Pioneer+TANF


 * CONTENTION 1 IS INHERENCY

TANF legislation restricts social services to many poor mothers based on their marital and reproductive choices, reinforcing dominant gendered and racial hierarchies. Mink**, professor of women's studies at Smith College, 20**02** (Gwendolyn, The Good Society, Project Muse) Let me turn now...mothers' citizenship

Paz-Fuchs**, Senior Lecturer at Ono Academic College, 20**08** (Amir, Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law, Lexis Academic) And yet, significant...unique dissimilarities.
 * The Federal government currently controls social service spending via the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families bill, also known as TANF.


 * Plan: The United States federal government should allow individuals to recieve social services under the Temporary Assistance to Need Families Act regardless of marital or reproductive choices.**

ADVANTAGE 1: PATRIARCHY
 * CONTENTION 2 IS OPPRESSION

These gendered structures threaten the very basis of women’s rights by questioning their ability to make choices about their own lives. Mink,** professor of women's studies at Smith College, 20**02** (Gwendolyn, The Good Society, Project Muse) The seeming irresistibility...to see how

Johnson et al**, Professor of Political Science at Williams College, 20**07** (Cathy Marie, also Georgia Duerst-Lahti, Professor of Political Science at Beloit College, and Noelle Horton, Professor of Political Science and IR at the University of San Diego, Creating Gender: The Sexual Politics of Welfare Policy, pp.19-20) Government is central...create in the process
 * Government welfare policy is a key site of contestation against patriarchy.

Warren and Cady**, Professors of Philosophy at Macalester College & Hamline University, 19**94** (Karen and Duane, Hypatia, Spring, Proquest) The notion of patriarchy as a socially dysfunctional system...and global contexts.
 * The dysfunctionality of patriarchy guarantees continued violence, war, and environmental destruction.

French**, PhD from Harvard, 19**92** (Marilyn, Beyond Power: On Women, Men, and Morals, pp.494-5) Just as our present morality...and in biology and ecology.
 * Setting a goal to end patriarchy will create new anti-patriarchal structures


 * ADVANTAGE TWO IS RACISM

First, Marriage promotion programs are founded on racial hierarchies – must be rejected in order to embrace culturally different family arrangements. Onwuachi-Willig, 05** Acting Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis (Angela, California Law Review, December, Lexis Academic) More imaginative and culturally-inclusive legislation

Bullock and Limbert 05** (Wendy and Heather, Professors at the University of Santa Cruz, “Playing the Fool’: US Welfare Policy from a Critical Race Perspective,” Feminism & Psychology, Vol. 15, No. 3, 253-274 (2005)) As with work requirements, a critical analysis...women of color.
 * Second, the family cap policy is motivated by racist stereotypes.

Onwuachi-Willig 05**, Acting Professor of Law at the University of California, Davis, 2005 (Angela, California Law Review, December, Lexis Academic) Part II.A demonstrates how discussions...do not deserve pubic aid.
 * Opposition to welfare are steeped in racist stereotypes that lead to contrived policy scenarios

Bardnt 91**. (Director of Crossroads, a non-profit org and Joseph-ordained minister. “Dismantling Racism: The Continuing Challenge to White America; p.31-33) Racism can be expressed...our benefit.
 * We must solve for the systematic and entrenched nature of racism in order to solve for its harms

Bardnt 91**. (Director of Crossroads, a non-profit org and Joseph-ordained minister. “Dismantling Racism: The Continuing Challenge to White America; p.155-156) To study racism is to study walls...to continue.
 * Plan is part of the effort to break down racism – which is key to preventing our systemic self-destruction


 * CONTENTION 3 IS SOLVENCY

US domestic practices get modeled globally. Norris 01** Editor in Chief of UCSD Guardian (Alison, University Wire, January 25, Lexis) It may be argued...oppressive practices

Ernst 08** Assistant Professor in the Dept of Political Science, Seattle University (Rose, The Journal of Gender, Race & Justice, Winter, Lexis) 2006 marked the tenth anniversary...it is most needed.
 * Abdication of federal responsibility fractures movements committed to gender and racial equality – only the plan solves broader societal discrimination.

Cherlin 03** (Andrew J., Professor of Public Policy at John Hopkins University, “Should the Government Promote Marriage?” Contexts vol. 2, Number 4, Fall 2003.) Despite the attention paid...intend to help.
 * The symbol of federal restrictions is key – it creates an idealized vision of family that influences public discourse.


 * CONTENTION 4 IS NOT ANOTHER K FRAMEWORK

If you focus on minute probabilities, all actions can have catastrophic consequences – absolute risk avoidance would stifle all assessment – even if we cannot draw a perfect line, we should still act on probabilities Hansson, 2006**; professor in philosophy Royal Institute of Technology (Sven Ove; May 23, 2006; “The Epistemology of Technological Risk”; http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v9n2/hansson.html#bondi However, it would not be feasible...been sufficiently systematized.

Daniel **Callahan**, prof of philosophy at Harvard, 19**73** [ Co-founder and former director of The Hastings Institute, “The Tyranny of Survival” p 91-93 The value of survival could not be so readily...in not doing so.
 * Opponents of social progress use contrived threats to survival as political tools to perpetuate oppression**.

Dale Herbeck**, Professor of Communication at Boston College, 19**92** [Director of the Fulton Debating Society at Boston College, “The Use and Abuse of Risk Analysis in Policy Debate,” Paper Presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association (Chicago, IL), October 29th-November 1st, Available Online via ERIC Number ED354559, p. 10-12] Those of us who judge...borders on the absurd.
 * The refusal to assign zero risk to low probability impacts is based on a false belief in objectivity .This destroys the value of probability and divorces debate from the real world

Yudkowsky ‘6** (Eliezer; Research Fellow at the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence “Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks” Forthcoming in Global Catastrophic Risks, eds. Nick Bostrom and Milan Cirkovic 8/31/06) MG In addition to standard biases...taste in stories.
 * The fantasy of extinction has warped humanity’s understanding of existential risks as one judged by its descriptions and not necessary evaluation of the possibility event itself. Subjectivity inevitably colors their interpretation of the so-called “inevitable” future.

Yudkowsky ‘6** (Eliezer; Research Fellow at the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence “Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks” Forthcoming in Global Catastrophic Risks, eds. Nick Bostrom and Milan Cirkovic 8/31/06) MG Any existential risk evokes...difficult as lawyering.
 * Portrayal of existential risks requires the burden of skills in the study and the studies themselves. Lack of probability discussion is a reason for you to be skeptical of their internal link chains.

Gewirth, 94.** (Absolutism and its Consequentialist Critics. Prof of Philosophy at the University of Chicago. Alan Gewirth.) Suppose a clandestine group...rights of blacks.
 * Never perpetrate a sure evil to forestall a possible evil.


 * CONTENTION 5 - YOUR IMPACTS ARE IMPOSSIBLE

No war – no benefits, rising costs, democracies, common security, clear power divisions make escalation unlikely Mandelbaum**, Professor of American Foreign Policy at Johns Hopkins University, 19**99** Michael, Christian A. Herter Professor of American Foreign Policy, The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University; Director, Project on East-West Relations, Council on Foreign Relations “Is Major War Obsolete?” Why is this so? Most simply...attack on a king.

Quigley, 2007**. (John B. Quigley is a professor of law at The Ohio State University. March 4, 2007 —Iran reasonably sees nukes as best defense against U.S.  Pantagraph.com) If Iran develops nuclear weapons...days of meetings.
 * MAD prevents even very belligerent countries from launching nukes.


 * FROM HERE THE 1A WILL READ MORE IMPACT DEFENSE - EXACT CARDS VARY ON WHAT DAs THE NEG TEAM COMMONLY RUNS****