as isolationism or multiculturalism.  

2NC AT: Democracy Turn

Taking policy out of Congress best for democracy – eliminates desire for partisan gains.Brookings Fiscal Seminar 09—a group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, to discuss federal budget and fiscal policy issues (Brookings Fiscal Seminar, “THE POTENTIAL ROLE OF ENTITLEMENT OR BUDGET COMMISSIONS IN ADDRESSING LONG-TERM BUDGET PROBLEMS,” June 2009, http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2009/6/commissions%20sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill)//FJ The use of commissions can also be seen as a means of taking an issue outside of the political arena

where unelected nonpartisan experts can be free to produce recommendations or findings based upon sound and reasoned analysis rather than partisan gains . More technical issues increase the desirability that a panel be comprised of unelected experts rather than elected representatives .2

National ocean policy increases public participation – reform comes from the bottom up.Moran 14—Acting Director of the National Ocean Council Office; Executive Office of the President (Dr. S Bradley, “Strengthening America’s Ocean Economy: The National Ocean Policy ,” Sea Technology Magazine, January 2014, http://www.sea-technology.com/features/2014/0114/8_Moran.php)//FJA common misconception about marine planning is that regional planning bodies wield the power to make decisions about who can use the ocean and where certain activities can occur. In fact, regional planning bodies do not have this power; their purpose is simply to create a marine plan, which is not a regulatory action. With input from the public, ocean industries and all interested stakeholders, regional planning bodies first define what ocean issues they want to address in their regions and how they want to do so. Federal agencies can then use the resulting marine plan to ensure they fully understand and take into account regional

priorities when exercising their existing statutory decision-making authorities. This coordinated planning process stands in sharp contrast to last-minute, project-by-project choices that so often can run afoul of one another and ultimately waste time and money . A common example of the need for this process comes from Rhode Island waters, where plans for a wind energy facility proceeded for months, and at significant expense, until it was discovered that the site in question was already being used for military training exercises. When people begin to discuss what activities are already happening and what uses may come in the future, they inevitably start discussing what kind of science and data they need, what the conflicts are and how they can be avoided—a process that can benefit all parties. We are already seeing that simply getting the federal agencies, states and stakeholders together (whether in person or remotely) to discuss marine activities in the region yields benefits. Marine planning will always have constraints, including that our information about ocean resources and ocean uses will never be perfect, but it is an ongoing process that is meant to be flexible as states

of knowledge, and even values, change over time. Because these are inherently bottom-up, democratic processes , interest in a given region is the driving force for creating a regional planning body, and four regions have already established bodies: the Northeast, the Mid-Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Pacific Islands. In other regions, discussions are underway to better understand how marine planning could work for those regions. In regions that choose not to establish a body, federal agencies are committed nonetheless to working cooperatively with each other and with states, tribes and stakeholders as they carry out their missions.

2NC AT: NOP=Increase Regulation/Bureaucratic Oversight

NOP doesn’t result in increased regulation – merely streamlines squo laws and agencies.Marine Conservation Institute 11—a tax-exempt nonprofit ocean conservation organization working to identify and protect vulnerable ocean ecosystems worldwide (“FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY AND COASTAL AND MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING,” Marine Conservation Institute, 8/9, http://www.marine-conservation.org/media/filer_public/2011/08/09/faq_-trajan.pdf)//FJ“The National Policy does not establish any new regulations or restrict any ocean uses or activities. It does not require new legislation in order to be implemented and does not supersede or alter any agency or department’s existing authority .” —Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, 2010 The

National Ocean Policy was created because we have too many laws and regulations, which need harmonizing and streamlining if we are serious about better ocean governance. The challenge today is to make ocean governance effective. What is needed is an overarching approach that manages and protects both our ecosystems and the economies they support. An overarching strategy would coordinate mandates, integrate planning amongst sectors and create a broader view of the benefits and impacts stemming from the use of our ocean resources. Our ability to care for our nation’s coastal and marine resources as a whole depends on an approach that is holistic, not helter skelter.

2NC NOP Solves Economy

NOP supports the economy – increases productivity of coastal regionsCenter for American Progress 11—an independent educational, public policy research, and advocacy organization (“National Ocean Policy Ensures Economic Growth, Security, and Resilience,” Center for American Progress, 10/24, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/24/10485/national-ocean-policy-ensures-economic-growth-security-and-resilience/)//FJNational Ocean Policy will preserve the health of oceans and the local economies they support In addition to supporting COP, the National Ocean Policy contains eight other national priority objectives, including the establishment of a science-based strategy to align conservation and restoration goals at federal, state, tribal, local, and regional levels and the strengthening and integration of federal and nonfederal ocean observing systems and data management into one national system, to then be integrated into international observation efforts. Our oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are critical components of our nation’s economy. U.S. coastal counties are home to more than half of all Americans, generate an estimated $8 trillion per year, and support 69 million jobs. Tourism, recreation, and fishing contributed $18.9 billion to Florida’s GDP in 2005. In addition to the benefits the entire nation will reap from implementation of the nine priority objectives in the NOP, Florida’s coast is particularly vulnerable to sea level rise as a result of global climate change, and its reefs are at significant risk from ocean warming and acidification. The NOP’s goals include strengthening resiliency of coastal communities to these threats. As of 2007 more than 85 percent of California’s gross domestic product and nearly 12 million jobs came from economic activity in these coastal estuarine areas. California’s state government has prioritized ocean conservation and has used the concept of COP in implementation of the Marine Life Protection Act, which used stakeholder input to develop the boundaries of marine protected areas within its state waters. And in Michigan, a state deeply affected by the economic downturn, 15 percent of all jobs are associated with the Great Lakes, and they make up 23 percent of the total payroll. While some would imply that the administration is over-reaching its authority by extending ocean policy to the Great Lakes, the core missions of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, BOEMRE, and other federal agencies with oversight of ocean activities already encompass the Great Lakes. This is appropriate as activities on the Lakes, including fishing, boating, shipping, and energy

development, are equivalent to their maritime counterparts. Declining ocean health and a lack of effective coordination among regional groups, states, and federal bodies is putting this great economic engine at risk . Wise investment in the future of our oceans will provide a tune-up for our marine economic engine that will keep it running smoothly for future generations. On the other hand, failing to address these inadequacies will inevitably prove disastrous.

NOP k2 revitalizing stability Huffington Post 13 – Huffington Post, “Why We Need a National Ocean Policy”, 4/24/2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sea-to-table/why-we-need-a-national-oc_b_3149217.html¶ ¶ This week over one billion people in 192 countries celebrated Earth Day. We planted trees, shared recycling tips, pledged action to combat climate change, and took a moment to reflect on what nature has given us. Wendell Berry once said, "The earth is what we all have in common," but consider these statistics: 71 percent of the Earth's surface is covered in water, and 80 percent of the Earth's population lives near the ocean. Yet 95 percent of the Earth's ocean remains unexplored, and we know more about the mountains of the moon than about this great abyss. With more than half of the United States' population living within fifty miles of our coasts, one in every six jobs in the U.S. is marine-related . If we care about our economic stability, our health, and our environmental future, it's time that our purview of the Earth becomes less terrestrial.¶ ¶ Earlier this month the White House finalized the National Ocean Policy, a plan to manage the nation's oceans and reconcile the interests of over two dozen federal agencies. Initiatives of the new plan include monitoring ocean acidification and pollution, regulating aquaculture, improving access to renewable offshore energy, and protecting coastal communities. The policy also intends to improve fishery management in order to meet the growing demand for sustainable seafood. Not everyone is happy about the new policy, arguing that the Obama administration is overreaching. We disagree. If we want a sustainable future, the importance of managing our oceans, arguably our most critical natural resource, cannot be underestimated.¶ ¶ Anyone who doubts the need for ocean regulation need only to look to the United States, where better management of fish stocks has brought the fishing industry, and the local economies that depend upon it, back from the brink of ruin. Worldwide the situation is grimmer. Over one billion people

depend on fish as their primary source of protein, yet 85 percent of the world's fisheries are considered overexploited. Only 25 countries control more than 75 percent of the world's fish stocks - imagine what could happen if these

countries worked together? How many people could be fed? Our hope is that the U.S. N ational Ocean Policy sets a precedent for a global effort toward greater ocean stewardship .¶ ¶ If the Earth were a body, the ocean would be

our most important organ. It's our planet's breath, the force that governs our climate and atmosphere, a source of food and economic stability. Its potential to sustain us is vast if only we nurture it properly. A healthier ocean benefits us all.

Ocean planning brings our economy billions of dollars – studies confirmChasis 12 - Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “Ocean Planning Would Bring Billions of Dollars of Economic Benefits, New Study Confirms”, 4/6/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/ocean-planning-would-brin_b_1345424.htmlSmart ocean planning can bring our economy billions of dollars of benefits according to a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The study examined where to best locate new offshore wind farms in coastal waters around Massachusetts, confirming that smart-planning will help us determine the most efficient way to balance different human activities in our oceans and ensure the continued health of ocean resources. With industrial pressures on our oceans only increasing, this study shows that comprehensive ocean planning is the right choice for our economy, coastal communities, and ocean life.¶ We demand a lot from our oceans. From fishing and tourism to shipping and energy development, we expect our oceans to deliver valuable resources for generations to come. However, with all these different human activities currently handled on an ad hoc basis -- it’s a first-come, first-served system for industries like fishing and oil-extraction -- it’s not surprising that our seas are suffering under a barrage of problems. Pollution, overfishing, ocean acidification, and loss of wildlife habitat are putting our food sources, ocean-related jobs, and important marine ecosystems in jeopardy.¶ Comprehensive ocean planning, also known as marine spatial planning (MSP), offers a common sense solution through smart planning. It allocates space in the oceans for various uses, balancing multiple demands and the need to protect ocean ecosystems and habitats. It identifies and can help quantify the trade-offs among different siting options. In other words, this smart planning strategy can identify the most efficient solution, minimizing conflicts between different industries, while protecting the marine environment and wildlife.

NOP generates more funds and prevents losses in the industries – Massachusetts study provesChasis 12 - Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “Ocean Planning Would Bring Billions of Dollars of Economic Benefits, New Study Confirms”, 4/6/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/ocean-planning-would-brin_b_1345424.html

¶ The Massachusetts study shows clearly how our economy can benefit from such spatial planning. New wind energy zones, off Massachusetts and other coastal areas, could contain hundreds of turbines that—if located incorrectly—could harm fish habitat, alter commercial fishing patterns, and displace endangered whale species. The study assesses the potential conflicts among offshore wind energy, commercial fishing, and whale-watching sectors and identifies and quantifies the value of choosing optimal wind farm locations that minimize conflicts among these sectors. The study concludes that optimal siting of offshore wind zones could generate more than $10 billion in extra value to the energy sector and prevent more than $1 million in losses to the fishery and whale-watching sectors, as contrasted to the status quo.¶ ¶ It’s this same emphasis on finding efficient, win-win solutions that forms the backbone of our nation’s first National Ocean Policy, established by President Obama in 2010. Up until now, some 140 laws and 20 agencies have governed our seas, each with their own agendas and often conflicting mandates. The National Ocean Policy requires that all agencies that play a role in ocean-related work finally coordinate their efforts. ¶ ¶ This is a major step to reduce waste, inefficiency, and delay in our government. The National Ocean Policy calls for agencies, together with states and Tribes, and with stakeholder and public input, to develop comprehensive regional ocean plans. As shown in the Massachusetts Bay example, such planning can mean a stronger economy and more jobs for hardworking Americans.¶ ¶ With our oceans contributing more to our nation’s economic output than the entire U.S. farm sector, we can’t afford to just cross our fingers and hope for the best. The National Ocean Policy will help us efficiently protect our ocean resources and our economy for generations to come.

2NC NOP Solves Environment

NOP checks back on environmental issuesMigliaccio ’14 – Migliaccio is a Legal Extern at Vermont Supreme Court and is also part of the Ocean and Coastal Law Committee is a branch of Vermont Law School’s Environmental Law Society and is a forum for students, graduates and professors to pass on information regarding internships, jobs, and advocacy opportunities with regards to ocean and coastal issues. (Emily Migliaccio , “THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE ¶ POLLUTION AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN ¶ BUREAUCRACY?”, 2014, http://vjel.vermontlaw.edu/files/2014/04/Migliaccio_FORPRINT1.pdf //HK

The Obama Administration’s call for a national ocean policy was a long time coming . For decades, policymakers have planned and devised various strategies for ocean management and protection, and over time ¶ “various ocean law leaders, commissions, and scholars have called for the creation of a NOP .”93 After Congress

enacted the Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act in 1966, ocean governance evolved. 94 Congress enacted legislation involving ocean resources and development,95 and federal and state ocean-policy committees published reports and recommendations for a national o cean policy.96¶ Building upon previous ocean governance efforts, President Barack Obama established the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force97 on June 12,¶ 2009 and charged it with developing recommendations to “better meet our Nation’s stewardship responsibilities for the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes.”98 President Obama’s initiative paved the way for the present¶ NOP—a policy that evolved through four stages. The first stage was the issuance of the Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force (“Final Recommendations”) on June 19, 2010.99 In the Final Recommendations, the President detailed nine national priority objectives:¶ (1) ecosystem-based management; (2) coastal and marine spatial planning;¶ (3) inform decisions and improve understanding; (4) coordinate and support; (5) resiliency and adaptation to climate change and ocean acidification; (6) regional ecosystems protection and restoration; (7) water quality and sustainable practices on land; (8) changing conditions in the¶ Arctic; and (9) ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes observations, mapping, and infrastructure.100¶ In the second phase, adopting the Final Recommendations of the Task Force, President Obama issued Executive Order 13,547.101 The Order “establishes for the first time a

comprehensive, integrated National Policy for the stewardship of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes.” 102¶ Specifically, the Policy aims to develop a more comprehensive management of the ocean with greater coordination across all levels of government in order to reduce duplication of federal agency policies and activities . Additionally, the Policy seeks to engage all stakeholders who use, care about, and depend upon ocean resources.103 In the Order, President Obama declares that the United States shall promote the policy by: (i) ensuring a comprehensive and collaborative framework for the stewardship of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes that facilitates cohesive actions across the Federal Government, as well as participation of State, tribal, and local authorities, regional governance structures, nongovernmental organizations, the public, and the private sector; (ii) cooperating and exercising leadership at the international level; (iii) pursuing the United States’ accession to the Law of the Sea Convention; and (iv) supporting ocean stewardship in a fiscally responsible manner.104

NOP solves environmental degradation Reuters 14 – Reuters, “Obama Moves to Protect Vast Pacific Ocean Areas”, June 17, 2014, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/obama-moves-to-protect-vast-pacific-ocean-areas/

President Barack Obama's proposal, to go into effect later this year, would create a vast marine sanctuary and is part of an effort to safeguard more ocean territory, which is under threat from several factors, including overfishing and climate change, the White House said.¶ The announcement, part of the president's national ocean policy, coincided with an oceans conference held by the State Department on Monday and Tuesday at which Secretary of State John Kerry called for a global effort to protect the world's oceans, which cover more than 70 percent of the planet.¶

" We've already shown that when we work together, we can protect our oceans for future generations. So let's redouble our efforts," Obama said in a statement .¶ The president's plan would expand the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument from its current area of 87,000 square miles and would affect seven islands and atolls controlled by the United States.¶ The coral reefs and marine ecosystems of this section of the south-central Pacific Ocean are some of the most vulnerable areas to climate change and ocean acidification, the White House said.¶

The president will also direct federal agencies to create a comprehensive program to prevent illegal fishing and stop illegally caught fish from being sold, a move designed to spur the market for sustainably caught seafood.¶ "Because our seafood travels through an increasingly long, complex and non-transparent supply chain, there are numerous opportunities for seafood fraud to occur and illegally caught fish to enter the U.S. market," said Beth Lowell, campaign director at the ocean conservation group Oceana.¶ Obama also announced measures to protect coastal communities vulnerable to climate change, including an offer of $102 million in grants to restore flood plains and natural barriers along the Atlantic coast, and released a paper detailing the impacts of ocean acidification.¶ The measures will be carried out by executive order, and do not require congressional approval.¶ A comment period over the summer will allow the Commerce and Interior departments to hear objections and fine-tune the plan.

NOP solves a litancy of impactsJarocki 14 – Nonpartisan examiner, (Gailann Jarocki), “Obama's new executive orders to preserve and protect the oceans”, http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-s-new-executive-orders-to-preserve-and-protect-the-oceans

This week, the State Department hosted the “Our Ocean” conference, an international conference on sustainable fisheries, marine pollution, and ocean acidification. Today, as part of the closing of the conference, Obama, in a video message

announced his new executive actions to preserve and protect the oceans. During Obama's first term, he launched the National Ocean Policy in order to streamline more than 100 laws that govern our oceans and create a coordinated, science-based approach of management. The conference discussed the variety of issues that were contained in the recently release National Climate Assessment that confirmed that climate change is causing sea levels and ocean temperatures to rise.¶ Today, Obama announced the commitment to use his authority to protect our Marina landscape, as he has done for our mountains, rivers and forests. He seeks input from other shareholders and world leaders before making decisions about the geographic scope and details of future marine protections. He has directed federal agencies to develop a comprehensive program aimed at stopping illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing. His administration will help establish a pathway to new marine sanctuaries, will implement his voluntary marine planning committees diverse coastal regional marine planning by the end of his term, and will address the impact of ocean acidification. It was announced, yesterday, that the Department of Interior has opened $102 million in competitive grants to build more resilience in coastal communities against future storms.¶ Obama, also stated that federal agencies are completing work on a new road map to streamline the permitting process for shellfish aquaculture by removing barriers in the permitting process. Currently, most seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported, resulting in a seafood trade deficit of between $8 and $10 billion a year. Farming more shellfish will also be an economic boon to local communities, creating jobs and investment on our shores.

NOP helps -Costal communities -Overfishing -Illegal fishingBanerjee 14 - Neela Banerjee covers energy and environmental policy out of the Washington, D.C., bureau. She writes about federal policymaking and broader national issues, such as climate change, hydraulic fracturing and the Keystone XL pipeline. Before joining the Los Angeles Times in fall 2010, Neela covered global energy, the Iraq war and domestic faith and ethics issues for the New York Times and served as a Moscow correspondent, (Neela Banerjee, “Obama to order major expansion of ocean sanctuary in Pacific”, June 17, 2014, http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-oceans-20140617-story.html

Illegal seafood accounts for one-fifth to one-third of wild-caught seafood imported to the U.S. in 2011 ,

according to a recent study in the journal, Marine Policy. Further, about one-third of seafood is mislabeled, according to a study last year by the environmental group Oceana, which analyzed more than 1,200 seafood samples bought in 21 states. The study found that fish sold as snapper was misidentified 87% of the time and tuna, mislabeled 59% of time.¶ “Because our seafood travels through an increasingly long, complex and non-transparent supply chain, there are numerous opportunities for seafood fraud to occur and illegally caught fish to enter the U.S. market,” said Beth

Lowell, director of Oceana’s Stop Seafood Fraud campaign. “By tracing our seafood from boat to plate, consumers will have more information about the fish they purchase.”¶ The White House plan would also improve monitoring of ocean acidification, fueled by the ever-greater amounts of carbon dioxide the oceans absorb . Atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by about 40% since the preindustrial era, thanks to the combustion of fossil fuels, according to a report issued Tuesday by the White House Office of Science and Technology.¶ Oceans absorb about 25% of the carbon dioxide that human activity generates, and when the gas dissolves in

seawater, some of it forms carbonic acid. Greater ocean acidity poses a threat to a range of marine life, including coral reefs and shellfish beds, like oyster hatcheries in the Pacific Northwest. Under the plan, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration would get $9 million over three years to better monitor the local effect of ocean acidification, which, in turn, could help individual coastal communities.

2NC NOP Solves Leadership

NOP solves leadership – coast guard Conathan 11 - Michael Conathan is the Director of Ocean Policy at American Progress, (Michael Conathan) “National Ocean Policy: A Path to America’s Ocean Future”, October 26, 2011, http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/26/10451/national-ocean-policy-a-path-to-americas-ocean-future/

Finally, leadership at the highest levels of our nation’s ocean security forces is united in their support for the National Ocean Policy and comprehensive ocean planning. In 2009 Adm. Thad Allen, then-commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard testified before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation that “A new national ocean policy, especially as it creates a unified framework for effective coastal and marine spatial planning, is critical to the nation and to the ability of the Coast Guard to execute its mission.” He went on to emphasize that planning would “better address the ‘gaps’ in current ocean management regimes and better manage ocean uses. This will allow the Coast Guard to more effectively execute its many missions in support of safety, security, and stewardship in our ocean and coastal waters.”¶ Adm. Allen’s successor as commandant, Adm. Robert Papp, has continued this support for comprehensive ocean planning and the National Ocean Policy, stating in 2010 that the final recommendations of the Ocean Policy Task Force, “provide a balance between protecting and preserving the marine environment, and promoting economic progress. The framework protects the interests of all users, improves ocean stewardship, and provides the foundation for improving maritime governance at the international, regional, state, and local levels."¶ Voicing the U.S. Navy’s support for the president’s Ocean Policy Task Force, Rear Adm. Herman Shelanski emphasized, "The U.S. Navy is committed to being responsible stewards of the environment. As such, we understand the importance of developing a new national ocean policy—one that includes ecosystem-based coastal and marine spatial planning and management in the United States. … we also believe such management should be balanced to maintain and enhance multiple ocean uses, including those that contribute to our nation’s security and global stability."

2NC NOP Solves Energy

JOC supports NOP to improve sustainable energy – offshore wind Conathan 11 - Michael Conathan is the Director of Ocean Policy at American Progress, (Michael Conathan) “National Ocean Policy: A Path to America’s Ocean Future”, October 26, 2011, http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/26/10451/national-ocean-policy-a-path-to-americas-ocean-future/A June 2011 report by the nonpartisan Joint Ocean Commission, comprised of members of both the Pew and U.S. Ocean Commissions, expressed strong ongoing support for comprehensive ocean planning and the National Ocean Policy, stating, “the current sector-by-sector management system is incapable of providing the integrated, comprehensive, and flexible approach needed to ensure that conflicts among proposed uses are minimized and potential benefits enhanced.”¶ In fact, strategic planning maximizes organizational efficiency and use of taxpayer dollars. Contrary to the false depiction of the National Ocean Policy as excessive government regulation, it will bring all interested parties to the table before key management decisions are made. This will improve opportunities for industry, communities, nongovernmental organizations, and citizens to participate in the planning process and facilitate sustainable economic growth by providing transparency and predictability for economic investments . The alternative is allowing developers of individual projects to drive the regulatory process without adequate guidance from regulators or input from alternate stakeholders, a process that has been shown to lead to a seemingly endless string of lawsuits, political quagmires, and a poisonous investment climate.¶ There is no better example of the inefficiencies inherent in the piecemeal system than the offshore wind industry. Offshore wind is a viable and rapidly growing piece of the energy picture in other parts of the world. Today European countries have installed nearly 3,000 megawatts of offshore wind facilities, and Europe and China combined have permitted more than 40,000 megawatts of wind turbines in their oceans. The United States has permitted exactly 488 megawatts, and we have yet to break ground on our first turbine.

NOP solves – allows effective coordinationMoore 12 – Ceo of Deepwater Wind, (Will Moore, “National Ocean Policy makes smart business sense”, May 07, 2012, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-a-environment/225779-national-ocean-policy-makes-smart-business-senseIf we don’t implement the National Ocean Policy, it is likely to cause delays in the development of offshore renewable energy, limiting the ability to hire new workers.¶ ¶ Deepwater Wind has already participated in creation of the Rhode Island Ocean Special Area Management Plan (OSAMP), a planning process akin to that outlined in the National Ocean Policy. Our experience is that the plan greatly increased certainty for our business and expedited our ability to move forward. ¶ Deepwater Wind’s Block Island Wind Farm is located in a renewable energy area identified through the OSAMP process. That planning – a result of a rigorous data collection and stakeholder engagement effort by Rhode Island’s coastal zone management agency – has greatly advanced the siting and approval process for what we believe will be a path breaking offshore project. ¶ ¶ In fact, the Block Island Wind Farm’s permit applications and other approvals are pending; we have an agreement with Siemens for their latest offshore wind turbine technology; and we are

planning to start construction next year. This tremendous progress in building America’s first deep water offshore wind farm was made possible because of the data that was collected and the stakeholders that were engaged during the OSAMP process.¶ ¶ So for those of us with businesses and livelihoods that rely on the ocean, the benefits of the National Ocean Policy are clear.¶ ¶ The demand for ocean resources is growing by the day. Renewable energy, commercial and recreational fisheries and maritime industries, among others, are

all interested in the same waters. Many times these areas intersect, and conflict between uses could result without sensible planning.¶ ¶ Fortunately, the National Ocean Policy is about minimizing those issues by coordinating existing activities and services, and in turn, reducing redundancy. Many elements of the policy, such as mapping and data collection – programs already in place and used on a daily basis by many businesses – provide the opportunity to reduce conflicts and improve regulatory timelines, meaning more predictability. Comprehensive ocean planning makes smart business sense.¶ ¶ Recently, the benefits of regional stakeholder engagement on ocean development could be seen in Rhode Island and Massachusetts. In February, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management determined Wind Energy Areas off the states’ coast.¶ ¶ After extensive input, the locations excluded sections deemed important fishing areas for the region. This accommodation was important because our planned 900-megawatt Deepwater Wind Energy Center will be located in these waters, supplying power to New England and Long Island. Cooperation with important stakeholders like the fishing industry only helps

our chances of success. Efforts like this show that industries can co-exist in the same waters, but only if the sufficient coordination is in place. The National Ocean Policy provides that service. ¶ ¶ One of the National Ocean Policy Draft Implementation

Plan’s objectives is to use the best available science and knowledge to inform decisions affecting our ocean, coasts and the Great Lakes. But if the policy’s implementation is blocked, and these services are negatively affected, how are companies supposed to make educated investments without the latest data and maps on ocean resources?¶ ¶ Another key tenet of the National Ocean Policy is providing weather and ocean data for coastal and offshore renewable energy development. But if implementation is prohibited, would that affect

access to this key information? ¶ ¶ The United States has a lot of catching up to do when it comes to offshore renewable energy. However, with several plans for wind farms underway, we are on the brink of providing jobs to thousands of Americans and a secure energy source to even more.¶ ¶ The National

Ocean Policy is about securing current and future jobs for everyone who depends on the ocean for their livelihood.

2NC NOP Solves Coral Reefs

Implementing the NOP addresses climate change and solves Al Jazeera 14 - “Kerry: Global strategy needed to protect oceans”, June 16, 2014, http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/16/obama-kerry-oceans.html

Coral reefs are among the planetary systems that, if pushed beyond their limit, could trigger a chain reaction of abrupt climate consequences, according to a March report by the American Association for the Advancement of Scientists. Other systems that could cause such global disruption include large-scale ice sheet melting, the collapse of the Gulf Stream and destruction of the Amazon rain forest.¶ Once started, those chain reactions become unstoppable even if humans do not add any more CO2 into the atmosphere, the scientists warned.¶ Only 2 percent of the world’s oceans are protected areas that limit human activity and protect marine life, and countries should strive to raise that to 10 percent, Kerry said on Monday, adding that any global effort to protect the ocean should include ways to enforce those policies on a global scale.¶ Joining Kerry was Kiribati President Anote Tong, who said the small Pacific nation would ban commercial fishing from its Phoenix Islands Protected Area by Jan. 1.¶ The low-lying state, like many other Pacific island nations, is highly vulnerable to rising sea levels, one of the most severe effects of climate change. Most of Kiribati’s land is less than 80 inches above sea level.¶ He called climate change “the greatest moral challenge of our time” and said that “our hope of addressing climate change lies in the oceans.”¶ “This is about the survival of our people,” Tong said. “This is not about economics, not anymore. It is now about what we must do as responsible global citizens.”NOP solves for corals and environmental degradation Lewis 14 - Digital News Producer, (Renee Lewis, “Obama announces creation of world's largest marine reserve”, June 17, 2014, http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/17/obama-oceans-protections.html“I think today’s announcement is a success, but when you put it in context, it builds off of five and a half years of solid efforts by the president to keep moving forward on ocean issues,” said Emily Woglom, vice president for conservation policy and programs at the Ocean Conservancy. “It’s clear that Obama is turning towards his legacy.”¶ Earlier in his presidency, Obama had created a National Ocean Policy by executive order on July 19, 2010. The policy created a council of 27 federal agencies and departments, in an attempt to better cooperate, share information and streamline decision making.¶ That order aimed to better manage ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources, to develop and disseminate scientific information to various stakeholders, to share data about severe storms and sea level rise and to restore important habitats.¶ Unspoiled coral reefs¶ In Tuesday’s

orders, the president also directed the government to create a program to deter illegal fishing and seafood fraud , as an estimated 20 percent of wild marine fish caught each year are part of the black market.¶ “Because our seafood travels through an increasingly long, complex and nontransparent supply chain, there are numerous opportunities for seafood fraud to occur and illegally caught fish to enter the U.S. market,” said Beth Lowell, campaign director at the ocean conservation group Oceana.¶ Anote Tong, president of Kiribati, a small Pacific island nation, spoke at the Our Ocean event and announced Monday that it would ban all commercial fishing in its own marine park, the size of California. The ban will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2015.¶ “We will also close the area around the southern Line Islands to commercial fishing to allow the area to recover,” Tong said. The area around Kiribati is home to some of the most unspoiled coral reef archipelagos in the Pacific.¶ “Diving in the southern Line Islands is like getting in a time machine and traveling back to the reefs of the past,” National Geographic explorer-in-residence Enric Sala said.¶ Obama also announced new measures to protect coastal communities that are vulnerable to climate change. He added that $102 million in grants would be offered to restore floodplains and natural barriers along the Atlantic coast.¶ The measures will be carried out by executive order, so they will not require congressional approval. ¶ Ocean acidification, also the result of global-warming-causing carbon emissions, was another item on the president’s agenda . He said funding would be offered for research into how the ocean’s changing chemistry is affecting marine life.¶ In an effort to curb climate change and ocean acidification, Obama announced last month new measures to cut carbon emissions — targeting a 30 percent reduction from the country’s power plants.¶ “This process is to identify and build support to protect special areas of the ocean — today is just the beginning,” Woglom said. “This conference is an opportunity to take this energy and high-level attention and make sure that Obama follows through in the next two and a half years to advance this as much as we can

2NC NOP Solves Fishing Industry

NOP is necessary to a stable fishing industry McMurray 12 – president of One More Cast Charters, (John McMurray, “National ocean policy protects ocean health and benefit fishermen”, April 24, 2012, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-a-environment/223325-national-ocean-policy-protects-ocean-health-and-benefit-fishermenRecreational and commercial fishermen would indeed benefit from the National Ocean Policy. It would help us address all the factors that stand to jeopardize fish populations, from habitat destruction to water pollution. While ocean-use conflicts between industries like fishing and energy development continue to increase, the NOP will help us manage these conflicts by planning ahead to help keep, for example, energy plants off prime fishing grounds and unique habitat, so that all sectors can coexist. In fact, a recent Massachusetts case study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that planning ahead for ocean industry could generate more than $10 billion for the energy sector and prevent more than $1 million in losses to the fishery and whale watching sectors, compared to the status quo. Relying on partisan politics and fear mongering, some members of Congress have repeatedly forecast economic disaster and demolished livelihoods for fishermen as a result of the National Ocean Policy. The current claims that fishing will be banned or even substantially restricted under the National Ocean Policy link back to a wildly inaccurate rumor circulated in 2010 by an ESPN writer, of all sources. Even ESPN has since admitted that the rumor was false and characterized the article that kicked off the insanity as an opinion piece. Why in the world our representatives continue to fuel national panic about this common sense policy is beyond me.¶ Let’s be clear. Comprehensive ocean planning isn’t a new idea, and it shouldn’t be a partisan issue. The idea of a National Ocean Policy was proposed by a 2004 commission, appointed by President George W. Bush. Fishermen have been involved in NOP discussions for years, with hundreds of recreational and commercial fishermen, and the organized sportfishing lobbies, issuing comments on the policy. ¶ With the explosion of interest and money in offshore energy, such an Ocean Policy is simply a necessity if fishermen want to maintain access to historical fishing grounds . Fishermen have perhaps the most to lose if a minority in Congress succeed in defunding it. A healthy fishing industry depends on a National Ocean Policy. It will help us maintain access to historic fishing grounds, and address all those factors that harm commercial and recreational fishing, like habitat loss, coastal pollution and invasive species. Any attempts to defund or delay implementation of the National Ocean Policy are a dangerous political move that puts the health of our oceans, coastal communities, jobs and fishing industry at risk.

NOP is actually good for the fishing industry Chasis 12 - Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “The National Ocean Policy Will Help Fishermen”, 3/23/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/the-national-ocean-policy_b_1373145.htmlThis week the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs held a hearing entitled “Empty Hooks: The National Ocean Policy is the Latest Threat to Access for Recreational and Commercial Fishermen.” Unfortunately, the title of this hearing is highly misleading. The National Ocean Policy will help fishermen by ensuring important fishing grounds are protected from pollution and habitat destruction, making fishing a viable livelihood today and into the future. ¶ Shortly before the National Ocean Policy was established, a firestorm broke out when a columnist for ESPN.com spread the unfounded rumor that the policy would close off large swaths of the ocean to fishing. Almost immediately, columnists from around the country proclaimed that President Obama was trying to ban fishing, except the rumor was false. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association issued a response stating in no uncertain terms “The Ocean Policy Task Force has not recommended a ban on recreational fishing.” ESPN, after severe criticism from other outdoor columnists, ran a clarification that it was an opinion piece.¶ The truth is the National Ocean Policy will be GOOD for fishing. Agencies are tasked with helping preserve and restore important fish habitat, not to ban or curtail recreational fishing. Comprehensive ocean planning helps us address various stressors on fish populations – from habitat loss to pollution – in a comprehensive manner and puts fishermen at the table so that their voice is heard at the start of the planning process. ¶ The National Ocean Policy is a landmark policy that calls on us to evaluate all of the uses of the ocean –fishing, tourism, industry, military, energy – and identify how to manage these uses more sustainably. Instead of the current first-come, first-served approach to using our ocean waters, it calls for the development of regional ocean plans that would benefit us all.

2NC NOP Solves Overfishing

NOP bolsters shellfish aquacultureHaeck 14 - KIRO Radio Reporter, (Tim Haeck), “Obama oceans plan could boost state shellfish industry”, June 19, 2014, http://mynorthwest.com/11/2547824/Obama-oceans-plan-could-boost-state-shellfish-industry

President Obama's plan, announced this week, to protect U.S. oceans and coastal areas, could provide a big boost to farming in Washington. Seafood farming, that is.¶ The President, on Tuesday, declared the oceans are at risk from multiple threats. "Rising levels of carbon-dioxide are causing our oceans to acidify, pollution endangers sea life." So he announced his N ational Ocean Policy, which includes strategies to bolster the shellfish aquaculture . Around the Northwest, that includes the farming of fish, mussels, geoducks, clams and oysters.¶ One goal is to encourage shellfish farming and cut into a huge seafood trade deficit, estimated at $8-10 billion.¶ "I think it can be done," said Margaret Barrette, with the Pacific Coast Shellfish Growers Association. Her organization represents 120 members large and small, mostly in Washington. "It will take some time and it will take a multifaceted approach, getting people to aim for fish that's wild here naturally, in the states versus going for a cheaper alternative from overseas."¶ Washington has about 300 shellfish farms but Barrette said a new farm has not opened in the last seven years.¶ "That's because the permitting process is a bit cumbersome and has been gummed up," said Barrette. "One of the things that President Obama's announcement calls out for is actually looking at improving the permitting process, removing barriers in this process and encouraging shellfish farming to work toward [reducing] this seafood deficit."

NOP prevents overfishing Barclay 14 - contributing writer to the GSN magazine, (Lorrie Barclay, “White House details plan to protect Pacific waters”, 6-20-14, http://www.gsnmagazine.com/article/41524/white_house_details_plan_protect_marine_waters_pac

“If we ignore these problems, if we drain our oceans of their resources, we won’t be just squandering one of humanity’s greatest treasures, we’ll be cutting off one of the world’s major sources of food and economy growth, including for the United States,” President Obama said. “And we cannot

afford to let that happen.”¶ President Obama’s proposal includes combating black market fishing and supporting fishermen. Black market fishing drains $23 billion per year from legitimate fishing enterprises, according to the White House.¶ Environmental groups have praised the initiative. “Healthy oceans are vital, not just for the creatures who live in them, but for human populations the world over,” John Hocevar, director of Greenpeace’s oceans campaign, told Government Security News. “However, climate change, overfishing, ocean acidification, and pollution have combined to push ocean health to the brink.¶ “The sanctuary will now be the world’s biggest, and it just about doubles the entire global area of ocean under full protection,” he said. “The expansion would mean five times more underwater mountains will be protected. It will end tuna fishing in the area, as well as providing safe harbor to whales and other marine mammals, sea turtles, and sharks.”¶ The proposal does not come without controversy. “Oceans, like our federal lands, are intended to be multiple-use and open for a wide range of economic activities that includes fishing, recreation, conservation, and energy production,” said House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA). “It appears this Administration will use whatever authorities -- real or made-up -- to close our ocean and coastal areas with blatant disregard for possible economic consequences.”

2NC NOP Solves STEM

NOP key to STEM – more investment is neededMigliaccio ’14 – Migliaccio is a Legal Extern at Vermont Supreme Court and is also part of the Ocean and Coastal Law Committee is a branch of Vermont Law School’s Environmental Law Society and is a forum for students, graduates and professors to pass on information regarding internships, jobs, and advocacy opportunities with regards to ocean and coastal issues. (Emily Migliaccio , “THE NATIONAL OCEAN POLICY: CAN IT REDUCE MARINE ¶ POLLUTION AND STREAMLINE OUR OCEAN ¶ BUREAUCRACY?”, 2014, http://vjel.vermontlaw.edu/files/2014/04/Migliaccio_FORPRINT1.pdf //HK

Arguably one of the most important areas of the NOP is in the promotion and support for research and education on marine issues. The ¶ JOC gave this category a “C” because although some progress had been made, there had been “funding and program cuts, as well as delayed implementation of critical tools, weakened ocean science, research, and education.” 170 One of the greatest improvements in this area was the installation of the data portal,

ocean.data.gov, which “serves as a clearinghouse for access to non-confidential federal ocean data and planning tools.” 171 There have also been “strong regional efforts to coordinate on regional ocean and coastal research, observing, mapping, and restoration priorities.”172 However, more is needed in terms of funding and support for further education. Investments in research, science, and education on ocean and coastal issues are crucial, particularly in the context of marine pollution, because it will “produce a more informed citizenry; create better stewards of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources; and increase awareness of business opportunities related to these resources.” 173 With a greater knowledge base, people can participate in activities that address the issues facing our oceans and coasts. Furthermore, an educational system that incorporates ocean and coastal science is crucial to ensuring that the next generation of ocean scientists and engineers are sufficiently trained “to continue to lead an

innovation-based global economy.” 174 Country-wide education would also bring more awareness to the pervasive interconnectivity of land and marine pollution, and hopefully illuminate the need for efforts across the nation, rather than just on the coasts.

JOC willing to push STEMRuckelshaus and Mineta - Co-Chairs, part of the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, (William Ruckelshaus and Norman Mineta), April 29, 2014, http://www.jointoceancommission.org/documents/Joint%20Initiative%20STEM%20Letter%20to%20Senate%20CJS.pdf

The Joint Initiative is deeply alarmed by the major restructuring in the ¶ Administration’s proposal that would consolidate science, technology, ¶ engineering, and mathematics (STEM) programs, including the elimination of ¶

funding for ocean education programs in NOAA. We appreciate your ¶ thoughtful response to the STEM consolidation proposal in the FY 2014 ¶ Omnibus Appropriations report, which noted that the proposal “failed to ¶ sufficiently recognize or support a number of proven, successful programs.” ¶ We believe NOAA education programs—especially the NOAA Competitive ¶ Education Grants Program, Ocean Exploration and Research education, and ¶ Sea Grant STEM education activities including all state Sea Grant Program ¶ STEM activities—fall into this category. ¶ By eliminating key ocean education programs at NOAA, we are concerned ¶ that ocean science content may be lost in the proposed consolidation, as it is ¶ not traditionally viewed as a “core science.” In addition, removing education ¶ programs from mission-driven agencies such as NOAA will isolate scientific ¶ research and its results from ocean education efforts. The Joint Initiative also notes that the National Ocean Policy Implementation Plan identifies ¶ priority education actions and proposes to use existing, proven networks to promote ocean ¶ literacy and develop the future ocean workforce. Many of the programs underpinning this ¶ effort would be terminated if the STEM consolidation proposal is adopted. NOAA education ¶ programs are critical given the tremendous growth in careers that require ocean-related ¶ education and knowledge. A recent report by the statutorily-created Ocean Research Advisory ¶ Panel (ORAP) forecast a need for approximately one million more college graduates than ¶ currently estimated in STEM fields over the next decade. This report underscores the need for a ¶ STEM literate, and ocean literate, workforce to fill positions in commerce, energy, ¶ transportation, energy, food production, national security, recreation, and tourism.

2NC AT: Spatial Planning Kills Investment Spatial planning helps investment – streamlines complicated regulatory process – states prove.Center for American Progress 11—an independent educational, public policy research, and advocacy organization (“National Ocean Policy Ensures Economic Growth, Security, and Resilience,” Center for American Progress, 10/24, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/24/10485/national-ocean-policy-ensures-economic-growth-security-and-resilience/)//FJMarine spatial planning is already working Several states, including Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Oregon, have already implemented COP at the state level. They have taken proactive steps to identify areas most suitable for various commercial and recreational uses of ocean space, including fishing, energy development, sand and gravel mining, shipping traffic, conservation, recreation, and other activities.

These efforts ensure the relative benefits of each action are considered and prioritized to meet economic, environmental, security, and social goals. In addition to their in-state work, Rhode Island and Massachusetts cooperated on a landmark agreement for the development of offshore wind energy . Announcing the agreement, former Rhode Island governor, Republican Don Carcieri, said, "The shared waters between Rhode Island and Massachusetts hold the key to the future of offshore wind developments along the East Coast and the country. It is in the best interest for both states to work together to expedite the federal permitting process through this collaborative effort. We share mutual interests in developing offshore wind projects, bringing greater economic development activity and economic security to the region.” At the federal level, the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, has applied the principles of COP in its “Smart from the Start” initiative to streamline offshore wind permitting. Instead of waiting for developers to request permitting, this program is in the process of designating wind energy areas in federal waters in the northeast and mid-Atlantic. BOEMRE has taken input from other federal agencies and local stakeholders while designating these areas, and amended their initial proposals—reducing the size of the area proposed to be opened for development off the coast of Massachusetts by nearly 50 percent after receiving input from the fishing industry.

AFF

Competition/Theory

2AC—Perm—Do CP ---Perm-Do the Counterplan-

Reject CP’s that do the entire AFF

1. Leveraging the AFF is impossible because we would need cards in the context of their external mechanism which rigs the game for the NEG

2. Wrecks education by crowding out topic specific strategies and warping what an opportunity cost is

CP’s have to be functionally and textually competitive-key to solve bad CP’s like conditions, consult and delay.

AND--Should means desirable Oxford Dictionary 13http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/shouldverb (3rd sing. should) 1used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone’s actions: he should have been careful I think we should trust our people more you shouldn’t have gone indicating a desirable or expected state: by now pupils should be able to read with a large degree of independence used to give or ask advice or suggestions: you should go back to bed what should I wear?

1AR AT: Increase

Increase is to make greaterDictionary.com Unabridged [Based on the Random House Dictionary, Random House, Inc. 2010., "Increase," http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/increase)

in·crease   [v. in-krees; n. in-krees] Show IPA verb, -creased, -creas·ing, noun–verb (used with object)1.to make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment; add to: to increase taxes.

1AR AT: Resolved

Resolved means by voteWebster’s 1998Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, 1998 (dictionary.com)

Resolved: 5. To express, as an opinion or determination, by resolution and vote; to declare or decide by a formal vote; — followed by a clause; as, the house resolved (or, it was resolved by the house) that no money should be apropriated (or, to appropriate no money).

1AR AT: Should

“Should” is distinct from “must”- it allows exceptionsFranzel, GAO Financial Management and Assurance director, 8 (Jeanette M., US Government Accountability Office, "Exposure Draft of Proposed Changes to the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing," 3-31-2008, www.gao.gov/govaud/cl_iia080331.pdf)

The second sentence of the “must” definition used in the exposure draft instructions is more aligned with the definition of “should” as used by other standards setters,

including GAO. The definition of “should” as used by GAO , which is intended to be consistent with the definition used by the AICPA and

the PCAOB, indicates a presumptively mandatory requirement and contains the following language: “…in rare circumstances,

auditors and audit organizations may depart from a presumptively mandatory requirement provided they document their justification for the departure and how the alternative procedures performed in the circumstances were sufficient to achieve the objectives of the presumptively

mandatory requirement.” Page 3 We suggest that the IIA move the second sentence of the “must” definition to the “should” definition. The definition of “must” needs to be clear that “must” indicates an unconditional requirement and that another procedure cannot substitute for a “must.” Also, we suggest adding language to the definition of “should” to indicate that substituting another procedure for a “should” requirement is allowed only if the auditors document their justification for the departure from the “should” and how the alternative procedures performed in

the circumstances were sufficient to achieve the objectives of the “should” requirement. The IIA should review every “must” requirement in the Standards to determine whether there are acceptable alternatives to the procedure; if so, “should” is the appropriate word.

1AR AT: Substantially

Substantially” means to large extentMerriam-Webster, 2002 (Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary Tenth Edition http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary)

To a great extent or degree

Solvency/Turns

AT: NOP Helps EconNOP key to the economy Chasis 12 - Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “Attacks Threaten the Health of Our Oceans and Economy”, 5/07/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/attacks-threaten-the-health-of-our-oceans_b_1497707.htmlThe target of these attacks is the National Ocean Policy (NOP), a landmark effort to safeguard our oceans and coasts, in much the same way the Clean Water Act protects our waters and the Clean Air Act reduces pollution in our air. Recommended by two separate bipartisan commissions, the National Ocean Policy will ensure that important habitats for fish and ocean wildlife remain intact, that our beaches are clean and that renewable energy facilities are located correctly to do the most good and the least harm.¶ As part of an ongoing effort to weaken environmental protections across the board, Republicans in Congress have launched a partisan attack to defund the National Ocean Policy. Falsely labeling it as additional bureaucracy, they’ve built fear around a common-sense management system for our oceans.¶ The reality is that the National Ocean Policy will reduce waste, inefficiency and delay in our government. Currently, more than 20 agencies and 140 laws govern our oceans, each with their own agendas and conflicting mandates. Management is often done on an ad hoc basis, without considering how the actions of one industry, such as oil and gas development, will affect other activities, such as fishing, tourism and recreation.¶ The National Ocean Policy is designed to bring order to this chaos and to ensure better stewardship of our valuable ocean resources. It will require that all agencies that play a role in ocean-related work finally coordinate their efforts. By engaging federal agencies with regional, state and tribal initiatives, the National Ocean Policy will ensure that stakeholders at every level have a say in the future of our oceans.¶ With our economy still struggling to recover, this smart ocean management will help preserve and create American jobs in ocean-related industries. In 2009 alone, ocean-related tourism and recreation generated more than 1.8 million jobs and contributed more than $61 billion to the nation’s GDP. That same year, the commercial fishing industry supported more than 1 million jobs. In fact, the U.S. ocean economy is larger than the entire U.S. farm sector.

NOP solves econ - EEZConathan 11 - Michael Conathan is the Director of Ocean Policy at American Progress, (Michael Conathan) “National Ocean Policy: A Path to America’s Ocean Future”, October 26, 2011, http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/green/report/2011/10/26/10451/national-ocean-policy-a-path-to-americas-ocean-future/

America’s exclusive economic zone, the biggest in the world, presents a unique regulatory and environmental challenge but also a tremendous economic opportunity. We have seen how the policies of the past—a first-come, first-served gold rush approach—lead to chaos and delay. Lack of certainty leads to a lack of financing. A lack of financing means a lack of economic growth. And a lack of growth means a lack of jobs. Until we create and implement a process that brings all stakeholders to the table to air grievances and develop solutions, we will continue to stagger along in a series of fits, starts, and lawsuits that will leave America’s ocean industries falling farther behind our international counterparts and adversely affect our environmental resources.¶ The National Ocean Policy recognizes that now is the time for common sense and partnership, not nonsense and partisanship, as we determine how to manage our invaluable oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes. Support for the National Ocean Policy is support for the future of America’s maritime industries and our marine environment.

NOP Bad – No one funding

Congress prevents fundingPCFFA 13 – Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, “The Advocate for the Independent Fisherman”, http://www.pcffa.org/FN0613_PCFFA.pdf

Another troubling part of the Implementation Plan and its schedule is lack of any discussion of how all of this is to be paid for. We’re not arguing against the Plan because of money, but there needs to be an honest discussion about where the funding is going to come from, other than just CWA 319 grants. True, some things such as coordination between states (e.g., the West Coast Governors’ Agreement on Ocean Health) are not costing the federal government anything, and some of the actions don’t have any substantive federal cost associated with them or are paid for from other sources, but a lot of new money will also be needed. Both of the ocean commission reports called for the establishment of an Ocean Trust Fund to financially support oceans conservation work. That concept is not to be found in this document, yet it needs discussion if we’re serious about protecting our oceans and the economies, such as fishing, that depend on ocean resources, In fact, the document fails to even mention in its discussion of ports that Congress is refusing to turn over monies from the existing harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (funded from a fee on goods coming into US ports) back to local ports for such things as

maintenance dredging. This is particularly critical at this time for smaller, coastal fishing harbors, where we’re about to lease the economic activity and jobs these ports create.

Polls agree that warming isn’t anthropogenic and real – no one caresCaruba 14 - Initially a fulltime journalist, Caruba is a veteran public relations counselor who is often asked by members of the news media to comment on news involving PR issues. A longtime member of the Society of Professional Journalists, the American Society of Journalists and Authors, and the National Association of Science Writers, (Alan Caruba, “International climate skeptics gather in Las Vegas”, July 6, 2014, http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/caruba/140706In June a Pew Research Center poll announced that 35% of Americans say there is not enough solid evidence to suggest mankind is warming the Earth while another 18% says the world has warmed due to "natural patterns" and not human activity. That's a total of 53% who disagree with the lies about climate change being told by President Obama and a host of politicians and scientists who have received millions to maintain the hoax. The poll also noted that 40% of Americans still believe that mankind is causing the planet to warm. They likely represent the cohort that has graduated from American schools whose curriculum has taught the Al Gore version of science.¶ Among the participants in Heartland's 9th conference are Habibulio Abdussamatov, a Russian astrophysicist; Sonya Boehmer-Christiansen, a research analyst from Great Britain; Fred Goldberg, an associated professor at the Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden; Madhav Khandekar, a research analyst from Environment Canada; William Kinimonth who worked with the Australian Bureau of Meteorology for 38 years; and Lord Christopher Monckton, Viscount of Brenchley, a chief policy advisor to the Science and Public Policy Institute. They will be joined by American

scientists, longtime skeptics of the hoax, often called "deniers" by those advocating it.¶ It is doubtful that the U.S. media will give much, if any, news coverage of the conference, but the eight previous conferences have done much to debunk and dispel the deluge of lies about the Earth's climate.¶ Leading Heartland has been its president, Joseph Bast, who asks "How can there be a 'scientific consensus' on the causes or consequences of climate change when thousands of scientists, economists, and policy experts attend conferences devoted to expressing the opposite theme, that the science is still unsettled and climate change is not a crisis?" In May Bast was joined by research scientist, Roy Spencer, in a Wall Street Journal commentary that debunked the lie that 97% of scientists support climate change, noting that "surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus."

NOP Bad – Links to Politics

Public opposes NOP – fishing groupsEilperin 14- Juliet Eilperin joined The Washington Post as the House of Representatives reporter, where she covered the impeachment of Bill Clinton, lobbying, legislation, and four national congressional campaigns. Since April of 2004 she has covered the environment for the national desk, reporting on science, policy and politics in areas including climate change, oceans, and air quality (Juliet Eilperin, “Fishing groups criticize Obama’s Pacific plan”, July 2, 2014, http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20140702/NEWS03/140709875

WASHINGTON – When President Barack Obama announced two weeks ago that he intended to expand federal protections around seven islands and atolls in the central Pacific Ocean, many environmentalists hailed the move as an important step for conservation.¶ But the main group overseeing fishing operators in Hawaii and three U.S. territories declared Monday that it opposes the proposal, on the grounds that it would hurt the U.S. fishing industry.¶ The Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council - composed of fishing industry representatives as well as some state and federal officials - helps establish fishing policy for both commercial and recreational operators in Hawaii as well as the territories of American Samoa and Guam, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. In a statement Monday afternoon, members of the quasi-governmental agency said they would oppose any additional limits on commercial fishing in the area.¶ President George W. Bush used his executive authority to establish the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument, which now encompasses almost 87,000 square miles, in 2009. Obama is now contemplating widening those boundaries to cover nearly 782,000 square miles of federal waters, which would be off-limits to fishing, energy exploration and other activities. The designation now extends 50 miles out from shore; it could be extended as far out as 200 miles.¶ The statement argues that the move would deprive fishing operators of an important resource. “U.S. fishermen, including those in the Pacific, already abide by the strictest fishing regulations in the world, and this plan further inhibits their economic survival,” they wrote, adding it would yield “few, if any, ecological benefits from the restrictions.”¶ But Marine Conservation Institute founder and chief scientist Elliott Norse, who has lobbied for the expansion, challenged the council members’ assertion that “there is no scientific evidence indicating that the U.S. purse seine and longline fishing vessels operating in the offshore waters” outside the current monument “are impacting seabird populations.”¶ “Fishing for tunas mean there are fewer tunas,” Norse said in an interview, adding that the millions of seabirds that nest and forage in the area depend on the area’s tuna population. “We would like there to be more tunas in this ecosystem because they play an important role in that ecosystem.”

Commissions still causes political backlash Brookings Fiscal Seminar 9 – The Brookings Institution Fiscal Seminar, group of scholars who meet on a regular basis, under the auspices of The Brookings Institution and The Heritage Foundation, June 2009, “The Potential Role of Entitlement or Budget Commissions in Addressing Long-Term Budget Problems,” online: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2009/06_commissions_sawhill/06_commissions_sawhill.pdf

Political. In some cases, reliance on the recommendations of commissions may have ¶ political ramifications as well. There are some instances where the recommendations of a ¶ commission have the effect of limiting debate in the Congress. (Indeed, that may be the ¶ intent.) For example, the Greenspan Commission’s set of recommendations was ¶ approved in part because proponents made a persuasive argument that the package was of ¶ a take-it-or-leave-it form. That is, to change or substitute a different proposal for one of those recommended by the commission could lead to the collapse of a delicately balanced ¶ compromise. Similarly, because amending the package was considered dangerous to the ¶ passage of a legislative response to the looming Social Security insolvency, even the ¶ debate on the merits of the package and its components was largely muted. ¶ ¶ The use of commissions can also be seen as a means of taking an issue outside of the ¶ political arena where unelected nonpartisan experts can be free to produce ¶ recommendations or findings based upon sound and reasoned analysis rather than ¶ partisan gains. More technical issues increase the desirability that a panel be comprised ¶ of unelected experts rather than elected representatives.2

NOP Bad – FisheriesNOP destroys fisheriesWinn 11 - Pete Winn joined CNSNews.com in October of 2007 and has reported on key legal, cultural, political, scientific and religious topics at the national level for online, magazine, radio/TV and print publications. His work has been quoted by, or appeared in, The Washington Times, ABC News, AP, UPI, MSNBC and The New York Times, (Pete Winn, “Fishermen to Congress: Please Scuttle Obama’s National Oceans Policy”, http://cnsnews.com/news/article/fishermen-congress-please-scuttle-obama-s-national-oceans-policy(CNSNews.com) – The nation’s commercial fishermen say the Obama administration is trying to impose top-down bureaucratic regulation on the use of the oceans and the nation’s fisheries, which they say will put fishing jobs at stake.¶ A group calling itself the Seafood Coalition is calling on Congress to do what it can to scuttle President Obama’s National Ocean Policy National Ocean Policy, which the president unilaterally imposed by executive order in 2010.¶ In a letter to the House Natural Resources Committee, the Seafood Coalition said that the president’s plan adds a needless level of top-down bureaucracy and regulation on fisheries.¶ “The National Ocean Policy creates a federal ocean zoning regime that will likely result in substantial new regulations and restrictions on ocean users,” Nils Stolpe, spokesman for the Seafood Coalition, told CNSNews.com on Monday.¶ The coalition says it is also concerned that the administration is going to take money away from programs that are currently working well to pay for the new layer of bureaucracy.¶ “What we’ve asked for in our letter to the chairman was for Congress to use whatever funding capacity they have to stop this,” Stolpe said. The Seafood Coalition describes itself as a “broad national coalition of commercial fishing interests, seafood processors, and coastal communities” that includes members from every region of the U.S. and “accounts for about 85 percent of the fish and shellfish products landed annually in the U.S.”¶ In July of 2010, President Obama signed the order establishing a National Policy for the Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes.¶ The order directs all federal agencies to implement the Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, which was created by White House Council on Environmental Quality.¶ The National Ocean Policy identifies nine objectives and outlines a “flexible framework” for how bureaucrats will “effectively address conservation, economic activity, user conflict, and sustainable use of the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes.”¶ One of the key objectives is called “coastal and marine spatial planning (CMSP)” -- which the executive order defines as “a comprehensive, adaptive, integrated, ecosystem-based, and transparent spatial planning process, based on sound science, for analyzing current and anticipated uses of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes areas.”¶ It added: “In practical terms, coastal and marine spatial planning provides a public policy process for society to better determine how the ocean, our coasts, and Great Lakes are sustainably used and protected -- now and for future generations.”¶ But Stolpe and the Seafood Coalition said CMSP essentially means the imposition of top-down federal planning boards to govern ocean use.¶ “It establishes a number of regional boards that in essence are in charge of what goes on in the oceans of those particular regions -- from a fishing perspective, from an energy development perspective, from a transportation perspective, from a recreational use perspective,” Stolpe said.

NOP Bad – BiodiversityNOP doesn’t allow for effective management of the oceans – existing domestic laws crumblingBiron 13 - Carey L. Biron for IPS, part of the Guardian Environment Networktheguardian.com, (Carey Biron, “US has failed to protect marine life, say conservationists”, July 9th 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/09/us-failed-protect-marine-life“The Obama administration has put more focus on creating a comprehensive framework for managing our oceans,” Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director for the Center for Biological Diversity, an advocacy group, told IPS.¶ “That said, one of the pieces that fell short was using powerful existing laws to protect the oceans, and the Endangered Species Act is an example of legislation that was probably underutilised in the National Oceans Plan.”¶ Taking advantage of a provision within the Endangered Species Act that allows for science-based petitions from the public, the WildEarth Guardians request builds upon the assessments of two international wildlife observer groups, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a 1973 global agreement.¶ All 81 species included in the new petition have been deemed endangered or critically endangered by the IUCN and CITES. As such, environmentalists see the new petition as a way to test U.S. regulators’ seriousness following President Obama’s 2010 order.¶ “If [the government] won’t take action in situations as dire as those faced by these critically imperilled species,” Jay Tutchton, WildEarth Guardians’ general counsel, said Monday, “it signals the agency doesn’t really want to do anything but talk about declining ocean health.”¶ Importantly, the Endangered Species Act allows the U.S. government to offer protections to species not living within the country’s territory. Doing so can assist in, for instance, cutting down on U.S. demand for certain wildlife products and making available funding for overseas management activities.¶ “There is certainly increased awareness of the significance of the threats to marine health and ocean ecosystems, but we’ve repeatedly seen action at the international level become stymied by politics,” Bethany Cotton says.¶ “Just as the most politically volatile such discussions on terrestrial animals revolve around elephants, because of the money involved in the ivory trade, this is also true of the coral used in jewellery and the sharks killed for the lucrative fin trade. That’s why it’s particularly important that the United States, which has supported protection efforts on sharks and coral at the international level, to do whatever it can under domestic laws to protect those species.”

NOP Bad – Energy

Loss of offshore development causes destruction of the industry Whatley 12 - Michael Whatley is the executive vice president of Consumer Energy Alliance in Washington D.C., (Michael Whatley, “Proposed National Ocean Policy is Bad Politics and Worse Policy”, October 01, 2012, http://www.rigzone.com/news/oil_gas/a/121063/Proposed_National_Ocean_Policy_is_Bad_Politics_and_Worse_Policy#sthash.u4GWHdVL.dpufWhile the Administration claims the plan won't block additional offshore development, it is difficult to reach that conclusion when details of the plan are loosely defined. Representatives from the U.S. House Natural Resources

Committee have repeatedly requested additional information on the plan. The requests have gone unanswered. No doubt House members are wondering what potential impacts the new plan may have on offshore development in light of prior restrictive actions in the Gulf and other offshore areas.¶ Considering the National Ocean Council last summer proposed to "reduce the impacts of stressors over which we have more direct control," such as "resource extraction," in reference to addressing climate change issues, it would appear the apprehensions of the Committee members are well placed.¶ Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has already reversed previous plans for expanded offshore development,

citing the National Ocean Policy Executive Order in part as justification. This means one office of Administration is justifying its actions based on another office that no one knows anything about. This didn't sit well with groups like the Outer Continental Shelf Governors Coalition, which recently sent a letter to the President saying they are "concerned about the lack of communication from the federal government on critical matters that affect our coastal development."¶

Advocates for the policy say they only wish to create a framework for enforcing current offshore regulations. But this is a tough argument to swallow, considering the foundational document for the policy states that the initiative will "require clear and easily understood requirements and regulations, where appropriate, that include enforcement as a critical component." One thing is certain: development of the nation's offshore resources holds great promise for our economy. In spite of these recent roadblocks, offshore oil and gas activities were responsible for contributing roughly $121 billion in economic output last year. Future potential is even greater, with reports estimating that total government revenues derived from offshore production could reach $2.6 trillion.¶ With anemic economic growth in other industries, mulishly high unemployment, and an election looming, Interior and the broader Administration should transparently move to free up the industry and allow expanded production of our offshore resources. Their reluctance to do so speaks volumes about the Administration's feelings towards a proven offshore resource base.¶ We know offshore production can create jobs and economic growth in areas hit by overly cautious government intervention. Studies have shown that just returning to historical production levels in the Gulf of Mexico could provide between 110,000 to 230,000 jobs, with larger offshore development having the potential to create

over 1 million jobs. Our offshore resources present the Administration with the ability to practice smart politics and sound economic policy. The National Ocean Policy fails the President, and the American people on both counts.

NOP Bad – Economy

NOP hurts the economy – uncertainty causes loss of investors Hastings 13 - Chairman, U.S. House Natural Resources Committee (Doc Hastings, “National Ocean Policy Creates More Red Tape, Hurts Economy”, 2013, http://sea-technology.com/features/2013/0113/national_ocean_policy.php

The oceans are an integral part of the U.S. economy, supporting millions of jobs throughout the country. It is important to protect and properly manage the oceans through a balanced, multiuse approach that recognizes the need for both environmental stewardship and responsible use of resources. Unfortunately, President Barack Obama has imposed new regulations that counter this balanced approached to ocean management. ¶ The administration’s National Ocean Policy creates a massive new federal bureaucracy with unprecedented control over our oceans, Great Lakes, rivers and watersheds that could negatively impact nearly every sector of the U.S. economy in significant ways. ¶ Additional Bureaucracy¶ President Obama enacted the National Ocean Policy by issuing an executive order, meaning this drastic change in ocean management was done without Congressional authorization. To date, no bill has passed the U.S. House of Representatives to implement similar far-reaching ocean policies. ¶ The executive order creates a web of bureaucracy that includes dozens of new policies, councils, committees, planning bodies, priority objectives, action plans, national goals and guiding principles. Rather than streamline federal management, the president’s initiative will instead add layers of new red tape and create a top-down approach. ¶ For example, federally-controlled regional planning bodies will be tasked with creating zoning plans for each region without input or representation from local stakeholders or affected industries. All relevant federal agencies, states and regulated communities will be bound by the plans, which will be used to make decisions on regional permitting activities. ¶ Job and Economic Impacts¶ Although marketed as a common-sense plan to develop and protect our oceans, the National Ocean Policy will inflict economic harm and uncertainty on America’s job creators. Imposing mandatory ocean zoning could place huge portions of our oceans and coasts off-limits, curtailing energy development, commercial fishing and recreational activities. ¶ The reach of the policy goes beyond the oceans. It gives the regional planning bodies authority to regulate as far inland as necessary. This could impact all activities occurring on lands adjacent to rivers, tributaries or watersheds that drain into the ocean. ¶ A multitude of industries could be affected, including agriculture, fishing, construction, manufacturing, mining, oil and natural gas, and renewable energy. These industries support tens of millions of jobs and contribute trillions of dollars to the U.S. economy. ¶ The policy also involves vague and undefined objectives that would create uncertainty for businesses and job creators, and open the floodgates for litigation. According to testimony received by the House Natural Resources Committee, this uncertainty will likely increase costs to private landowners and businesses, cause companies to cut back on investment and job creation, and limit American energy production both on- and offshore. ¶ It is also unclear how much this initiative will cost taxpayers, how it is being funded and if it will take money away from existing agency budgets at a time when budgets are already being cut.

NOP hurts the economy – regional fisheries Hastings 13 - Chairman, U.S. House Natural Resources Committee (Doc Hastings, “Obama's national ocean policy threatens jobs and economic activities onshore and off”, 2013, http://sea-technology.com/features/2013/0113/national_ocean_policy.php

President Obama is using the ocean as his latest regulatory weapon to impose new bureaucratic restrictions on nearly every sector of our economy. While marketed as a common sense plan for the development and protection of our oceans, it is instead being used to create a massive new bureaucracy that would harm our economy.¶ Established through Executive Order, Mr. Obama with a simple stroke of a pen took unilateral action to impose a massive top-down federal bureaucracy with broad regulatory control over our oceans, Great Lakes, rivers, tributaries and watersheds.¶ The Executive Order creates a tangled web of regulatory layers that includes: 10 National Policies; a 27-member National Ocean Council; an 18-member Governance Coordinating Committee; and 9 Regional Planning Bodies. This has led to an additional: 9 National Priority Objectives; 9 Strategic Action Plans; 7 National Goals for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning; and 12 Guiding Principles for Coastal Marine Spatial Planning.¶ Imposing mandatory ocean zoning could place huge portions of our oceans and coasts off-limits, seriously curtailing recreational activities, commercial

fishing, and all types of energy development – including renewable energy such as offshore wind farms.¶ What’s even more alarming is that the impact of this Executive Order is not limited to just our oceans. It establishes regional planning bodies with the authority to regulate as far inland as necessary. All rivers eventually drain into the ocean, which gives this policy the justification it needs to reach far inland.¶ For example, the Gulf of Mexico Regional Planning Body will make decisions to regulate activities throughout the entire Mississippi River watershed if those activities have the potential to affect the Gulf of Mexico. This means a policy billed as protecting our oceans will have the ability to regulate inland activities that occur as far north as Minnesota. If farmers and ranchers thought having the EPA in their backyard was bad, wait until the National Ocean Council comes sailing upstream for a visit too.¶ The American Farm Bureau Federation has raised serious concerns, stating that “it could extend to the regulation of every farm and ranch in the United States.”¶ To make matters worse, taxpayers will be stuck with the considerable financial costs of implementing this Executive Order and the vague and undefined objectives will no doubt be used as fuel for costly frivolous lawsuits to stop or delay federally-permitted activities. Adding to these costs is the lost economic activity and stifled job creation that will result from new restrictions and regulatory uncertainly brought on by the policy.¶ Over the past year, the Natural Resources Committee has held multiple oversight hearings to investigate the policy, its implementation and potential impacts. However, the Obama administration has refused to answer important questions. That’s why I recently supported bipartisan efforts in the House to pause funding for this policy until the true job and economic impacts are known. This pause in funding was supported by over 80 organizations, including the US Chamber of Commerce, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Association of Homebuilders, American Forest & Paper Association, and the National Fisheries Institute.¶ Millions of Americans depend on the ocean for their livelihoods and there needs to be a balanced, multi-use policy that recognizes both the importance of environmental stewardship and the responsible use of our oceans. ¶ Executive Branch agencies with jurisdiction over our ocean policy can, and should, work in a more coordinated manner, to share information, and reduce duplication of their work. This would save money and could be supported by all. Unfortunately, President Obama’s Executive Order pushes far beyond this common ground and uses the ocean as a regulatory tool to limit job-creating activities on both land and sea.

NOP expands safe zones, which prevents getting resources IBT 14 – International Business Times, “US Fishing Group Say World's Largest Marine Sanctuary Won't Help Conservation”, July 03, 2014, http://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/us-fishing-group-say-world's-largest-marine-sanctuary-won't-help-conservation-292926“The NGOs push the president to make these monuments, then the NGOs leave, and the local government and the federal government are held to try to live up to the promises,” Sylvia Spalding, spokeswoman for the council, said.

“But without the resources, we can’t.”¶ The extended Pacific Remote Islands Marine Sanctuary would be the world’s largest, covering

seven islands across nearly 782,000 square miles of federal waters and prohibiting energy exploration, fishing and other activities. The current sanctuary zone extends 50 miles around each island’s coast, protecting marine life like coral reefs . The extension, which is not specified yet, could cover up to 200 more miles, areas Spalding says contain only open-ocean, highly migratory fish like tuna.¶

“They’re penalizing the U.S. fishermen even after the president recognized that through our management system we have reduced illegal fishing,” she said.¶ Fish caught in the area account for about 3 percent of the yearly U.S. tuna supply from the western and central Pacific, according to The Pew Charitable Trusts.¶ According to the Marine Conservation Institute, which supports the sanctuary’s expansion, tuna fishermen in the area can obtain 95 percent of their catch from regions outside the waters being considered for protection. But the Council also argues that some illegal foreign boats will try to fish in the zone anyway, and banning U.S. fishing vessels in the area will only worsen monitoring.¶

“The U.S. fishing fleet are the eyes and ears for the Coast Guard,” Eric Kingma, National Environmental Policy Act

coordinator for the Council, said. “When they see illegal foreign vessels they call the Coast Guard and they let them know. If we close off those areas to fishing, the Coast Guard is losing resources to monitor those waters .”¶ In January 2009, then-president George W. Bush established a national monument cointaining the Marianas Trench, 14 islands near Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CMNI), west of Hawaii and just beyond the eastern limit of the Philippines’ waters. More than five years after the proclamation, the U.S. and CMNI governments are still working on a co-management plan for the monument, and there’s no specific timeline when the deal must be finalized.¶ “They can’t even take care of the monuments they’ve already developed,” Spalding said.

NOP Bad – Alt cause

NOP still can’t solve – obstructionist politics Chasis 12 – Chasis is a director and part of NRDC's ocean initiative, (Sarah Chasis, “New Report Shows Obstructionist Politics Harming Ocean Management”, 6/07/2012, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-chasis/ocean-management-politics_b_1575222.htmlThis week in our nation’s capital, ocean leaders, advocates and businesses, along with ocean champions in Congress, are taking a closer look at the future of our oceans, as part of Capitol Hill Oceans Week. Thanks to a report released today by the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, identifying some of our oceans’ greatest challenges might be easier than expected for our representatives. To see much of what’s harming the health of our ocean resources, coastal economies, and communities, some leaders in Congress simply need to look in the mirror. Back in 2010, President Obama announced the creation of the National Ocean Policy (NOP), a landmark effort to safeguard our oceans and coasts, and the jobs and communities that depend on them. For the first time ever, the 20 federal agencies that govern our oceans are now working together, rather than in conflict, to manage our marine resources and activities. This common-sense principle has such clear rewards that it was recommended by two separate bipartisan commissions during George W. Bush’s presidency. ¶ The latest report from the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative (JOCI) shows how far we’ve come in just two years under the National Ocean Policy. After decades of uncoordinated ocean management, federal agencies are now communicating more efficiently and effectively under the National Ocean Council. By coordinating more closely with states, tribes, and local governments, federal agencies are working to cut waste while preserving resources important to local economies that depend on fishing, tourism, and clean energy development.¶ And at the regional level, under the National Ocean Policy, multi-state partnerships are facilitating greater engagement among stakeholders, fostering ocean science and research, and using improved tools like regional ocean planning to map out a sustainable future for our oceans.¶ Despite these gains, the National Ocean Policy has a long way to go, especially with obstructionist politics standing in its way. As JOCI’s report card emphasizes, Congressional attacks on the National Ocean Policy threaten to hurt its effectiveness and contribute to the bad grade given for national-level implementation.¶ In the most recent round of partisan attacks on this common-sense policy, Republican leaders in Congress are trying to gut the National Ocean Policy all together.¶ Just last month, House Republicans passed through an amendment to a critical government spending bill, prohibiting any federal funding for National Ocean Policy efforts. With this misguided vote, leaders of the House aimed to stop agencies from working together to address critical problems, like contaminated beachwater, marine debris, loss of valuable coastal habitat, and future oil spills like the 2010 disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. The Joint Ocean Commission rightfully urges Congress to reject such efforts to restrict or prohibit funds from being used to implement the National Ocean Policy.¶

NOP Fails – Funding Blocks

The public blocks the fundingTOT 12 – Trade only today, “Groups ask Congress to block National Ocean Policy funding”, April 16th, 2012, http://www.tradeonlytoday.com/2012/04/groups-ask-congress-to-block-national-ocean-policy-funding/Eighty-one groups recently submitted a letter to U.S. House Appropriations Committee chairman Harold Rogers, R-Ky., as well as the chairman of each House Appropriations subcommittee, asking that language be included in all fiscal 2013 appropriations bills that would prohibit the use of funds to implement the new National Ocean Policy.¶ “The request was made as part of an effort to achieve a pause in policy implementation that would provide more time for oversight and examination of potential impacts,” according to the Recreational Fishing Alliance, which signed on to the letter.¶ The letter’s signatories represent a wide array of commercial and recreational interests and reflect the breadth of concern that citizens and businesses across the United States continue to have about the National Ocean Policy as developed thus far, the fishing group said.