Border Infrastructure Neg

***NAFTA/Trade***

NAFTA Sucks
NAFTA hurts Mexico LAHT 9 (Latin American Herald Tribune, NAFTA Hurts Mexico More Than Spaniards Did, Farmers Say, 2009,
http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=366312&CategoryId=14091, AC)

Free Trade Agreement has done more harm to Mexico than Spain did during the colonial period, the influential CNC farmers confederation said. NAFTA has done in 16 years what it took the Spanish Empire nearly five centuries to do, as the transnational firms that operate in Mexico likewise control production, marketing, fertilizers and transportation of food in the country,
MEXICO CITY

The North American

the CNC said in a statement. The agreement linking the U.S., Mexican and Canadian economies took effect Jan. 1, 1994. On the eve of the Sept. 15-16 bicentennial of independence from Spain, Mexico

finds its food sovereignty diminished by

half, according to the CNC, a group with traditional ties to the main opposition Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI. Imports
now account for 33 percent of the corn the heart of the Mexican diet and 75 percent of the rice consumed in the country, while beef imports have surged 440 percent in the last three years, the CNC says. CNC leader Cruz Lopez Aguilar, who is also a PRI congressman, blames the ills of Mexican agriculture on NAFTA. The trade agreement is as bad as, or worse than, the presence of the Spanish monarchy 200 years ago and I

accuse it (NAFTA) of the existence of nearly 3 million jobless, the 17 percent fall in remittances (from emigrants) and the increasing cost of food, he said. NAFTA was
negotiated and signed during the PRIs 1929-2000 tenure in power, but some elements of the party have joined voices on the left in calling for a revision of the trade pact.

NAFTA kills natives Landau 99 (Saul Landau, NAFTA Hurts Mexicos Poorest, 01/01/1999, http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1999-0101/news/9812310564_1_zapatista-army-chiapas-mexico-s-ruling-pri, AC) Five years ago, on Jan. 1, 1994, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation announced its presence and demanded justice for Mayan peasants -- the poorest inhabitants of Mexico. Subcomandante Marcos, the spokesman, said the Zapatistas chose Jan. 1 to launch the uprising because it marked the beginning of the North American Free Trade Agreement among the United States, Canada and Mexico. "For Indian people, NAFTA is a death sentence," Marcos said. The Zapatistas claimed the Chiapas uprising was a necessary response to the violence felt every day by indigenous and other poor people in Mexico. But above and beyond the daily injustice that poor Mexicans experience, NAFTA

marked Mexico's official entry into the globalization process. To prepare Mexico for the massive entrance of foreign capital, President Carlos Salinas de Gortari revised an article in Mexico's constitution that protected communal lands from sale, rent or lease. This prevented Mayan and other Indian nations from reproducing their families and cultures on their sacred land. The Zapatistas
revolted to alert people around the world to the threat that globalization posed to indigenous and peasant societies. The rebellion burst the "happy Mexico" bubble spun by NAFTA's promoters. But it did not redress the income gap between the handful of very rich and the 60 million very poor; nor did it lessen injustice in Chiapas. The

Mexican government has not met the basic demands of its people. Instead of responding to issues of land, education, medical care, justice and democracy, it
has stationed its occupation army in the pro-Zapatista areas. And the Mexican army has helped equip and train paramilitary gangs. On Dec. 22, 1997, such a group entered the village of Acteal in the Chiapas highlands and systematically slaughtered 45 people, mostly women and children. The Catholic diocese and other reputable organizations linked the killings to the highest levels of the Chiapas state government. In turn, those ruling party officials had links to Mexico's ruling PRI party. Many of those implicated have gone unpunished. By waging this counterinsurgency war and occupying part of its own territory, the

Mexican government is forcing Indians to flee their ancient lands, pushing them out of peasant life and into the vast world labor force. This is NAFTA in action, just as Marcos warned. It's time to face facts. Neither U.S. policy nor the much-heralded Mexican economic model have improved the lives of Mexico's poorest citizens. Congress must examine our so-called free-trade policy with Mexico and our support for the Mexican government. The costs to human life are too great.

NAFTA hurts jobs and causes income inequality

New York Times 3 (Celia W. Dugger, Report Finds Few Benefits for Mexico in NAFTA, 11/19/2003,
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/19/world/report-finds-few-benefits-for-mexico-in-nafta.html, AC) As the North American Free Trade Agreement nears its 10th anniversary, a

study from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace concludes that the pact failed to generate substantial job growth in Mexico, hurt hundreds of thousands of subsistence farmers there and had ''minuscule'' net effects on jobs in the United States. The Carnegie Endowment, an independent, Washington-based research institute,
issued its report on Tuesday to coincide with new trade negotiations aimed at the adoption of a Nafta-like pact for the entire Western Hemisphere. Trade ministers from 34 countries in the Americas are gathering now in Miami. The report seeks to debunk both the fears of American labor that Nafta would lure large numbers of jobs to low-wage Mexico, as well as the hopes of the trade deal's proponents that it would lead to rising wages, as well as declines in income inequality and illegal immigration. Though sorting out the exact causes is complicated, trends are clear. Real

wages in Mexico are lower now than they were when the agreement was adopted despite higher productivity, income inequality is greater there and immigration has continued to soar. ''On balance, Nafta's been rough for rural Mexicans,'' said John J.
Audley, who edited the report. ''For the country, it's probably a wash. It takes more than just trade liberalization to improve the quality of life for poor people around the world.'' The Carnegie findings strike a much more pessimistic note than those of a World Bank team that concluded in a draft report this year that the trade accord ''has brought significant economic and social benefits to the Mexican economy.'' The bank's economists argue that Mexico would have been worse off without the agreement as the country struggled to recover from a deep financial crisis in the mid-1990's and that the income gap between Mexico and the United States is smaller than it would have been otherwise. Luis Servn, research manager for Latin America at the bank, said in an interview that he disagreed with the Carnegie report's contention that the trade agreement had hurt small subsistence farmers. He also said that the higher productivity Mexico had achieved in the Nafta years was ultimately the only route to higher wages there. The intensity of the debate about the agreement's consequences is likely to grow with the approach of the pact's 10th anniversary in January as pro- and antiglobalization forces marshal arguments to influence negotiations for a Free Trade Area of the Americas and for a new bilateral trade deal between the United States and Central America. Carnegie's policy experts stop short of contending that Mexico would have been better off without the agreement. ''Mexico

would have been better off with a

better Nafta,'' said Sandra Polaski, a senior associate at Carnegie who was director of economic research at the Nafta labor secretariat from 1996 to 1999. The authors of the report say developing countries have much to learn from Mexico's mistakes in the Nafta deal. Trade negotiators for Central and South American countries, they said, should
bargain for more gradual tariff reductions on corn, rice and beans -- the staples of subsistence farming -- to give peasants time to adjust to tough competition from large, highly efficient and heavily subsidized American farmers. Carnegie's researchers also say developing countries should push international donors and rich countries to finance transitional assistance for the retraining of workers and farmers displaced by global competition. Developing countries should also seek greater leeway to promote the use of domestic suppliers in manufacturing over imported components -- a step that would increase job creation, the authors say.

NAFTA eliminates job opportunities and undermines growth Fletcher 11 (Ian, Senior Economist of the Coalition for a Prosperous America and research fellow at the U.S. Business and
Industry Council, More Free Trade Agreements? When NAFTA Failed? Huffington Post The Blog, 03/11/2011, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-fletcher/more-free-trade-agreement_b_838196.html, AC) With the Republicans and the Obama administration attempting to rush headlong into a new trade agreement with Korea, and possibly also with Panama and Colombia as well, it is incumbent on Americans to apply a bit of empiricism. How have our past trade agreements worked at all, how's the grand-daddy of them all, NAFTA, doing? Unfortunately, NAFTA

is a veritable case study in failure. This is all the more damning because this treaty was created, and is administered, by the very Washington
elite that is loudest in proclaiming free trade's virtues. So there is no room for excuses about incompetent implementation, the standard alibi for free trade's failures in the developing world. So if free trade was going to work anywhere, it should have been here. Instead, what happened? NAFTA was sold as a policy that would reduce America's trade deficit. But our

trade balance actually worsened against both Canada and Mexico. For the four years prior to NAFTA's implementation in 1994, America's annual deficit with Canada averaged a modest $8.1 billion. Twelve years later, it was up to $71 billion. Our trade with Mexico showed a $1.6 billion surplus in 1993 but by 2010, our deficit had reached $61.6 billion. Eccentric billionaire and 1992 presidential candidate H. Ross Perot was roundly mocked for predicting a "giant sucking sound" of jobs going to Mexico if NAFTA passed. But he has been vindicated. The Department of Labor has estimated that NAFTA cost America 525,000 jobs between 1994 and 2002. According to the more aggressive

Economic Policy Institute: NAFTA

has eliminated some 766,000 job opportunities--primarily for non-college-

educated workers in manufacturing. Contrary to what the American promoters of NAFTA promised U.S. workers, the

agreement did not result in an increased trade surplus with Mexico, but the reverse. As
manufacturing jobs disappeared, workers were down-scaled to lower-paying, less-secure services jobs. Within manufacturing, the threat of employers to move production to Mexico proved a powerful weapon for undercutting workers' bargaining power. The idea of Mexico as a vast export market for American products is a sad joke; Mexicans are simply too poor. In the 1997 words of Business Mexico, a pro-NAFTA publication of the American Chamber of Commerce of Mexico: The reality is that only

between 10 and 20 percent of the population are really considered consumers. The extreme unequal distribution of wealth has created a distorted market, the economy is hamstrung by a work force with a poor level of education, and a sizable chunk of the gross domestic product in devoted to exports rather than production for home consumption. According to official figures that year,
fewer than 18 million Mexicans made more than 5,000 pesos a month. And even that was only about $625: roughly half the U.S. poverty line for a family of four. This has not improved much since, so, as Paul Krugman has pointed out, "Mexico's economy is so small--its GDP is less than four percent that of the United States--that for the foreseeable future it will be neither a major supplier nor a major market." But if NAFTA wasn't a plausible economic bonanza for the U.S. and America's establishment knew it, then what was going on? Krugman again supplies an answer, writing in Foreign Affairs that, "For the United States, NAFTA is essentially a foreign policy rather than an economic issue." The

real agenda was to keep people like President Carlos Salinas, friendly with powerful interests in the U.S., in power in Mexico City. Bottom line? Free trade was pushed not
because of any sincerely anticipated economic benefits, but to serve an extraneous foreign policy agenda. To his credit, Krugman later admitted the utter chicanery of it all, writing in The New Democrat in 1996 that: The agreement was sold under false pretences. Over the protests of most economists, the Clinton Administration chose to promote NAFTA as a jobs-creation program. Based on little more than guesswork, a few economists argued that NAFTA would boost our trade surplus with Mexico, and thus produce a net gain in jobs. With utterly spurious precision, the administration settled on a figure of 200,000 jobs created--and this became the core of the NAFTA sales pitch. NAFTA was sold in Mexico as Mexico's ticket to the big time. Mexicans were told they were choosing between gradually converging with America's advanced economy and regressing to the status of a backwater like neighboring Guatemala. What actually happened? In reality, the income gap between the United States and Mexico grew (by over 10 percent) in the first decade of the agreement. This doesn't mean America boomed; we didn't. But Mexico slumped terribly. In NAFTA's first decade, the Mexican economy averaged 1.8 percent real growth per capita. By contrast, under the protectionist economic policies of 1948-73, Mexico had averaged 3.2 percent growth. Because Mexico's labor force grows by a million people a year, job creation must get ahead of this curve in order to raise wages; this is simply not happening. Mexican workers can often be hired for less than the taxes on American workers; the average maquiladora wage is $1.82/hr. The maquiladora sector is deliberately isolated from the rest of the Mexican economy and contributes little to it. Workers' rights, wages, and benefits are deliberately suppressed. Environmental laws are frequently just ignored. Mexican agriculture hasn't benefited either: NAFTA

turned Mexico from a food exporter to a food importer overnight and over a million farm jobs were wiped out by cheap American food exports, massively subsidized by our various farm programs. Promoters of NAFTA have tried to cover up its problems by using inappropriate yardsticks of success. For example, they have claimed that the expansion of total trade among the three nations vindicates the pact. But this expansion has been due to a growing American deficit. Because a growing deficit means, by definition, that our imports have been growing faster than our exports, there is no way that economic growth per se will ever solve the problem. Congress was right to reject NAFTA initially, which never enjoyed sincere majority support in either the House or the
Senate and was bought with sheer patronage by Bill Clinton. To be fair, NAFTA is not the only thing that has been wrong with the Mexican economy in recent decades. But NAFTA was the capstone to a series of dubious free-market economic experiments carried out there since the early 1980s. Between 1990 and 1999, Mexican manufacturing wages fell 21 percent. It gets worse. Despite the fact that, compared to the U.S., Mexico is a cheap-labor economy, there are plenty of nations with even lower average wages. For example, Mexico is now losing manufacturing jobs to China in such areas as computer parts, electrical components, toys, textiles, sporting goods, and shoes: 200,000 in the first two years of the millennium alone. Mexico's trade deficit against the rest of the world has actually worsened since NAFTA was signed. In the words of liberal commentator William Greider, "The Mexican maquiladora cities thought they were going to become the next South Korea, but instead they may be the next Detroit." NAFTA is not America's only free trade agreement, of course. But our other agreements tell similar tales. We have signed 11 since 2000: with Australia, Bahrain, Chile, Colombia, Jordan, Korea, Oman, Morocco, Singapore, Panama, and Peru. (El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic were lumped together in the Central America Free Trade Agreement or CAFTA.) Every agreement but one has coincided with greater American deficits. The only exception is Singapore, where our existing surplus increased somewhat. But Singapore is tiny, a mere city-state. Nevertheless, our government pushes for more. As of 2011, country agreements with Colombia, South Korea, Oman and Panama were pending ratification, and the U.S. was in stalled negotiations with Malaysia, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates. Next on the list are reportedly Algeria, Egypt, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In December 2009, the Obama administration announced its intention to eventually join the existing Trans-Pacific Partnership and elevate it into a full-blown free trade area comprising the U.S. plus Singapore, Chile, New Zealand, Brunei, Australia, Peru, and Vietnam. In December 2010, the administration reached a slightly-improved deal with South Korea and announced it would push for Congressional ratification. When will we ever learn?

Imports under NAFTA displace domestic goods and kill jobs

Scott 3 (Robert E., international economist at the Economic Policy Institute, The High Price of Free Trade: NAFTAs Failure Has
Cost The United States Jobs Across The Nation, 11/17/2003, http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/, AC) Since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was signed in 1993, the rise in the U.S. trade deficit with Canada and Mexico through 2002 has

caused the displacement of production that supported 879,280 U.S. jobs. Most of those lost jobs were high-wage positions in manufacturing industries. The loss of these jobs is just the most visible tip of NAFTAs impact on the U.S. economy. In fact, NAFTA has also contributed to rising income inequality, suppressed real wages for production workers, weakened workers collective bargaining powers and ability to organize unions, and reduced fringe benefits . NAFTA
is a free trade and investment agreement that provided investors with a unique set of guarantees designed to stimulate foreign direct investment and the movement of factories within the hemisphere, especially from the United States to Canada and Mexico. Furthermore, no protections were contained in the core of the agreement to maintain labor or environmental standards. As a result,

NAFTA tilted the economic playing field in favor of investors, and against workers and the environment, resulting in a hemispheric race to the bottom in wages and environmental quality. False promises Proponents of new trade agreements that build on NAFTA, such as the proposed Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA), have frequently claimed that such deals create jobs and raise incomes in the United States.
When the Senate recently approved President Bushs request for fast-track trade negotiating authority1 for an FTAA, Bush called the bills passage a historic moment that would lead to the creation of more jobs and more sales of U.S. products abroad. Two weeks later at his economic forum in Texas, the president argued, (i)t is essential that we move aggressively *to negotiate new trade pacts+, because trade means jobs. More trade means higher incomes for American workers. The problem with these statements is that they misrepresent the real effects of trade on the U.S. economy: trade both creates and destroys jobs. Increases

in U.S. exports tend to create jobs in this country, but increases in imports tend to reduce jobs because the imports displace goods that otherwise would have been made in the United States by domestic workers. President Bushs statementsand similar remarks from others in his administration and
from members of both major parties in Congressare based only on the positive effects of exports, ignoring the negative effects of imports. Such arguments are an attempt to hide the costs of new trade deals, in order to boost the reported benefits. These are effectively the same tactics that led to the bankruptcies of Enron, WorldCom, and several other major corporations. The impact on employment of any change in trade is determined by its effect on the trade balance, the difference between exports and imports. Ignoring imports and counting only exports is like balancing a checkbook by counting only deposits but not withdrawals. The many officials, policy analysts, and business leaders who ignore the negative effects of imports and talk only about the benefits of exports are engaging in false accounting. NAFTA supporters

frequently tout the benefits of exports while remaining silent on the effects of rapid import growth (Scott 2000). Former President George H.W. Bush,
whose administration negotiated NAFTA, recently claimed that two million NAFTA-related jobs have been created in the United States since 1993 (Bush 2002). But any evaluation of the impact of trade on the domestic economy must include the impact of both imports and exports. If the United States exports 1,000 cars to Mexico, many American workers are employed in their production. If, however, the United States imports 1,000 cars from Mexico rather than building them domestically, then a similar number of Americans who would have otherwise been employed in the auto industry will have to find other work. Another critically important promise made by the promoters of NAFTA was that the United States would benefit because of increased exports to a large and growing consumer market in Mexico. This market, in turn, was to be based on an expansion of the middle class that, it was claimed, would grow rapidly due to the wealth created in Mexico by NAFTA. Thus, most U.S. exports were predicted to be consumer products destined for consumption in Mexico. In fact, most U.S. exports to Mexico are parts and components that are shipped to Mexico and assembled into final products that are then returned to the United States. The number of products that Mexico assembles and exportssuch as refrigerators, TVs, automobiles, and computershas mushroomed under the NAFTA agreement. Many of these products are produced in the Maquiladora export processing zones in Mexico, where parts enter duty free and are re-exported to the United States in assembled products, with duties paid only on the value added in Mexico. The share of total U.S. exports to Mexico that is represented by Maquiladora imports has risen from 39% of U.S. exports in 1993 to 61% in 2002.2 The number of such plants increased from 2,114 in 1993 to 3,251 in 2002 (INEGI 2003a, 2003b).

NAFTA devastates the manufacturing sector Scott 3 (Robert E., international economist at the Economic Policy Institute, The High Price of
Free Trade: NAFTAs Failure Has Cost The United States Jobs Across The Nation, 11/17/2003, http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/, RLA)

NAFTAs impact in the United States, however, has been often obscured by the boom-and-bust cycle that drove domestic consumption, investment, and speculation in the mid- and late 1990s. Between

1994 (when NAFTA was implemented) and 2000, total employment rose rapidly in the United States, causing overall unemployment to fall to record low levels. But unemployment began to rise early in 2001, and 2.4 million jobs were lost in the domestic economy between March 2001 and October 2003 (BLS 2003). These job losses have been primarily concentrated in the manufacturing sector, which has experienced a total decline of 2.4 million jobs since March 2001. As job growth has dried up in the economy, the underlying problems caused by U.S. trade deficits have become much more apparent, especially in manufacturing.

NAFTA increases the trade deficit, resulting in unemployment Scott 3 (Robert E., international economist at the Economic Policy Institute, The High Price of
Free Trade: NAFTAs Failure Has Cost The United States Jobs Across The Nation, 11/17/2003, http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/, RLA)
Research by Monge-Naranjo (2002) shows that the passage

of NAFTA immediately translated into significant increases in FDI into Mexico, in large part because NAFTA made Mexico an attractive export platform for labor-intensive manufacturing. A recent report from the World Bank reaches a similar conclusion: In
particular, a conservative estimate of NAFTAs influence would suggest that it is responsible for increasing FDI in Mexico by about 70% (Cuevas, Messmacher, and Werner 2002). NAFTA has resulted in a huge surge of foreign direct investment into Canada and Mexico, as shown in Figure 2. This figure measures changes in the stock of FDI over 10-year periods, before and after NAFTA took effect (IMF 2003).4 Between 1983 and 1992, before NAFTA, the stock of FDI in Mexico increased by $23 billion U.S. dollars. In the decade after NAFTA, between 1993 and 2002, the stock of FDI increased $124 billion, an increase of 435% over the decade before NAFTA. In Canada, the story is much the same. Between 1983 and 1992, before NAFTA, the stock of FDI in Canada increased by $44 billion U.S. dollars. In the decade after NAFTA, between 1993 and 2002, the stock of FDI increased $202 billion, an increase of 354% over the decade before NAFTA. Inflows

of FDI, along with bank loans and other types of foreign financing, have funded the construction of thousands of Mexican and Canadian factories that produce goods for export to the United States. Canada and Mexico have absorbed $326 billion in FDI from all sources since 1993. One result is that the United States absorbed 84% of Mexicos total exports in 2002, up from 77% in 1993.5 The growth of U.S. imports from these factories has contributed substantially to the growing U.S. trade deficit and the related job losses. The growth of foreign production capacity in these
factories has played a major role in the rapid growth in exports to the United States.

***NADBank Adv***

NADBank Fails
NADBank is inefficient Taylor 2 (Steve Taylor, Ag commissioner disappointed with NADBank funding decisions, 12/09/2012,
http://intrabecc.cocef.org/programs/intranetnotasperiodico/uploadedFiles/Decisions.pdf, AC) AUSTIN Agriculture Commissioner Susan Combs has joined Rio Grande Valley farmers in protesting an apparent U-turn by the U.S. Treasury on the criteria to be used for funding water conservation projects. At the annual meeting of the North

American Development Bank on Thursday, Treasury official William Schuerch shocked a delegation of Valley farmers leaders when he claimed that a potential $40 million in grant funding was not tied to Mexicos growing water debt to the United States. Combs and Valley farmers were under the impression that
the Water Conservation Infrastructure Fund came about as a result of a "financial side agreement" to Minute 308, an international accord signed by the United States and Mexico last June. Minute 308 was triggered by Mexicos 1.5 million acre-feet water debt to the United States and its failure to meet the terms of a 1944 water treaty. "Clearly Minute 308 of June 28, 2002, expected significant funds to be spent on both sides of the border to solve the water crisis between the United States and Mexico by funding conservation projects," Combs said. "I am amazed that the Treasury Department does not have the same understanding." Combs said she was also "extremely disappointed and dismayed" with NADBanks apparent "indecision"

on allocating the

potential $40 million to South Texas projects. NADBank fails cost inefficiencies, sovereignty

Vanderpool 6 (Tim Vanderpool, NADBank Blues: Will Border Cleanup Efforts Be Abandoned, 04/13/2006,
http://www.tucsonweekly.com/tucson/nadbank-blues/Content?oid=1083801, AC) Still, the NADBank has been no stranger to criticism. Environmentalists

condemn its secretive operating style, while others have chastised the bank's inability to offer lower-interest loans to desperately poor communities. Congress liberalized the finance rate structure in 2001, allowing the bank more loan flexibility. But the criticism has nonetheless grown among U.S. Treasury Department officials, who target the bank's administrative costs totaling about $80 million over the past dozen years. There are also NADBank
critics south of the line. According to Hugh Holub, they include officials at Mexico's treasury department, Hacienda. "We were getting info that the

attack (on NADBank) was coming from Hacienda," Holub says. "The EPA reaches through

the NADBank to (provide grants). So you have the EPA setting all these terms and conditions for spending that money. The

Mexicans didn't particularly like having conditions imposed on them--conditions that were impinging on their sovereignty." Attempts to contact Hacienda officials for comment were unsuccessful. Nancy Woo is
associate director of the EPA's Region 9 Water Division. She denies that the agency is heavy-handed in Mexico. "I don't think that's an issue," she says from her San Francisco office. For example, "We have a very good working relationship with (Mexico's) federal water authority." This conflict hit a fever pitch last year, when word leaked out that NADBank's future was under discussion between U.S.

Treasury and Hacienda negotiators. Those murky bull sessions reportedly included disbanding the NADBank altogether. Such claims are denied by Brookly McLaughlin, a Treasury Department
spokeswoman. "There has probably been some confusion," she says. "There were all these reports that we were talking about closing the bank, and we never said that. We had no intention to close the bank." Not true, says NADBank spokesman Juan Antonio Flores. "We learned in late January that there were discussions among some representatives at the U.S. Treasury and Hacienda," he says. "They were looking at the role of the bank and what its future may be. Among options possible closure

being considered was of the bank." Still, Treasury Department officials have been more honest about their ongoing complaints. "Our concern is with the functioning of the bank," says McLaughlin. "We think the administrative costs are pretty high. NADBank empirically fails high interest rates, poor management

AP 1 (Associated Press, NADBank Admits Poor Lending Record, Lubbock Avalanche-Journal,

http://lubbockonline.com/stories/081401/upd_075-5743.shtml, AC)

BROWNSVILLE, Texas {AP} Officials of the North American Development Bank, a U.S.-Mexico development bank set up under the North American Free Trade Agreement, admit they have failed to meet their goal of funding key environmental projects near the border. "We are the first to admit our lending record is very, very, poor. Yes, in a sense we have failed miserably but that's because of the interest-rate situation. It has been that way since we were set up," Jorge Garcs, deputy-managing director at the San Antonio-based NADBank, told the Brownsville Herald in Tuesday's editions. NADBank has loaned only $11 million out of an authorized $3 billion in its five years in existence. "We are well aware of our constraints and are hoping to see some modifications to make more loans available." The funding is used to help communities within 100 kilometers on either side of the border with water and wastewater projects. Critics blame a combination of high interest rates, poor management and federal bureaucracy for the banks performance. They are urging Presidents Bush and Fox to overhaul the institution when they discuss the issue in Washington in September. Officials from NADBank and its sister organization, the Border Environmental Cooperation Commission, met in Washington last week to hammer out new loan guidelines in advance of the Bush-Fox summit but could not reach agreement. Officials from the bank say they have only $350 million in cash to lend right now, not the $3 billion in capitalization pledged by the U.S. and Mexico, but admit they are not meeting the challenge presented by border communities. "It's clear there's been a fatal flaw in the execution of their mandate," said Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda, a UCLA professor who, as an adviser to President Clinton, helped draft the rules of the banks lending process. "The Treasury Department has insisted the bank sets interest rates above the market rate and that is completely inappropriate for the border's infrastructure needs. It's been a wretched performance," Hinojosa-Ojeda said. NADBank, comprising U.S. and Mexico state department, treasury and environmental agency officials, was formed through legislation parallel to NAFTA in 1996. The role of the Border Environmental Cooperation Commission is to identify and certify projects for NADBank to fund. While only loaning $11 million during the last five years, NADBank has helped distribute grants totaling almost $1 billion to the border region, most of the funds coming from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The Mexican government has to match EPA grants when the water and wastewater projects are for Mexican border communities.

NadBank is ineffective LCLAA, 04 (Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, Public Citizen, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C.,
dedicated to advancing consumer rights, through lobbying, litigation, research, publications and information services, Another Americas is Possible: The Impact of NAFTA on the U.S. Latino Community and Lessons for Future Trade Agreements, A Joint Report by Labor Council for Latin American Advancement and Public Citizens Global Trade Watch http://www.citizen.org/documents/LatinosReportFINAL.pdf)//YS, accessed 7/02/13 The institutions created to fund environmental cleanup efforts and public health infrastructure development the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American Development Bank (NADBank)

have been ineffective at best, hamstrung by cumbersome procedures and unreasonable criteria (such as requiring impoverished communities to come up with matching funds in order to gain a loan for assistance). During the NAFTA debate in 1993, NADBank was promoted to a skeptical Congress and public as offering an expected lending capacity of $2 billion.38 However, by March 2004, it had still only disbursed $186 million in financing for U.S. and Mexico projects combined.39 To put this in perspective, the cost of the U.S.Mexico border environmental cleanup was estimated by the Sierra Club in 1993 to be $20.7 billion.40 Since then, the problems have only worsened the Mexican government estimated the cost of NAFTA-related
environmental damage at $47 billion in 1999 alone.

NADB Has no money

NAD bank funds Environment Infrastructure and its total budget is less than 400 million, and individual loans rarely exceded 15 million Reuters 12 (Dude, you cant indict Reuters, youll look bad TEXT-S&P revises North American Development Bank outlook
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/23/idUSWNA177320120723 Jul 23, 2012)

The negative outlook reflects rising embedded risks in NADB's loan portfolio. Rating Action On July 23,
2012, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'AA+/A-1+' foreign currency issuer credit ratings on the North American Development Bank (NADB). At the same time, we revised the outlook to negative from stable. Rationale The ratings on NADB reflect its strong capital ratios and ample balance sheet liquidity. Its

business profile, however, is weaker than other multilateral lending institutions. The outlook revision to negative reflects our expectation that NADB's narrow lending mandate will continue to pose embedded risks to NADB's loan portfolio as it expands in the next few years. NADB was established by an intergovernmental agreement between the U.S.
(AA+/Negative/A-1+; foreign currency sovereign ratings) and the United Mexican States (BBB/Stable/A-2; foreign currency sovereign ratings) in 1993, as an outcrop of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Its mission is to finance environmental infrastructure projects within 100 kilometers north and 300 kilometers south of the border between the two countries. These include the U.S. states of Arizona (AA-/Stable; global scale ratings), California (A-/Positive), New Mexico (AA+/Stable), and Texas (AA+/Stable). The Mexican states, which we rate according to the Mexican national (CaVal) rating scale, include Baja California (mxAA-/Stable), Chihuahua (not rated), Coahuila (mxBBB-/Negative), Nuevo Leon (mxA/Stable), Sonora (mxA/Negative), and Tamaulipas (mxAA/Negative). The majority of NADB's loans are typically less than $15 million, and although its loan portfolio is growing, the bank retains a small market share relative to its sub-federal government borrowers' total debt financing. As of year-end Dec. 31, 2011, just under two-thirds of its $396 million international program loan exposure (net of foreign exchange adjustments) was to Mexican borrowers, principally public sector loans collateralized by federal government transfers and denominated in pesos. Standard & Poor's views the risks from the geographic proximity of NADB's obligors (a feature of its narrow lending mandate) and the use of Mexican federal government transfers to collateralize a significant share of the bank's loans to public-sector borrowers as highly correlated. We expect that NADB's loan portfolio will remain
highly concentrated and this characteristic will continue to constrain our ratings on NADB. In addition, NADB's non-accrual loans rose to 5% of total international loans at the end of 2011 from 2% the previous year, and the allowance for loan losses covered 40% of non-accrual international program loans at the end of 2011. NADB has a strong level of capitalization. As of Dec. 31, 2011, NADB's narrow risk-bearing capacity (shareholders' equity plus allowance for loan losses) covered 127% of its development-related exposure (DRE), which is comprised solely of loans. Although this ratio has steadily declined and we expect it to decline further--as NADB mobilizes its resources in order to execute its mandate--we believe that capitalization will remain a supporting factor of NADB's credit. The bank also has callable capital from its shareholders, but we place less weight on this feature of NADB's capital structure, particularly in light of the appropriation risk in the U.S. should a call be made. Given

NADB's relatively small size (total assets of $828 million as of Dec. 31, 2011) and its strong capitalization, NADB is an infrequent issuer in the bond markets. Its balance sheet liquidity is strong, with liquid assets representing 43% of total assets at the end of 2011.
These liquid assets are invested in securities of its two shareholders, as well as corporate and structured assets rated 'AA' or higher.

NADB uses currency interest-rate swaps to transform its dollar-denominated debt and equity capital to peso-denominated loans for its Mexican borrowers. These swaps create some volatility in NADB's comprehensive income. Outlook The outlook on the ratings is negative. Further increases in the
embedded risk of NADB's portfolio or the deterioration of its loan portfolio performance could result in a downgrade. The bank's plan to increase its leverage will likely preclude an upgrade. Additionally, our revised multilateral lending institutions criteria, which we expect to have in place by the end of this year, could affect the ratings. Related Criteria And Research

It funds water infrastructure and road maintenance not new investment and it can only fund the plan if it is environmentally beneficial

Balido 8/29/2011 Nelson Balido is the president of the Border Trade Alliance http://www.thebta.org/btanews/bill-to-expandnadbank-projects-holds-potential-to-make-big-impact-for-border.html Bill to expand NADBank projects holds potential to make big impact for border Over the past sixteen years of operation, the NADBank

has been vitally important to improving basic services in the border region by financing numerous water, wastewater, solid waste and street paving projects, among others. To date, NADBank has provided approximately $1.24 billion in loans and grants to support 149 infrastructure projects in the border region, which represents a total investment of $3.26 billion and will benefit more than 12.8 million residents of the region. One particularly notable
accomplishment is the significant improvement in wastewater treatment coverage on the Mexican side of the border. In 1995, it was estimated that 27 percent of wastewater generated in border communities was being treated. According to Mexicos National Water Commission (CONAGUA), wastewater treatment coverage has now reached approximately 85 percent. This dramatic improvement is in large part due to the work of NADBank. The

bank remains limited, however, in the projects it can finance. Its charter permits the bank only to get involved in projects deemed to have a significant positive environmental impact. There have been cases where the NADBank has taken interest in projects involving international ports of entry that would benefit an areas economy and create new jobs. Yet the bank has been unable to deliver financing to such projects, over the objections of its board of directors, for not demonstrating a sufficient environmental benefit to merit NADBank financing.

NADBank cant solve relations

NADBank fails only works for environmental problems doesnt spillover into other parts of the relationship - Uncertainty kills the environmental benefit also means perception is key Kevin P. Gallagher 2009 Associate Professor of International Relations. (BA, Northeastern University; MA, PhD, Tufts
University) Specialization: Economic Development, Trade and Investment Policy, International Environmental Policy, Latin America. NAFTA and the Environment: Lessons from Mexico and Beyond http://www.ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/PardeeNAFTACh6GallagherEnvtNov09.pdf Renewed Institutions for Environment and Development In order for the expanded role of environmental issues under NAFTA to work and be accepted, the existing mechanisms for nancing environmental initiatives in the region will need to be strengthened. As it stands, funding for environmental improvements in Mexico has been on the decline since NAFTA. If the

environmental provisions of NAFTA are seen as an unfunded mandate there will be great reluctance or ability on the part of the Mexican government to carry those provisions out. Indeed, there is some evidence that such perceptions persisted when NAFTA was signed, partly explaining why the environmental record under NAFTA has been poor in Mexico. 14 The NADBANK was originally proposed by prominent economists Albert Fishlow, Sherman Robinson, and Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda. 15 The idea was that the institution would serve as a regional development and adjustment assistance bank to help harmonize development in North America. The NADBANK was indeed established under NAFTA, but in the end only to address environmental problems in the U.S.-Mexico border. The organization was long plagued by difculties and reformed by the Bush and Fox administrations in 2001, but only to strengthen its mandate to U.S.-Mexico border environmental issues. A revitalized NADBANK would go back
to its originally proposed idea of being a development bank and adjustment assistance facilitator, modeled after the structural funds under European economic integration and Brazils national development bank, (BNDES). To that end, the NADBANK

would have to be recapitalized by NAFTA governments and be able to sell bonds and take equity stakes in order to raise more funds when needed as well. In relation to the environment in all three NAFTA countries, a revitalized NADBANK would have to: Support small scale, sustainable agriculture initiatives provide loans for small- and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) for innovation and to comply with
environmental regulations. provide loans and

financing support for public infrastructure renewable energy development, and environmental cleanup projects. Support public-private partnerships for environmental related research and development activities. develop and maintain and active research team that examines the environment and development aspects of the NAFTA countries and bank activities.

Agency Overstretch
Expanding the NADBank mandate to include transportation infrastructure crushes environment-based projects overstretches the institution

Kourous (directs the IRC's BIOC program, Writer, Editor & Senior Program Associate at International Relations Center (IRC)) October 2000 The Great NADBank Debate ProQuest
George

The charter that created BECC and NADBank requires the institutions to support projects that address "water pollution, wastewater treatment, municipal solid waste management, and related matters." Now, NADBank management is recommending that this list be expanded to include seven new areas, including: general air quality projects; air quality projects related to street paving; housing improvements and mortgages; industrial and hazardous wastes; municipal urban roads and public transportation; water and wastewater home installations; and water transfers (agricultural to municipal). The recommendation has gotten mixed reviews. Municipal
government officials working to provide their communities with potable water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste disposal facilities are the most skeptical. Hector Gonzalez, Strategic Business Manager at the El Paso Water Utilities Board, thinks that these are still the priority areas for border infrastructure development and that BECC and NADBank should stick to their original mission. "Our concern is that by

expanding the scope of the kinds of projects they fund, they might limit funding for water and wastewater projects," Gonzalez explains. "There's still lots of work to be done in those areas, and the focus should be there first." Mariano Martinez, Director of Public Works for the border town of Calexico, California, is also wary. "I don't agree with it," he says. "They're going to lose sight of the original intent, which was to address these environmental infrastructure needs, especially in small border communities." Border environment expert Mark Spalding, while
not 100% opposed to all the proposed additions, has similar concerns. "I would like to search for more and better ways to make NADBank's capital affordable," he says, "rather than to quickly over-expand the mandate. After all, the

original mandate was selected for a reason." In addition to these concerns, other aspects of the bank's proposal have raised red flags for border environmentalists. For example, Mark Spalding and others have pointed out that aside from diverting resources from the border's still-pressing needs related to clean water, wastewater treatment, and solid waste disposal, some of the new areas proposed by NADBank--such as transportation infrastructure and water transfers--could easily exacerbate environmental problems on the border rather than ameliorate them. "Water transfers," notes Spalding, "are not environmentally sound. They often foster further population growth and neglect the needs of natural ecosystems, including in-stream flows." Another concern is that many of the new projects proposed by NADBank are more likely to benefit private industry than border communities. A proposed railway to connect the port of San Diego to Arizona and the rest of the U.S., for instance, is highlighted in the bank's
report as a way of reducing traffic congestion and air pollution. These are difficult goals to find fault with, say environmentalists, but ultimately will benefit the private sector most--at the possible expense of the border's poor households, many of whom still lack basic services like running water and sewage disposal.

NADBank expansion crushes the BECC

Kourous (directs the IRC's BIOC program, Writer, Editor & Senior Program Associate at International Relations Center (IRC)) October 2000 The Great NADBank Debate ProQuest
George Smothering BECC

Because this debate started as a discussion focused solely on NADBank, little attention was paid to the impact that mandate expansion would have on BECC. Most observers agree, however, that because NADBank is required to work with BECC and can only fund BECC-certified projects, any expansion at the bank would have to be mirrored at BECC. Indeed, a favorite phrase of NADBank General
Manager Victor Miramontes used to be that BECC and NADBank were "joined at the hip." Aside from the possible side-effect of diverting attention and resources away from the border's pressing water, waste-water, and solid waste infrastructure needs, expanding

NADBank's mandate and requiring BECC to match that expansion would place an additional financial burden on the already strapped-for-cash institution. "Currently, BECC is too under-funded to do more than a cursory review of water, wastewater, and solid waste projects, where it does have

considerable expertise," says Cyrus Reed. " Any

expansion of the types of projects considered would necessitate creating some kind of financial mechanism to assure an adequate BECC review ,
administration of that review, and the required public participation component." Each year, BECC's budget must depend upon appropriations from both Mexico and the United States. BECC

appropriations debates have become annual battles, and have led to an actual drop in BECC's budget even as the institution has taken on more projects and responsibilities. If the expansion of NADBank's mandate were tied to increased funds, it might actually help put BECC on more solid ground. On the other hand, if that expansion comes without additional funding for BECC, border environmentalists warn that BECC will find itself severely overstrained and could buckle. Organizations like the Texas Center for Policy Studies caution that, even with additional funding, this could still be a danger. Despite the fact the BECC and NADBank are required to work together as sister institutions, the bank has done little to bring BECC into the process of examining mandate expansion. When BECC first caught wind that the bank was considering the matter, it
suggested that a bi-institution working committee be formed, but NADBank did not bite. BECC also suggested a jointly conducted series of public consultations, again with no bank follow up. BECC also asked to make a public presentation on the topic at NADBank's last public board of director's meeting in July, but the bank declined BECC's offer. "We're

not particularly happy about the manner in which the NADBank set out to do this, and that has mainly to do with the fact that NADBank and the BECC are sister institutions that are supposed to work like two arms on the same body," says Lynda Taylor, "and they sort of launched this initiative without any real discussion with the BECC. They just sort of told us, `we're doing this, and we'll take your comments when we take all the other public comments.'" Mark Spalding says NADBank's failure to consult with BECC when developing its proposal was a serious mistake. "It appears that the draft document was prepared without direct and meaningful advance consultation with the BECC," he notes. "That omission alone makes the draft fatally flawed. Mandate expansion is too important an issue to go without such consultation, and the NADBank board should take no action until such full consultation is undertaken."

EXT Uniquness
NADB currently funds only environmental infrastructure BECC 142 [Border Environment Cooperation Commission, AN INDEPENDENT, BINAT IONAL ORGANIZATION CREATED TO
SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS IN THE 100 KM REGION ON EITHER SIDE OF THE U.S.-MEXICO BORDER. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/border/Documents/becc.pdf ]

The Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) is an independent, binational organization created to support the development of environmental infrastructure projects in the 100 km region on either side of the U.S.-Mexico border. The Governments of the United States and Mexico created the BECC, and its sister organization, the North American Development Bank (NADBank), pursuant to an Agreement between the two Governments, in November of 1993. The two organizations provide a new, bilateral approach for the development and financing of environmental infrastructure projects (water supply, wastewater treatment, and municipal solid waste). The BECC identifies, assists, evaluates, and certifies projects for financing consideration from the NADBank, or other funding sources. The BECC and NADBank work hand-in-hand to develop and finance projects in the border region.
When the NADBank is fully capitalized, it will have the lending capacity of $3 billion dollars, with contributions made equally by the United States and Mexico, to leverage the financing needed by border communities. NADBank has additional resources to supplement its loan funding. The Border Environment Infrastructure Fund (BEIF), a $170 million grant program initially funded by EPA, was created to provide grants for construction and transition funds to BECC-certified projects. Furthermore, the investment of private capital or equity capital and additional sources of funding is critical to complement NADBanks resources.

EXT - Link
NADB funds are limited- expanding projects hurts environmental infrastructure GAO 2k US General Accounting Office, Report to Congressional Requesters, (US Mexico Border- Despite Some Progress,
Environmental Infrastructure challenge remain March 2000, http://www.gao.gov/assets/230/228734.pdf) The Border Environment Cooperation Commissions primary function is to certify that proposals submitted by border communities for environmental infrastructure projects meet criteria for technical and financial feasibility and that the projects are environmentally sound, self-sustaining, and supported by the public. The Border Commission also assists states and localities in the preparation, development, implementation, and oversight of environmental projects in the border region. Based on guidance in

the Border Commissions charter, the board of directors has limited its area of consideration to water, wastewater, and solid waste disposal. The Border Commission emphasizes the importance of project sustainability in its certification process because, in the past, projects have been built in poor communities with grants and other assistance that could not be properly maintaineed due to the communities limited institutional capacity and financial resources. The Border Commission also provides technical assistance to border
communities with project development activities, including devising plans, creating project designs, and performing environmental assessments. According to Border Commission officials, the process to develop and certify a project generally takes between 3 and 5 years, depending on (1) the complexity of the project, (2) the level of development a project is at when submitted, (3) the institutional capacity of the community, and (4) the amount of technical assistance the Border Commission needs to provide to the community. (Table 3 in app. I provides further details on the Border Commissions project identification and development process.) As of September 1999, the Border

Commission had certified 31 projects 12 in Mexico and 19 in the United States. Twenty-eight projects are for water and wastewater treatment systems, and 3 are for solid waste disposa
facilities. The total estimated construction cost of these projects is $680.2 million, and, when completed, they are expected to benefit a total of 6.7 million people. (See table 4 in app. I for more details on the 31 Border Commission-certified projects.) The

United States and Mexico provide annual appropriations to the Border Environment Cooperation Commission to cover operational expenses. In addition, most of the Environmental Protection Agencys technical assistance funding
to U.S. and Mexican communities for water or wastewater treatment projects is provided through the Border Commission. (See table 6 in app. I for more details on Border Commission funding.) Only

projects certified by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission qualify for construction financial assistance from the North American Development Bank. The Banks primary purpose is to facilitate financing for the development, execution, and operation of environmental infrastructure projects. The Bank may make
loans and/or loan guarantees, and it also administers Environmental Protection Agency grant funds through the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund. Established in 1997, the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund provides grants to communities to reduce the total cost of needed projects. These grant

funds may be applied to water and wastewater projects on the U.S. side of the border and on the Mexican side, if the infrastructure deficiency affects both sides
of the border. If grant funds are used on the Mexican side of the border, Mexico must provide an equal border investment. The Bank also provides technical assistance to communities to help them develop the financial and administrative capacities of utility managers and their staffs. The United States and Mexico agreed to contribute equally to the capitalization of the bank. The agreement called for a total of $3 billion $450 million in paid-in capital and an additional $2.55 billion in callable capital. 8 Ten percent of the paid-in capital was earmarked to community adjustment and investment activities in both countries. To date, each country has contributed $174.4 million, or 78 percent, of the Banks paid-in capital, with the remaining paid-in capital to be paid by September 2004. As of September 1999, the Bank had obligated a total of $154.5 million in loans and grants to fund construction for 20 Border Commission-certified projects. Of the total, $11.2 million was provided through direct loans. These loans represent only 3.2 percent of the Banks total paid-in capital contributed to date. The biggest source of the Banks assistance has been through Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund grants, which had an initial funding of $170 million. All but 4 of the 20 Bank-financed projects had such grant funding. Since the creation of the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund, $143.4 million have been obligatedrepresenting 93 percent of the total funds provided through the Bank. Applications

for $34.4 million were

pending certification by December 1999, which will deplete the initial funding. However, as of December 1999, the
Environmental Protection Agency allocated an additional $41 million to the Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund. According to North American Development Bank officials, without

continued funding for Border Environmental Infrastructure Fund grants, environmental infrastructure development along the border will be jeopardized. Figure 2
shows the breakdown of all funding sources for the 20 projects. The Bank provided $85.2 million, or 21 percent, of U.S. project costs, and $69.3 million, or 50 percent, of Mexican project costs through loans or Environmental Protection Agency grants. The

grants,

however, amounted to 96 percent and 88 percent of the Banks funds provided to U.S. and Mexican projects, respectively. (See table 7 in app. I for more details on the 20 Bank-financed projects.)

Impact I/L Renewables

Environmental funding key to alternative energy development BusinessWire 1/14/13- (North American Development Bank and Soriana Move Forward on Wind Energy January 14,
2013, http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130114006289/en/North-American-Development-Bank-Soriana-Move-Wind) Organizacin Soriana, who with the Mexican company GEMEX and Swiss investor Grupo ECOS have formed the company Compaa Elica de Tamaulipas S.A. de C.V. (CETSA), announce the closing of financing for the construction of its first wind energy project on the farm cooperative known as Ejido El Porvenir in Reynosa, Tamaulipas. The North American Development Bank (NADB) and the Mexican commercial bank Grupo Financiero Banorte (BANORTE) are

providing financing to CETSA for the project. The project consists of the installation of 30 wind turbines, each with a nominal capacity of 1.8 MW, which will be
provided by the Danish company VESTAS, a worldwide supplier of wind turbines, as announced by Vestas Mediterranean on December 28, 2012. The Mexican retailer Organizacin

Soriana will purchase the electricity produced by the wind actively contribute to the development of renewable and sustainable energy, while at the same time reducing its energy costs by purchasing the electricity generated by CETSA through a self-supply structure. This electricity will be used by Soriana to supply 163 stores throughout Mexico, which represents the displacement of 100,00 tons of carbon dioxide a year, equivalent to taking 29,000 cars a year out of circulation, stated Aurelio Adn Hernndez, Soriana
farm through a long-term power purchase agreement, in order to Chief Financial Officer. Construction is scheduled to begin during the first quarter of this year and is estimated to cost more than US$130 million. With respect to the financing, NADB and BANORTE through a bank consortium are providing a loan to CETSA through a project finance mechanism for the construction of what will be the first wind farm in the state of Tamaulipas. This

is the first wind energy project in Mexico to be funded by NADB, stated NADB Managing Director Gernimo Gutirrez, referring to the US$51 million loan provided by the bilateral financial institution for the project. Its an example of the joint efforts of the public and private sectors to implement clean energy projects, as well as
supports the efforts of the State of Tamaulipas and the Mexican Government to combat climate change. Tamaulipas Governor Egidio Torre Cant indicated that El Porvenir reflects the potential for developing wind energy projects in Tamaulipas, as well as his Administrations commitment to promoting investment in the state, to the environment and to the development of sustainable infrastructure. For his part, Adrian Katzew Corenstein, Vice President and General Manager of Vestas Mexico & Caribbean, said, This

project demonstrates our dedication to Mexico and Vestas commitment to continue playing a leading role in the diversification and sustainability of the countrys energy mix." Environmental benefits related to this project include the displacement of over 90,976 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2), 1,442.4 metric tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 189.7 metric tons of nitrogen oxides (NOx)
per year. The project was certified by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) in February 2012.

No Solvency - Bureaucracy
NADBank doesnt solve bureaucracy

Dallas Morning News April 2011 Editorial: North American Development Bank needs streamlined bureaucracy
http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20110415-editorial-north-american-development-bank-needs-streamlined-bureaucracy.ece

The bank hasnt had a stellar past. Because all loans require approval of agencies and officials from both countries, all kinds of political jockeying can come into play. A simple loan application can get mired in bureaucratic quicksand. There was a justified concern that the bank wasnt performing as it should, said Gernimo Gutirrez, NADBanks managing director. Much has changed. The bank, which
once relied on congressional funding, now is 100 percent self-financing, with $3 billion in capital. It holds upper-tier status from major ratings agencies. The

bank can perform even better if Mexico and the U.S. find ways to streamline the binational governing structure and empower the banks leadership to make decisions more quickly. Dont relax oversight, but dont allow bureaucracy to stifle NADBanks good work at the border.

EXT NADBank only environment

NAD Bank can only address environmental issues Gallagher, 09 (Kevin P., November, professor at Boston University IR Department and an expert on: Economic
Development, Trade and Investment Policy, Boston Universitys The Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, The Future of North American Trade Policy: Lessons from NAFTA, http://www.bu.edu/pardee/files/2009/11/PardeeReport-NAFTA.pdf)//YS, accessed 7/02/13 The NADBANK was originally proposed by prominent economists Albert Fishlow, Sherman Robinson, and Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda.15 The idea was that the institution would serve as a regional development and adjustment assistance bank to help harmonize

The NADBANK was indeed established under NAFTA, but in the end only to address environmental problems in the U.S.-Mexico border. The organization was long plagued by difficulties and reformed by the Bush and Fox administrations in 2001, but only to strengthen its mandate to U.S.-Mexico border environmental issues. A revitalized NADBANK would go back to its originally proposed idea of being a development bank and adjustment assistance
development in North America. facilitator, modeled after the structural funds under European economic integration and Brazils national development bank, (BNDES). To that end, the

NADBANK would have to be recapitalized by NAFTA governments and be able to sell bonds and take equity stakes in order to raise more funds when needed as well. In
relation to the environment in all three NAFTA countries, a revitalized NADBANK would have to: Support small scale, sustainable agriculture initiatives. Provide loans for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) for innovation and to comply with nvironmental regulations. Provide loans and financing support for public infrastructure, renewable energy development, and environmental cleanup projects. Support public-private partnerships for environment-related research and development activities. Develop and maintain an active research team that examines the environment and development aspects of the NAFTA countries and bank activities.

Bureaucracy issues, only $3 billion in capital, and projects have to be environmental Dallas News, 11 (April 15, North American Development Bank needs streamlined
bureaucracy http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20110415-editorial-northamerican-development-bank-needs-streamlined-bureaucracy.ece)//YS, accessed 7/02/13
The North American Development Bank is one of those entities that 99 percent of Americans probably dont know exists. Thats because they dont live along the border or understand the dire need for Mexico and the United States to cooperate on projects that affect the quality of life on both sides. Take, for example, water treatment. Before NADBank existed, Mexican border cities tended to dump their raw sewage into the closest waterway. For cities like Tijuana, that meant a daily output of 20.88 million gallons of sewage heading right into the Pacific, and much found its way onto San Diegos beaches. The same was true for cities south of Texas along the Rio Grande. Financing fixes to those problems is what NADBank is all about. Its not glamorous, headline-grabbing work, but it affects millions of people. NADBank was created under the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement to address what both countries acknowledged to be the serious and growing population-related problems along the border. All

of its projects must somehow enhance environmental quality, recognizing that an unfixed problem on one side of the border
can have serious consequences for residents on the other side. For example, a large part of the smoky haze that regularly settles over Big Bend National Park is the result of air pollutants from dumps and coal-fired power plants in Mexico. The bank hasnt had a stellar past. Because

all loans require approval of agencies and officials from both countries, all kinds of political jockeying can come into play. A simple loan application can get mired in bureaucratic quicksand. There was a justified concern that the bank wasnt performing as it should, said Gernimo Gutirrez, NADBanks managing director. Much has changed. The bank, which once relied on congressional funding, now is 100 percent self-financing, with $3 billion in capital. It holds upper-tier status from major ratings agencies. The bank
can perform even better if Mexico and the U.S. find ways to streamline the binational governing structure and empower the banks leadership to make decisions more quickly. Dont relax oversight, but dont

allow bureaucracy to stifle NADBanks

good work at the border.

Projects financed by the NadBank have to be environmentally friendly NADBANK, 12 (December, Information Statement,
http://www.nadbank.org/BondsAndInvestment/PDF/2012Information%20StatementDec10.pdf )//YS, accessed 7/02/13 General. The North American Development Bank is a binational development financing institution established by the United States of America (United States or U.S.) and the United Mexican States (UMS or Mexico) to finance environmental infrastructure projects in the U.S.-Mexico border region. The Banks financing activities
historically focused on creating and sustaining drinking water supplies and developing wastewater treatment and municipal solid waste management facilities. In 2000, its

mandate was expanded by the Banks Board of Directors (the Board) to include other sectors that have environmental and/or health benefits for the residents of the border region, including air quality, clean energy, energy efficiency, public transportation and water
management. As part of this expanded mandate, the Bank participated in its first loan to a solar energy project in 2011, followed in the first three quarters of 2012 by two additional solar energy project loans and one wind energy project loan. Additionally, the Bank is currently working on financing seven additional projects (three wind energy, two solar energy, one air quality, and one water). The financing agreements for these projects are in various stages of development (some are in final negotiations while others are executed and actively disbursing), and all are expected to be executed by the end of 2012. The technical feasibility and

environmental impact of, and public participation with respect to, all projects to be financed by the Bank are required to be evaluated and certified by the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC).

The aff hurts the border environment therefore it cant be financed by NADBank Rosenblum, 12 (Marc, January 6, Specialist in Immigration Policy, Congressional Research Service, Border Security:
Immigration Enforcement Between Ports of Entry, http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/180681.pdf)//YS, accessed 7/02/13 On the other hand, the

deployment of border enforcement personnel and infrastructure also entails a number of costs at the local level. First, the construction of fencing, roads, and other tactical infrastructure may damage border-area ecosystems. These environmental considerations may be especially important because much of the border runs through remote and environmentally sensitive areas.146 For this reason, even when accounting for the possible environmental benefits of reduced illegal border flows, some environmental groups have opposed border infrastructure projects because they threaten rare and endangered species as well as other wildlife by damaging ecosystems and restricting the movement of animals, and because surveillance towers and artificial night lighting have detrimental effects on
migrant birds.147

***Nieto Credibility***
Nieto cred high now structural reforms
Lomeln 13 (Gustavo, 4/8/13, Political journalist in Mexican media, Mexican Optimism regarding the forthcoming Obama-Pea Nieto Talks http://mexidata.info/id3591.html)
Mexico and the United States have an historic opportunity to strengthen their bilateral relationship. President Barack Obama will visit Mexico in early May, and he has already shown his willingness to reduce the trade and trafficking of arms, and to push immigration reform that legalizes the status of 11 million undocumented immigrants, mostly Mexicans. While Obama's decision to reduce illegal arms trafficking seeks to avoid new tragedies in the United States, like the massacre in Newtown last December that killed 26 people, including 20 children, Mexico is interested in a more stringent and restrictive regulation, particularly for assault weapons that are sold illegally to Mexican drug cartels. Furthermore, according to studies and experts, immigration reform will have a favorable impact on the economies of Mexico and the United States. According to several studies, millions of undocumented immigrants living in the shadows could obtain better wages, consume more and pay more taxes with a work permit and residence. As well, they would send more money to our country as remittances, at a time when that foreign exchange flow has contracted due to the economic crisis in the United States. These effects would strengthen economic growth and job creation, and there would be a Mexican economy spillover. For his part,

President Enrique Pea Nieto has gained credibility both within and outside the country based on the recent structural reforms adopted through the Pact for Mexico, with agreements reached between the federal government and the major political parties (PRI, PAN, PRD and PVEM). Just [a week ago] the influential U.S.

newspaper The Washington Post noted the adoption of structural reforms in Mexico, and, in particular, progress on a new framework to breakup monopolies in the country. In its main editorial, The Washington Post noted that the ability to negotiate between the Pea Nieto government and Congress should be taken as an example in the United States. Moreover, legal modifications that were blocked for more than a decade, that the country urgently needed, [have been] solidified with the new administration in a matter of months. "Now, with the new administration, Mexicans are showing that big political negotiations can happen, and that democracies can tackle their toughest problems," noted the U.S. newspaper. It is increasingly evident that, little by little, the image of the country has been "de-narcotized" in order to prioritize positive issues on the national agenda, such as economic and migratory [matters]. In fact, the drug fighting policy of the Pea Nieto government is directed at the roots of the problems, like poverty and unemployment. Besides, the current administration is attacking problems that have retarded the country for generations, during which the economy of misery empowered the drug cartels in Mexico. It is clear that Obama [and] Pea Nieto act with effective public policies in order to profoundly change their respective countries, and this will undoubtedly result in a better relationship between the two nations that transcends the bonds between theEmpire and the Colony that have a habit of prevailing

***Border Insecurity***

Effective now
Border security is effective in the status quo
Reuters 13 (Reuters, "Mexico Concerned By U.S. Measure To Strengthen Border Security" June 25, 2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/mexico-concerned-bordersecurity_n_3498605.html, RLA)
On Monday, a

border security amendment seen as crucial to the fate of an immigration bill backed by President Barack Obama cleared a key procedural hurdle in the U.S. Senate, helping pave the way for the biggest
changes to U.S. immigration law since 1986.

The amendment would double the number of agents on the southern border to about 40,000 provide more high-tech surveillance equipment to stop illegal crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border. The amendment also calls for finishing construction of 700 miles (1,120 km) of border fence. The bill would also grant legal status to millions of undocumented foreigners, who would be put on a

over the next 10 years and

13-year path to citizenship.

U.S. Mexico border has never been safer any threats are exaggerated
Ball 2/22 (Molly Ball, journalist for The Atlantic and The Next America National Journal, Will Immigration hawks ever think the border is secure enough?, 2/22/13, http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/immigration/will-immigration-hawks-everthink-the-border-is-secure-enough-20130222, 7/2/13) Border security could be the issue that kills immigration reform. And yet, by most measures, the U.S.-Mexico border has never been safer. The bipartisan group of U.S. senators seeking comprehensive immigration reform have proposed a "trigger" mechanism, whereby a path to citizenship would be contingent on increased border security. President Obama and liberals have not endorsed the idea, although the president is "committed to increasing our border security further," according to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. Disagreement over the trigger is the largest current discrepancy between the Senate and White House versions of immigration reform. It could cause the whole thing to fall apart. Yet the idea -- expressed by both sides -- that the border needs more security may be the biggest myth of the immigration debate, according to Rep. Beto O'Rourke. A newly elected Democrat, O'Rourke represents El Paso, Texas, the border city that shares a street grid -- and 11 border inspection stations -with the Mexican city of Juarez. El Paso also has the lowest crime rate of any large U.S. city. (The second-safest large city? It's on the border, too: San Diego.) The common assumption, O'Rourke told me recently, "is that the border is not secure." In fact, by almost any measure -crime, unauthorized border crossings, resources devoted to border patrol -- the U.S.-Mexico border has never been more secure than it is now. The problem for the immigration debate is that those who claim we need more border security are rarely called upon to prove it. No one has proposed a set of concrete standards; rather, some are calling for a subjective evaluation to be made by border-state governors, some of whom have political incentives to exaggerate the threat -- and track records of doing so.

At: Border Terror

Cant solve border terrorism theyll use other means or adapt Allen, 12 Senior Fellow at CFR (Edward, CATO Journal, Immigration and Border Control, http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj32n1/cj32n1-8.pdf SW) The third need is to reconsider our understanding of national security and border control. The close link in the public mind is largely a result of the specific circumstances of the 9/11 attacks, in which all the attackers entered the United States from overseas. The result has been an intense focus on policies designed to prevent similar future attacks, and border control has figured prominently. But if the attacks had been carried out by individuals who had lived many years in the United Statessuch as the perpetrators of the 2005 London subway bombing, who were all born or raised in the United Kingdonthe response would have been quite different. Immigration policy might still have figured prominently in the reaction, but the issue would have beenas it has largely been in Europethe failure of integration rather than the failure of border control. Border control is a very limited counterterrorism tool. While it can raise the hurdles for entry, there are many other ways to carry out terrorist attacks successfully. It is not coincidental that since 9/11 the majority of the terrorist conspiracies in the United States have involved U.S. citizens or permanent immigrants rather than recent arrivals. Terrorist groups have simply adapted to tougher border controls and recruited accordingly (Alden 2010c).

Status quo measures solve all forms of terrorism Department of Homeland Security 13(The Department of Homeland Security Protecting
Our Borders This is CBP 03/11/2013 http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/about/mission/cbp.xml, RLA) CBP assess all people and cargo entering the U.S. from abroad for terrorist risk. We are able to
better identify people who may pose a risk through initiatives such as: the Advance Passenger Information System, United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indication Technology (known as US-VISIT), and the Student and Exchange Visitor System. CBP regularly refuses entry to people who may pose a threat to U.S. security. In addition, CBP

uses advance information from the

Automated Targeting System, Automated Export System, and the Trade Act of 2002 Advance Electronic Information Regulations to identify cargo that may pose a threat. CBPs Office of Intelligence and Operations Coordinations National Targeting Centers enhance these initiatives by synthesizing information to provide tactical targeting . Using risk management techniques, the centers identify suspicious individuals or containers before arrival. The Automated Commercial Environment has made electronic risk management far more effective. The ACE Secure Data Portal provides a single, centralized on-line access point to connect CBP and the trade community. CBP's modernization efforts enhance border security while optimizing the ever-increasing flow of legitimate trade. ( ACE: Modernization Information Systems ) CBP also screens high-risk imported food shipments in order to prevent bio-terrorism/agro-terrorism. For the first time, U.S. Food and Drug Administration and CBP personnel are
working side by side at the NTC to protect the U.S. food supply by taking action, implementing provisions of the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. CBP and FDA are able to react quickly to threats of bio-terrorist attacks on the U.S. food supply or to other food related emergencies.

Terrorists do not enter the US from the Mexican border Ball 2/22 (Molly Ball, journalist for The Atlantic and The Next America National Journal, Will Immigration hawks ever think the border is secure enough?, 2/22/13, http://www.nationaljournal.com/thenextamerica/immigration/will-immigration-hawks-everthink-the-border-is-secure-enough-20130222, 7/2/13) Terrorists are not coming over the border. There's never been a reported case of a terrorist attack in the U.S. that involved someone coming across the Mexican border. A congressional subcommittee report on the threat of cross-border terrorism cited unsubstantiated claims and three specific cases, including a Tunisian cleric caught hiding in the trunk of a car in San Diego who was not accused of involvement in any terrorist activity. The other two also were not linked to specific terrorist plots.

Border breaches are inevitable even the most fortified borders leak Allen, 12 Senior Fellow at CFR (Edward, CATO Journal, Immigration and Border Control, http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj32n1/cj32n1-8.pdf ) But border security for the purpose of dissuading illegal migration is an entirely different matter. Here, perfect security cannot be the goal. Even the Cold War border between the two Germaniesthe most heavily fortified in modern historywas successfully breached a thousand or so times each year. There is simply no way for a large, open, and democratic country like the United States to construct and maintain perfect border defenses. It is hard to think of another issue where the public debate is so utterly at odds with what the government can realistically achieve (Ziglar and Alden 2011).

Adequate now Waste of $

Squo border security adequate, more spending would hurt the U.S.
The Economist 6/22 (Authoritative weekly newspaper focusing on international politics and business news and opinion, 6/22/13, http://www.economist.com/news/unitedstates/21579828-spending-billions-more-fences-and-drones-will-do-more-harm-good-secureenough, The US-Mexico Border Secure Enough, 7/2/13) To bolster its argument that the border is secure, Barack Obamas administration points to the drop in apprehensions at or near it (see map). These bottomed out in 2011, and as the onceporous Tucson sector has tightened there are signs that the action may be moving east, to Texas. Apprehension numbers are a poor proxy for border security, but few dispute that, compared with the free-for-all of the late 1990s and early 2000s, todays border is calm (see charts). Why might this be? Economics probably matters more than enforcement. Americas downturn cost many illegal migrants their jobs, just as opportunities were blossoming back home in Mexico. In the past two years Mexicos economy has grown at a healthy 3.9% annually, creating jobs (albeit at much lower pay than in America). In the longer term, demography is also likely to slow the flow of migrants. The number of 15-24-year-olds in Mexico and El Salvador will start declining between 2015 and 2020. Since illegal crossers tend to be young men, this will surely ease the pressure on the border. And over the next 40 years fertility rates in both countries are forecast to drop below Americas. Walls and drones do make a difference. Gordon Hanson, an economist at the University of California, San Diego, credits tighter security for one-third of the drop in migration between the late 1990s and 2010. Spending yet more money could reduce crossings further, he saysalthough he believes that America is already inflicting economic self-harm by spending so much to keep workers out.

T /- Kills more
Tighter border security leads to more deaths
The Economist 6/22 (Authoritative weekly newspaper focusing on international politics and business news and opinion, 6/22/13, http://www.economist.com/news/unitedstates/21579828-spending-billions-more-fences-and-drones-will-do-more-harm-good-secureenough, The US-Mexico Border Secure Enough, 7/2/13) Tighter security pushes border-crossers to more remote areas. Out in the desert, dozens of miles from Nogaless steel-and-concrete fence, the chances of detection are slimmer. But so are the odds of survival; the number of bodies recovered by border agents has remained stable even as apprehensions have plummeted (see chart). As Robin Reineke of the Missing Migrant Project points out, these are merely the bodies that agents chance upon; the true toll must be higher.

AT Al Qaeda
Al Qaeda threat consistently exaggerated by officials
Mohammadi 10 (Saman Mohammadi, journalist for The Excavator, 11 Reasons Why The Threat From Al-Qaeda is Not Real, 12/8/10, http://www.infowars.com/11-reasons-why-the-threatfrom-al-qaeda-is-not-real/, 7/2/13)
Since World War II U.S. leaders have consistently lied to the American people about foreign

threats in order to feed the military machines appetite for war. All of these wars are unjust and unwarranted but that does not stop the self-interested criminals who control U.S. foreign policy. A recent example of a lie they told was their assertion that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. That episode revealed to many people the true nature of the American
government. Simply put, it does not care about the truth, or the American people, or the members of the military. U.S. leaders like former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and current Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, to name but a few, tell lies at will. Dishonesty means nothing to them. They deceive the

American people, the American military, and the world about their motives and methods and they lie to themselves about their own powers and abilities.

Border Security CP

Tightening border security is mandatory to control drug trafficking Cardesh et al 11(Sharon L. Cardash, Frank J. Cilluffo and Bert B. Tussing, Joint Policy and
Research Forum co-convened by the George Washington University Homeland Security Policy Institute and the Center for Strategic Leadership, U.S. Army War College, THE HYBRID THREAT Crime, Terrorism and Insurgency in Mexico December 2011 http://www.csl.army.mil/usacsl/publications/HybridThreatMonographInternetVersion.pdf, RLA)
Start with crime, meaning the organized variety that has significant impact on society at large. Think narco-trafficking, kidnapping, and extortion, to name a few.

Drug trafficking in Mexico is big, if illicit, business. The most are huge, and the enterprise is sprawling, reaching into the United States, Central America, and beyond. In recent testimony, the Assistant Administrator and Chief of Intelligence for the U.S. Drug Enforcement
notorious players include the Sinaloa Cartel, the Gulf Cartel, Los Zetas, Juarez Cartel, and La Familia Michoacana. Profits Administration (DEA) estimated that $322 billion is generated annually by the global trade.2 Others adjudge that $19 to $29 billion in monies from the drug trade conducted by transnational criminal organizations flows into Mexico from the United States each year.3 problem didnt originate in Mexico, but migrated there in force after Colombia cracked down on its own drug lords. As Mexican authorities attempt to put on the squeeze, the kingpins have sought sanctuary in Central America. Only

a regional response will help prevent them from seeking and gaining footholds in nearby countries that are ill-equipped to deal with the challenge. Americas partnership with Mexico under the rubric of the Merida
Initiative (detailed below), and other U.S. partnerships with neighbors such as the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, and the Central American Regional Security Initiative aim to contain the spread of the problem. But some

have pointed out the limited capacity of partners in the region to absorb this U.S. assistance.4 In short; the illegal drug business continues to thrive amidst a global economic downturn.

No Boarder Violence
Border-violence fears are a myth Shore, 10 (Elena, August 20, an editor at New America Media and is co-director of NAM's Women Immigrants Project, La
Prensa San Diego The U.S.-Mexico Border Is Safer Than You Think http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/docview/749647221/13EF1C7E9F31EE948AC/12?accountid=14667)//YS, accessed 6/28/13

Crime along the U.S.-Mexico border has been cited to justify everything from Arizona's new
immigration law to Congress's decision Tuesday to spend another $600 million in border enforcement. Arizona Governor Jan. Brewer has referred to "mayhem" and "headless bodies" found along the border, while Sen. John McCain said that the failure to secure the border "has led to violence - the worst I have ever seen." And when asked why they supported Arizona's immigration law, SB 1070, many Americans cited security reasons and an increase in violent crime along the U.S. border. But a new poll says that this

is

a myth. There has been no increase in violent crime on the U.S. side of the border. In fact, reports show that the U.S. border is getting safer. The poll, commissioned by the Border Network for Human
Rights in El Paso, Tex., and conducted by the independent polling firm The Reuel Group, Inc., found that the vast majority (more than 87 percent) of people living along the U.S. border feel safe. That's compared to 8 percent who said they didn't feel safe, and around 5 percent who were undecided. The poll surveyed 1,222 adults, primarily likely voters, in 10 communities along the U.S. border: Douglas, Nogales and Yuma, Ariz., El Centro and San Diego, Calif., Las Cruces, N.M. and Brownsville, El Paso, Laredo, McAllen, Tex. The results support

the latest statistics that show the U.S.-Mexico border is actually one of the

safest regions in the country . An FBI report obtained by the Associated Press found that the four big U.S. cities with the lowest rates of violent crime are all along the border : San Diego,
Phoenix, El Paso and Austin. A U.S. Customs and Border Protection report obtained by AP also found that being a Border Patrol agent is much less dangerous than being a street cop in most cities. "The border is safer now than it's ever been," U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesman Lloyd Easterling told the Associated Press. Yet

politicians and media continue to describe the border as a zone of "war, mayhem, chaos and fear," according to Fernando Garca, executive
director of the Border Network for Human Rights. "This poll sets the record straight," he says, by "challenging the false assumption that it is a violent border on the U.S. side." Garca spoke on a teleconference organized to discuss the findings of the poll. Congress decided Tuesday to send another $600 million to enhance enforcement along the border, a move that Garca calls "a political decision" that is not in the interest of the people who actually live there. In Arizona, political leaders have touted the issue of security in order to push through a number of anti-illegal immigration laws. The murder of an Arizona rancher, for example, was largely credited with spurring support for SB 1070, the law that made it a state crime to be undocumented. A week after signing SB 1070 into law in April, Gov. Brewer released a statement responding to a shooting of a Pinal County Sheriff's deputy: "Arizona is now confronted by some of the most vicious and dangerous narco terror organizations the world has seen," Brewer said. "Their cause is not honest labor in desperate need of sustenance; it is murder, terror and mayhem in furtherance of a multi-billion dollar criminal enterprise." Although a federal judge temporarily blocked key provisions of SB 1070, the danger of border violence has been a recurring theme in speeches by Brewer and McCain - both of whom are up for election in November. But Rep. Kyrsten Sinema, DAriz., who was born and raised in southern Arizona, notes that much of the fear of border violence comes from people in the north. "The

fear that folks have around border security largely rests in the interior, from folks who live far away from the border," says Sinema, adding that this is because they get their information from politicians and the media. People who live along the border, Sinema says, know that "we have not seen an increase in border-related violence in the last 18 years. If anything, we've seen a decrease in [border-related violence] the last 10 years." El Paso Sheriff Richard Wiles adds that it's actually in the interest of Mexican drug cartels to keep U.S. border cities safe. "We know
most of the drugs come across our port of entry," says Wiles. "After 9/11, the port was closed, and it impacted their profits," he says. "So it's in their best interest to keep the ports open."

***Competitiveness***

Solvency T/O
No solvency for competitiveness lack of human capital Gerber and Valencia et al, 11 (January 24, the Director of the Center for Latin American Studies (CLAS) and a
Professor of Economics at San Diego State University, Associate Professor, School of Transborder Studies, Senior Sustainability Scientist, Global Institute of Sustainability Affiliate, North American Center for Transborder Studies, Director of the Research Network for Transborder Development and Governance, Global Economy Journal, 10.4, Article 5, Re-Imagining the U.S.-Mexico Border: Policies toward a More Competitive and Sustainable Transborder Region http://www.degruyter.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/view/j/gej.2011.10.4/gej.2011.10.4.1681/gej.2011.10.4.1681.xml?format=INT)//YS, accessed 6/28/13

In addition to institutional gaps that hold back the regions competitiveness, there are human capital gaps as well. These too, are infrequently addressed. Table 5 shows the share of the population 25 years old and over, with 12 or more and 16 or more years of schooling, as measured by the 2000 U.S. and Mexican censuses. In order for firms to produce higher value added manufactured goods, they must have a labor force with advanced levels of literacy. This usually requires a high school education or beyond, and is one of the key characteristics that the World Bank identified as a component of successful East Asian export economies (World Bank, 1993). Firms that located in South Korea or Malaysia were assured that they could recruit workers with the advanced literacy skills that were required by their manufacturing processes. Mexicos standard for school leaving is 9th grade, while in the U.S. it is 12th grade. Consequently, there is inadequate high school capacity in Mexico, and its percentage of the adult population that has completed high school is far below OECD standards. While younger cohorts are graduating from the equivalent of high school at higher rates, Mexico is
still at the bottom of the OECD and is below several Latin American countries of similar income.6 The differences between its border regions (states or municipios) slightly favor the border (with the exception of college education in border municipios), but it remains low by world standards. In

the U.S., border counties and states have significantly less high school educated labor, although border states have slightly more college educated adults. The implication of Table 5 is that the aspirations for a knowledge-based economy expressed by key informants in the Delphi study conducted for the Border Governors Conference face significant obstacles, partly for reasons that have little or nothing to do with the border.

No solvency security issues need to come first Gerber and Valencia et al, 11 (January 24, the Director of the Center for Latin American Studies (CLAS) and a
Professor of Economics at San Diego State University, Associate Professor, School of Transborder Studies, Senior Sustainability Scientist, Global Institute of Sustainability Affiliate, North American Center for Transborder Studies, Director of the Research Network for Transborder Development and Governance, Global Economy Journal, 10.4, Article 5, Re-Imagining the U.S.-Mexico Border: Policies toward a More Competitive and Sustainable Transborder Region http://www.degruyter.com.proxy.lib.umich.edu/view/j/gej.2011.10.4/gej.2011.10.4.1681/gej.2011.10.4.1681.xml?format=INT)//YS, accessed 6/28/13

There are numerous proposals for new border trade systems, competitive and sustainable development, a prosperous and secure relationship, sustainable security and competitiveness, and cooperative solutions to common problems. The authors of these proposals make serious points and each of them is worth reading. There are dozens of concrete steps that might be taken and many of the ideas appear to be realistic and reasonable. However, in the current climate of terrorist fears, narco-violence, and migration worries, any way forward must begin from the proposition that, for better or worse, in the current historical moment , security issues trump all others .8 This is why the Bush Administration was able to obtain an environmental waiver for its border fence, why traffic grinds to a halt and waits (and waits) at the border, why gang members are dumped in Mexican border cities, and

why new inspection systems on southbound traffic seem poised to create the same bottlenecks that northbound travelers experience.

***US Mexico Relations***

Turn - The plan is divisive and worsens relations
Reuters 13 (Reuters, "Mexico Concerned By U.S. Measure To Strengthen Border Security" June 25, 2013 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/25/mexico-concerned-bordersecurity_n_3498605.html, RLA) The Mexican government on Tuesday voiced concern about U.S. congressional proposals to beef up security along the U.S.-Mexico border, saying it was divisive and would not solve the problem of illegal
immigration. Immigration plays a significant part in the countries' bilateral relations. Millions of Mexicans live and work on the U.S. side of the border and tens try to enter the United States annually, often at peril to their lives. "Our

country has let the United States government know that measures which affect links between communities depart from the principles of shared responsibility and good neighborliness," Foreign Minister Jose Antonio Meade said in a televised statement. "We're convinced that fences do not unite, fences are not the solution to the migration phenomenon and are not in line with a modern, safe border."

***Solvency***

No Solvency Say No
No Mexican cooperation
David

Hendricks (writer for the San Antonio Express-News) February 7, 2006 NADBank's future called into question Lexis

The U.S. and Mexican treasury departments are discussing the future of the San Antonio-based North American Development Bank, and a Mexican newspaper has reported that Mexico wants to shut it down. A U.S. Treasury spokeswoman declined to discuss the possibility of the bank's closure Monday. "I can say we are in discussions to assess the role of the bank and its appropriate future," said Brookly McGoughlin in the U.S. Treasury's public affairs
division. "That is all I can say at this point," she said. NADBank officials in San Antonio said they recently became aware of the talks but could not comment. Reforma, a Mexico City daily newspaper, has reported that Mexican Finance Minister Francisco Gil Daz "is looking to liquidate Mexico's participation" in NADBank by moving its loan capital from the bank to the Mexican government's infrastructure bank Banobras. Since 1995, NADBank has supplied $704 million in loans and grants to fund 90 projects along the U.S.-Mexico border -- areas that couldn't pay for utilities themselves. Typical projects have included a sewage-treatment system in Ciudad Jurez and a water plant in the Southern California city of Brawley. The bank employs 52 people in San Antonio. The United States and Mexico each have $150 million of paid loan capital in the development bank. San Antonio business leaders began fighting to win the development bank in November 1993, the week Congress approved the North American Free Trade Agreement. The bank became active in early 1995. U.S. Rep. Charles Gonzalez, D-San Antonio, whose district includes NADBank's downtown San Antonio headquarters, said the U.S. Treasury has been uncomfortable with the development bank since its inception. "This is nothing new," Gonzalez said of discussions to diminish or dismantle NADBank. He was alluding to an effort by the U.S. Treasury in 2001-02 to merge NADBank and its sister institution, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission, based in Ciudad Jurez, Mexico. The proposal then was to move NADBank from San Antonio and base the merged institutions in El Paso. The environment commission reviews and certifies projects for NADBank loans and grants. But during a summit in Monterrey, Mexico, in March 2002, President Bush and Mexico President Vicente Fox reaffirmed their support for NADBank. They agreed to broaden into such categories as energy and to expand the geographic areas in which the bank could lend and approve grants. The reform effort led to a merging of the boards of directors of the two institutions. The new board consists of 10 members, five from each country, but it has not met for more than two years. Four members, two from each country, were appointed last week. Gonzalez said he does not know whether Mexico or the United States is pushing the bank shutdown, but he will fight it. "I have a sense we'll rally the Bexar County delegation and the Texas senators, because this is bigger than Bexar County, and take this to the appropriate (congressional) committees in securing the integrity of the NADBank," Gonzalez said. "It will be a long road before anything happens," he said. Gonzalez expressed disappointment that talks between the U.S. Treasury and Hacienda (Mexico's Treasury) have occurred without Congress being apprised. "Whoever is promoting this goal without notifying Congress is doing a very dangerous thing," Gonzalez said. "We streamlined the NADBank to make it more effective and efficient. To have this happening now is outrageous." NADBank's $704 million in loans and grants has made possible projects worth $2.35 billion. An additional $46.8 million in loans is pending before the bank's directors, and loans worth $37.4 million are in the approval process. NADBank also operates a Utility Management Institute that trains municipal officials from border cities in the design, construction and operation of utilities. To date, 870 such officials have received NADBank training. The

Reforma article cites "little cooperation" between the U.S. and Mexican governments over the years in helping NADBank succeed.

Cant solve Congestion

cant solve delays - other sources Accenture, 08 global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, report commissioned by the DOC (March, commissioned by the Department of Commerce's International Trade Administration, IMPROVING ECONOMIC OUTCOMES BY REDUCING BORDER DELAYS FACILITATING THE VITAL FLOW OF COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC ACROSS THE U.S.-MEXICO BORDER, http://shapleigh.org/system/reporting_document/file/487/DRAFT_Reducing_Border_D elays_Findings_and_Options_vFinal_03252008.pdf ) The complex international trade process reaches its climax at our nations POEs, requiring the highly coordinated effort of a diverse set of public and private sector stakeholders. Therefore, it is important to view delays in that context and use a measure of total wait time that captures the border crossing system as a whole. Total wait time is defined as the time elapsed from entering the line in Mexico leading to Mexican export inspection through exit from U.S. inspection facilities, including any U.S. state-conducted inspections. Importantly, this definition of border crossing wait time captures the fact that processing time at U.S. primary is not the driver of wait time; instead, delays are due several factors, including many outside U.S. federal control. This represents an expansion of traditional wait time metrics and raises the focus from a processing time level to a more comprehensive system view. The importing community has long sought a well-constructed wait time metric. This construction, or one similar, is proposed as the national standard to account for system-wide border crossing wait time.

***Off Case***

Politics Links
Plan is unpopular bureaucracy causes backlash

Dallas Morning News July 2008 EDITORIAL: NADBank deserves U.S. funding ProQuest
Not everyone agrees about the merits of the North American Free Trade Agreement, but it's hard to argue that the

North American Development Bank, created under NAFTA, hasn't brought overwhelmingly positive changes to the border region. NADBank's good work needs to continue, and that won't happen if Congress continues to whittle down its funding. Before NAFTA, the border region was an environmental disaster zone. Mexican border
towns dumped millions of gallons of raw sewage into area rivers. Tap water was undrinkable. Pollution and industrial waste abounded. It's better now, but much cleanup work remains to be done. Through grants and low-interest loans, NADBank has sparked more than $1.4 billion in public infrastructure projects on both sides of the border. This is not sexy stuff. Much of it involves sewage-treatment plants, landfill sites, water projects and road work. NADBank officials estimate that such projects have halted the dumping of about 300 million gallons per day of sewage into the Rio Grande and other waterways. Washington's

skepticism about NADBank has grown in recent years, partly because the bank has been slow to disburse its funds. Bank officials say the backlog was caused by the two-year average lead time needed to study, plan and approve each project before it could be funded. Steps are under way to streamline its processes, bolster accountability and reduce backlogs. As the fervor
over NAFTA has died down, so has Capitol Hill's enthusiasm for funding NADBank. Initial U.S. appropriations of nearly $100 million a year have steadily been slashed since NAFTA took effect 14 years ago. The requested 2009 appropriation is only $10 million. Texas Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn have been enthusiastic supporters of NADBank in the past. A renewed funding push by them and other border-state legislators would help ensure that the bank's important work stays on track in the future.

Politics Link Border Security

Politics Link to the aff Allen, 12 Senior Fellow at CFR (Edward, CATO Journal, Immigration and Border Control, http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj32n1/cj32n1-8.pdf ) It may be reasonable to set a higher goal for border apprehensions, so long as Congress is prepared to appropriate the necessary funds, though the current budget environment is one in which extra dollars are certain to be scarce. But no serious discussion of border enforcement is
possible until reasonable targets can be set by political leaders.

Politics - Link- Temporary Work Programs

Largest possible link U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 11 (Steps to a 21st Century U.S.-Mexico Border http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/2011_us_mexico_report.pdf ) To alleviate the pressure on the border and to ensure the safety of our country, we must enact comprehensive immigration reform that includes a streamlined temporary worker program. There is, arguably, no higher contested issuepoliticallythan that of a temporary worker program. This issue has many facets and its complexity demands that it be combined with a full-scale, comprehensive change to Americas immigration system. The U.S. Chamber has and will continue to call for comprehensive immigration reform to secure our borders and security and create an immigration system that works toward the goals of economic growth and physical security

NAIF CP

1nc

Counterplan text maybe: the NAIF should invest 20 billion dollars for ten years in Mexican infrastructure and rural colleges -with a sunset provision after ten years -with conditions for the reform of the Mexican economic model

NAIF solves the plan Pastor 8 [Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf]

The World Bank initially viewed large infrastructure projects as key to development and, after its start in 1960, the Inter-American Development Bank also invested heavily in infrastructure. But beginning in the mid-1970s, there was a gradual shift away from such projects toward those aimed at education, health, and poverty reduction. More recently, the World Bank has begun to re-evaluate the importance of infrastructure and a number of studies have concluded that lagging performance in infrastructure has cascading negative effects throughout the economy. It increases the cost of doing business, decreases international competitiveness, and hinders the countrys growth and poverty alleviation prospects (World Bank, 2003, p. 1). Mexico has long underinvested in infrastructure but the decline in government investment in infrastructure as a percentage of GDP fell precipitiously from about 8% in 1980 to 1.2 % in 2003. In 1960, Korea had
less than half of Mexicos paved road density. In 2005, it had eleven times that of Mexico. Similarly, in 1969, Korea had one third the power infrastructure per capita of Mexico but, in 2005, it had three times as much. While the comparison with Korea is particularly sharp, Mexico compares poorly with other major Latin American countries. For example, Mexicos road density is currently about one-half that of Brazil. Moreover, the costs of railways and ports in Mexico are higher than for Brazil and the U.S (World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank, 2005; World Bank, 2005; Rodriguez Barochio, 2005, p. 15). The

lack of infrastructure and its poor quality and reliability have added significantly to the cost of doing business in Mexico. It also has encouraged foreign investment to concentrate on the border. Therefore, one effective way to reduce geographical disparities within Mexico while reducing pressures for out-migration would be to improve the road system from the U.S. border to the center and southern parts of the country. Because of foreign investment, the northern border economy is booming and attracting labor from the poorer parts of the country. However, in many cases, workers stay on the Mexican side of the border only long enough to learn how to cross into the United States, where they can earn a lot more. U.S. firms do not like to invest in the
border area because of the pollution and the inefficiencies associated with such a high turnover rate but they do so because the roads from the border to the center of the country are bad or non-existent. If roads were built or improved from the border to the center of the country, investors would locate there for three reasons. First,

the center and south of the countryfrom Oaxaca, Zacatecas, Michoacan, Guanajuatohave the highest rates of unemployment and, indeed, are the principal sources of immigrants to the border and to the United States. Secondly, the wage level is much lower in these areas and the workers are no less educated than those on the border. Indeed, they are often the same workers. Finally, the region is not the polluted, cramped border. The government has incentive systems to encourage investors to locate there but the problem is a lack of infrastructureroads, electricity, etc. Build them, and investors would come, immigration
levels would decline and so would disparities in income. Mexico has been criticized for subsidizing higher education at the cost of elementary and secondary schools and that is true (Kogan, 1987, pp. 56-78). But Spain and Portugal discovered that investments in technical and community colleges in rural areas had a large multiplier effect. College-educated students returned from the capital to their small towns to teach at these colleges and, as they raised a family, they insisted on improvements in elementary and

secondary schools where their children attended. The community colleges proved to be the catalyst to improve the level of education at all levels in the rural areas. (3) Mechanism/Institution. In

the interest of using scarce resources, most effectively, and keeping bureaucracy to the minimum, the three governments should establish a North American Investment Fund as the principal instrument for channeling money to narrow the income gap. North America should not create a new bank. Rather, it should deposit money in a Fund that would be administered by the World Bank (and/or the Inter-American Development Bank) under the supervision of a Board appointed by all three governments. To avoid the EUs problem of perpetual institutionalization, the Fund should have a sun-set provision. It should have a ten-year term and it should be continued beyond that date only by decision of all three governments. Some have proposed using the North American Development Bank (NAD Bank), but that institutions mission is to invest in environmental and small infrastructure projects near the border and it does not have the capability for the large infrastructure projects needed to close the development gap. Rather than provide funds and personnel to give the Bank such a capability, it would make more sense to use an existing institution with a proven capability. To
establish such a fund, the leaders of the three countries would need to make such a request of the President of the World Bank.

2nc
Solves the income gap Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf]

Despite the expansion of trade and investment achieved by the North American Free Trade Agreement, challenges remain. The most serious is the persistence of an income gap between Mexico and its northern neighbors. Unless this gap is narrowed, other challenges, including immigration, trade, and security, will persist. The solution is the creation of a viable North American Investment Fund, which will be possible only if the three governments articulate a North American Community and pledge to contribute, each in its own way, to a strategy that will close the
income gap and build institutions to resolve old problems and address new opportunities.

All three governments need to invest to solve Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf]

All three problems point to the same solution: a North American Investment Fund which invests $20 billion per year for a decade to close the income gap by grants to build infrastructureroads, communications, railroads, portsto connect the poor center and south of Mexico to its northern neighbors. Ten billion dollars would come from additional taxes by Mexicans; $9 billion would come from the United States, and $1 billion from Canada. But these would only be part of an arrangement whereby Mexico undertakes the kinds of reforms that would allow it to make effective use of these resources. Such a Fund is only possible if the three governments articulate a North American Community and pledge to contribute, each in its own way, to a strategy that will close the income gap and build institutions to resolve old problems and address new opportunities. That is the solution. Now, what exactly is the problem? If immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy so
much, why is it a problem?

Only conditions to reform solves Mexican competitiveness Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf]

How can Mexico grow at twice the rate of the United States and Canada? Using a computable general equilibrium model of Mexico, Robinson, Morley, and Diaz-Bonilla conclude that the current export model is unlikely to generate sufficient growth to begin to close the income gap. Instead, Mexico needs a fundamental
change in development strategy and they propose two options. Capital formation would need to be raised to the level of 30 percent or more of GDP. Without a significant increase in domestic savings, Mexico would need $30 billion more per year of foreign capital, net of interest payments. An

alternative would be to channel $17-20 billion in new capital, net of interest payments, each year into infrastructure and human capital. As Mexico cannot sustain more debt, grants are needed from abroad. With these investments, they estimate that Mexico could grow at an annual rate of about 6 percent (Robinson, Morley, Diaz-Bonilla, 2005). Others have pointed to Mexicos declining competitiveness and attribute that to Mexicos inability or unwillingness to undertake essential tax and fiscal, labor, energy and electricity reforms. An

IMD World Competitiveness Survey attributed declining competitiveness to poor infrastructure. Of the 30 largest economies in terms of their infrastructure, the IMD survey found that in just three years
2000-03 Mexico had slipped from 18th to 29th, while the U.S. infrastructure competitiveness remained the top ranking and Spain slipped from 9th to 10th (IMD, 2004).

NAIF invests in colleges in rural Mexico and infrastructure in infrastructure Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf] How much money would be needed for such a Fund, and how should it be allocated?

The World Bank has estimated that Mexico has a ten year infrastructure deficit of $20 billion per year. This is separate from the
additional $10 billion that Mexico needs to invest, annually, in exploration and development of its natural gas and oil fields (Guigale, Lafourcade, Nguyen, 2001, pp. 2, 10-11, 357-376). The computer model suggests a similar amount: $17-20 billion in new capital each year, net of interest payments, to grow at annual rate of 6 percent for a decade in order to close the income gap by 20 percent. On

the other hand, they note that Mexico cannot service new debt of that magnitude but that half of that could come from domestic savings increase in taxes. The rest would have to come from its neighbors. Thus, the North American Investment Fund should be prepared to provide $20 billion in grants per year for ten years in order to help Mexico grow at a rate of 6% for a decade. How should the funds be spent? The Fund should invest in two areas: infrastructure that would connect the center and south of Mexico to its northern neighbors and education in the poor rural areas of Mexico. Eighty-five percent of the funds should be spent in infrastructurebuilding roads from the northern border to the cities in the center and south, bypassing Mexico City. The projects should include ports, railroads, airports, telecommunications, etc. Thirteen percent of the funds should be used to build community colleges in the rural areas of Mexico and two percent to serve as matching funds for each country to promote
research and educational exchanges.

Funding the border exacerbates the problem Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf] Europe, of course, has spent more than twice as much as is proposed here for more than twenty years but it was spent in too many areas, which, however commendable, diluted the impact. If

the funds are to provide a needed jolt for the Mexican economy, then the three nations need to avoid three temptations. They should not spend the money: (a) in the poorest part of Mexico; (b) on the border; (c) on other commendable projects, whether related to the environment, justice, poverty, etc. Although these are all worthwhile projects or areas, the funds would be most effective if they were concentrated. Using the funds on the U.S.-Mexican border will exacerbate, not solve, its problems. It would increase the power of the magnet, which is emptying the most enterprising labor from the southern and central parts of Mexico. Some funds are, of course, needed on the border but this job should be left to the North American Development Banknot the North American Investment Fund.

Canada and the US would only pay half Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf]

Of the $20 billion each year for the North American Investment Fund, Canada and the United States should pay half, with the U.S.with about nine times the economy of Canadaaccounting for 90 percent of that. Mexico should contribute the other $10 billion. The United States and Canada are unlikely to contribute funds unless both countries felt that it would be used wisely and that Mexico would undertake serious long-term reforms. Mexico understands that it

needs to undertake fundamental reforms in sensitive sectors such as energy, taxes, pensions, electricity, and the judicial system but the political system has been stalemated. If its

partners were to define, together, a community of three nations in which each would contribute to that future, then that might alter the political balance in a way that would make both the reforms and the Fund possible. Absent those changes, the U.S. and Canada might very well conclude that their funds would not be put to good use and would not want to contribute. Spain and Ireland understood the need for reforms but
they could only implement them with the support of the EU.

Canada CP
Canada wants to fund the plan Pastor 8 *Robert A. Pastor, Director of Center for North American Studies, The Solution to North Americas Triple Problem: The
Case for a North American Investment Fund Office of International Affairs, January 2008 http://www.american.edu/sis/cnas/upload/triple_problem_pastor.pdf] second question is: why should Canada contribute to a fund for the development of Mexico? Canada, of course, had difficulty seeing Mexico over the United States but, with the approval of NAFTA, it began to develop its relationship with Mexico. As its trade and investment increased, Canada recognizes that Mexicos development will yield economic benefits. Canada has an increasing number of emigrants from Mexico, particularly in the west. Canada does not have a stake in Mexicos development comparable to that of the United States but it does have a sizeable foreign aid program. The question is whether that aid should continue to be aimed in the poorest countries or whether it should be part of a new North American strategy. In addition to economic interests, there are three reasons why Canada should want to build a North American Community and contribute to a fund to narrow the development gap. First, Canada is a multilateral institution-builder and there is no relationship more important to Canada than with the United States (James, Michaud, OReilly, 2007, ch. 1). It follows that a tri-national institution could be constructed in a manner that would serve Canadas long-term interests in assuring that the U.S. negotiates fairly and complies with the rules of an agreement. Secondly, Canada wants the U.S. to pay attention to its concerns and is frustrated that it does not. A joint approach with Mexico, which can gain US attention because of the large Mexican-American population, would certainly assist Canada. But Mexico and Canada are likely to be more effective if they pursue fair rules rather
A

than appear as if they are conspiring against the U.S.

Planning K
(You can run this as specific links to a K that you normally run) Transportation infrastructure planning is represented in a desire for wholeness that can never be achieved. Gunder & Hillier 09 Associate Prof @ the School of Architecture and Planning @ U. of Auckland, Prof of Town and Country
Planning @ School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape @ Newcastle U. (Michael and Jean, Planning in Ten Words or Less, Chapter 2: A Lack of Certainty, pg. )
It is an imaginary object. Lacan's object of maternal desire functions as the injunction 'no' in the symbolic system 'as causative of a lack-in-being' (Ragland 2004, 2). Language and the cultures built by, and in, language separate us from our primordial state of original completeness with Mother. We fundamentally desire to return to this slate, but, of course, cannot. This symbolic separation from the primary care giver is inherently tearful and the subject's fundamental repressed desire is to return to an idyllic state of

This impossible desire will drive the subject through life via metonymical displacement and metaphorical substitution where this initial 'desire is taken captive by language and its original nature is lost' (Dor 1998, 118). This subject may materialise his/her desire sexually, or more often, through sublimation into alternative cultural activities that supplement the subject's existing identifications. This might be to become part of a 'prestigious' (or even infamous ) club , profession , o r 'gang' , to acquire particular identity
maternal bliss.

defining beliefs, knowledges and attributes, or the acquisition of material symbols of consumer success and distinctiveness (Apollon 1994; Stavrakakis 2007). This forgotten and hence unconscious infantile compulsion

drives and shapes all human subjects . While needs may be met and specific fears overcome, desire is seldom, if ever, achieved and, if so, never sated. This is because we always desire more as we seek to repeat what we can never duplicate; our initial experience of maternal enjoyment beyond that of mere satisfaction (Lacan 2006, 431). For Lacan, desire and subjectivity are inseparable. Subjectivity is characterised by uncertainty, anxiety, alienation, a desire for ontological security, originally that of the infant in relation to the mother. As such, desire to gain a sense of being, or a capacity to know, is inevitable. Actors desire some sort of control over the self, others and their environment, which Giddens' ( 1991) termed life politics. Lacan (2006, 689) would suggest that it is repressed desire which surfaces in actors (such as vocal interest group members) and is manifest in a particular demand , often expressed as a 'need'; such as 'we need better parks, schools, public transit , or road safety'. There are important differences between desire, need and demand. As Fuery (1995, 97) explains, 'desire is not bolstered by needs, but rather the contrary; needs are derived from desire.' Whereas, 'need' and 'demand' can be tied to specific objects, 'desire' always exceeds those objects. Regardless of how well the demands of better social or transportation infrastructure are met, in the example above, or in desire can never be satisfied : subjects eventually demand more. Core to the Lacanian subject is that it is always split and divided, never whole. This 'is echoed on the level of the social' by "'antagonism", which persists in all social formations and renders any idea of social unification', contentment, 'or harmony illusory' (Jameson 2005, 192). Such search, or desire, for wholeness drives us, but it is never achieved. Fulfillment of a desire is never enough. It never recreates the sense of security
other instances,
provided by our original maternal completeness. Desire for the Harmony of Wholeness As developed in Chapter 1, identification with a range of identity shaping labels called 'master signifiers' constitutes the person or 'subject' as an individual in society (Verhaeghe 2001).

This manifests through current plannings attempt at certainty - planners try to plan away contingency and multiplicity. As the planners create a perfect world, they structurally recreate violence. Only the aff can overcome this. Gunder & Hillier 09 Associate Prof @ the School of Architecture and Planning @ U. of Auckland, Prof of Town and Country
Planning @ School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape @ Newcastle U. (Michael and Jean, Planning in Ten Words or Less, Chapter 2: The Lack of Certainty, pg 18-21) In Chapter 1 we have hopefully persuaded readers why our approach to spatial planning is useful for understanding contemporary city-making. We considered how the art or science of planning is largely

ideologjcal in its techno-political policy intent and tentatively explored the mechanism of hegemonic articulation deployed in its shaping of the built form. Personal and group identification is central to this process. We then introduced the ten words selected for investigation as systematic of contemporary near-universal planning practice orthodoxy. In Chapter 2
we commence with a detailed discussion of the place of 'lack' in Lacanian thought, commencing with the primordial maternal lack of young humans yet to be integrated into language and culture; and how it is then deployed in contemporary political and technocratic processes to inspire desire for a particular solution or policy process. Examples will be used to illustrate how this is nurtured as a popular desire underlain by a promise, or illusion, of harmony and fulfillment, which, of course, never materialises. The metaphorical framing of spatial planning fantasy will be discussed and its ideological power in shaping and guiding desire for specific community aspirations as the only 'correct'

it is the desire for veracity of prediction - truth- which we claim is synonymous with the desire for certainty towards the unknowable future, which
consensual belief will be explored. The chapter will argue how

underwrites the very ontological purpose of spatial planning and gives it its popular support. In Chapter 3 we wilt examine the concept of the good from a Lacanian perspective. We first consider the impossibility of the idealised, utopian city where 'good' for: all can be achieved. We will suggest that fantasy and misrecognition are central to this process. The metaphor of the city as healthy body will be explored in this context. The chapter will then
provide an appreciation of how our personal striving, to be perceived by the Other as 'good', shapes our very concept of self and our wider outwardly-materialising behaviours which, in turn, shape our empirically measurable social world. The chapter will also consider what constitutes 'good' urban behaviour, at least for our agents of governance, and how this is shaped through our media and other arenas of socio-political life. The chapter will then have regard to the fantasy constructs deployed in this manner to shape 'our:' desired cities: what they ought to be, but without questioning for whom! Chapter4 takes the discussion of the desire for certainty as a core human 'good' further, drawing on Ulrich Beck's concept of risk society. We start with a discussion of realism and constructivism as alternative ways of constituting knowledge in the social sciences, including

We then expand the constructivist position into a discussion on representation and non-representation, which on the Lacanian Real. Derrida's concepts of undecidability and tauntology are in turn engaged to argue planning's very ontological being as papering over of the fear of risk and uncertainty of the unknown risky future. We will suggest, however, that the ontological nature of planning, to provide an illusion of certainty towards the future, impairs its ability to engage
spatial planning.

introduces and draws

with emerging problems . Planning is largely solution-driven, and without a solution to frame an emerging issue, spatial planning, as currently practised, has great difficulty tackling the new. In
Chapter 5 we explore the American signifier Smart Growth to consider the concept of economic growth in the contemporary world of finite carrying capacity. We use this metaphor of American city and regional planning to explore both the dominance of liberal global capitalism and how much of the orthodox international response to city shaping and making is derived from its hegemonic values. The Lacanian concept of jouissance - pleasure- will be defined in this chapter and then further explored in the subsequent two chapters. However, as we will explain, with Lacanian jouissance 'we are not dealing with simple pleasures, but with a violent intrusion that brings more pain than pleasure'. We will argue that to enjoy in such a context 'is rather something we do as a kind of weird and twisted ethical duty' (Zi:l.ek 2008a, 343). Chapter 6 builds on Chapter 5 to argue that city policy management in areas of spatial planning and economic development are largely predicated on the imperatives of competitive globalization. Our primary focus is on the way the Lacanian concepts of jouissance and desire are deployed by both markets and governance to create desiring citizens who respond appropriately. We introduce Lacan's (2007) Theory of the Four Discourses, with particular focus on the discourses of the 'master' and 'university/bureaucracy'. We conclude the chapter by asking the question: in whose interest is enjoyment actually articulated and achieved? In Chapter 7 we expand further on Lacanian jouissance in the context or multiculturalism, largely drawing on Zi7.ek's (1993) conceptualisation that the Other always steals my enjoyment. We also engage further with Lacan 's discourse theory (2007) and introduce the discourses of the 'hysteric' and 'analyst'. We illustrate how difference constitutes the contemporary metropolitan city. Yet we argue that this is, by necessity,

a difference of exclusion and agonism that should be engaged with, not papered over by fantasy constructs of tolerance that, again drawing on Zizek (1997a, 1999c, 2008c), are shown to be mere arguments of, at best, subtle racism. Chapter 8 explores sustainability. We argue that sustainable development is the now dominant spatial planning narrative. although perhaps implicitly trumped in achievement at the city-region level by the desire to be a 'globally competitive city'. Sustainable development is explored to illustrate how the term acts as a foil to give the appearance of doing something about global warming and the environment, when in effect it is largely deployed to maintain the priority of economic growth for achievement of global competitiveness. We suggest that
sustainable development is considered so wonderful for all of us, for as we drive our hybrid car we can think we are saving the environment and making our cities better, when in reality we are simply perpetuating the idea of economic growth or 'business as usual'. The penultimate Chapter 9 engages with the signifier: responsibility. We consider the traditional placed-based concepts of responsibility and city-shaping largely deployed in contemporary orthodox planning practice. We then broaden this concept of responsibility, drawing on Levinas, Derrida, Iris Marion Young and, primarily, from Lacanian-derived literature, what is often titled an 'Ethics of the Real' (Zupancic 2000) to argue

for an ethics for planning and city-making that is globally conscious. We suggest that such an ethics might involve practising an understanding of responsibility that is predicated on a premise of 'avoidance of avoidance', especially when we are aware of the global implications of our actions. The chapter concludes with a reflection on these implications
for contemporary placed-based planning. In Chapter 10 we summarise the prior chapters in the context of the signifier rationality, its relationship to jouissance and the materialisation of ideology. We

consider the rationality which has traditionally underlain spatial planning and argue that it is often not a rationality of balancing

facts, but rather a rationality of balancing desires. We then consider the spatial planner as a Lacanian subject. We suggest the need for alternative ways forward beyond continued imposition of transcendental ideas and the ideological deployment of language to structure our cities within wider social reality. From this perspective we indicate how spatial planning might engage with new potentials, inclusive choice and openness, rather than its traditional focus on exclusion and enclosure of a prescribed orthodoxy seeking only one, or at most a few idealised, but limited, end states.

This causes a runaway spiral, as planners project security, planning is viewed as the solution to everything. The prescription is always one more plan to end all our woes but this acts as the priest attempting to exorcise the specter of uncertainty, which destroys agency, causes authoritarianism, and ensures extinction. Gunder & Hillier 09 Associate Prof @ the School of Architecture and Planning @ U. of Auckland, Prof of Town and Country
Planning @ School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape @ Newcastle U. (Michael and Jean, Planning in Ten Words or Less, Chapter 2: The Lack of Certainty, pg 57-61)

We take the discussion of the desire for certainty, health and 'goodness' further in this chapter, drawing on Ulrich Beck's (1992, 1998, 2006a, 2006b, 2008) concept of risk society. We start with a discussion of scientific empiricism 1 and social constructionism 2 as alternative ways of constituting learning in the social sciences, including that of spatial planning. We then discuss and critique Beck's concept of risk. The
subsequent section then expands the constructionist position into a discussion on representation and non-representation, which draws on the Lacanian Real, which we will discuss in some detail in relationship to Hemi Lefebvre's (1993, 1991, 2003) concept of urban space. Derrida's concept of hauntology is in turn briefly engaged with, to further argue spatial

planning's very ontological being as the papering over of the fear of risk, uncertainty and perhaps, ultimately, of our very death, in the unknown future. We contend that risk is a fear of the undecidable and unknown, which inherently haunts society as a spectre seeking exorcism. We argue that planning should not necessarily seek to maintain its 'priestly' role of exorcism by providing the illusion of certainty toward the future. We contend that planning (and wider society) tends to avoid, or repress, emerging issues constituting risk until a solution is available for prescription. This is not without cost. We conclude by arguing the need to accept uncertainty and to actively strive to engage with emerging 'risky' issues, rather than avoid or negate them, even though spatial planning and its institutions may be unable to provide definite resolution to the new concerns. Social Constructionism versus Scientific Empiricism Just as, a century or so ago, the idea of progress helped to name an optimistic era, so today risk, by its very pervasiveness, seems to be the defining marker of our own less sanguine historical moment. (Jasanoff 1999, 136 - emphasis in original) In the wider social science literature, two perceptions of risk tend to dominate conceptualisations of the term (Cutter 1993; Evanoff2005; Healy 2004; Jasanoff 1999; Lidskog et al. 2006; Snary 2004). The first perspective, empiricism, which has tended to dominate governmental and scientific discussions of risk, espouses a 'positivistic scientific theory of knowledge and a bureaucratic-rationalistic policy orientation' (Jasanoff 1999, 137). Risk, in this view, is something that can be measured, observed, mapped and, hopefully, controlled. In this perspective, risk is considered to exist only when it can be assigned a probability of occurrence. Otherwise it is regarded as uncertainty (November 2008, 1524). An institutional failure to manage risk is therefore either a consequence of the available knowledge and capability being disparate to the institution's mission, or a 'lack of political will to take unpalatable action' (JasanolT 1999,137). The second
perspective is a social constructionist one, where risks 'do not directly reflect natural reality but are refracted in every society through lenses shaped by history, politics, and culture', and/or focused by the narratives of the 'specialised languages and sets of practices' 'which serve to channel power in society' (137). In this context '[r]isk is

not an objective condition, but a

social construction of reality , which starts with the question of how people explain misfortune' (Hoogenboom and Ossewaarde 2005, 606). As suggested by this quotation, predictable or unpredictable occurrences, uncertainty and even the unknowable can all be accommodated in a social constructionist perspective on risk. Risk, in this mode of interpretation, is inherently an ideological construct addressing a lack of understanding that in turn seeks an authoritarian response , that purports to control this unknowable, or unpredictable 'Thing' - what is missing - and provides, at least the illusion of certainty, solution, or control, over this unrevealed threatening spectre. That is: what is lacking, missing, empty is filled, covered over, contained, or given the illusion of safety and certainty as developed in the previous chapters. Consequently, Tierney (1999, 223) observes that 'political power, organizational agendas, and economic interests drive the science of risk assessment' and that any effective cultural understanding of risk requires that the relationship of power and risk to be explored. As Bruno Latour (1993) amply demonstrates, power, politics and science are inherently and always intertwined when
addressing the unknown 'Thing'. In this regard, the invention of facts is not, however, a discovery of the things that are 'out there'; but 'an anthropological creation that redistributes God, will, love, hatred , and justice 'in light of, and through the filtering and interpretation mechanisms of empirical observation (Latour 1993, 83-84). Risk is a virtual threat (November 2008). Kristeva (1.982, 1) regards risk as epitomising the abject: 'a threat that seems to emanate from an exorbitant outside or inside, ejected beyond the scope of the possible, the tolerable, the thinkable' so that 'the one haunted by it [is) literally beside himself.' Further, a

response to this cultural fear, or haunting, and its desired resolution, results in the constant seeking of an impossible absoluteness of knowledge to provide, or at least give the illusion of, certainty towards a safe tomorrow - a core tenet of planning . Moreover, this seeking of comprehensive knowledge and/or construction of illustrating narratives that, at least, give the illusion of certainty of knowledge, underlies and empowers both the positivistic and constructionist perspectives put forward by Jasanoff as well as underlying spatial planning's central ontology . We contend that human societies increasingly reside in a life-world of fear and anxiety largely constituted by a loss of trust in our
own ability and that of our national institutions to both ultimately know and deliver a better world. As Beck (2006a, 2008) has observed, this is exemplified by repeated public sector mistakes and failures - not to mention those of the global private financial sector - and compounded by ever-increasing media awareness of the incapacity of our institutions to provide a predictable and secure state of existence: Gidden's (1991) ontological security. Overwhelmed

'by complex institutional logics and technologies that we [i.e., the lay public] do not understand, we experience a lack of faith in our own agency ; exhausted by the failure of bureaucratic and political attempts to make the world a better place, we lose faith in the power of humans to solve problems'
(Lavin 2006, 259). This occurs while we still maintain a traditional vision of the world as a stage that has been largely shaped by human will and ability in the struggle for continued existence and progressive betterment. Moreover, this illusionary vision and expectation of our institutions to provide for continued societal security, if not outright progress and betterment, persists, despite daily experiences of the general failure of institutions to successfully address the underlying causes that induce this constant fear and anxiety induced by the unknown (Lavin 2006, 261 ). At best, the

responses of traditional institutions of government, including those of spatial planning, displace this fear rather than address and conquer it , resulting in a constant state of ongoing ontological anxiety and distrust . There is fear both of the 'absolute threat of extinction' , and the corresponding 'relative threat to self-preservation and selfenhancement' induced by our perceived lack of security and control
(Hendrix 1967, 64). For many, this state of fear and anxiety with regard to ontological security is inherently a condition of the current state of contemporary existence, without hope of resolution and escape; what Beck (1992) refers to as the risk society (Ungar 2001). This anxiety is further compounded by a 'dislocation, disintegration and disorientation associated with the vicissitudes of detraditionalization' as a consequence of the 'collapse of inherited norms, values, customs and traditions' often perceived as a direct consequence of globalisation, or as Beck argues: the emergence of the cosmopolitan state (Beck 2004, 2005b, 2006b; Ekberg 2007, 346). Planning for Ulrich Beck's Risk Society Today,

in the era of 'risk

society', the ruling ideology endeavors to sell us the very insecurity caused by the dismantling of the Welfare State as the opportunity for new freedoms. (Zizek 2008b, np) Oren Yiftachel (2006) argues that spatial planning theorists do not need to talk just about what planners do, but also to theorise about planning's implications for wider society. Perhaps planning theory's focus on spatial planning practice explains why there has been, relatively

limited engagement until recently with the sociology of the 'risk society' and related social constructionist orientated interpretations of risk in the planning theory literature.' Gleeson (2000) addressed Beck's conceptualisation of the risk society in his wider debate on reflexive modernisation. Gunder (2003a, 249) drew on Beck's conceptualisation to explain wider society's disillusionment with positivist science. Similarly, Davoudi (2000, 129) referred to its reflexive value for critically shaping the educationalist needs of a reflexive profession supportive of sustainability. Numerous other planning theory articles and books have touched on Beck (often together with the British sociologist, Anthony Giddens) and give a passing reference to reflexive modernity (see, for example: Allmendinger 2002a; Flyvbjerg et al. 2003; Hasson 2005; Healey 1997; Howe and Langdon

Beck (1999, 3) defines risk as 'the modern approach to foresee and control the future consequences of human action ... an (institutionalised) attempt, a cognitive map, to colonize the
2002).

future' . Further, risk is a 'systematic way of dealing with hazards and insecurities induced and introduced by' the processes of 'modernization
itself' (Beck I992,21 - emphasis removed). Does this not resonate with practices of modernist spatial planning in its striving for certainty towards the future? Indeed, we suggest that the concept of risk, and society's responses to it, underlie spatial planning's ontological premise within modernity. Ulrich Beck was one or the first social scientists to identify the 'strange paradox in modem society; that risk might in fact be increasing due to technology, science and industrialism rather than being abated by scientific and technological progress' (Jarvis 2007, 23). Beck's concept of risk includes 'problems that are difficult, if not impossible, to understand and resolve scientifically' and that are often external to traditional areas of individual or institutional responsibility (Bickerstaff and Simmons 2008, 131 5). Beck's (1992, 22-24) theory of risk advances an argument for a 'second modernity' of reflexivity premised on five interrelated theses of risk. Firstly, that the concept of risk and the power that it engenders is different from that of material wealth and its traditional power. Modernity is dependent on the knowledge and judgements of experts. Accordingly, for Beck, the pivotal players in risk society are the experts: legal, scientific and mass media practitioners, including spatial planners, all of whom gain both social and political empowerment via their expertise and dispersal of the social definition and construction of knowledge.

The search for certainty causes a crusade against imagined enemies, culminating in extinction Lifton 1989 (Robert Jay, MD and renowned psychologist famous for his probing investigation into Chinese Totalistic
Psychology, Updated preface to Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, MT) Now, after twenty-eight years, my own sense of this book has changed. I see it as less a specific record of

Maoist China and more an exploration of what might be the most dangerous direction of the twentieth-century mindthe quest for absolute or "totalistic" belief systems . Indeed, that quest has produced nothing short of a worldwide epidemic of political and religious fundamentalismof movements characterized by literalized embrace of sacred texts as containing absolute truth for all persons, and a mandate for militant, often violent measures taken against designated enemies of that truth or mere unbelievers. The epidemic includes fundamentalist versions of existing political movements as well as newly emerging groups that
may combine disparate ideological elements. These latter groups are often referred to as cults, now a somewhat pejorative designation, so that some observers prefer the term new religions. But I think we can speak of cults as groups with certain characteristics: first, a charismatic leader, who tends increasingly to become the object of worship in place of more general spiritual principles that are advocated; second, patterns of "thought reform" akin to those described in this volume, and especially in Chapter 22; and third, a tendency toward manipulation from above with considerable exploitation (economic, sexual, or other) of ordinary supplicants or recruits who bring their idealism from below. Indeed, this book is largely responsible for my having been drawn into these controversies. With the profusion of the religious cults during the late 197os and 198os, I began to hear that Chapter 22 was being made use of for various forms of "deprogramming" of cult recruits, and then that the same chapter was being studied by cult leaders, ostensibly for the purpose of dissociating their groups from the patterns I described. Young people who had been involved in cults and the parents of such people began to consult me about these general

I felt I had to clarify my position by preparing a new essay on cult formation and totalism in my recent collection The Future of Immortality and Other Essays for a Nuclear Age (1987), but specially pleased
patterns.

by the extent to which is his earlier volume on thought reform has remained central to literature on cults and on totalism in general. Tendencies toward totalism in China itself have diminished over the years, as have specific thought reform programs. But that did not happen until after a fierce reassertion of totalistic behavior during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution of the late 1960s and early 1970s. I was able to study that upheaval and saw in it an effort on the part of the aging Mao Zedong to call forth the young in a common quest to reassert the immortalizing power of the revolution itself, and hence I entitled the work Revolutionary Immortality: Mao Tse-Tung and the Chinese Revolution (1968). Chinese society is still recovering from that extreme, often violent, outbreak. The regime's subsequent tendency, through fits and starts, has been in the direction of liberalization throughout the society, but that in no way precludes the possibility of

future waves of totalistic policies or thought reform projects. From the beginning, this book was meant to provide principles
of a general kind, criteria for evaluating any environment in relationship to ideological totalism. Such patterns are all too readily embraced by a great variety of groups, large and small, as a means of manipulating human beings, always in the name of a higher purpose. And it should not be forgotten that such groups can hold great attraction for large

Nazi Germany I was able to explore the most sinister of all historical examples of this phenomenon. I found that a particular kind of totalistic ideology a biologized view of society, or what I called a biomedical vision - could, with its accompanying institutions, draw ordinary people into murderous activities . I came to understand that, in an
numbers of people. In recent research on

atmosphere of totalism and brutality, even fragments of an ideology can readily contribute to participation in killing, as I reported in my book The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (1986) There are parallels in Naz i and Chinese Communist cure by re-

killing on so great a scale as to dwarf even what the Nazis did, that associated with nuclear threat. Nuclear fundamentalism can take shape around the weapons themselves: the exaggerated dependency on them and embrace of them to the point of near worship. That is what I call the ideology of nuclearism. The weapons become an ultimate truth in their ostensible capacity to grant security and safety, to keep the world going, to offer salvation. A seemingly different but related form of nuclear fundamentalism is the "end-time" ideology, within which nuclear holocaust is viewed as the realization of of biblical prophecy prophecy and a necessary occurrence to bring about the longedfor Second Coming of Jesus and eventual earthly paradise. In a study we have been conducting at The City University Center on Violence and Human Survival, we
education. I have been equally concerned with a contemporary category of fundamentalism that could contribute to have been pleased to learn that even fundamentalists with strong belief in end- time ideas find it hard to espouse this formula without great ambivalence and uncertainty. They too, it seems, have taken in some of the horrible actuality of the consequences of nuclear weapons and find it hard to believe that God would bring about such horrors or permit them to occur. Nonetheless, these fundamentalist attitudes become associated with the weapons in varying ways and with varying intensity throughout much of our society, and in the process they interfere greatly with the nuanced thought and moral imagination needed to cope with nuclear threat. While totalitarianism is a twentieth-century phenomenon requiring modern technology and communications networks, the totalistic cast of mind is not. It probably was, in fact, much more

What is new is the potential for radically increased consequences of totalism, to the point of human
common in previous centuries. It is in any case part of the human repertoire, an ever-present potential that can readily manifest itself when historical conditions call it forth.

extinction . The kind of wisdom that totalistic ideas now interfere with has to do with what I call species awareness and the species self, the recognition that, given the capacity of our weaponry to destroy all human life, each sense of self becomes bound up with the life of every other self on the planet. My critical evaluation of ideological totalism in this book is meant to further that species orientation.