Cockett/Teruya

CAFÉ-GOOD
Significance:
National Research Council evidence is from 2002, talking about crashes in 1993...not up to
date.
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (a nonprofit research and communications organization
that identifies ways to reduce deaths, injuries, and property damage on our nation’s highways,
sponsored by US automobile insurers) May 18th, 2009 Statement before the US House
Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection, http://www.iihs.org/laws/testimony/pdf/testimony_2009-05-18.pdf
More than 30 years have elapsed since Congress enacted the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act of 1975, which required manufacturers to build cars that use less fuel. The result of this law
was to improve the overall fuel economy of the US car fleet. The downside was to increase
fatality risk in crashes. The finding was a 23 percent increase in deaths per 10,000 registered
cars. Subsequent research documents the continuing loss of life. For example, the National
Research Council concluded in 2002 that 1,300 to 2,600 additional crash deaths occurred in 1993
because of vehicle weight reductions to comply with federal standards.

Solvency:
1. Alternate causality: carbon dioxide regulation may require cars to also meet strict fuel
economy.
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (a nonprofit research and communications organization
that identifies ways to reduce deaths, injuries, and property damage on our nation’s highways,
sponsored by US automobile insurers) May 18th, 2009 Statement before the US House
Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection, http://www.iihs.org/laws/testimony/pdf/testimony_2009-05-18.pdf
One consequence of recent federal and state efforts to reduce carbon dioxide may be to require
vehicles to meet even more stringent fuel economy requirements. While reducing carbon
emissions is an important societal goal, it needs to be accomplished so as to avoid any conflict
with the size-indexed fuel economy approach NHTSA has adopted.
Impact: aff. does not solve for carbon dioxide regulation, so cars will still be made lighter

DAs:
1. Increased Oil dependence
Link: Lowering CAFE standards increases US oil dependence
Impact: US national security is threatened
Center For American Progress, Augusr 25th, 2009 “Securing America’s Future
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/08/securing_future.html
The United States has an historic opportunity to enhance its national security by reducing its
dependence on oil. Policies to accomplish this goal, including more efficient fuel economy
standards, investments in hybrid and electric vehicles, development of natural gas-fueled heavy
duty vehicles, and production of advanced biofuels would also create jobs and reduce global
warming pollution.
Cockett/Teruya

Fuel efficiency decreases oil dependence.

FuelEconomy.gov 2008
Today, over half of the oil we use is imported (57%), and our dependence will increase as we use
up domestic resources. Congress recently passed legislation to decrease our dependence on oil by
increasing corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards on new cars and trucks.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/oildep.shtml

2. Environment will be harmed

Link: Increasing CAFE standards reduces greenhouse gases
United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Press release, July
4, 2007
Senator Ted Stevens Vice Chairman of the committee also noted that increasing CAFE standards
will help reduce emission of greenhouse gases. The transportation sector contributes roughly one
third of all greenhouse gas emissions. "By increasing fuel efficiency, we will reduce greenhouse
gas emissions.
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?
FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=6ab3clae-85bf-40c0b17b-
63b8246b6ea9&Month=1&Year=2007
Impact: The environment will be harmed through the Aff plan

3. Increase oil spills

Link: aff. abolishes CAFE standards
Internal link: CAFE standards is key to stopping oil spills
Noam Mohr and Joseph Shapiro(Researchers at the U.S. PIRG Education Fund) October
2000“Pumping up the Price: The Hidden Costs of Outdated Fuel Efficiency Standards”,
ttp://uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdf
Every year, the U.S. experiences thousands of spills. By reducing the amount of petroleum that
must be stored and transported, updating CAFE standards would prevent more than 808 oil
spills on average each year in the United States, amounting to more than 3.2 million gallons of
oil annually. As the U.S. imports half the oil it uses, the number of oil spills worldwide resulting
directly from outdated fuel efficiency standards is higher.
Impact: Without CAFE, oil spills will increase.

CAFE Counter-Plan
Observation 1. Plan
Mandates 1. Congress shall pass a law saying that CAFE Standards will be set to 30 miles per
gallon by 2011.
2. Congress shall also pass a law mandating that car manufactures use the technology available
to make cars safer while meeting the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards.

Agency will be the President and Congress.

Enforcement will be the NHTSA
Funding- Since this plan is purely legislation, no funding will be necessary.
Cockett/Teruya

Observation 2. Non-topicality
Energy Policy.

As we showed you in our topicality argument against the Aff team, CAFE standards were
introduced under an Energy Act. Because our Counter-Plan deals with CAFE standards only, we
are reforming an energy policy.

Observation 3. Solvency.
1. Engine technology can increase fuel economy and safety.
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (a nonprofit research and communications organization
that identifies ways to reduce deaths, injuries, and property damage on our nation’s highways,
sponsored by US automobile insurers) May 18th, 2009 Statement before the US House
Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer
Protection, http://www.iihs.org/laws/testimony/pdf/testimony_2009-05-18.pdf
This can be done if auto manufacturers change, or are required to change, how they use engine
technology, which they have been using to increase horsepower. By using engine technology to
increase fuel economy, rather than to increase horsepower, automakers can offer midsize and
larger vehicles that achieve higher fuel economy and also potentially reduce the frequency of
crashes.

2. Empirics prove a federal action is needed for the success of fuel efficiency
Union of Concerned Scientists, February 24 2004
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=221
If improving fuel economy makes so much sense, why aren't automakers doing it already?
Automakers have a history of not incorporating cost effective technologies that benefit consumer
safety and the environment until they are required to do so. As a result, government has had to
step in to protect consumers by setting safety, fuel economy and emissions standards. One of the
most recent in a line of examples is the air-bag that is now required in all new vehicles -
automakers resisted this technology even in the face of clear demonstration of its safety benefits
and calls from consumers for safer vehicles.

Backup Evidence:
Recent evidence suggests a lower rebound effect.
Kenneth Gillingham (Ph.D. Candidate, Stanford University, Management Science &
Engineering (Engineering-Economic Systems)
Ph.D. Minor in Economics, M.S., Stanford University, Statistics, M.S., Stanford University,
Management Science & Engineering (Economics and Finance), A.B., Dartmouth College,
Economics and Environmental Studies (minor in Earth Sciences)) 2006
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/display.abstractDetail/abstract/8223
However, recent evidence suggests that as consumers become wealthier (or spend more time in
traffic), the time cost of travel becomes relatively more important than the fuel cost of travel, so
consumers become less sensitive to changes in the fuel cost of travel, implying a lower rebound
Cockett/Teruya

effect. The theory behind this important result remains largely unexplored, warranting further
empirical work to more deeply understand the behavioral effects of CAFE standards.

CAFE Standards Light Truck Example: from 2005-2007 total benefits were at least twice
the amount of initial cost.
Brent D. Yacobucci (Specialist in Energy Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division)
Robert Bamberger (Specialist in Energy Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division)
January 19th, 2007 CRS Report for Congress
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/82504.pdf
Table 2. Estimated Costs and Benefits from the MY2005-
MY2007 Light Truck CAFE Standards
Total Costs(million) Total Societal Benefits (million) Net Benefits(million)
MY2005 $108 $219 $111
MY2006 221 513 292
MY2007 373 794 421

Tiny increases in fuel efficiency standards would immediately decrease our need for foreign
oil. By raising CAFE standards 1 MPG, we eliminate the need to drill in ANWR.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (chief prosecuting attorney for the Hudson Riverkeeper, senior attorney
for the Natural Resources Defense Council, president of the Waterkeeper Alliance and as
clinical professor and supervising attorney at the Environmental Litigation Clinic at Pace
University School of Law) Newsweek, November 17, 2003
If you really wanted to wean our dependence from oil, the obvious and most instantaneous
solution is corporate average fuel-efficiency standards, which impose fuel efficiency on the
automobile industry. If we raise the fuel efficiency in our automobiles by one mile per gallon, we
save more oil than would be in two Arctic National Wildlife Refuges. If we raise it by 2.6 miles
per gallon, we save more oil than we get from Iraq and Kuwait combined.
plan raises current CAFE standards by 2.5 MPG.