Answering the 'Rider' Politics DA

Exchange plans, get ideas and ask questions about all areas concerning affirmative cases.

Moderator: lsabino

Answering the 'Rider' Politics DA

Postby brubaie » Tue Nov 01, 2011 2:02 pm

One variety of politics DA is known as the 'Rider' DA. The argument is that legislative action is ground to a halt in the status quo. One political party would really like to pass a piece of controverisal legislation but they can't do it unless it's attached as a rider to something the other party likes.

As an example, consider this version read by the University of Michigan (http://68.233.253.124/xwiki/wiki/openca ... s+Negative)

EPA stripping isn’t passing now
Graves, 11 [Lucia, Huffington Post, “War On The EPA: Republican Bills Would Erase Decades Of Protection”, 10/9, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/0 ... 00664.html]
WASHINGTON -- America's …….. stop them. The White House also has promised vetoes of the measures.

Fiat means that EPA stripping legislation is attached to the plan
Graves, 11 [Lucia, Huffington Post, “War On The EPA: Republican Bills Would Erase Decades Of Protection”, 10/9, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/0 ... 00664.html]
Still, once anti-EPA legislation …. that will not go away, and likely could pick up steam -- especially if Republicans take back the Senate in 2012.

Impact is warming
Parenti, 10 [Christian Parenti, writer for the Nation, NPR, “The Nation: The Case for EPA Action]
On April 1 the Environmental Protection ……… or letting the administration dither away its responsibility to act boldly would be a disaster. The EPA is our last, best hope.

Extinction
Sify 2010 – Sydney newspaper citing Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, professor at University of Queensland and Director of the Global Change Institute, and John Bruno, associate professor of Marine Science at UNC; Sify News, “Could unbridled climate changes lead to human extinction?”, http://www.sify.com/news/could-unbridle ... daahc.html
The findings of the comprehensive ….. findings were published in Science.

Why mention the Rider DA? Because it was a very effective argument before today, when Hoyer gathered 182 Democratic signatures against riders
http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/a ... ing-riders
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has convinced 182 Democrats to oppose including any controversial policy riders in the 2012 appropriations bills.


Why'd he do it?
Hoyer's move is intended as a sign of political strength that will either force Republicans to unite or to drop some of the policy riders, which include measures to block environmental regulations and stop implementation of the new healthcare law.


Will it work? Most likely, but not certainly because...
Hoyer did fail to win the signatures of 12 Democrats, which could give Republicans room to lose a few of their members.


However, it is still very unlikely that controversial riders will pass
Even if a bill with riders clears the House, it would face an uncertain path in a Senate held by Democrats. President Obama could also choose to veto an appropriations measure over a rider. By one calculation, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) would need eight Democrats to join him to pass a rider-laden appropriations bill.
----
Brian Rubaie, Director
brian dot rubaie at ncpa dot org
User avatar
brubaie
nu
 
Posts: 697
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: Dallas, TX

Return to C-X Affirmative

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron