UMKC SDI ‘08

NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

NATIVE AMERICAN WIND NEGATIVE

NATIVE AMERICAN WIND NEGATIVE ....................................................... ..1
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN................................... .........3
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN................................... .........4
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN................................... .........5
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) TURN EXT: MODELLED GLOBALLY..........6
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX....................................................7
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX....................................................8
SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX....................................................9
“TRIBE” 1NC KRITIK..................................................................... .........10
“TRIBE” 1NC KRITIK..................................................................... .........12
“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT....................................................... .......................13
“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT....................................................... .......................14
“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT....................................................... .......................15
“TRIBE” KRITIK: A/T: WE CHANGE MEANING.........................................16
POLITX LINK: PUBLIC OPPOSES.......................................................... ....17
POLITX LINKS: DEMOCRATS LIKE PLAN.................................... ..............18
POLITX LINKS: GOP LIKES PLAN............................................ ................19
POLITX LINKS: GOP HATES...................................................................20
POLITX: PLAN IS CONTROVERSIAL................................................... ......21
PTCS BAD........................................................................................ .....22
PTCS NOT SOLVE FOR NATIVES.................................... ..........................23
WIND BAD: FOSSIL FUELS TURN.......................................................... ..24
A/T: CULTURE/COLONIALISM................................................................ ..25
A/T: CULTURE/COLONIALISM................................................................ ..26
INDONESIA TURN – 1NC............................................................... ..........27
INDONESIA TURN EXT......................................... ..................................28
INDONESIA TURN EXT......................................... ..................................29
ETHNIC CLEANSING TURN.............................................................. ........30
ECON LINKS............................................... ..........................................32
ECON LINKS............................................... ..........................................33
WIND POWER BAD .............................................. .................................34

1
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

WIND POWER BAD................................................... .............................35

WIND POWER BAD – BIRD KILLERS!!.................................................... ...36
SELF-DETERMINATION GENERIC LINK TURNS:.........................................37
SELF-DETERMINATION GENERIC LINK TURNS:.........................................38

2
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN

A) AMERICAN INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION IGNITES OTHER SELF-

DETERMINATION MOVEMENTS GLOBALLY

Churchill 93 (Ward Churchill, Creek/Cherokee/Metis, former Professor of Ethnic Studies at

University of Colorado, Boulder, BA and MA in Communications from Sangamon State, 1993
STRUGGLE FOR THE LAND: INDIGENOUS RESISTENCE TO GENOCIDE, ECOCIDE
AND EXPROPRIATION IN CONTEMPORARY NATIVE NORTH AMERICA, p. 429-431)

At this point, we've arrived at an area comprising roughly one third of the continental U.S., a
territory which—regardless of the internal political and geographical subdivisions effected by the
array of native peoples within it--could be defined as a sort of "North American Union of
Indigenous Nations." Such an entity would be in a position to assist other indigenous nations
outside its borders, but still within the remaining territorial corpus of the U.S., to resolve land
claim issues accruing from fraudulent or coerced treaties of cession (another 15 or 20 percent of
the present 48 states). It would also be in a position to facilitate an accommodation of the needs
of untreatied peoples within the U.S., the Abenaki of Vermont, for example, and the Native
Hawaiians and Alaskan natives. Similarly, it would be able to help secure the self-determination
of U.S. colonies like Puerto Rico. You can see the direction in which the dominoes begin to fall.

Nor does this end with the United States. Any sort of indigenous union of the kind I've described
would be as eligible for admission as a fully participating member of the United Nations as, say,
Croatia and the Ukraine have recently shown themselves to be. This would set a very important
precedent, insofar as there's never been an American Indian entity of any sort accorded such
political status on the world stage. The precedent could serve to pave the way for comparable
recognition and attainments by other Native American nations, notably the confederation of
Incan peoples of the Andean highlands and the Mayans of present-day Guatemala and southern
Mexico. (Indians are the majority population, decisively so, in both locales.) And, from there,
other indigenous nations, elsewhere around the world. Again, you can see some of the larger
political implications. If we're going to have a "New World Order," let's make it something just a
bit different from what George Bush and his friends had in mind. Right?

3
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN

B) INDIA AND PAKISTAN ARE BOTH CONTENTIOUS OVER KASHMIR

SELF-DETERMINATION -
Safvi ’07 (Syed Ali Safvi, Associate Editor of Etalaat. An AMU post-graduate in Mass
Communication, Safvi talks about the solution to the Kashmir issue,
http://www.countercurrents.org/kashmir-safvi240207.htm, ACCESSED 7/25/08)

However, when Kashmir, which is a bone of contention between India and Pakistan, comes for
discussion the atmosphere of hope turns into despair and both the countries are unable to come to
a joint agreement. Both the nations must know that the good relations will last long only when
the made-complex issue of Kashmir is resolved, otherwise such Confidence Building Measures
(CBMs) will turn out to be fruitless only. India and Pakistan are so allergic to each other that they
are not going to accept any solution proposed by either of the two. The reason is that the leaders
of the two countries don't trust each other and the history too does not augur well for them.
Musharraf's proposals of 'demilitarization' and 'self-rule' was turned down by India without
considering them worthy of giving a serious thought. In such a hostile and hopeless situation, the
solution of Kashmir crises looks very much elusive. It is very pathetic on part of the Indian
leaders not to come up with any proposal. If they don't like the proposal put forth by Musharraf
why they don't then come up with their own proposal? This clearly shows how "serious" and
"committed" they are to resolve the impending dispute over Kashmir. You cannot castigate others
and yourself remain silent at the same time. Either you have to accept the proposals or come up
with one. The history bears testimony to the fact that India and Pakistan can't reach any solution
and the measures they take are only to make an impression in the international stage that
Kashmir is being 'seriously' discussed. In fact, both the countries are merely killing time and the
status quo will mean that Kashmir crises will continue unabated.

4
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) 1NC TURN

C) WAR OVER KASHMIRE RESULTS IN EXTINCTION

Washington Times ’01 (July 8, “The most dangerous place” LEXIS)

The most dangerous place on the planet is Kashmir, a disputed territory convulsed and illegally
occupied for more than 53 years and sandwiched between nuclear-capable India and Pakistan. It has
ignited two wars between the estranged South Asian rivals in 1948 and 1965, and a third could
trigger nuclear volleys and a nuclear winter threatening the entire globe. The United States would
enjoy no sanctuary. This apocalyptic vision is no idiosyncratic view. The director of central intelligence,
the Defense Department, and world experts generally place Kashmir at the peak of their nuclear
worries. Both India and Pakistan are racing like thoroughbreds to bolster their nuclear arsenals
and advanced delivery vehicles. Their defense budgets are climbing despite widespread misery
amongst their populations. Neither country has initialed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, or indicated an inclination to ratify an impending Fissile
Material/Cut-off Convention.

5
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) TURN EXT: MODELLED

GLOBALLY

NATIVE AMERICAN SELF-DETERMINATION ADVANCES ARE MODELLED

GLOBALLY
Ryan ‘00 (Missy, June 3, HEADLINE: Will the Ambassador From Navajo Yield?, The National
Journal, Pg. 1768; Vol. 32, No. 23)

For State Department diplomats, expanding Indian rights also increases the risk of more
balkanizations here and around the globe. Although American Indians protest that they aren't
after secession, native groups in other parts of world, such as in the volatile Chiapas region of
southern Mexico, are much more likely to take any such rights and run with them.

6
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX

7
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX

INDEPENDENT KASHMIR LEADS TO MORE CONFLICT IN INDIA, PAKISTAN AND

CHINA

RAMESH ’02 (Randeep, south Asia correspondent, specializes in globalisation, “State of

Emergency” The Guardian, Jan. 14,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jan/14/india.kashmir?commentpage=1, accessed 7/26/08)

Can Kashmir ever be independent and survive? The question is about a people's right to self-
determination, but the answer is not local but geopolitical. Since 1947, Kashmir has been carved
up by the nuclear powers - India, Pakistan and China - with which it shares borders. These
neighbours don't want Kashmir to secure a vote for independence for fear of encouraging
secessionist struggles in their own countries.

Military analysts point out that if ever Kashmir were to break free, India might try to occupy the
mountains overlooking the plains of the Punjab and Haryana - and New Delhi - for fear of
exposure to attack. Pakistan would be worried as its own capital would be close to the putative
border and would be vulnerable to attack along the Jhelum river. Some suggest that a free state of
Kashmir might seek US help and let Washington have a foothold in the centre of Asia, which
worries Beijing since the thrust of US foreign policy before September 11 was the containment
of China.

8
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION (KASHMIR) MPX

MISCALUCULATIONS OVER KASHMIR LEAD TO NUCLEAR EXCHANGE

THE GUARDIAN ’04 (“WORLD AT WAR” 9/11,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/11/20203)

India and Pakistan's rivalry over Kashmir could, by 2020, have finally have erupted into a
nuclear exchange that might leave 100 million people dead and lay waste to half a million square
kilometres of rich agricultural land in Asia. The roots of such a disaster would lie in a series of
political miscalculations and in chronic economic mismanagement. The main problem will be the
two neighbours refusing to make the tough decisions required for peace. Political misjudgments
would see India failing to realise its potential as an economic powerhouse, with successive
governments introducing policies that favour the rise of a small urban elite, rather than lifting the
fortunes of the rural poor. This could spark armed insurrection among the poor of northern and
eastern India. The Maoist rebellion in Nepal would exacerbate the problem, providing
ideological coherence from the Himalaya to the plains of India.

THE IMPACT RESULTS IN EXTINCTION

BUSINESS RECORDER ’00 (“OBSERVATIONS ON A KASHMIR CEASE-FIRE”, Dec. 17,

LEXIS)

India has suffered modest economic sanctions for its muscular nuclear and missile profiles.
But the global worry over its domestically popular aspiration to big power status has rocketed
because of the ongoing conflict in Kashmir. Pakistan has sought to match India bomb for
bomb and missile for missile. And the greatest causes belli for warring between the two South
Asian rivals is Kashmir, which has already sparked two such clashes. But they came before
India and Pakistan could engage in nuclear volleys that could menace the entire planet with
nuclear winter or a variation of that apocalypse. It is the potential for nuclear exchanges over
Kashmir that has prompted President Bill Clinton and his national security advisers to
characterise the disputed territory as the most dangerous place on the earth.

9
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” 1NC KRITIK

A. THE ETYMOLOGY OF "TRIBE" REFERRING TO AMERICAN INDIANS

CASTS NATIVE PEOPLES AS "ANIMALISTIC," "SUB-HUMAN," &
"INFERIOR"-CONDITIONS NATIVE SELF-IDENTIFICATION IN THE
CONTINUAL EUROAMERICAN SUBJUGATION—you should reject THIS
LINGUISTIC OPPRESSION; USING "PEOPLES" INSTEAD OF "TRIBES" IS
A PREFERABLE ALTERNATIVE
CHURCHILL '94 [Ward (Creek/Cherokee Metis), Coordinarot for AIM-Colorado Chapter, VP
of the Anerican Indian Anti-Defamation Council, Naf1 Spokesperson for the Leonard Peltier
Defense Committee & Assoc. Prof. of American Indian Studies and Communication ~ Univ. of
Colorado a; Boulder, INDIANS ARE US? CULTURE AND GENOCIDE IN NATIVE NORTH
AMERICA, p. 29G-298)

This may explain why no native language in ' North America-and surely language must be taken
as a key indicator of traditional concepts-contains a word which translates accurately as "tribe."
The literal translation of most American Indian people's names for themselves was, traditionally,
exactly that: "people." The consistency with which what is at best a mistranslation has been
substituted for more accurate terminology cannot be dismissed as something either benign or
inadvertent. Consider the relevant portion of Webster's definition of most native groups' own
self-descriptor:

Peo'ple...l. A body of persons united by a common character, culture, or sentiment; the indi-
viduals collectively of any characteristic group, conceived apart from the unity of the group as
subject to common government (that is, as a state) or as issued from a common stock (that is, as a race
or tribe). 2. A race, tribe, or nation; as, the peoples of Europe [emphases in the original).The OED
amplifies this, defining a people as being:A body of persons composing a community, tribe, race, or
nation; = FOLK ...Sometimes viewed as a unity, sometimes as a collective of number ...The persons
belonging to a place or occupying a particular concourse, congregation, company, or class ...Those to
whom any one belongs; the members of one's tribe, clan, family, community, association, church, etc.,
collectively ...The common people, the commonality ...The whole body of enfranchised or qualified
citizens, considered as the source of power; esp. in a democratic state, the electorate... Men or women
indefinitely; men and women; persons, folk.Plainly, there is nothing positive which can be said to be
intrinsic to the meaning of "tribe" and not immediately encompassed within the much more
broadly delineated term "people." The significance of the Euroamerican's continuing insistence
upon referring to native societies as tribes rather than as peoples can thus be located primarily-
though not necessarily exclusively, as will be explained belowin the expressly animalistic
emphasis embodied in the former, a matter readily contrasted to the fact that the latter relates, as
the OED puts it, specifically and "emphatically [to] Human beings" (emphasis in the original).

10
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

CARD CONTINUED………

(CONTINUED….)

It follows that, when indigenous peoples are passed off as tribes, and conditioned to view
themselves in this way, they are effectively cast as being subhuman. The upshot is unmistakable.
Designation of Indians as tribes provides a near perfect psychic rationalization/justification of the
perpetual, "natural," and "inevitable" subordination of native ("tribal" and therefore "lower,"
"lesser," or "inferior") societies to their purported European/ Euroamerican "betters" ("non-
tribal," and therefore, by definition, "superior"). From the imposition of such linguistic
subordination, it is but the easiest of steps, both psychologically and physically, to what has
always been Eurosupremacism's business-as-usual: the wholesale and systematic expropriation
of American Indian assets.

11
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” 1NC KRITIK

B. THE ALTERNATIVE IS TO SUBSITUTE “PEOPLES” FOR “TRIBES”

WHEN DISCUSSING INDIAN NATIONS.

C. WE SHOULD REJECT RACIST CONSTRUCTIONS AT EVERY TURN

BARDNT 91 (JOESEPH, MINISTER, DISMANTLING RACISM, p. 155-156)

To study racism is to study walls. We have looked at barriers and fences, restraints and
limitations, ghettos and prisons. The prison of racism confines us all, people of color and
white people alike. It shackles the victimizer as well as the victim. The walls forcibly keep
people of color and white people separate from each other; in our separate prisons we are all
prevented from achieving the human potential that God intends for us. The limitations
imposed on people of color by poverty, subservience, and powerlessness are cruel, inhuman,
and unjust; the effects of uncontrolled power, privilege, and greed, which are the marks of
our white prison, will inevitably destroy us as well. But we have also seen that the walls of
racism can be dismantled. We are not condemned to an inexorable fate, but are offered the
vision and the possibility of freedom. Brick by brick, stone by stone, the prison of
individual, institutional, and cultural racism can be destroyed. You and I are urgently
called to join the efforts of those who know it is time to tear down once and for all, the walls
of racism.

12
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT

THE DISCOURSE OF "TRIBALISM" IS GENOCIDAL--POLICIES DONE

UNDER THE RUBRIC OF "TRIBALISM" FOSTER COVERT
DISCRIMINATION
CHURCHILL '94 [Ward (Creek/Cherokee Metis), Coordinarot for AIM-Colorado Chapter, VP
of the Anerican Indian Anti-Defamation Council, Nat] Spokesperson for the Leonard Peltier
Defense Committee & Assoc. Prof. of American Indian Studies and Communication @ Univ. of
Colorado C Boulder, INDIANS ARE US'? CULTURE AND GENOCIDE IN NATIVE NORTH
AMERICA, p. 316-317)

In sum, there can be no question but that the sort of dehumanizing implications of Europe's
imposing the mantle of tribalism upon indigenous peoples through popular discourse has
contributed greatly to the kind and extent of ill-treatment, often quite literally genocidal, we have
suffered since our fifteenth-century "discovery" by Europeans. While it is true that the most overt
pattern of behavior by which this was expressed is primarily historical, at least in North
America,73 there is no shortage of indication that certain effects continue to linger: witness the
sign on the door of a bar in Scenic, South Dakota-removed only during the late 1980s-which read
"No Dogs or Indians Allowed." More importantly, the evidence is overwhelming that much of
what was worst in the historical interactions between Europeans/ Euroamericans and Indians is
being continued in more covert fashion, as a matter of official policy, and under the timetested
rubric of indigenous tribalism.

13
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT

THE LANGUAGE OF "TRIBALISM" IS NOT BEGNIN--FORECLOSES

POTENTIAL FOR POSITIVE CHANGE
CHURCHILL '94 [Ward (Creek/Cherokee Metis), Coordinarot for AIM-Colorado Chapter, VP
of the Anerican Indian Anti-Defamation Council, Naf1 Spokesperson for the Leonard Pelticr
Defense Committee & Assoc. Prof. of American Indian Studies and Communication @ Univ. of
Colorado (cu Boulder, INDIANS ARE US? CULTURE AND GENOCIDE IN NATIVE NORTH
AMERICA, p. 291-292)
"What's your tribe?" This familiar query, typically coming after introductory greetings between
American Indians, or extended by non-Indians when introduced to Indians, is hardly as
innocuous as it may seem on its face. Nor is the usual reply, offered reflexively and consisting of
only a few words: "I'm a member of the Kiowa Tribe," or "the Mohawk Tribe," the "Lummi
Tribe," or any of several hundred comparable designations popularly, anthropologically, and
often legally recognized as describing the status of the many distinct peoples indigenous to North
America. Although both the question and its response(s) may appear harmless enough, merely a
cordial or even "sensitive" intercultural speech-pat-tern which has become well accepted through
customary usage, they are actually charged with a high degree of political content, all of it
implicitly negative in terms of native rights and dignity. Indeed, the vernacular of "tribalism" is
one which goes a long way toward foreclosing on the potential for positive changes in the
socioeconomic and political situation of American Indians occurring in the future.

14
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” KRITIK EXT

ETYMOLOGY OF "TRIBE" SHOWS THE REDUCTION OF INDIGENOUS

PEOPLES TO "PRIMITIVE" "ANIMALS"--"TRIBAL" DISCOURSE IS A
RACIST CONSTRUCTION
CHURCHILL '94 [Ward (Creek/Cherokee Metis), Coordinarot for AIM-Colorado Chapter, VP
of the Anerican Indian Anti-Defamation Council, Nat'I Spokesperson for the Leonard Peltier
Defense Committee & Assoc. Prof. of American Indian Studies and Communication @ Univ. of
Colorado (i% Boulder, INDIANS ARE US? CULTURE AND GENOCIDE IN NATIVE NORTH
AMERICA, p. 294)

"Tribes" versus "Peoples"

The ongoing significance of Europeans' bestowal of the term "tribes" upon the native peoples
they encountered during the period of their expansion across the globe may be apprehended in a
meaning of the word which was being developed concurrently. According to the definitive
Oxford English Dictionary (OED), a tribe is a "group in the classification of plants, animals, etc.,
used as superior and sometimes inferior to a family; also, loosely, any group or series of
animals."' There is thus little disparity between categorizing indigenous peoples as tribes, and
classifying them as being aggregated into herds, packs, gaggles, coveys, flocks, or any other
mode of "lower" animal organization. When applied to specifically human groups, the term takes
as its primary focus the lineage of the people included within its rubric, in much the same
manner that cattle breeders concern themselves with the pedigree of their livestock. In fact,
Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary continues to directly associate the term with "Stock
Breeding" (emphasis in the original), as in "a group of animals descended from some particular
female progenitor, through the female line."2 It is in this light that the balance of the OED's
current definition of "tribe" should be considered: A group of persons forming a community and
claiming common ancestry ...A particular race of recognized ancestry; a family ...the families or
communities of persons having the same surname ...A race of people; now esp. to a primary
aggregate of people in a primitive or barbarous condition, under a headman or chief.Or, examine
the pertinent language in Webster's:"(A]ny aggregation of people, esp. in a primitive or nomadic
state, believed to be of a com mon stock." No matter which way one twists it, to be addressed as
"tribal" by English-speaking people-and by speakers of all other major European languages as
well-is to be demeaned in a most extraordinarily vicious way. Not only is one's society
definitionally restricted from having achieved any level of cultural attainment beyond that of
"primitivism" or "barbarism"-both thoroughgoing pejoratives in the Western lexicon-but one is
personally reduced thereby to being construed as no more than the product of one's gene pool.
Suffice it to say that a more resoundingly racist construction would be difficult to conceive.

15
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

“TRIBE” KRITIK: A/T: WE CHANGE MEANING

CAN'T RESTORE "TRIBE" & "TRIBALISM" TO ORIGINAL MEANING

BECAUSE THEY WERE MISPLACED & DISCIMINATORY IN THE 1ST
PLACE--- THIS DISCOURSE JUSTIFIES THE DISCRIMINATORY HISTORY
OF AMERICAN INDIAN PEOPLES
CHURCHILL '94 [Ward (Creek/Cherokec Metis), Coordinarot for AIM-Colorado Chapter, VP
of the Anerican Indian Anti-Defamation Council, Nat'I Spokesperson for the Leonard Peltier
Defense Committee & Assoc. Prof. of American Indian Studies and Communication @ Univ. of
Colorado @ Boulder, INDIANS ARE US? CULTURE AND GENOCIDE IN NATIVE NORTH
AMERICA, p. 32G-327]

Predictably, even with all this explained, there will be those who will still seek to argue that the
points raised, though "interesting" in some respects, are merely an academic and perhaps arcane
preoccupation, but certainly not adding up to the sort of issue which displays.abiding
significance to the real life struggles of American Indians today. Some will obfuscate, insisting
that at base questions of terminology reduce to no more than matters of opinion, that things may
never have really meant what they seem to mean, and that there is therefore no cause for serious
concern. Others will respond that, while what is said above may be objectively true, they have
taken as their mission the "redemption" of terms like "tribe" and "tribalism," devoting themselves
to "restoring" meanings to the words which were never there in the first place. Still others will
stipulate that, true or not, they couldn't care less; the dominant society is at liberty to call them
most anything it likes, so long as it provides them "something tangible" in exchange (usually
meaning a minor share of the loot deriving from the existing order), thereby "proving" that no
harm is intended.

Those inclined to such positions would do well to wonder why, if the vernacular by which
indigenous societies are described is essentially inconsequential or irrelevant, representatives of
the United States and Canada have spent the past decade adamantly opposing Indians being
addressed as "peoples"-they have insisted, emphatically, that we be defined instead only as
"populations" and/or "tribal" or "ethnic" groups-in the draft of an international legal instrument
designed to extend specific United Nations human rights protections over us for the first time.lo4
The answer is that the governments of these countries understand quite well, though some of us
may not (or do not wish to admit), that there is an umbilical connection between the description
imposed upon any group and how it is treated, between the label a group can be convinced to
accept as appropriate to itself and the treatment it is ultimately entitled to demand.1os This is
neither an "abstraction" nor "past history."

16
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

POLITX LINK: PUBLIC OPPOSES

GOP & WESTERN STATES OPPOSE EXERCISING TREATY RIGHTS

MILLION 2000 [Dian, Athabascan and French Canadian, author self-identifies as "American
Indian," of "Native American Peoples," and "Indian", Doctoral candidate in Ethnic Studies
Graduate Group @ U-Cal Berkeley, "Policing the Rez," SOCIAL JUSTICE, fall, p.101+]

On June 21, 2000, the Washington Republican Party passed a resolution to abolish tribal
governments. "We do not recognize them as sovereign nations, as governments," said John
Fleming, the Skagit County delegate who was a main author of the resolution. It calls on the
federal government to "immediately take whatever steps necessary to terminate all such non-
republican forms of government on Indian reservations...." "We think it can be done
peacefully," Fleming said. But if tribes were to fight the effort, "then the U S Army and the Air
Force and the Marines and the National Guard are going to have to battle back" (The
Olympian, 2000). The national Republican Party immediately withdrew their support for this
ill-timed and politically inexpedient platform. In this election year, with George W. Bush
making an effort to recruit minority votes, such a racially charged action had immediate
reverberations in Indian country and beyond (Seattle Times, July 18, 19, 2000). The national
Republican platform notwithstanding, there is risin resistance in western states with large
American Indian populations that exercise their treaty rights In Idaho the Nez Perce tribal
government is faced with constant harassment from the North Central Idaho rtirisdic c e an
alliance of local governments (Kamiah, Craigmont, Kooskia, Stites, Mrofino, Reubens,
Nezperce, and Winchester) that overlap the Nez Perce treaty-protected lands. In his essay
introducing the Alliance platform of abolishing any jurisdiction (including Indian preference
on federal contracts) tribal governments might have over non-Indians, Orifino's city
administrator, Rick Laam, recently threatened that bloodshed is inevitable (Titone, 2000: 3).

17
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

POLITX LINKS: DEMOCRATS LIKE PLAN

Democratic Party is Recognizing Native American issues and

bringing them into the political system.
Tharp ’08 (Francisco, author for High Country News covering environmental news and the
communities of the American West, http://www.hcn.org/servlets/hcn.Article?article_id=17590,
March 13, accessed 7/25/08)

Women and African-Americans aren’t the only demographics receiving extra attention from
Democrats this year. The party has also been reaching out to Native Americans.

“In the past, Native American voters have been ignored, or thought of in the last minute,” says
Laura Harris of the Comanche Tribe. “What (Democratic National Committee Chairman)
Howard Dean has done is incorporate us into the process, not just for our vote, but for our
participation and economic support, too. It’s an exciting time to be a Native American and take
our place in the political process of the U.S.”

Harris, who serves as the executive director of the nonprofit Americans for Indian Opportunity, is
one of an “unprecedented” six Native Americans appointed to the Democratic National
Convention’s standing committees. She’s just one example of how the Democratic Party is
recognizing Native American issues and courting Indian voters.

18
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

POLITX LINKS: GOP LIKES PLAN

Native american policies popular with the Gop.

Robertson ’08 (Larry D.writer for Talking Points Memo Commentary on political events
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/republican-kansas-sen-sam-brow.php,
March 2 2008, accessed 7/25/08)

Recently, the Senate passed the "Native American Apology Amendment" led by Republican
Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback. The Amendment was attached to the reauthorization of the
"Indian Health Care Improvement Act" and it offered an official apology from the Federal
Government to Native Americans. The measure passed successfully according to a press release
issued by Brownback's office on Tuesday.

In an earlier press release, Brownback said:

Our nation's relationship with the Native peoples of this land is an issue that is very important to
the health of the United States. For too much of our history, Federal-Tribal relations have been
marked by broken treaties, mistreatment, and dishonorable dealings. We can acknowledge our
past failures, express sincere regrets, and establish a brighter future for all Americans.

19
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

POLITX LINKS: GOP HATES

Native american policies not popular republicans

Democratic Party ’08 (“Offers daily news updates, policy analysis, links, email updates and
opportunities to participate in the political process,
http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/08/native_american.php, June 26, acess. 7/24/08)

Over the past six years, Americans have witnessed a systematic deterioration and near
dismantling of Native American programs by the Republican Congress and the Bush
Administration. From Head Start to healthcare, from law enforcement to small business; funding
for key Native American programs has not kept up with the needs of Indian Country or fulfilled
the trust responsibility of the federal government to tribal governments and urban Indians. Tribal
governments are working hard to find creative ways to maintain programs that are key to the
well-being and growth of their communities, but they need help. The present Republican
Administration and Congress have created an environment that undermines Indian Country’s
forward progress.

20
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

POLITX: PLAN IS CONTROVERSIAL

Native policies are controversial

Indian Country Today, 8-20-01

WASHINGTON—In a move expected to bring both criticism and praise from Indian country,
Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Neal McCaleb has delayed the effective date on land to
trust regulations drafted during the last administration.

The new regulations, which enable tribes to acquire lands once lost to them, have been a
controversial issue for years. McCaleb said the delay is being imposed to gather comments on
whether the Department of Interior should withdraw or replace the new regulations, and gather
further views from state and local governments.

“Secretary Norton and I recognize that the land-into-trust process is critically important to
helping tribes regain lost lands, but that it also has a major impact on state and local
governments,” McCaleb said.

21
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

PTCS BAD

PRODUCTION TAX CREDITS LEAD TO MONOPOLIES

GIPE ’03 (Paul, former exec. Director of Ontario Sustainable Energy Association, “Why I
oppose the production tax credit” Feb. 12, http://www.wind-
works.org/articles/lg_ProductionTaxCreditNo.html, accessed 7/25/08)

5. Production Tax Credits lead to concentration of the technology in the hands of a few. One-
half of all wind capacity in the USA is owned or operated by Florida Power & Light's
unregulated subsidiary. The trend in the U.S. industry is toward monopolistic power and control
of the political process. This concentration of power is not seen in markets where Electricity
Feed Laws are used.

PRODUCTION TAX CREDITS LEAD TO UNRELIABLE CONTROL

GIPE ’03 (Paul, former exec. Director of Ontario Sustainable Energy Association, “Why I
oppose the production tax credit” Feb. 12, http://www.wind-
works.org/articles/lg_ProductionTaxCreditNo.html, accessed 7/25/08)

7. Production Tax Credits encourage obscure and non-transparent forms of ownership structures.
Part of the ongoing criminal investigation of Enron partnerships involves wind deals designed to
maximize use of the Production Tax Credits. It's nearly impossible to follow the money in these
transactions. Of course, that was the intent. For the environmental community, this complexity
leads to an absence of accountability. Who is responsible to clean up environmental damage
from improperly developed wind projects? The operator? The owner? If so, who is the owner?

22
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

PTCS NOT SOLVE FOR NATIVES

TAX CREDITS WILL NOT BE THE SOLE SOLUTION TO ECONOMIC

INDEPENDENCE FOR NATIVE AMERICANS

Shahinian ’08 (Mark Shahinian, 3rd year law student at University of Michigan, “Special
Feature: The Tax Man Cometh Not: How the non-transferability of tax credits harms
Indian tribes” American Indian Law Review, 32 Am. Indian L. Rev. 267)

New ideas in tax credits and other tax incentives for tribes can be a part of this nation-
building approach, by laying the fiscal framework for tribal business to prosper. But tax
credits will only be a part of the solution - moving toward tribal economic development will
require much broader effort than tax credits alone, and Congress should be cautioned against
thinking that solving the PTC transferability problem will prove a magic bullet for tribes.

23
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

WIND BAD: FOSSIL FUELS TURN

WIND POWER DOESN’T REDUCE FOSSIL FUEL CONSUMPTION.

CONVENTIONAL PLANTS HAVE TO BE BUILT TO MATCH EACH WIND
FARM, INCREASING COSTS
Schwartz ‘04, ( L.M., The Virginia Land Rights Coalition,
“Wind - Facts or blowing hot air?,” March, www.sovereignty.net/p/clim/wind-leo.htm, accessed
7/25/08)

The initial cost of wind farms is "much higher" than other generation plants and the $4,000 per
kilowatt capacity is three times higher than a coal-fired facility. Tax incentives cover one-third of
the construction costs of new turbines, but the expiration of production tax credits would force
consumers to pay an additional 4.3¢/kWh. Wind farms are only 25%-30% efficient and fail to
generate any power on calm or very windy days, and "proponents neglect to mention that for
each wind farm, an equivalent amount of conventional generation must be built to provide
backup power when there is too much/little wind," it says. Rights-of-way must be purchased and
additional transmission lines constructed to remote wind farms, but "these 'hidden' costs and
taxes are never included in proponents' kWh cost calculation." "If wind energy truly made good
economic sense, we wouldn't need a law to force utilities to produce it."

24
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

A/T: CULTURE/COLONIALISM

MOST NATIVE AMERICANS DO NOT LIVE ON RESERVATIONS, YET

CULTURES REMAIN IN TACT – PROVES NO RISK OF COLONIALSIM
DESTROYING CULTURE
Champagne ‘99(Duane , Editor and Dir. Of the American Indian Studies Center at UCLA,
“Introduction,” CONTEMPORARY NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL ISSUES, p. 9 )

Again, most Native people currently live off reservation and within urban communities. Yet
many urban Indians have life-long ties to their tribal communities. Intertribal powwows,
urban community centers, and university Indian studies centers have contributed to preserving
tribal and Indian identity among those who have less and less direct contact with their tribal
community. Even in urban areas, Indians have preserved tribal identities while creating
pan-Indian tribal institutions and organizations. Nevertheless, more and more Native peo-
ple are emerging as second- and third-generation off-reservation people. This group may
be well on their way to creating an intertribal, ethnic Native American identity and
community that is organized in very different ways from tribal communities.

25
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

A/T: CULTURE/COLONIALISM

NATIVE AMERICANS ADAPT TO COLONIALISM IN WAYS THAT

PRESERVE THEIR CULTURE—THERE’S NO IMPACT
Champagne ‘99 (Duane , Editor and Dir. Of the American Indian Studies Center at UCLA,
“Introduction,” CONTEMPORARY NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL ISSUES, p. 10 )

While Native people have been exposed to colonial imposition of nontribal cultural
concepts and experiences, they have increasingly developed creative ways to express tribal
issues and help preserve and extend tribal traditions by incorporating many U.S. cultural
elements. Since the 1960s, Native authors writing powerful novels about Native experiences
have emerged in increasing numbers. As a result, many Native American issues and
experiences are more widely and deeply understood than before. Dance troupes such as the
American Indian Dance Theater have presented social and instructive dances to audiences
around the world. Recent Native theater and dance groups have taken up Native themes and
issues that speak to broad audiences and, at the same time, support the preservation and creative
extension of Native culture. Since the early 1990s, Native people have increasingly gained
access to participation in movie production. Through a variety of contemporary media,
Native artists, writers, and producers explore, preserve, and extend the interpretation of
Native cultures.

26
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

INDONESIA TURN – 1NC

A. U.S. signal for self-determination leads to Indonesian

fragmentation
Menon ’01 (Rajan , Monroe J. Rathbone Professor of International Relations at Lehigh
University, Fall 2001, The National Interest, LEXIS)

Washington should also declare its support for a unified Indonesia, particularly
because prominent Indonesians have accused it of conniving to destroy their country.
Growing violence in Indonesia will bring human rights to the forefront of American
debates, and properly so. But the mechanical application of the principle of self-
determination to so large and important a country will assuredly not curb but increase
long-term violence and disorder. The United States should also favor settlements in Aceh
and West Papua that offer autonomy and address in bold, convincing ways the economic
and social problems that feed separatism in these provinces. It must, as a corollary, convey
to nationalists in these regions that it will support devolution, but not secession. This is
because the proliferation of mini-states in Southeast Asia and the implosion of its most
important country will increase poverty and violence and unsettle the balance of power in
ways that may cast a long and dark shadow. The United States should therefore help
identify the providers of arms and training to separatists and militias in Indonesia and use
its influence to cut the supply. To help stabilize the Indonesian economy, the United States
should organize a fund to support the rupiah and coordinate a long-term program to rebuild
what is a ravaged country.

B. That leads to massive violence

The Australian, 12/13/2001

The other nightmare scenario is the break-up of Indonesia. The objections to this again
are extremely powerful. The process would likely be unimaginably violent, with savage
ethnic cleansing all over the archipelago. The TNI would certainly object and come back
to the centre of Indonesian politics. And even if all the violence could somehow be avoided
the result would likely be one new Brunei, three Bangladeshes and a new Papua New
Guinea -- not what you'd call an inspiring prospect.

27
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

INDONESIA TURN EXT

Indonesian fragmentation leads to violence and regional turmoil

The Straits Times, November 3, 1999

Indonesia It remains a cauldron of disaffected ethnic groups, despite a recent

democratic transition. The potential for violence was demonstrated both in East Timor
and in riots targeting the country's Chinese minority which led to President Suharto's
resignation last year. The decision by his successors to permit the independence of East
Timor has intensified the centrifugal forces tugging at the country. Instability in
Indonesia could threaten the Malacca Strait, a key oil shipping lane that links the
Pacific and Indian oceans. Secessionist movements elsewhere in South-east Asia could
be strengthened and refugees could inundate Australia and other neighbours.

28
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

INDONESIA TURN EXT

Indonesian collapse leads to internal violence, regional

destabilization and proxy wars
Menon ’01 (Rajan, Monroe J. Rathbone Professor of International Relations at Lehigh
University, Fall 2001, The National Interest, LEXIS)

Refugee flows will also accelerate if Indonesia starts to break apart. The refugee
population of one million already within its borders will soar, dragging the economy
down further and aggravating communal violence. Refugees could also be driven
beyond Indonesia into neighboring countries that are neither prepared to receive them
nor able to bear the burden of caring for them. Malaysia, which lies across the water from
Aceh, has already seen rising illegal immigration from Indonesia, and its officials worry
about the social tensions that could result. The refugee problem also figures prominently
in Australian and Singaporean discussions of Indonesia. Indonesia's neighbors have
other worries, as well, as they watch this wobbly behemoth. For Malaysia, one is that
the Malaysian Islamic Party, already powerful in northern Malaysia, could receive a
fillip were militant Islam to become more significant in Indonesia's politics as a result
of the turmoil-or were it to dominate its successor states. Thailand and the Philippines,
which have breakaway Islamist groups in their southern regions, fear that Indonesia's
collapse could produce an undesirable demonstration effect. Papua New Guinea, which borders
West Papua, could be swamped by refugees and also face an older problem: incursions from the Indonesian military in
hot pursuit of Papuan guerrillas. Singapore and Malaysia have invested in pipelines carrying energy from Riau and from
Indonesia's Natuna gas fields (located in the South China Sea between peninsular Malaysia and Sarawak) and are
watching nervously. ASEAN, whose economic and political clout has fallen short of members' hopes, will be reduced to a
salon if Indonesia, its keystone, crumbles. Neither
is it clear how Japan, China and Australia
would react to various scenarios in Indonesia. Few convergent interests unite them, and history
has done much to divide them. This augurs ill for cooperation on economic assistance, refugee relief, piracy,
or peacekeeping to stem Indonesia's unraveling or to deal with the consequences if that proves impossible.
Indeed, anarchy in Indonesia could start a scramble among these states that is driven more by fear,
uncertainty and worst-case thinking than by the opportunistic pursuit of advantage. A processleading to
sponsorship of competitive proxy proto-statelets that rise from Indonesia's wreckage
is an extreme scenario, but cannot be ruled out. Beyond the general tendency of states
divided by suspicion to jockey for position when uncertainty or opportunity prevails, there
are other specific motives for intervention. China could be drawn into the fray if
Indonesia's seven-million-strong Chinese population, which has often been a scapegoat
in times of trouble, were to be victimized. Beijing's increasing concern for secure energy supplies since
becoming a net importer in 1993 has already made it more assertive in the South China Sea, and could provide another
motive. Given Indonesia's uncertain future, Chinese maps depicting Beijing's jurisdiction over Indonesia's Natuna gas
fields are a worrisome portent, particularly for Malaysia and Singapore, who envision energy pipelines from this site.

29
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

ETHNIC CLEANSING TURN

Self determination leads to ethnic cleansing to create an ethnic

majority
Kingsbury’00 (Benedict, Professor of Law, New York University School of Law,
Operationalizing the Right of Indigenous People to Self Determination, p. 35-36)

One of the unresolved dilemmas of basing indigenous claims on self-

determination is that in encouraging groups to mobilize as ‘nations’,
some groups or their leaders may take what to outsiders (and to some
insiders) appears the path of nationalist excess, oppressing dissenters,
mistreating and even creating minorities in order to create a clear
majority and reinforce the dominant identity, and confronting neighbours.
Some persons who are indigenous but have multiple connections may not wish
to be forced to opt decisively into one group and out of others; other persons
who identify as indigenous, especially in urban areas, may be living outside
traditional communities and be left with no group to join. The self-
determination programme can have such costs. They can be ameliorated,
but not wished away; they must be evaluated in defining and determining the
limits of the self-determination programme. On the other side of any such
evaluation, as many members of indigenous groups point out, is the price of
not having self-determination, which has been extremely high—state policy,
pursued with bureaucratic rationality but little accountability, has often been
very expensive for the state and dismal for indigenous people. The logic of
self-determination is that ‘the people’ themselves should make these
evaluations, not state governments; but this is not the logic of the human
rights programme.

30
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

STATES CP SOLVENCY

States have successfully provided energy tax credits to natives

American Indian Law Review 2008 [Mark Shahinian, third-year law student at the University
of Michigan] SPECIAL FEATURE: THE TAX MAN COMETH NOT: HOW THE NON-
TRANSFERABILITY OF TAX CREDITS HARMS INDIAN TRIBES American Indian Law
Review 2007 / 200832 Am. Indian L. Rev. 267, LEXIS)

The idea of a tradable tax credit is not a new one, nor is it without precedent. A group
advocating renewable energy development on Indian lands originally proposed the idea
for tribes 72 and the Western Governors' Association has supported it. 73 In Oregon, the
state's Business Energy Tax Credits allow renewable energy project owners to trade ("pass
through" is the Oregon term) state renewable energy tax credits to taxable entities. Project
owners can be non-profit organizations, tribes or public entities that partner with Oregon
businesses or residents with an Oregon tax liability.

31
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

ECON LINKS

PTCS COST TAXPAYERS MONEY

Christian Science Monitor 08 (Mark Clayton, Staffwriter, “Wind, Solar Tax Credits
to Expire,” 1/22/08, http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0122/p03s05-usec.html,
Accessed 7/26/08.)

The production tax credit, or PTC, now pays utilities about 2 cents for every kilowatt
of wind power they produce over the first 10 years of a project's operation.
Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation estimated the cost to taxpayers at less than
$1 billion a year, AWEA officials say.

The solar investment tax credit, or ITC, if extended for eight years would raise a cap
on the tax credit for residential installations from $2,000 to $4,000, and would allow
utilities to tap the credit, too. Total cost: about $800 million.

Together, today's tax breaks for wind and solar cost taxpayers a little more than $1
billion annually.

Where to get the money to pay for the renewed tax credits for solar and wind power
has been difficult. Efforts to wrap them into the new energy law foundered last
month, in the face of opposition from the White House and GOP senators.

32
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

ECON LINKS

Wind power boosts economy and creates jobs.

Christian Science Monitor 08 (Mark Clayton, Staffwriter, “Wind, Solar Tax Credits
to Expire,” 1/22/08, http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0122/p03s05-usec.html,
Accessed 7/26/08.)

The 2005 energy bill provided exactly the kind of multiyear support the wind
industry says it needs. The impact has been dramatic. Nearly one-third of all US
power capacity added last year – about 5,244 megawatts – was in wind. Overall
wind-generating capacity soared 45 percent last year, adding the clean-energy
equivalent of 10 large coal-fired power plants, the American Wind Energy
Association (AWEA) reported last week.

Wind power injected $9 billion into the US economy and now employs 20,000
people directly, the industry says. Plans for at least eight new US wind-power
manufacturing plants employing 5,000 workers were announced last year, AWEA
officials say.

"This is a critical time for extending the production tax credit for wind," says Joshua
Magee, research director for wind energy at Emerging Energy Research, a Boston-
based research firm. "If we move into 2009 and it hasn't been extended, new orders
will shrink and it will be a major blow to these new US [wind] manufacturing,
investment, and jobs across many states."

33
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

WIND POWER BAD

No solvency – wind power won’t solve fossil fuel use, it hurts the
surrounding environments, and wind-based energy isn’t reliable
Zaidi, ‘7 – Lawyer at Millrise Law Office, JD from U Tulsa Law

[Kamaal R. “WIND ENERGY AND ITS IMPACT ON FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

PLANNING: POWERING RENEWABLE ENERGY IN CANADA AND ABROAD.” Albany
Law Environmental Outlook Journal, 11 Alb. L. Envtl. Outlook 198]

However, the drive towards wind energy and other renewables is not without its challenges.
First, companies producing energy from conventional fossil fuels are still active in distributing
electricity to consumers. 527 These sources of electricity will not be entirely replaced by
renewable sources, such as wind energy, given that current infrastructure plans still rely upon
contribution from the conventional fossil fuel sector. 528 Second, environmental assessments
may reveal some limitations since wind projects may impact the surrounding environment
because the wind farms may encroach upon existing wildlife habitat. 529 Third, the natural
availability of winds may not exist in certain regions to deliver enough wind energy. 530
Surveying wind maps and other relevant data may reveal that certain locations or [*275]
climates may not be suitable for creating wind farms. 531 This is where scientific research in
improving wind turbine technology serves its purpose. 532 Finally, the degree of political
support and societal recognition may not be strong enough to help launch future wind energy
projects. 533 Here, some regional governments are throwing their political support behind wind
energy projects by promoting investment opportunities in the renewable sector. 534

34
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

WIND POWER BAD

Wind power will fail – they look terrible, they pose huge risk to
animals, and there’s no regulation process for how to distribute the
wind energy
KAPLAN, ‘4 – counsel in the Boston, Massachusetts, office of the law firm of Nixon Peabody
[Carolyn S. “COASTAL WIND ENERGY GENERATION: CONFLICT AND CAPACITIE:
SYMPOSIUM ARTICLE: Congress, the Courts, and the Army

Corps: Siting the First Offshore Wind Farm in the United States.” Boston College Environmental
Affairs Law Review, 31 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 177, p. Lexis]

Wind power critics argue that wind's benefits are overstated, citing to negative visual and
aesthetic impacts, 154 the alleged risk posed to birds and other avian species, 155 and the
lack of a regulatory process [*204] designed to allocate offshore resources for public use.
156 High-ranking commonwealth officials, including Governor Mitt Romney and Attorney
General Thomas F. Reilly, have come out against the project, at least until a more defined
legislative and regulatory review process has been established. 157 A number of bills
aimed at limiting ocean development have been introduced in the Massachusetts general
court (or legislature), 158 and the commonwealth's Environmental Affairs Secretary
[*205] appointed an Ocean Management Task Force to develop a comprehensive plan to
manage the commonwealth's ocean resources.

35
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

WIND POWER BAD – BIRD KILLERS!!

Wind turbines kill birds and put species in danger

USA Today, ‘05

(Wind Turbines Taking Toll On Birds Of Prey, January 1, 2005,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm, July 8, 2008)

The massive fiberglass blades on the more than 4,000 windmills have been chopping up tens of
thousands of birds that fly into them, including golden eagles, red-tailed hawks, burrowing owls
and other raptors. Scientists don't know whether the kills reduce overall bird populations but
worry that turbines, added to other factors, could tip a species into decline.

They also kill bats

New York Times, ‘06

(Debate Over Wind Power Creates Environmental Rift, June 6, 2006,
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/06/us/06wind.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1, July 8, 2008)

Wind Turbines kill birds and bats; they are too noisy; they are inefficient, making no more than a
symbolic contribution to energy needs. In the mountainous terrain of southwestern Pennsylvania,
western Maryland or West Virginia, areas where 15 new projects have been proposed. If all were
built, 750 to 1,000 giant turbines would line the hilltops, most producing, on average, enough
electricity to power 600 homes.

36
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION GENERIC LINK TURNS:

Turn: Expanding conceptions of self determination ruins its political

efficacy
Kelly ‘99(Michael , Director of Legal Research,Writing & Advocacy at Michigan State
University's Detroit College of Law, 1999, Drake Law Review, LEXIS)

Significantly, only three of Professor Cassese's five described manifestations of self-

determination are currently in operation: "[S]elf-determination appears firmly entrenched
in the corpus of international general rules in only three areas: as an anti-colonialist
standard, as a ban on foreign military occupation, and as a standard requiring that racial
groups be given full access to government." The first aspect encompasses the final stages
of decolonization, the second aspect encompasses the ouster of foreign military forces, and
the third aspect encompasses the three manifestations of self-determination outlined above
and explored by this Article. One possible negative counter-effect to this newly
discovered elasticity for the principle of self-determination is the undermining of its
legitimacy. The more diverse the situations to which this principle is applied, the
further its achieved meaning will be eroded. In other words, at some point, when this
metaphorical rubber band can no longer stretch, it will break-becoming dysfunctional
and useless.

37
UMKC SDI ‘08
NATIVE WIND NEG

CULP/EASLEY

SELF-DETERMINATION GENERIC LINK TURNS:

Turn: The affirmative makes the U.S. more able to export its evil,
colonial vision of self determination throughout the world
Fourth World Center for the Study of Indigenous Law and Politics ‘96 (Marc Sills and
Glenn Morris), Spring/Summer 1996, Fourth World Bulletin,
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/public/fwc/Issue10/fwbtoc.html)

The reticence of the US to extend international law is most clearly evident on the issue of
self-determination. Again, the US wants to confine any discussion to a domestic context
and offers the distorted definition of self-determination that it has fabricated in US
Indian Law for application within a global context. According to the US statement, self-
determination "means promoting tribal self-government and autonomy over a broad range
of issues." In domestic practice, the US definition of "self-determination" has meant
the opportunity for "tribal" governments, as subordinate sovereigns (sometimes
referred to as comprador or puppet governments), to expend money that has been
allocated (and can as quickly be unallocated) by the federal government. The US
brand of domestic "self-determination" is exercised in indigenous territories where the
ultimate, overarching title is claimed by the US, contrived through the miraculous
"Christian discovery doctrine" which was sanctified through US case law. "Self-
determination" in US Indian Policy is deliberately shaped around the British colonial
model of "indirect rule." In the US version of "self-determination," indigenous peoples
have rights only as "domestic dependent nations," and only to the degree that the
"plenary (absolute) power" of the US Congress and the President allows them to exercise
those rights. US policy has allowed the government to make solemn international
treaties with indigenous nations (sometimes with their consent, but often through
coercion), take the benefits of the treaties, and then unilaterally violate or completely
abrogate those agreements, without any effective or impartial recourse for the indigenous
peoples. The effect has been to create a state enterprise built on stolen land and resources,
with the dispossessed peoples condemned to an eternity of internal colonialism. Under US
"self-determination" policy, the territorial integrity of every indigenous nation has
been violated, every indigenous government has been altered, supplanted or
destroyed, every indigenous economy has been subverted, and the cultural integrity
of virtually every indigenous nation within the claimed US territory has been assaulted.
Now, the US would like to export its version of "self-determination" and indigenous
freedom to the rest of the world.

38