If you need a warrant for things, then that takes out the drone internals because they cant

use
drones anymore.
Answer: Yes we can still use them because we only ban the ones used to surveil people

What states have the farming problems/which ones would reverse the bans? California,
Nebraska, Kansas --- if theyve banned drones already, theres nothing about the AFF that saves.
Look up the list of the 20 countries and see how they affect

Drone leadership bad

No states CP---states

Persuaded by there is no reason why the plan is necessary; states that like drones will keep
liking drones---states that hate them will still hate them---places that are concerned about
privacy (Mountain West, for example)---ban drones

Fuck this srocher card it goes neg

1AC

Plan
The United States Federal Government should ban warrantless use of
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles surveillance on US persons within the
United States.

Backlash
Contention one is Backlash
Public backlash against drones causes state bans on the tech
Sorcher 13, National Journals national security correspondent, won the National Press
Clubs Michael A. Dornheim Award in 2014; graduated from Tufts University 2/21/13, Sara,
National Journal, The Backlash Against Drones,
http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/the-backlash-against-drones-20130221
February 21, 2013 The Seattle Police Departments planned demonstration of its small
surveillance drones quickly devolved into a noisy protest. Angry residents attending the
community meeting in October chanted No drones! drowning out officers attempts to explain
how the unmanned aerial vehicles would support certain criminal investigations, help out
during natural disasters, and assist in search-and-rescue operations. Now its clear that Seattles
drones, purchased with federal grants, wont be flying over the metro area anytime soon. Amid
backlash from civil-liberties advocates and citizens worried about government invasion of their
privacy, the mayor earlier this month tabled any drone ambitionsfor now. Public concerns are
not limited to Seattle. Lawmakers in at least 11 states want to restrict the use of drones because
of fears they will spy on Americans, and some are pushing to require warrants before the robots
collect evidence in investigations. Just this month, the Virginia General Assembly passed a twoyear moratorium on drones. The outcry comes after the Electronic Frontier Foundation sued
last year for a list of drone applicants within the U.S. When that information went public, staff
attorney Jennifer Lynch says, it really got people up in arms about how drones are being used,
and got people to question their city councils and local law-enforcement agencies to ask for
appropriate policies to be put in place to regulate drone usage. Drones change the game: Nearly
continuous surveillance could be possible without a physical intrusion such as a property search
or an implanted listening device. The flying robots can carry high-powered cameras, even facialrecognition software or thermal imaging to see through walls. They can hover, potentially
undetected, for hours or days at a time. As of yet, however, there are no laws governing the use
of domestic drones when it comes to privacy. Unless Congress or the executive branch moves to
regulate the robots use before they take to the skies en masse, states will likely continue to try to
limit or ban drone use altogether, which could stymie their potential for other, beneficial uses.
And failing to enact privacy limits only increases the likelihood of an incident in which the
public perceives that the technology is being misused. The Federal Aviation Administration,
which is charged with overseeing drone implementation in the U.S., says its focus is totally on
safety, not privacy worries. We are concerned about how its being used only to the extent it
would affect the safety of the operation, says FAA spokesman Les Dorr. GAO recommends that
the FAA, along with the Justice and Homeland Security departments, discuss privacy
parameters. If we wait until theres a crisis, oftentimes the rules and regulations that are made
in crisis arent our best showing, Dillingham says. Congress can also act; Reps. Ted Poe, RTexas, and Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., introduced a bill last week requiring warrants for the use of
drones in criminal investigations.

Scenario 1 is Farming
Food Insecurity is occurring globally and is a national concern
Forman and Maxey 15 (Johanna Mendelson Forman, scholar in residence at
American University's School of International Service, Levi Maxey, part of the
Managing Across Boundaries Initiative at the Stimson Center, Should Food Security
be a National Security Issue?, 4/9/2015, Stimson,
http://www.stimson.org/spotlight/should-food-security-be-a-national-security-issue/,
DJE)
Food security as a policy issue has evolved to reflect the dynamism of global
events. The increasing attention paid to foods impact on poverty, humanitarian
crises, conflicts and climate change all suggest that food security is a national
security concern. Since the term was first used at the 1974 World Food Conference
the United Nations Food and Agriculture Program has recognized that food security
is multidimensional. It includes food availability, food access (i.e., having adequate
resources for a nutritious diet), utilization (inputs to food like water and sanitation)
and stability. To be a secure population, household or individual must have access
to adequate food at all times. In 2015 we can see that this is often not the case in
fragile states but also in many parts of the developed world. The food price crisis of
2008 reverberated globally. From the food riots that accompanied the Arab Spring,
to the upheavals in Haiti due to the increases in the price of rice, to the corn riots in
Mexico because of the high costs of a staple like tortillas, one thing was clear: food
had entered the security space . Much like climate change is now considered a
national security concern, food security has recently moved from the realm of
development economists and humanitarian organizations into the halls of the
Pentagon where analysts began recognizing the linkages between food insecurity,
climate change, and natural and man-made disasters . In the United States, food is a
much more complicated subject than it used to be. Today, policymakers must

access to locally grown

commodities, management of food waste, and the impact
of commodity prices on the daily cost of food. Food security

consider not only nutrition but also

both affects and is vulnerable to changes in economic stability, climate change, education
and national health. Debate over food deserts, or places without access to fresh
fruits and vegetables, remain important when it comes to socio-economic
indicators, and addressing the double burden of malnutrition and obesity in the
United States sparks conversations about access, education, and nutrition
regulations in the food industry. When striving for the physical wellbeing of the
public within an interdependent system, these kinds of issues surrounding food
security rest at the foundation of any national security strategy.

U.S. is a key leader in world food production

Gayle Tzemach, 8-2-2012, "U.S. Drought and Rising Global Food Prices," Council on
Foreign Relations, http://www.cfr.org/food-security/us-drought-rising-global-foodprices/p28777

This is the hottest summer on record in the United States since 1895, and people are beginning
to wonder whether this type of drought that we're experiencing could become a new normal.
The United States is a pivotal player in world food production and has the most
sophisticated agricultural sector in terms of seeds, technology, irrigation, deep
commodity markets, and future markets. If the United States crop is so devastated by
drought, what is going to happen to the rest of the world? How do rising U.S. food prices affect
global food prices down the world's food supply chain? Which areas of the globe are most at
risk? There are many large food producers in the world. China is the largest wheat producer, but
it is also the largest wheat consumer. What makes the United States unique is that we are the
largest exporter, so we produce about 35 percent of the world's corn and soybean supply. Those
two commodities are crucial in the food chain, because they are used for feed stock for animals.
Around the world you have rising middle classes, a growing demand for meat and protein in the
diet, and countries around the world are becoming increasingly dependent on relatively
inexpensive food stocks from the United States. When you see a crop failure of the magnitude
you have seen this summer, it flows through the whole food chain. Right now you have
American livestock producers taking their pigs and cattle to the slaughter house because they
simply don't have the food to be feeding them. So you're going to see meat prices in the short
term in the United States go down, but over the longer term you're going to see rising meat
prices; [experts] are predicting already 4 to 5 percent price increases in meat for
the next year. That flows through the whole food chain , [to] big-population countries
that import a lot of food, such as the Philippines, Afghanistan, Egypt. And when you see rapidly
rising food prices, of course it leads to instability. We've seen [this] in the last five years
across many of those countries, and you see rising food prices translate almost directly into
street protests. You're going to see the continuation of [political] instability driven in part by
rapidly rising food prices. In 2008, we had food protests across much of the Middle East, so
governments are going to be very much on the alert for unrest and very sensitive to it.
Egypt is already spending about one-third of its subsidies on food, and it is draining the
Egyptian foreign exchange reserve to continue those subsidies. This combination of an already
mobilized population out on the streets demanding lots of different changes [in Egypt], and
rising food prices is going to create a very unstable atmosphere. What are some policy responses
for alleviating the pressures being felt in the United States and other countries because of rising
food prices? In the United States, we have to look at our own policies that are part of the
problem, [including] our mandated use of ethanol in gasoline. This is something that is a
mandated [10] percent that is not flexible, and when you have rising food prices and a problem
with the failing crop, you would think that maybe

we could lighten up on the

ethanol mandate . Because right now so much of our food production is going into
ethanol. So you've already seen governors across the United States in some of the hard-hit states
saying, "Shouldn't we review our ethanol policies?" That's not a short-term fix, but it is
potentially longer-term and something we should be looking at carefully. In terms of policy, we
have a rising global population. We have more mouths to feed every year, and food
security for the world is a critical issue. We should be looking at how to build in more
resilience into the global food system. Africa, which has the highest population growth rates of
any continent in the world, used to feed itself and used to export food, but [its] agriculture has
suffered tremendously over the last half century. Only 4 percent of the land in Africa is even
irrigated, and you've seen a green revolution occur in many parts of the world that has really
passed Africa by. And so building in greater resilience and improving the agricultural capacity of
Africa is a critical part of this equation, so that Africa has more of an ability to feed itself and

become more a part of the global supply chain and not be so dependent on it. Unfortunately,
governments have not made the investments in the agricultural sector that they needed to over
the past half century, which is why you have this situation in Africa today.

Current ag unsustainable, drones are key to solve

Larson 15 (Sarah Larson, March 30, 2015, ARE DRONES THE FUTURE OF FARMING?, Escoffier,
, http://www.escoffieronline.com/are-drones-the-future-of-farming/, AZ)

Many people imagine farming as a quaint, rural enterprise that requires a tremendous amount
of manual labor. While agriculture indeed requires a lot of work and dedication, the country
myth certainly no longer exists in the traditional sense. Though farmers may be surrounded by
miles of crops, agricultural technology is increasingly becoming the norm, and modern
advancements are making farming more efficient and environmentally friendly. For chefs of
various international culinary schools, such technology may someday lead to new ingredients in
the kitchen and produce with optimized nutritional value. Drones and other automatons are
essential to this process and are changing the course of a farmer's daily work. How drones can
help Drone technology is used for everything from military applications to novel ventures such
as delivering packages. Yet one of the biggest industries these unmanned vessels may alter is
farming. According to Mashable, unmanned aerial vehicles can be used to monitor crop health
and assists in finding areas where conditions need to be improved. Imagine if these machines
could be used to identify plots of land that are in need of fertilizer, don't get enough sunlight or
are being damaged by insects or disease. While the legislation regarding the use of drones is still
a work in progress, it likely won't be long before UAVs play a pivotal role in managing the health
of our food supply. Precision Drone, a commercial producer of agricultural UAVs, states that
these devices can increase crop yield while minimizing costs for farmers . The company notes
that its drones are easy to use, can follow field borders and come with a failsafe button that
commands the craft to return to its point of takeoff immediately. As these devices become
increasingly user-friendly, it's possible more farmers will adopt them in order to save costs and
improve sustainability practices. From an environmental standpoint, if drones can
demonstrably increase crop yield, then these machines may play a big role in benefiting the
global food supply. Food is in increasingly high demand as the population increases and the
middle class grows worldwide. According to Oregon Live, the world's middle class is expected to
triple by 2050, making current agricultural practices unsustainable. Embracing the juxtaposing
ideas of environmental technology and farm-to-table practices may potentially lead to long-term
ecological benefits and change the way our food is produced on a mass scale.

Drones are key to precision farming

Griekspoor 13 P.J. Griekspoor, 3-21-2013, "Precision Agriculture Seen as Big Winner in
Drone Technology," No Publication, http://farmprogress.com/story-precision-agriculture-seenbig-winner-drone-technology-9-96113
The biggest thing on the horizon in precision agriculture is Unmanned Aerial Vehicle flights,
according to a new report from the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International.
Kansas, already a leader in research on the vehicles that are expected to see explosive growth
when integration into national airspace begins in 2015 , ranks No. 7 among states likely to see
economic benefits the report says, with the state expected to see a $2.9 billion impact and 3,700
new jobs between 2015 and 2025. The greatest area of growth indicated by the report will be in

precision agriculture, which is slated to grow 10 times that of the public safety market for UAS.
Precision agriculture use of UAS refers to two segments of the farm market: remote sensing used
to scan plants for health problems, growth rates and hydration; and precision application of
needed pesticides or nutrients in order to save money and reduce environmental impact. Aerial
sensing with the hexacopter, can provide mapping of an entire section of land at 1-inch
resolution in about 18 minutes a task that would take hours if not days on a tractor. Aerial
sensing with the hexacopter, can provide mapping of an entire section of land at 1-inch
resolution in about 18 minutes a task that would take hours if not days on a tractor. Members
of the Kansas Ag Research and Technology Association got an upclose look at the work that is
being done at Kansas State University by agronomy professor Kevin Price, who is working
closely with Deon van der Merwe, head of the toxicology section at the K-State Veterinary
Diagnostic Laboratory. UAVs can help monitor crop conditions Van der Merwe is a remotecontrolled aircraft enthusiast who is excited about the prospect of using UAVs, commonly
referred to as drones, to detect blue-green algae blooms in bodies of water. Price brought two
aircraft to the KARTA conference, a flying wing by RiteWingRC called the Zephyr II and a DJI
S800 Spreading Wings hexacopter. Price said the promise of using the aircraft to do remote
sensing to monitor crop condition, detect diseases and map fields for variable rate application of
nutrients or pinpoint areas for fungicide or pesticide application, is huge. Aerial sensing with
the hexacopter, for example, can provide mapping of an entire section of land at 1-inch
resolution in about 18 minutes a task that would take hours if not days on a tractor.

Precision farming key to prevent agricultural collapse

Gonzalez 13 Sarah Gonzalez, 2-27-2013, "Data analysis, biotech are key in agriculture's
future sustainability," No Publication, http://www.agri-pulse.com/ag-issues-biotech-future22613.asp
Bayer's forum, which began on Tuesday in Orlando, Florida, included a futuristic look at
agriculture in the year 2025, just 25 years before the world population is expected to reach nine
billion and agriculture is required to increase productivity by 70 percent. We've been able to
convince consumers that biotechnology is the core of sustainability by 2025, Kottmeyer said,
adding that convincing and educating consumers is more important than convincing regulators.
During the shift of focus from regulator to consumer he predicts, Kottmeyer said it is important
to appeal to the emotional sentiments on which the consumer bases decisions. Furthermore, the
organic customer is attracted to simpler agriculture, social justice, sustainability and good
stewardship, which he says are all things biotechnology can provide. The approach that they're
rejecting has a clear benefit to the very things most important to them, he said. The benefits of
seed technology will be realized, particularly because of the increased global population in 2050,
as well as the prediction that more than half the world population will be in the middle class by
that date. He said this huge middle class, particularly in China and India, will create a new
consumer. While the European Union currently blocks all U.S. biotechnology products,
Kottmeyer is optimistic the consumer will drive a change. He noted that data analytics, which
allowed him to make his 2025 predictions, show that finding ways to influence consumers is
much simpler than normally anticipated. You just have to crunch the data, he said. In fact, the
entire agriculture industry is currently moving into a data-centric era, said David Nicholson,
head of Bayer's Research and Development, during the forum. Using the information gained
from technology in a way that helps agriculture achieve the required 70 percent increase in
productivity is the key to success or failure, he said. Precision agriculture, in particular, is the

focus of this data-driven era allowing the farmer to know what to grow and where to grow it for
the best results. When we think of the farmer of the future we see a grower as CEO, said David
Hollinrake, Bayer's Vice President of Agriculture Commercial Operations Marketing, adding
that farming will increasingly become a business investment instead of a lifestyle or family
choice. We want to be able to participate as an enabler of using data as precision tools.

The impact is food wars

Lugar 2000 (Richard Lugar, US Senator from Indiana, Chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, and a member and former chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee,
2000)

In a world confronted by global terrorism, turmoil in the Middle East, burgeoning nuclear
threats and other crises, it is easy to lose sight of the long-range challenges. But we do so at our
peril. One of the most daunting of them is meeting the worlds need for food and energy
in this century. At stake is not only preventing starvation and saving the environment, but also
world peace and security. History tells us that states may go to war over access to
resources, and that poverty and famine have often bred fanaticism and terrorism .
Working to feed the world will minimize factors that contribute to global instability and
the proliferation of [WMDs] weapons of mass destruction. With the world
population expected to grow from 6 billion people today to 9 billion by mid-century,

the demand for affordable food will increase well beyond current international
production levels. People in rapidly developing nations will have the means greatly to
improve their standard of living and caloric intake. Inevitably, that means eating more meat.
This will raise demand for feed grain at the same time that the growing world population will
need vastly more basic food to eat. Complicating a solution to this problem is a dynamic that

developing countries often use limited

arable land to expand cities to house their growing populations . As good

must be better understood in the West:

land disappears, people destroy timber resources and even rainforests as they try to
create more arable land to feed themselves. The long-term environmental consequences
could be disastrous for the entire globe. Productivity revolution To meet the expected
demand for food over the next 50 years, we in the United States will have to grow
roughly three times more food on the land we have. Thats a tall order. My farm in Marion
County, Indiana, for example, yields on average 8.3 to 8.6 tonnes of corn per hectare typical
for a farm in central Indiana. To triple our production by 2050, we will have to produce an
annual average of 25 tonnes per hectare. Can we possibly boost output that much? Well, its
been done before. Advances in the use of fertilizer and water, improved machinery and better
tilling techniques combined to generate a threefold increase in yields since 1935 on our farm
back then, my dad produced 2.8 to 3 tonnes per hectare. Much US agriculture has seen similar
increases. But of course there is no guarantee that we can achieve those results again. Given the
urgency of expanding food production to meet world demand, we must invest much more in
scientific research and target that money toward projects that promise to have significant
national and global impact. For the United States, that will mean a major shift in the way we

conduct and fund agricultural science. Fundamental research will generate the innovations that
will be necessary to feed the world. The United States can take a leading position in a
productivity revolution. And our success at increasing food production may play a decisive

humanitarian role in the survival of billions of people and the health of our
planet.
Best studies prove it goes nuclear
Gary Kleyn, 25 May 2012, WA State Director at Australian Christians, Research Manager at
Future Directions International International Conflict Triggers and Potential Conflict Points
Resulting from Food and Water Insecurity,
http://www.futuredirections.org.au/files/Workshop_Report_-_Intl_Conflict_Triggers__May_25.pdf

A study by the International Peace Research Institute indicates that where food
security is an issue, it is more likely to result in some form of conflict. Darfur,
Rwanda, Eritrea and the Balkans experienced such wars. Governments, especially
in developed countries, are increasingly aware of this phenomenon. The UK Ministry
of Defence, the CIA, the US Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Oslo
Peace Research Institute, all identify famine as a potential trigger for conflicts
and possibly even nuclear war.

Scenario 2 is the economy

US economy is experiencing slowed growth
Koesterich 15 (Russ Koesterich, Global Chief Investment Strategist for BlackRock , Is the
US Economy Treading Water?, 7/22/2015, http://marketrealist.com/2015/07/us-economytreading-water/, DJE)
Though the US economy is showing signs of life, Russ explains why US consumers arent
opening their wallets. Last week, investors digested the latest round of mixed economic data
about the US economy. While housing numbers came in strong, the disappointing June retail
sales report showed that consumer activity remains soft. The mixed data illustrate a basic
contradiction for 2015: Despite continued improvement in the labor market and lower gasoline
prices, consumers arent responding with open wallets. At 1.4 percent year-over-year, adjusted
retail sales growth is close to its lowest level since 2009. The above graph shows the monthover-month growth in retail (XRT) sales, which slumped by 0.3% in June. Households cut back
on purchases of automobiles as well as other goods. This raises concerns that the economy is
slowing again and tempers expectations of a September rate hike. Monthly retail sales have
now fallen four times in the last seven months. Retail trends show that consumption has not
quite picked up as much as expected. While poor economic data mean recovery remains weak,
they support equities (IVV) and bonds (AGG), which could potentially delay a rate hike. That
said, the rate hike is likely to be gradual and from extraordinarily low levels. On the other hand,
housing (IYR) (VNQ) numbers remain robust. Recently, new home sales reached a seven-year

peak. Another strong indicator is housing starts, as you can see in the above graph. Housing
starts in the United States surged 9.8% to 1,174 thousand units in June, compared to the
previous month. This is the highest level in almost eight years. Building permits also picked up
to multi-year highs. This indicates strength in the economy, as consumers are investing in bigticket items like houses. This fits well in the theme of the year so far, which has been a mixed bag
of macro data. In the next part of this series, well delve into the state of the labor market, which
is seeing a similar pattern.

Drones improve the efficiency of every sector of the economy

Dubravac 14 Chief economist of the Consumer Electronics Association (9-2-2014, Shawn
Dubravac, Richmond Times-Dispatch, "How commercial drones can drive economic growth",
http://www.richmond.com/opinion/their-opinion/guest-columnists/article_a849638c-bf53514d-a793-51255162a0bf.html)
Drones are an exceptional example of how emerging technologies can increase the productivity
of myriad diverse businesses. Whether monitoring valuable infrastructure, quickly and
inexpensively surveying an area, or delivering rich video in real time, drones will change the way
businesses do what they do. The CEA estimates the costs related to using a drone may be onetenth the cost of other alternatives of certain business activities. Because drones are such
efficient cost-reducers for various use-cases, entirely new services and consumer benefits are
now on their way to market. In some ways, the marketplace for commercial drones is limited
only by our imaginations . Drones have already helped catch cattle rustlers, capture wedding
memories and monitor national borders. In the agricultural sector alone, drones are farming
crops, weeding fields and applying fertilizers. Eventually, this technology will be integral to
media outlets, real estate professionals and emergency first responders. In July, a three-day
search for a missing senior in Wisconsin ended when an amateur drone pilot joined the effort
and spotted the man after only 20 minutes. As in most nascent markets, companies are
experimenting with drones across numerous business applications. In July, Amazon petitioned
the FAA for an exemption to allow the company to test drones in the U.S., an effort to
implement same-day package delivery. Such experimentation can lead to lasting innovation,
new business models and economic growth. Without the exemptions, Amazon may have to
move its research and development operations abroad, resulting in fewer domestic jobs and less
national investment. In the absence of federal guidelines from the FAA, states are instead
crafting their own drone laws, creating a patchwork of different and diverse state laws.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 16 states including Virginia have
enacted 20 laws regarding drone use the latest laws, in Tennessee and Indiana, went into
effect July 1. This maze of regulations will make compliance much more complicated for
companies that want to incorporate drones into their commercial operations. We shouldnt
delay any longer in opening our skies to new economic growth. While were waiting for the
government to provide clarity, the projected jobs, economic activity and $4.4 million in added
tax revenue the drone sector will provide in Virginia over the coming years are drifting that
much further out of reach. We need to feed tomorrows economic engine today, but the absence
of forward thinking is hindering our potential.

It transforms every industryclear regulation is key

Hash-Hoff 13 President, Electrofab Sales, (7-19-2013, Michele Nash-Hoff, Industry Week,
"What is the Importance of Unmanned Vehicles to our Economy?",
http://www.industryweek.com/emerging-technologies/what-importance-unmanned-vehiclesour-economy)
The report states that the main inhibitor of U.S. commercial and civil development of the UAS
is the lack of a regulatory structure. Non-defense use of UAS has been extremely limited
because of current airspace restrictions. The combination of greater flexibility, lower capital and
lower operating costs could allow unmanned vehicles to transform fields as diverse as

urban

infrastructure management, farming and oil and gas

exploration , to name a few. The use of UAS in the future could be a more responsible
approach to certain airspace operations from an environmental, ecological and human risk
perspective. Present-day unmanned vehicles have longer operational duration and require less
maintenance than earlier models and are more fuel-efficient. These aircraft can be deployed in a
variety of terrains and may not require prepared runways.

Economic collapse causes competition for resources and instability

that escalates and goes nuclear
Harris and Burrows 09 [counselor in the National Intelligence Council, the principal
drafter of Global Trends 2025, **member of the NICs Long Range Analysis Unit Revisiting the
Future: Geopolitical Effects of the Financial Crisis, Washington Quarterly,
http://www.twq.com/09april/docs/09apr_burrows.pdf]
Increased Potential for Global Conflict

Of course, the report encompasses more than economics and indeed believes the future is likely
to be the result of a number of intersecting and interlocking forces. With so many possible
permutations of outcomes, each with ample opportunity for unintended consequences, there is a
growing sense of insecurity. Even so, history may be more instructive than ever. While we
continue to believe that the Great Depression is not likely to be repeated, the lessons to be
drawn from that period include the harmful effects on fledgling democracies and multiethnic
societies (think Central Europe in 1920s and 1930s) and on the sustainability of multilateral
institutions (think League of Nations in the same period). There is no reason to think that this
would not be true in the twenty-first as much as in the twentieth century. For that reason, the
ways in which the potential for greater conflict could grow would seem to be even more apt in a
constantly volatile economic environment as they would be if change would be steadier. In
surveying those risks, the report stressed the likelihood that terrorism and nonproliferation will
remain priorities even as resource issues move up on the international agenda. Terrorisms
appeal will decline if economic growth continues in the Middle East and youth unemployment is
reduced. For those terrorist groups that remain active in 2025, however, the diffusion of
technologies and scientific knowledge will place some of the worlds most dangerous capabilities
within their reach. Terrorist groups in 2025 will likely be a combination of descendants of long
established groups inheriting organizational structures, command and control processes, and
training procedures necessary to conduct sophisticated attacks and newly emergent collections
of the angry and disenfranchised that become self-radicalized, particularly in the absence of

economic outlets that would become narrower in an economic downturn. The most dangerous
casualty of any economically-induced drawdown of U.S. military presence would almost
certainly be the Middle East. Although Irans acquisition of nuclear weapons is not inevitable,
worries about a nuclear-armed Iran could lead states in the region to develop new security
arrangements with external powers, acquire additional weapons, and consider pursuing their
own nuclear ambitions. It is not clear that the type of stable deterrent relationship that existed
between the great powers for most of the Cold War would emerge naturally in the Middle East
with a nuclear Iran. Episodes of low intensity conflict and terrorism taking place under a nuclear
umbrella could lead to an unintended escalation and broader conflict if clear red lines between
those states involved are not well established. The close proximity of potential nuclear rivals
combined with underdeveloped surveillance capabilities and mobile dual-capable Iranian
missile systems also will produce inherent difficulties in achieving reliable indications and
warning of an impending nuclear attack. The lack of strategic depth in neighboring states like
Israel, short warning and missile flight times, and uncertainty of Iranian intentions may place
more focus on preemption rather than defense, potentially leading to escalating crises. Types of
conflict that the world continues to experience, such as over resources, could reemerge ,
particularly if protectionism grows and there is a resort to neo-mercantilist practices.
Perceptions of renewed energy scarcity will drive countries to take actions to assure their future
access to energy supplies. In the worst case, this could result in interstate conflicts if government
leaders deem assured access to energy resources, for example, to be essential for maintaining
domestic stability and the survival of their regime. Even actions short of war, however, will have
important geopolitical implications. Maritime security concerns are providing a rationale for
naval buildups and modernization efforts, such as Chinas and Indias development of blue
water naval capabilities. If the fiscal stimulus focus for these countries indeed turns inward, one
of the most obvious funding targets may be military. Buildup of regional naval capabilities could
lead to increased tensions, rivalries, and counterbalancing moves, but it also will create
opportunities for multinational cooperation in protecting critical sea lanes. With water also
becoming scarcer in Asia and the Middle East, cooperation to manage changing water resources
is likely to be increasingly difficult both within and between states in a more dog-eat-dog world.

China
Contention two is China
Drones are critical to the economy/competitiveness but status quo
backlash will push the market out and stifle innovation
Gruber 4-25-15 [Robert H. litigation associate @ Greenberg Traurig] [COMMERCIAL DRONES AND PRIVACY:
CAN WE TRUST STATES WITH DRONE FEDERALISM?] (http://tinyurl.com/pgpsp64) [Richmond Journal of Law &
Technology Volume XXI, Issue 4] (accessed 7-13-15) //MC
At this stage, it is impossible to accurately predict the scope of the

future UAS industry. Its potential benefits are vast

and varied: beyond mere job creation, drones will contribute to efficiency in various industries and
aspects of society. This is particularly true in the commercial sphere , where competition and innovation
can drive progress towards functions far removed from the individual surveillance people fear. UAS have already proven
useful in functions from crop monitoring9 to gathering atmospheric data.10 Dominos Pizza made headlines when it
announced the development of delivery UAS systems, as have other companiesand while some skeptics dismissed the press
releases as publicity stunts,11 it

is not too difficult to imagine a future in which packages appear on our

doorstep out of the sky. 12 Recently, Facebook announced a plan that epitomizes the benevolent possibilities of commercial
UAS. 13 It has purchased the U.K.-based company Ascenta, which manufactures solarpowered aircraft that can stay aloft at high
altitudes for years at a time. Facebooks goal? Providing Internet access in areas where traditional connections are impractical or
impossible. 14 Even

though commercial UAS flight is still largely prohibited in the United States , the
battle over drone regulation has already begun , fixated largely on imagined harms to peoples
privacy.15 And the privacy advocates are winning: more than twenty states have passed laws
restricting UAS operations.16 Many of these address law enforcement surveillance, but an increasing number of states are
proposingand enactingrestrictions on private and commercial aircraft . For example, a bill proposed and
enrolled in Texas makes it a misdemeanor to collect an image of a persons land without consent.17 Other states are considering
similar legislation.18 One town in Colorado must have gotten Napolitanos memoit considered issuing drone hunting licenses
that would authorize its citizens to shoot any unpiloted aircraft.19 [5] This sort of

legislation is both premature and

problematic , particularly with respect to the kind of drones that will be used for commercial or civil
purposes (as opposed to law enforcement purposes). It is premature because legislators cannot foreseeand therefore
cannot balanceall of the potential benefits and harms of commercial drone use. Many of the privacy interests
purportedly advanced by restrictive legislation are already protected by other areas of the law. 20 It is problematic because

inconsistent and overly-restrictive regulations (1) potentially violate the First Amendment right to gather
information and (2) threaten to chill industry growth.21 The harms such legislation causes are analogous, in a sense, to
those that would have arisen if states had created a patchwork of Internet privacy laws several years before the development of the
World Wide Web.22 Right now, the

United States leads the pack in UAS technology. If the current

legislative pattern continues, the U.S. might very well drive a market with incredible potential
overseas , to more open-minded nations.23 [6] Is restrictive legislation nevertheless justified, as a means of vindicating
legitimate privacy interests?24 Perhaps not, particularly where commercial UAS use is concerned. There are few cognizable
circumstances in which using drones to monitor individual people will be profitable for non-government actors and entities. 25 First,

UAS could be used

profitably to survey mines, monitor power lines in remote areas, collect traffic-flow information,
spray and monitor crops, and so forth. Some predict that eighty-percent of commercial drones will be
used for agricultural purposes 26 so the majority will seldom even accidentally interfere with
individual privacy interests. As one person put it, corn doesnt mind if you watch it.27 Second, even if a particular
commercial drones images could be processed and linked to individuals identities , what would
justify the cost of such directed monitoring? Demographic information may be valuable, but our phones and Internet
activity paint a cheaper and more accurate picture of consumer activities where individuals go, where
a primary advantage of unmanned aircraft is that they can go swiftly and easily where people cannot.

they shop, and what they buy. [7] The global market for UAS is growing fast.28 At the moment, the best available UAS technology
belongs to the United States and Israel.29 Developed for military purposes, this

technology nevertheless has massive

export potential for civil and commercial uses. [8] However, the United States monopoly on UAS
technology may already be eroding. In 2013 Israel surpassed the U.S. as the chief exporter of UAS
technologyalthough Israel remains second to the U.S. in production.30 What accounts for this discrepancy? A regulatory barrier:
the companies that develop our military drones are restricted from marketing their technology elsewhere.31 China and other
countries are now entering the ring.32 By

competing in the global market, the U.S. can realize all the
benefits of a multi-billion dollar industry once the FAA opens up the national airspace 33which it is
poised to begin doing soon but only if the U.S. avoids establishing a draconian regulatory framework
for commercial UAS. [9] This Article focuses on commercial UAS, and on the legal frameworksboth current and potentially
forthcomingsurrounding them. 34 Part I provides a brief background of the politically-charged context within which UAS
regulation is being developed. Part II examines two critical issues in the UAS regulatory debate: (1) the extent to which the thirdparty doctrine will apply to information captured by commercial UAS; and (2) the boundaries of First Amendment protection of
information gathering. Part II also outlines existing state and federal laws governing civil drone use. Part III examines approaches
the United States could take in regulating commercial drone use. Ultimately, the article concludes that the

federalism model
will stifle the market for UAS aircraft and technology, unless Congress acts to create a baseline federal
scheme that assuages privacy concerns without hindering industry growth.

Declining military drone capability necessitates commercial

innovation
Fung 13 (Brian Fung, reporter, The next 25 years in military drone technology, in 1 chart,
12/27/2013, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theswitch/wp/2013/12/27/the-next-25-years-in-military-drone-technology-in-1-chart/, DJE)
With so much attention being devoted to commercial drones these days, it's easy to forget that
the military's long-term strategy for unmanned systems is still a work in progress. A lot of the
funding for drone operations comes from the special budget for the war in Afghanistan and as
the drawdown begins, that money is going to dry up. That's a big problem for the military. It
now has to transform what was originally a stopgap solution into a sustainable function of the
armed services. That process is also going to grant drones a more important place in combat,
according to the latest revision to a 25-year roadmap the Pentagon released this week.
Depending on the kind of drone we're talking about unmanned aerial systems (UAS),
unmanned ground systems (UGS) or unmanned maritime systems (UMS) the Pentagon
foresees an array of different problems that all need to be tackled over the next quarter century.
The near-term will mostly involve making sure the technology works at all. As we move into the
next decade, that will give way to exploiting the real potential of unmanned systems. That's
when a lot of the changes to doctrine and strategy will begin to take effect. Advances in
commercial technology will help speed that process. So will research being done by the Pentagon
itself. But the biggest challenges aren't necessarily technical. Take how humans will be expected
to interact with their machines in the field. While it's tempting to think about whole fleets of
unmanned ships steaming across the ocean as one, the reality is that people are going to be right
alongside them for the foreseeable future. There may be fewer humans than drones in a unit.
But you might have, for instance, a human pilot being aided by a set of unmanned wingmen in
the air. The military already has a name for this: Manned-Unmanned System Teaming, or
MUM-T. Figuring out how much interaction will be needed is going to be an ongoing process.

US drone leadership is key to stop Chinese territorial expansion into

the Senkakus and SCS maintaining the industry is critical to
maintain the lead
Zhou 12 [Dillon former research assistant @ Cyber Conflict Studies Association in
Vienna, graduated w/ a degree in IR @ University of Massachusetts Boston]
Its evident that China

intends to take full advantage of using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to achieve its
national interests including their territorial disputes over the Senkaku Islands and South China
Sea. The U.S. and the World should, therefore, be concerned with this development given that this may lead to a drone
race between the top two producers of drones the U.S. and China. In a world whose militaries and governments are
buzzing about the potential of the drones, it is no surprise that China is working to bring their drone program up
to speed to compete with America just as President Obama is executing his "Asia Pivot" through
strengthening U.S. military, political and economic presence in Asia. China is rising as evident in its growing economic and

If the U.S. works towards

countermeasures against drones from rival states like China the risk posed by the development of
competing drone programs can be minimized allowing the U.S. to implement its "Asia Pivot" with
military power but the U.S. should not treat the Chinese drone program as a cause for panic.

one less impediment. The Rise of the Drones Drones are the strategic tools of the future, especially when it comes to the political
contests between the major players in global affairs. The

Department of Defenses Defense Science Board (DSB)

released a report on the future of drones as a potent tool of great powers like the U.S. and
China . The report notes that drones are fast becoming a tipping point in global affairs because:
Armed forces in the United States and around the world have actively embraced unmanned systems. The advantages of these
systems in terms of persistence, endurance and generally lower costs and deployment footprint have been highlighted in recent
conflicts ... Unmanned

systems have become an established part of military operations and will

play an increasing role in the modern military machine . The value of the drone lies in its capacity to radically
expand a militarys ability to gather intelligence and expand its ability to project its power beyond limits faced by frontline
personnel. It can also carry out the unpleasant business of neutralizing enemies, including Anwar al-Awlaki and Abu Yahya al-Libi,
Al Qaedas last number two leaders, with some civilian casualties. However, the drone is not as precise or accurate as described by
the defense industry as shown by a joint study published by Stanford Law School and NYU School of Law, which detailed the
considerable toll taken on civilians in Pakistan and causes unintended consequences in its search and kill operations in multiple

The U.S. remains the leading market for drones , but other powers
like China, Russia, Europe and the Middle East are also working to develop their own drone capabilities.
Unlike the other powers, China is the most prolific developer of a rival drone program to America's program.
The DSB report said [i]n a worrisome trend, China has ramped up research in recent years faster than
any other country. Chinas New Dragons in the Sky Like the U.S., China has given its new fleet of UAVs unique code names
areas of U.S. intelligence operations.

which often include the character for dragon or "long" and designed them with comparable capabilities as their U.S.
counterparts. Many of its newer models including the CH-4, the Wing Loong and Xianglong appears to be copies of the U.S.
Reaper, Predator and Global Hawk designs. The

drone program has had a profound effect on Chinas

defense industry. The DSB report notes that [China] displayed its first unmanned system model
at the Zhuhai air show five years ago, and now every major manufacturer for the Chinese
military has a research center devoted to unmanned systems. One unique aspect of the Chinese drone
program is that the cost of the drones are significantly cheaper than those made by the U.S. and
Israel. For example, according to Wired, "[t]he Wing Loong [the Chinese equivalent of the U.S. Reaper] reportedly comes at a
rather incredible bargain price of $1 million (625,000), compared to the Reaper's varying price tags in the $30 million (18.7
million) range." For

China, their nascent drone program provides a valuable tool for projecting its
power in Asia, especially in a time when its engaged in territorial disputes with its neighbors .
More importantly, China feels a need to meet the threat in perceives in President Obamas so-called Asia Pivot. The drones
could act as the ideal surveillance tool in tracking U.S. and its Asian allies' military movements in the event of a crisis or
international spat and act as a proxy weapon to deter assertive behavior over the South China Sea and
Senkaku Islands. At the same time, the cheaper Chinese drones are a hot export product line for the Chinese defense industry.
Many African and Asian states have placed orders for the economic Chinese drones. "We've been contacting many countries,
especially from Africa and Asia," Guo Qian, a director at a division of the state-owned China Aerospace Science and Technology

Corporation. The geostrategic impact of the advent of these new "dragons" is to stoke fears of a drone race between the U.S. and
China, which have already manifested at the Pentagon. Worried About the Dragons Reach The U.S. is deeply concerned with the
speed of the Chinese drone program and the growing resources being devoted to the program. The main concern, according to the
DSB report, is as follows: The military significance of Chinas move into unmanned systems is alarming. [China] has a great deal of
technology, seemingly unlimited resources and clearly is leveraging all available information on Western unmanned systems
development. China

might easily match or outpace U.S. spending on unmanned systems , rapidly

close the technology gaps and become a formidable global competitor in unmanned systems .
Basically, the U.S. is afraid that it won't be able to keep up with a China that has invested itself in a intensive government-sponsored
effort to compete with the U.S. drone program in terms of technical quality, quantity, and as a export product to clients in the
developing world. On

a strategic level, the Chinese drones could be the " tipping point " for giving the
Chinese the edge in possible future disputes in Asia with the U.S. as it attempts to create regional security as
part of its "Asia Pivot." There are several facts that provide some solace to the U.S. as China's drones
are far from being a real challenge to the American drone program. First, the Chinese drones
are nowhere as sophisticated as U.S. drones in their range and proper hardware for optic systems and motors to
power the "dragons." The DSB report notes that the U.S. technical systems are almost unrivaled at present.
Second, China lacks the manpower to properly support their new fleet of drones . Whereas the U.S. has
been training and honing a large force of UAV pilots, technicians and operation managers for 15 years. Finally, the U.S. drone
program is about 20 years ahead of the Chinese program. The current models on show are
considered to be prototypes and not finished products. The Chinese also have not had a chance
to gain real experience with their drones during real operation .

It will escalate accidents, unwillingness to back down, 2 biggest

armies destabilizes the whole region
Auslin 13 [Michael Scholar @ American Enterprise Institute] [The Sino-Japanese Standoff]
(http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/338852)

What was more dangerous, however, was a game of chicken that began in the waters off the
Senkakus. Beijing dispatched private fishing boats and maritime patrol vessels on a near-daily basis to the islands, and Japan
responded with its coast guard. The two countries have now faced off regularly in the waters around the
Senkakus, sometimes with a dozen ships or more. Beijings goal seems to be to undercut
Tokyos claim of administrative control over the islands. That would then invalidate Japans
right to expel ships from the exclusive economic zone around the Senkakus. In recent weeks, though,
the Chinese have become more aggressive , and very visibly escalated tensions . For the first time
ever, they have flown maritime patrol planes into Japanese airspace around the islands. A
predictable cycle thus emerged: The Japanese responded by scrambling F-15s, and last week, the
Chinese sent two J-10 fighter jets to monitor Japanese military aircraft, according to the South China Morning Post.
Now, the new Japanese government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is preparing to go one step further: giving Japanese
pilots the authority to fire warning shots with tracer bullets across the nose of any Chinese aircraft that doesnt
heed warnings to leave Japanese-controlled airspace. It was barely a dozen years ago that the U.S. and China faced a crisis when a

Japan
and China are now on a metaphorical collision course, too, and any accident when tensions are
so high could be the spark in a tinderbox. Its not difficult to see Beijing issuing orders for
Chinese fighters to fire their own warning shots if Japanese jets start doing so. Even though
leaders from both countries promise to meet and keep things cool, a faceoff at 20,000 feet is
much harder to control than one done more slowly and clearly on the oceans surface. This
SinoJapanese standoff also is a problem for the United States, which has a defense treaty with
Tokyo and is pledged to come to the aid of Japanese forces under attack. There are also
mechanisms for U.S.Japanese consultations during a crisis, and if Tokyo requests such military
hotshot Chinese pilot collided with a U.S. electronic-surveillance plane over the South China Sea, crashing both aircraft.

talks, Washington would be forced into a difficult spot, since Beijing would undoubtedly
perceive the holding of such talks as a serious provocation. The Obama administration has so far taken pains
to stay neutral in the dispute; despite its rhetoric of pivoting to the Pacific, it has urged both sides to resolve the issue peacefully.
Washington also has avoided any stance on the sovereignty of the Senkakus, supporting instead the status quo of Japanese
administration of the islands. That may no longer suffice for Japan, however, since its government saw

Chinas taking to
the air over the Senkakus as a significant escalation and proof that Beijing is in no mind to
back down from its claims. One does not have to be an alarmist to see real dangers in play here .
As Barbara Tuchman showed in her classic The Guns of August, events have a way of taking on a life of their own
(and one doesnt need a Schlieffen Plan to feel trapped into acting). The enmity between Japan and China is deep
and pervasive; there is little good will to try and avert conflict . Indeed, the people of both
countries have abysmally low perceptions of the other . Since they are the two most advanced
militaries in Asia , any tension-driven military jockeying between them is inherently
destabilizing to the entire region. Perhaps of even greater concern, neither government has shied away
from its hardline tactics over the Senkakus, despite the fact that trade between the two has
dropped nearly 4 percent since the crisis began in September. Most worrying, if the two sides dont agree
to return to the status quo ante, there are only one or two more rungs on the ladder of military
escalation before someone has to back down or decide to initiate hostilities when challenged .
Whoever does back down will lose an enormous amount of credibility in Asia, and the possibility
of major domestic demonstrations in response. The prospect of an armed clash between Asias
two largest countries is one that should bring both sides to their senses, but instead the two seem to
be maneuvering themselves into a corner from which it will be difficult to escape. One triggerhappy or nervous pilot, and Asia could face its gravest crisis perhaps since World War II.

Draws in the US and goes nuclear

Blaxland and Kersten 13 [John Senior Fellow @ Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, the
Australian National University. Rikki Professor of modern Japanese political history in the School of
International, political and Strategic Studies @ College of Asia and the Pacific, Australian National University]
[Escalating territorial tension in East Asia echoes Europes descent into world war]
(http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2013/02/13/escalating-territorial-tension-in-east-asia-echoes-europes-descent-into-world-war/)
The recent activation

of Chinese weapons radars aimed at Japanese military platforms around the

Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands is the latest in a series of incidents in which China has asserted its power and authority
at the expense of its neighbours. The radars cue supersonic missile systems and give those on the receiving end only a
split second to respond . With Japanese law empowering local military commanders with increased
discretion to respond (thanks to North Koreas earlier provocations), such incidents could easily escalate . In an era of
well-established UN-related adjudication bodies like the International Court of Justice (ICJ), how has it come to this? These
incidents disconcertingly echo past events. In

the early years of the 20th century, most pundits considered a

major war between the great powers a remote possibility . Several incidents prior to 1914 were handled locally

or successfully defused by diplomats from countries with alliances that appeared to guarantee the peace. After all, never before had
the world been so interconnected thanks to advanced communications technology and burgeoning trade. But

alliance ties
and perceived national interests meant that once a major war was triggered there was little hope
of avoiding the conflict . Germanys dissatisfaction with the constraints under which it operated arguably was a principal
cause of war in 1914. Similarly, Japans dissatisfaction helped trigger massive conflict a generation later. A century on, many of the
same observations can be made in East Asia. Chinas rise is coupled with a disturbing surge in jingoism across East
and Southeast Asia. China resents the territorial resolution of World War II, in which the United States handed responsibility for the
Senkaku/Diaoyu islands to Japan while large chunks of the South China Sea were claimed and occupied by countries that emerged
in Southeast Asias post-colonial order. Oil and gas reserves are attractive reasons for China to assert itself, but challenging the US
place in East Asian waters is the main objective. China resents American re-balancing as an attempt at containment, even though
US dependence on Chinese trade and finance makes that notion implausible. China is pushing the boundaries of the accepted postSecond World War order championed by the United States and embodied by the UN. Chinas rapid rise and long-held grievances
mean its powerbrokers are reluctant to use institutions like the ICJ. But Chinas

assertiveness is driving regional

states closer into the arms of the United States. Intimidation and assertive maritime acts have been
carried out, ostensibly by elements not linked to Chinas armed forces. Chinas white-painted Chinese Maritime Services and
Fisheries Law Enforcement Command vessels operating in the South China Sea and around the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands have
evoked strong reactions. But Japans recent allegation

that China used active radars is a significant escalation.

could trigger a stronger reaction from Japan . China looks increasingly as
if it is not prepared to abide by UN-related conventions . International law has been established mostly by powers
Assuming it happened, this latest move

China sees as having exploited it during its century of humiliation. Yet arguably, it is in the defence of these international
institutions that the peaceful rise of China is most likely to be assured. Chinas

refusal to submit to such mechanisms as the ICJ

increases the prospect of conflict. For the moment, Japans conservative prime minister will need to
exercise great skill and restraint in managing domestic fear and resentment over Chinas assertiveness and the militarys
hair-trigger defence powers. A near-term escalation cannot be ruled out . After all, Japan recognises that China is
not yet ready to inflict a major military defeat on Japan without resorting to nuclear weapons
and without triggering a damaging response from the U nited S tates. And Japan does not want to enter into
such a conflict without strong US support, at least akin to the discreet support given to Britain in the Falklands War in 1982.
Consequently, Japan may see an escalation sooner rather than later as being in its interests, particularly if China appears the
aggressor. Chinas domestic environment has nurtured jingoism. The Chinese state has built up the publics
appetite for vengeance against Japan by manipulating films and history textbooks. On the other hand, Chinese authorities recognise
that the peaceful rise advocated by Deng Xiaoping is not yet complete (militarily at least). In the meantime it

is prudent to

exercise some restraint to avoid an overwhelming and catastrophic response . If the 191418 war taught us
outcome of wars is rarely as proponents conceived at the outset .

anything, it is that the

Solvency
Contention three is Solvency
The FAA regulations dont pose a serious threat to the commercial
drone industry this card assumes your limitations warrants
Whitlock 15 (Craig Whitlock, covers the Pentagon and national security for The Post, FAA
rules might allow thousands of business drones, 2/15/2015, The Washington Post,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/faa-releases-proposed-rules-fordomestic-drone-use/2015/02/15/6787bdce-b51b-11e4-a200-c008a01a6692_story.html, DJE)
Thousands of businesses could receive clearance to fly drones two years from now under
proposed rules that the Federal Aviation Administration unveiled Sunday, a landmark step that
will make automated flight more commonplace in the nations skies. Meanwhile, the White
House on Sunday issued presidential directive that will require federal agencies for the first time
to publicly disclose where they fly drones in the United States and what they do with the torrents
of data collected from aerial surveillance. Together, the FAA regulations and the White House
order provide some basic rules of the sky that will govern who can fly drones in the United
States and under what conditions, while attempting to prevent aviation disasters and
unrestrained government surveillance. The FAAs draft rules would make it relatively simple for
real estate agents, aerial photographers, police departments, farmers and anyone else to fly
small drones for work purposes. Operators would need to pass a written proficiency test, register
the drone and pay about $200 in fees but would not have to obtain a regular pilots license or
demonstrate their flying skills. The long-awaited regulations the FAA had been drawing them
up for several years are expected to lead to a revolution in commercial aviation. But they must
first undergo a lengthy period of public review and comment that is projected to take at least
until early 2017. Once the rules are finalized, the FAA estimates that more than 7,000
businesses will obtain drone permits within three years. Were putting forward what we believe
to be the safest possible approach at the moment, but of course we look forward to hearing back
from the public, Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx told reporters Sunday on a conference
call. The proposed regulations carry some significant limitations. Businesses would be allowed
to fly drones only during daylight hours. And drones would have to remain within eyesight of
the operator or observers posted on the ground. The drones could fly no more than 100 mph and
would have to stay below an altitude of 500 feet to avoid the risk of colliding with other aircraft.
They would also be prohibited from flying over bystanders not directly involved in their
operation. As a result, companies would not be permitted to fly drones over long distances. That
would effectively preclude companies such as pizza makers, Amazon.com and newspaper
companies from delivering goods to customers doorsteps via drone (Amazons chief executive,
Jeffrey P. Bezos, also owns The Washington Post). The rules, however, are expected to be
modified and loosened over the coming decade as drone technology advances . Unlike with
regular aircraft, the FAA would not require drone operators or manufacturers to certify in
advance that the drones are safe to fly. Michael Huerta, head of the FAA, said such a
requirement is unnecessary because small drones pose the least amount of risk to our
airspace. The regulations would apply only to drones weighing 55 pounds or less. The FAA is
still drafting rules for larger drones, and those are expected to take several more years to sort
out. In addition, FAA officials said they are considering a separate set of rules for microdrones that weigh less than 4.4 pounds. Under those rules, operators would not have to pass

any kind of test; they would only have to submit a written statement to the FAA promising that
they were familiar with basic aviation safety measures.

No circumvention congress can leverage decreased funding for

infractions
Michaels 8, Acting Professor, UCLA School of Law. Law Clerk to the Hon. David H. Souter,
U.S. Supreme Court, 2005-06. Law Clerk to the Hon. Guido Calabresi, U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit, 2004-05. J.D., Yale Law School, 2003. (August 2008, Jon D. Michaels,
CALIFORNIA LAW REVIEW, All the President's Spies: Private-Public Intelligence
Partnerships in the War on Terror, 96 Calif. L. Rev. 901, Lexis)
Armed with data far more detailed and more timely than what it currently receives, n227
Congress could decide to hold hearings (in camera, if necessary to preserve classified
information) to investigate programs that it suspects are misguided, insufficiently attentive to
privacy concerns, overly burdensome to the corporations, or exploitative of the status
differentials that make it legally easier for the private sector to collect information and give it to
the government than for the intelligence agencies to obtain the data in the first place. n228
Congress could also hold up confirmation votes on nominees as leverage to force the Executive
to make concessions. n229 Or, it could de-fund a given [*954] program, which it has previously
done when it disapproved of an intelligence or national-security operation. n230 (It should be
underscored, of course, that even a minority within Congress can wield tremendous influence,
by insisting on various amendments to critical bills, by itself trying to hold up nominees, or, at
least in the Senate, by filibustering.) The appropriations power n231 may be particularly potent
in the intelligence budgetary arena. Intelligence budgets are treated differently from much of the
rest of the overall federal budget, n232and to the extent intelligence line appropriations can
remain classified yet be subject to programmatic-level revisions, Congress would have both the
dexterity and political cover to exercise aggressively its co-ordinate powers over intelligence
policy. That is, the ability to tinker with funding streams on a regular basis gives the legislature a
means of acting promptly upon its concerns.n233 What is more, the concomitant opportunity to
appropriate in a manner largely occluded from the public gives lawmakers the political freedom
to challenge imprudent intelligence policies with less fear of being harshly punished at election
time for their so-called "soft-on-terrorism" vote - a fear that routinely prevents many a member
from voting against (publicly recorded) military-spending bills. When a vote to deny military
appropriations is taken as an article of disloyalty, as it often is, representatives lose perhaps the
most straightforward and valuable means of influencing foreign policy. n234 None of this is, of
course, to say that Congress [*955] will need to scrutinize every penny spent on intelligence
matters. Most operations, like most expenditures in the larger budget or, say, most military
promotions requiring Senate confirmation, will be approved as a matter of course. n235 But the
option to affect funding when necessary to redirect misguided policy is not an inconsequential
one.

Warranted drone use could be obtained for emergencies or public

safety purposes
Zabel 13 (Kylee Zabel, Bothell Reporter WNPA Olympia News Bureau, Drones surveillance
of farmlands ignites debate on privacy invasion, 2/27/2013, Bothell-Reporter,
http://www.bothell-reporter.com/news/192575561.html, DJE)
***HB 1771 is no longer a thing the plan is still unique
In a quest to defend the rights of Americans outlined in the Fourth Amendment, a seemingly
unlikely partnership between a Republican representative and the American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU) geared up bipartisan support to pass a bill that would limit the acquisition and
use of surveillance drones by state and local public agencies. As policy bills cut-off loomed, the
House Public Safety committee was able to hear public testimony on and vote 9-1 the proposed
legislation out of committee and onto House Rules Committee Thursday. What sparked the
House bill was a policy adopted by the Washington State Farm Bureau(WSFB) in November last
year to regulate the use of drones to survey farmland without the express consent of the
landowner. As early as August 2012, several national law enforcement agencies had requested
that states adopt drone acquisition and usage guidelines as the technology becomes more and
more mainstream. Rep. David Taylor (R-15th District, Moxee), prime sponsor of HB 1771, said
that the unregulated, unwarranted surveillance by drones, or unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs),
flies in the face of constitutional freedoms. [The bill] attempts to address and establish clear
guidelines and sideboards to protect public safety, protect our Constitutional rights and limit the
liability on taxpayers, he said. The bill calls for public agencies, such as state departments or
local law enforcement, that wish to employ drones for public safety use must receive legislative
approval, be that either the state Legislature or local government officials . There is one major
exception, however. UAVs may be used without explicit permission in the event of an
emergency, such as the use of drones during search and rescue efforts, in the pursuit of
dangerous criminals or finding missing children. In order to gain access to information collected
by UAVs, an agency must issue either a criminal, administrative or inspection warrant ,
depending on the nature of the case. Data collected that was not significant to an ongoing case
would need to be destroyed, following specific timelines delineated in the bill. The use of UAVs
for training purposes over an existing military installation in the state would also be permitted.

A clear national framework prevents patchwork state regulations

AIA 13 Aerospace Industries Association, the premier trade association representing major
aerospace and defense manufacturers and suppliers in the United States. (5/6/13, Aerospace
Industries Association, Unmanned Aircraft Systems: Perceptions & Potential, http://www.aiaaerospace.org/assets/AIA_UAS_Report_small.pdf)
One of the greatest threats to UAS airspace integration is a growing number of states and
communities that have passed laws the majority of which appear to be focused on personal
privacy concerns banning or restricting the use of UAS. A national framework must be
identified to address the concerns of these communities while avoiding the creation of a national
patchwork of conflicting rules that may ultimately limit UAS use for public service missions. An
appropriate first step would be the creation of national privacy objectives and guidelines.

FBI surveillance is a huge concern for privacy means the CP cant

solve anything
Guliani 15 Neema Singh Guliani, American Civil Liberties Union Washington Legislative
Office, focusing on surveillance, privacy, and national security issues. Prior to joining the ACLU,
she worked in the Chief of Staffs Office at DHS, concentrating on national security and civil
rights issues. She has also worked as an adjudicator in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Civil Rights in the Department of Agriculture and was an investigative counsel with House
Oversight and Government Reform Committee, where she conducted investigations related to
the BP oil spill, contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the Recovery Act. Neema is a graduate
of Brown University where she earned a BA in International Relations with a focus on global
security and received her JD from Harvard Law School in 2008, 2015 (Unchecked government
drones? Not over my backyard, The Hill, March 24th, Available online at
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/236701-unchecked-government-dronesnot-over-my-backyard, accessed on 7-13-15) GIE
Right now, the federal government doesnt have a clear picture of how its using drone
technology across agencies and departments, nor does it have clear, consistent standards in
place to protect Americans privacy. For example, at a hearing last June, then-FBI Director
Robert Mueller III acknowledged that the bureau was using drones for surveillance. When asked
about policy and procedures to regulate this use, he confessed that the agency was only in the
initial stages of creating them. If the federal government doesnt have clear rules in place for
drone use, how can citizens be sure that their privacy is being protected? Hopefully this will
begin to change with the new presidential memorandum. Mandating that agencies describe their
drone use is a necessary first step, and the Obama administration deserves credit for taking it,
but this is not a sufficient protection for Americans privacy. Given the potential invasiveness of
this technology and how frequently it is used, letting government agencies set their own drone
use guidelines, is a recipe for failure. Instead, Obama should require all federal agencies to meet
strong minimum privacy standards, and close the following privacy loopholes in his existing
guidance. First and foremost, absent an emergency, law enforcement agencies should only use
drones to conduct surveillance or gather information with a warrant. This is not a rule that
should be left to the discretion of individual agencies. Second, the federal government should
restrict the purposes for which drones can be used by agencies . The guidelines allow drones to
be used for any authorized purpose, which is not strictly defined. Drones should only be used
in emergencies, by law enforcement with a warrant, or in situations where they are unlikely to
substantially intrude on peoples privacy, such as environmental surveys. Third, information
collected by drones for one purpose shouldnt be used for other purposes. In other words, if the
government uses drones to help identify forest fires, this information shouldnt be passed on to
the FBI for law enforcement. The guidelines should make clear that information can only be
shared between agencies if it specifically relates to the original purpose for which it was
collected. Finally, the government should put in place more stringent restrictions on the
retention and use of information collected by drones. Under the presidents memorandum,
information collected by drones must be destroyed within 180 days, unless it is necessary to the
mission of the agency. Safeguards should be put in place to ensure that this exception is not used
to allow the government to store vast amounts of information on citizens.