Campus Debate questions that need answering. Help please

[Lochloosa]

Ole Miss Dems Prez does not have enough post to post (?). Here are the questions he needs answered for a debate. Thanks in advance.


I'm sorry I could not start my own topic--I haven't made enough posts on here for them to let me. Tomorrow Night, us College Democrats will be in a debate on campus here at the University of Mississippi against the Republicans and Libertarians (I couldn't find it in my heart to exclude anyone). I need to get some facts straight--I hope someone can provide:

1. I heard before Clinton's speech at the Boston convention that he was introduced as "The administration where more people moved up into the middle class than ever before." Is this true? Where can I find this cited?

2. Does anyone know how many House Democrats voted for the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (It raised interest on student loans)? I can find the Senate record, but the House is a pain in the neck to locate.

3. Same question for the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (A sinister giveaway to big drug companies).

4. How many troops do we still have in Kosovo? Is the casualty level still 0, after all these years?

5. What kind of alternative energy programs did Jimmy Carter have in place that Reagan dismantled? Whatever figures you have on this I would appreciate.

Thanks for the help guys, and as I piece stuff together, I'm sure there will be more!

[DS1]

1. You mean someone else claiming to be prepping for a debate

spewed out a list of right-wing talking points and wants us to debunk them one by one?

[Lochloosa]

5. Should be a piece of cake for you.

}(

[gatorboy]

17. They gotta throw in variety sometimes.

If it isn't a debate, then it's the "debunk this email" thread:

"Hi! I received this email that says that Clinton is responsible for all the evils of the world and I can't find anything to debunk it. Pleeze HELP!!!111" :P

[acmejack]

2. I will post the answers as I find them.

Here is the answer to number two. NONE, two Non Voters http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2005-601

Number Three: Eight, one No Vote http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2003-332

Number Five: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0503-22.htm

[Selatius]

3. You know what? I wouldn't bother defending Kosovo.

The problem isn't that it got UN approval vs. the Iraq War. The problem is that it is another case of nation building. The US wasn't established to be in the business of nation building, and armies weren't meant to be a police force. You get situations like Abu Ghraib when you make soldiers do jobs for which they have no training.

As far as Jimmy Carter goes, here's his speech. All the information is at the end. This is with respect to Jimmy Carter's energy plan.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_energy.html

--Reduce the annual growth rate in our energy demand to less than two percent.

--Reduce gasoline consumption by ten percent below its current level.

--Cut in half the portion of United States oil which is imported, from a potential level of 16 million barrels to six million barrels a day.

--Establish a strategic petroleum reserve of one billion barrels, more than six months' supply.

--Increase our coal production by about two thirds to more than 1 billion tons a year.

--Insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings.

--Use solar energy in more than two and one-half million houses.

[serryjw]

6. How outrageous

Now you know why Carter didn't get re-elected :sarcasm:

[immoderate]

4. Kick.

Welcome to DU Ole Miss.:hi:

Next time don't wait so long.

--IMM

[NoAmericanTaliban]

7. Here is a link comparing the Reagan & Clinton economies

http://gning.org/reagan-vs-clinton.html

has some good graphs showing the medium income level during clinton where they all went up , not just the wealty as for reagan.

Bush is always manipulating facts. Don't agrue the facts so much as to point out how they are manipulated Example - Point out how they classify fast food hamburger makers as a manufacturing job. What's next - will going to the bathroom become a manufacturing job :)

also mention that the 'good' job numbers are because Bush switched to using the household survey, which reports more jobs, unlike the old employer survey used by every other president - employer. There was a good DU post this weekend on that.



Make sure the Libertarian is a real one not a repuke in disguish. Don't argue with them - agree on points & use them againt the repuke

- like Iraq - what a mess it is & time to get out

& privacy rights ( bring up illegal survallance) Mention Bob Barr is on our side of civil libertarian

less gov't interference in our lives (that is what the GOP once stood for) but now they want to control our lives from marriage to divorce to spying on us.

Don't get caught up too much in a clinton vs. bush debate. If they bring up Clinton mention that the one thing they have in common is that Bin ladin is still alive under both presidents.

Some talking points:

Bush was president for America's biggest attack on our soil

I do want to congradulate Bush on one successful record - the most vacations taken by any president including Reagan who was shot.

Pres with the most individual bankrupcies & biggest corp failures - Enron, World Com, HealthSouth, etc. Some of the biggest corp scandals under his watch.

Border are unsecure - look at all the illegals that have come here since he took office

look at the environment programs that Bush has cut.

Good luck in the debate!

[Ole Miss Dems Prez]

8. Thank you

Y'all are awesome! I should have clarified the Kosovo-bit. I wanted to focus more on the military PLANNING aspect of that, as well as the allies part, and the 0 (Still correct? I think it is) casualties, despite having soldiers still there. These are college students--they won't think much. I just have to put some icing on the cake.

We're trying down here in Mississippi!

~J

[newyawker99]

9. Welcome Ole Miss Dems Prez!

:toast:

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

10. A comment--coming on here with a laundry list of questions that you are

asking the membership here to research and answer for you leaves, in my opinion, a poor impression... leaving aside for a moment the charge that it looks like a Right Wing Troll post, brought up by another, it just comes across that you are asking others to do your homework for you.

The inevitable thought arises, good luck to you in the rest of your undergrad career if you approach the rest of your assignments by asking others to do them for you.


Take a look at your question #5.

5. What kind of alternative energy programs did Jimmy Carter have in place that Reagan dismantled? Whatever figures you have on this I would appreciate.

I haven't researched this, but it looks like a classic right wing straw man. Let's say the answer was, none (although I do seem to recall at least a strong effort to promote use of gasohol during Carter years). The implication to the "poor Dem" answering this is that, Carter didn't do anything more or less than Reagan to spur alternative energy, as if a strong emphasis by a Democratic administration on conservation of energy, versus a Republican administration like Bush/Cheney seeming to tell us it's our patriotic DUTY to consume as much energy as possible and literally laughing off the idea of conservation shows no significant difference.

If you can't even do basic research on points like this yourself, and you are a campus debater, what hope is there for your team?

[Ole Miss Dems Prez]

12. Nah

No suh, I ASSURE you, I am NOT a "Red-Stater." I legitimately needed help as soon as I could get it--time is of the essence. I've been busy this week working my ass off--the College Democrats here are sponsoring a debate on our campus between the Democratic candidates who are running for the nomination to challenge Trent Lott for U.S. Senate...I'm moderating, taking care of PR and candidates themselves, media, you name it...I'm a pharmacy major, and we've got 4 tests these next two weeks. I'm sacrificing much of my study time for politics this week--but it's all in the name of the cause. But I don't mind. I just need help. I was scouring www.us.gov for the House votes and could not find them. I'm just eager to officially kick off the "Trent Lott (forced) Retirement Party" this Friday!

[roody]

16. Didn't Carter put solar panels on the white house

which Reagan had removed?

[Rose Siding]

11. Thanks- RW talking points disgust me too!

On economic growth, this should help-

snip>
Closing the Book on A Generation of Deficits -- in 1992, the deficit was $290 billion, a record dollar high. In 1999, we had a budget surplus of $124 billion -- the largest dollar surplus on record (even after adjusting for inflation) and the largest as a share of our economy since 1951. With the President's plan, we are now on track to eliminate the nation's publicly held debt by 2015.

More than 20 Million New Jobs -- more than 92 percent (18.5 million) of the new jobs have been created in the private sector, the highest percentage in 50 years. This is the most jobs ever created under a single Administration -- and more new jobs than Presidents Reagan and Bush created during their three terms. Under President Clinton, the economy has added an average of 244,000 jobs per month, the highest of any President on record. This compares to 52,000 per month under President Bush and 167,000 per month under President Reagan.
http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/economy.html

Lots more here about improvements in quality of life-

http://clinton3.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/numbers.html
Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Two Decades -- Since 1993, real wages have grown 6.5 percent -- compared to declining 4.3 percent during the previous two administrations. In 1998, real wages were up 2.7 percent -- that's the fastest annual real wage growth in over 20 years.

Here are some comparisons with what Bush squandered-

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=130838

The students "won't think much", huh? Too bad. That hasn't always been my experience. :hi:

[Emit]

13. RE: # 2

This link says all the Dems voted against it:

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:9dEwk5IMSN4J:www.eesi.org/publications/Press%2520Releases/2005/11.18.05_budget_reconciliation_house_passed.htm+House+Democrats+voted+for+the+Deficit+Reduction+Act+of+2005+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2

House Passes deficit reduction act of 2005: Bill makes Significant Cuts to Agriculture & Energy programs

Early this morning, November 18, the House of Representatives voted to pass, H.R. 4241, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. The bill passed 217 to 215 with 14 Republicans and all the House Democrats opposing the bill. This came after a long Veterans holiday weekend followed by a week filled with conversations on what changes to make to provide the Republican leadership enough votes to pass the bill. The final package passed by the House still eliminates support for Sec. 9006 Renewable Energy & Energy Efficiency Program and Sec. 6401 Value-Add Grant Program.

Here's another link with info: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:ceCiGGJPUrMJ:www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd%3Fbill%3Dh109-4241+House+Democrats+voted+for+the+Deficit+Reduction+Act+of+2005+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=6

[Emit]

14. Re: # 3

Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (H.R. 1):

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:ofNSYXrKotoJ:www.now.org/issues/health/120503medicare.html%3Fprintable+House+Democrats+voted+for+Medicare+Prescription+Drug,+Improvement,+and+Modernization+Act+of+2003+&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=9

The Medicare prescription drug legislation was basically written in secret by the Republican leadership, with heavy input from the health care industry. Democrats, with exception of Senators John Breaux (La.) and Max Baucus (Mont.), were kept out of the process. The language of the conference agreement was released little more than 24 hours before the House was to vote on the 1,100-page bill. Few members had time to read the fine print. But the Democratic leadership put up a good if losing fight. House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) undertook a heroic effort to unify Democrats against the bill, calling it "a historic hoax on 40 million seniors and disabled Americans."

H.R. 1 passed the House on Nov. 22 by the narrowest of votes: 220-215, after a rule-breaking delay of several hours when George W. Bush had to twist the arms of a few recalcitrant Republicans to produce the majority vote. In the Senate, Democratic Senators John Kerry and Ted Kennedy (both of Mass.) attempted to filibuster the bill, but this failed by 70 to 29 and then Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle (S.D.) attempted to stall the legislation by objections related to the Budget Act, but this failed as well (61-39). The final Senate vote on November 25 was 54-44, with 11 Democrats joining Republicans to support the bill. (See how they voted.) Bush is scheduled to sign the bill on Dec. 8.

See How They Voted: http://www.now.org/issues/health/120503medicare.html?printable#vote

How they voted: The following 16 Democrats voted for H.R. 1: Cramer (Ala.), Dooley (Calif.), Boyd (Fla.), Marshall (Ga.), Scott (Ga.), Alexander (La.), John (La.), Peterson (Minn.), Pomeroy (N.D.), Carson (Okla.), Wu (Ore.), Davis (Tenn.), Hall (Texas), Stenholm (Texas), Matheson (Utah) and Boucher (Va.). The 11 Senate Democrats who voted for the bill are: Baucus (Mont.), Breaux (La.), Carper (Del.), Conrad (N.D.), Dorgan (N.D.), Feinstein (Calif.), Landrieu (La.), Lincoln (Ark.), Miller (Ga.), Nelson (Neb.) and Wyden (Ore.). Hold them accountable for their votes and decide whether you can support them in the 2004 elections.

And from Wiki:

Legislative history
The bill was debated and negotiated for nearly six years in Congress, and finally passed amid unusual circumstances. Several times in the legislative process the bill had appeared to have failed, but each time was saved when a couple of Congressmen and Senators switched positions on the bill.

The bill was introduced in the House of Representatives early on June 25 as H.R. 1, sponsored by Speaker Dennis Hastert. All that day and the next the bill was debated, and it was apparent that the bill would be very divisive. In the early morning of June 27, a floor vote was taken. After the initial electronic vote, the count stood at 214 ayes, 218 noes.

Three Republican representatives then changed their votes. One opponent of the bill, Ernest J. Istook, Jr. (R-OK-5), changed his vote to "present" upon being told that C.W. Bill Young (R-FL-10), who was absent due to a death in the family, would have voted "aye" if he had been present. Next, Republicans Butch Otter (ID-1) and Jo Ann Emerson (MO-8) switched their vote to "aye" under pressure from the party leadership. The bill passed by one vote, 216-215.

On June 26, the Senate passed its version of the bill, 76-21. The bills were unified in conference, and on November 21, the bill came back to the House for approval.

The bill came to a vote at 3 a.m. on November 22. After 45 minutes, the bill was losing, 219-215, with David Wu (D-OR-1) not voting. Speaker Dennis Hastert and Majority Leader Tom DeLay sought to convince some of dissenting Republicans to switch their votes, as they had in June. Istook, who had always been a wavering vote, consented quickly, producing a 218-216 tally. In a highly unusual move, the House leadership held the vote open for house as they sought two more votes. Some of the dissenters said that they had been bribed to switch, allegations Hastert denied.

About 5:50 a.m., convinced Otter and Trent Franks (AZ-2) to switch their votes. With passage assured, Wu voted yea as well, and Democrats Calvin M. Dooley (CA-20), Jim Marshall (GA-3) and David Scott (GA-13) changed their votes to the affirmative. But Brad Miller (D-NC-13), and then, Republican John Culberson (TX-7), reversed their votes from "yea" to "nay". The bill passed 220-215.

The Democrats cried foul, and Bill Thomas, the Republican chairman of the Ways and Means committee, challenged the result in an empty gesture to satisfy the minority. He subsequently voted to table his own challenge; the tally to table was 210 ayes, 193 noes.
~snip~

Text

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:Z6EUq1oD2QUJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_Prescription_Drug,_Improvement,_and_Modernization_Act+House+Democrats+voted+for+Medicare+Prescription+Drug,+Improvement,+and+Modernization+Act+of+2003+&h

[Emit]

15. Re: # 5 Carter energy programs Reagan dismantled

~snip~

President Carter offered a series of individual actions. First he established a clear goal. "Beginning this moment, this nation will never use more foreign oil than we did in 1977 -- never. From now on, every new addition to our demand for energy will be met from our own production and our own conservation." By the end of the 1980s, he anticipated that the nation would cut "our dependence on foreign oil by one-half."

To achieve these goals he asked for "the most massive peacetime commitment of funds and resources in our nation's history to develop America's own alternative sources of fuel -- from coal, from oil shale, from plant products for gasohol, from unconventional gas, from the sun." He observed that while all Americans were suffering from higher energy prices, some of us were suffering much more. "Our nation must be fair to the poorest among us, so we will increase aid to needy Americans to cope with rising energy prices...."

Carter recognized this effort would be costly. To pay for it he proposed a windfall profits tax on the enormous profits oil companies were making because of OPEC-inspired rises in oil prices: "Congress must enact the windfall profits tax without delay. It will be money well spent. Unlike the billions of dollars that we ship to foreign countries to pay for foreign oil, these funds will be paid by Americans to Americans."

In 1980, Congress enacted much of what Jimmy Carter proposed. Within months, Ronald Reagan entered office, and immediately set about dismantling or dramatically cutting back most of the programs. He taught us that we should never act collectively, that government was the problem, not the solution. The energy crisis subsided. As a result of the severe worldwide economic downturn in 1981 and 1982, the price of oil dropped in half. A dependence on imported oil didn't seem so important. The nation dropped back into lethargy.
~snip~

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:nXMRvdAdw7YJ:www.alternet.org/story/26208/+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

~snip~
President Ronald Reagan dismantled the solar hot-water system installed by his predecessor, Jimmy Carter, on the White House roof; Congress allowed the federal solar tax credit to expire in 1985. State and local incentive programs also fell by the wayside....

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:I2tGvqfoRusJ:www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp%3Fid%3D10295+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2

~snip~

In 1975, during the depths of the energy crisis, Tom Harkin arrived in Washington as an Iowa congressman. In his first year on the House Science and Technology Committee, he decided that the threat to the future of energy was genuine. Then Carter was elected President, and, to Harkin's relief, the Administration began dispensing billions and creating incentives for solar, photovoltaic, wind and ocean thermal energy. Then the next President, Ronald Reagan, dismantled Carter's solar-heating apparatus on the White House roof and all the tax breaks and funding for alternative-energy research along with it. During those lean years, Harkin, now a senator, joined forces with longtime hydrogen zealot Sen. Spark M. Matsunaga of Hawaii to convince whomever they could that hydrogen wasn't some dumb fantasy.
~snip~

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:BvttAnkhCQcJ:homelands.org/articles/harnessing.html+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=7

~snip~
The Reagan White House then slashed the budget for the Solar Energy Research Institute, pushed out its independent-minded director, and dismantled most of the Carter-era renewable energy programs. When the oil embargo ended, the price of fossil fuels declined, and with it, interest in energy issues. Solar energy was once again outside most political radar screens.
~snip~

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:CpLdkxtwPVkJ:www.prospect.org/web/view-web.ww%3Fid%3D571+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12

~snip~

Then came Reagan. "If Jimmy Carter had been reelected president, we would now have a quarter or so of the nation's energy resources coming from renewables," Hayes says. "It was a clear, calculated campaign by the DOE in the years of the Reagan administration to crush the solar energy program of the federal government, driving many of the most talented people out of the field."

~snip~

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:SCPurYQWTHcJ:www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2000/03/solar.html+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=3



And lastly, may be of use to familiarize yourselves with: Carter and Reagan on removing price controls on oil (that came up a few times in Google search) Here's just one reference to this:

~snip~

An online Definition of 1979 energy crisis notes that "Carter as part of his administration's efforts at deregulation proposed removing price controls that had been imposed in the administration of Richard Nixon during the 1973 energy crisis. Congress agreed to remove price controls in phases, they were finally dismantled in 1981 under Ronald Reagan." Other sources state that Reagan merely accelerated the final phase of oil price decontrol, which was already largely complete and would have become final in the spring of 1981 in any event.

http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:epdldy3TZf4J:dailyablution.blogs.com/the_daily_ablution/2004/10/guest_post_your.html+energy+programs+did+Jimmy+Carter+have+in+place+that+Reagan+dismantled&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5