Pepperdine » Elechyan-Parker Aff

Elechyan-Parker Aff

Last modified by Abi Williams on 2013/02/13 19:10

Solar Fits 1ac

Observation One – The Status Quo

The federal government is embracing solar as a viable form of energy production for American homes, but their plans for expansion are limited to only 6 states and utility scale projects.
US Dept of Interior ’12 [http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Obama-Administration-Approves-Roadmap-for-Utility-Scale-Solar-Energy-Development-on-Public-Lands.cfm]

As part of President Obama’s all-of-the-above energy strategy to expand domestic energy production, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today finalized a program for spurring development of solar energy on public lands in six western states. The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for solar energy development provides a blueprint for utility-scale solar energy permitting in Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah by establishing solar energy zones with access to existing or planned transmission, incentives for development within those zones, and a process through which to consider additional zones and solar projects. Today’s action builds on the Administration’s historic progress to facilitate renewable energy development. On Tuesday, with the authorization of the Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Wind Energy Project site in Wyoming, Interior reached the President’s goal of authorizing 10,000 megawatts of renewable power on public lands. Since 2009, Interior has authorized 33 renewable energy projects, including 18 utility-scale solar facilities, 7 wind farms and 8 geothermal plants, with associated transmission corridors and infrastructure. When built, these projects will provide enough electricity to power more than 3.5 million homes, and support 13,000 construction and operations jobs according to project developer estimates.

The Administration’s recent decision to fast-track large-scale solar was a pivot point in our nation’s relationship with solar energy – it was a matter of choice, and the United States Federal Government chose to fund programs that will increase the cost of electricity for rate payers in low income communities while guaranteeing a boost in revenue for utilities.
Union Bulletin ‘13 [1/3, Small-scale solar's big potential goes untapped, by Julie Cart,http://union-bulletin.com/news/2013/jan/03/small-scale-solars-big-potential-goes-untapped/]

The Obama administration’s solar-power initiative has fast-tracked large-scale plants, fueled by low-interest, government-guaranteed loans that cover up to 80 percent of construction costs. In all, the federal government has paid out more than $16 billion for renewable-energy projects. #Those large-scale projects are financially efficient for developers, but their size creates transmission inefficiencies and higher costs for ratepayers. #Smaller alternatives, from rooftop solar to small- and medium-sized plants, can do the opposite. #Collectively, modest-sized projects could provide an enormous electricity boost — and do so for less cost to consumers and less environmental damage to the desert areas where most are located, say advocates of small-scale solar power. #Recent studies project that California could derive a substantial percentage of its energy needs from rooftop solar installations, whether on suburban homes or city roofs or atop big-box stores. #Janine Blaeloch, director of the nonprofit Western Lands Project, said smaller plants were never on the table when the federal solar policy was conceived early in President Barack Obama’s first term. #Utilities and solar developers wanted big plants, so that’s what’s sprouting in Western deserts, she said. #“There was a pivot point when they could have gone to the less-damaging alternative,” Blaeloch said, referring to both federal officials and environmental groups that have supported large-scale solar projects. #“There’s no question that it was a matter of choice, and it was the wrong choice.” #Built in far-flung locations where there is plenty of open land, large-scale plants require utilities to put up extensive transmission lines to connect to the grid. #Utilities charge ratepayers for every dollar spent building transmission lines, for which the state of California guarantees utilities an annual return of 11 percent for 40 years. #By comparison, small-scale plants can be built near population centers and provide power directly to consumers, reducing the demand for electricity from the grid. #Rooftop solar goes one step further. #It not only cuts demand from the grid, but also can allow homeowners and businesses to sell back excess power. #Falling start-up costs also have brought solar power within reach for many homeowners and small businesses.

And, even if current programs are expanded to include more states, grandiose federal projects do no integrate well into the low income communities that have been battered by their proximity to fossil fuel industries for decades; and are being excluded as beneficiaries of the solar movement.
Cervas ’12, Coordinator @ California Environmental Justice [Strela, 1/19, Solar for All,http://caleja.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SmallScaleRDGfitProposal_FINALv4.pdf]

Low-income, communities of color have shouldered the burden of living adjacent to polluting fossil fuel industries for decades and have suffered economically, environmentally, socially and physically as a result. Governor’s Brown’s commitment to building 12,000 MW of new Renewable Distributed Generation (RDG) represents an investment of tens of billions of dollars in California’s clean electric power infrastructure. “Who benefits” from this investment is not a matter of indifference. In a time of high unemployment and high poverty rates, investment in communities with the greatest economic and social needs is an imperative. California currently has a program created by SB 32 (Negrete-McLeod), known as a “feed-in tariff” (FiT), that allows eligible customers to enter into standard contracts with their utilities to sell the electricity produced by small renewable energy systems from 0-3 MW. However, SB 32 benefits only 2 to 3 MW renewable energy systems due to one-size-fits-all pricing. With SB 32 FiT and other programs focusing on 2-20 MW, the most vulnerable communities are left behind. The larger projects do not integrate well into poor urban and rural communities. The unemployment rates continue to rise among low income communities of color. Although many community members participate in and graduate from green jobs training programs, there are no local green jobs available to these trainees. Sadly, these trained workers are “all dressed up, with nowhere to go.” The California Environmental Justice Alliance (CEJA) proposes that legislation be introduced in 2012 supporting small-scale renewable distributed generation (RDG) through feed-in tariffs. This small scale RDG legislation will give teeth to the concept of investing in communities most in need.

This problem is not limited to project sizes – inequalities are exacerbated by current incentive structures that allow the benefits of solar panels to be reaped by middle and upper class families and businesses while low-income families literally pay the price.Cardwell ’12, Business Day reporter for The New York Times covering energy [6/4, Diane, Solar Panel Payments Set Off a Fairness Debate, New York Times,http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/solar-payments-set-off-a-fairness-debate.html?pagewanted=all]

In California’s sun-scorched Central Valley, the monthly electric bill can easily top $200. But that’s just about what George Burman spent on electricity for all of last year. When the sun is shining, the solar panels on his Fresno condominium produce more than enough power for his needs, and the local utility is required to buy the excess power from him at full retail prices. Those credits mostly offset his purchases from the electric company during cloudy days and at night. Mr. Burman says the credit system, known as net metering, is a “very nice benefit” for him. But it’s not such a good deal for his utility, Pacific Gas and Electric. As he and tens of thousands of other residential and commercial customers switch to solar in California, the utilities not only lose valuable customers that help support the costs of the power grid but also have to pay them for the power they generate. Ultimately, the utilities say, the combination will lead to higher rate increases for everyone left on the traditional electric system. “Low-income customers can’t put on solar panels — let’s be blunt,” said David K. Owens, executive vice president of the Edison Electric Institute, which represents utilities. “So why should a low-income customer have their rates go up for the benefit of someone who puts on a solar panel and wants to be credited the retail rate?” The net metering benefit, which is available to residential and commercial customers with renewable energy systems in more than 40 states and has helped spur a boom in solar installations, is at the heart of a battle. Utilities, consumer advocates and renewable energy developers across the country are fighting over how much financial help to give to solar power and, to a lesser extent, other technologies. Regulators are in the middle, weighing the societal benefits of renewables as well as how best to spread the costs. Net metering has been so popular that several states are rapidly approaching regulatory limits on how many systems are eligible, meaning new customers have no assurance they can reap the same rewards. The solar industry, which is growing in size and influence, has been pressing to raise those limits to continue to encourage rooftop installations, while the utilities have generally been opposed.

Thus, we offer the following plan: The Unites States Federal government should implement a Feed in Tariffs system for solar projects with a project size cap of 500 kW, a program cap of 375 MW by 2020 at a "regular annual pace" with a term minimum of 20 years.

Observation Two – Solvency

A small-scall FiT structure will facilitate solar installation in low income communities.
Cervas ’12, Coordinator @ California Environmental Justice [Strela, 1/19, Solar for All,http://caleja.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SmallScaleRDGfitProposal_FINALv4.pdf]

1 – Feed-in Tariffs (FiTs) for small-scale projects: A small-scale FiT allows solar installation in all communities. Renewable energy producers (which can be multi-family building owners, warehouse owners, small business owners, and farmers) get compensated for the cost of the renewable energy (solar) with a small, reasonable profit. This incentive has spurred dramatic growth of solar around the world. A FiT requires utilities to purchase electricity from renewable energy sources, thus accomplishing our clean energy and greenhouse gas reduction goals. Of the proposed 12,000 MW of the Governor’s RDG program, 3,000 MW should be allocated to a FiT program. This FiT program should have a capacity of not more than 1.5 MW. 2 – Renewables located in low-income communities: Of the 3,000 MW FiT program, at least 1,000 MW should benefit low-income and environmental justice communities. 3 – Local Hire Requirement: A preference for local hire in “low-income communities of color” would provide jobs where they are most desperately needed. A FiT alone will not guarantee jobs or economic benefits for our community members. The new law should require “economic benefits for low income communities” — including the “multiplier effect” where solar development in poor urban and rural areas spurs further business and economic activity in the community. The legislation can provide ways to bring down the cost of solar so that small RDG systems are installed in all communities. We can also include specific goals to support domestic upstream manufacturing, targeted hiring, innovation, education, etc. to local communities, especially underemployed communities.

These small scale projects will revitalize low income communities.
Cervas ’12, Coordinator @ California Environmental Justice [Strela, 1/19, Solar for All,http://caleja.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SmallScaleRDGfitProposal_FINALv4.pdf]

Low-income communities of color need renewable energy systems that are 1.5 MW or less. A small-scale feed-in tariff program for renewable distributed generation allows rooftop solar that can be sited in low income urban and rural communities. Small-scale projects create jobs, reduce energy bills, generate wealth, revitalize neighborhoods, and give people some control over their energy future.

Advantage ¬¬¬¬ One – The Economy

Debt ceiling and payroll tax uncertainty are OVER but the economy is still plummeting – high unemployment still means no spending.
Debroy ‘13, Professor @ Centre for Policy Research [Bibek, 1/1, US economy bound to slow down even post fiscal cliff aversion: Bibek Debroy,http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-01-01/news/36094255_1_bibek-debroy-fiscal-cliff-markets]

ET Now: Do you think that this is the temporary relief that the market was working with? Bibek Debroy: Yes, the important element right now is that the uncertainty is over. We have a reasonable idea of what the tax cuts are like. We still do not have a very good idea of what this means in terms of spending. The expression 'fiscal cliff' should not really be used because we are talking about a slowdown and it obviously has repercussions for the US economy and for the rest of the world because there will be some reduction in spending. ET Now: Do you think that they have balanced it out fairly? Bibek Debroy: Yes, although I would say that this is probably a bit more towards the Republicans advantage, but yes, it does balance it out on the tax side. ET Now: There is an issue now of whether or not the US will slip into a recession. What is your take on that? Bibek Debroy: The uncertainty is over, but the fact is that the US is headed for a slowdown. The last growth numbers that we saw were a bit higher than what had been forecast, but we are talking about growth rates of about 1.5% and because of what is likely to happen to spending, we are also probably going to see higher unemployment rates.

Low income communities have taken the brunt of the economic downturn and hold the key economic revitalization for the whole country.
Gerlach and Neal ’12, R-Pa. and D-Mass. [Jim and Richard, A bipartisan solution to aid America's low-income communities, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/231709-a-bipartisan-solution-to-aid-americas-low-income-communities]

How critical are these tax credits in stimulating economic development? According to the Government Accountability Office (GAO), almost nine of every 10 investors using the New Markets Tax Credit say they would not have made investments in low-income communities if not for this incentive. The NMTC is stimulating economic activity that wouldn’t happen without the program. The NMTC has a structure that ensures it does what it’s intended to do – encourage investments in communities in which the poverty rate is 20 percent or higher, or in which the median family income less than 80% of the area norm. The determination of who receives tax credits are made by community development organizations. The results this structure has generated prove it effective – in 2010, for example, 72 percent of NMTC investments were made in census tracts experiencing severe economic distress and 60 percent were made in communities with unemployment rates at least 1.5 times the national average. For those who believe that Democrats and Republicans can’t work together anymore to get things done, the NMTC proves that bipartisanship to accomplish important priorities is indeed still possible. Regardless of our political party, we want to create jobs and we want to reinvigorate communities that have taken the brunt of these difficult times. The New Markets Tax Credit plants the seed to build businesses, jobs and long-term growth, and it needs to be extended. When we return to our districts we see a business succeeding and people who have good jobs and are able to support their families. More than that, though, we see a key part of the solution to America’s economic dilemmas – one that may not be traditional, but has proven to be successful. And one that, in light of the disappointing May jobs numbers, our country can’t afford to let disappear.

Economic collapse will lead to global war.
O’Donnell ‘09 [2-26, Sean, “Will this recession lead to World War III?” Baltimore Republican Examiner, www.examiner.com/republican-in-baltimore/will-this-recession-lead-to-world-war-iii, accessed 9/20/11]

Could the current economic crisis affecting this country and the world lead to another world war? The answer may be found by looking back in history. One of the causes of World War I was the economic rivalry that existed between the nations of Europe. In the 19th century France and Great Britain became wealthy through colonialism and the control of foreign resources. This forced other up-and-coming nations (such as Germany) to be more competitive in world trade which led to rivalries and ultimately, to war. After the Great Depression ruined the economies of Europe in the 1930s, fascist movements arose to seek economic and social control. From there fanatics like Hitler and Mussolini took over Germany and Italy and led them both into World War II. With most of North America and Western Europe currently experiencing a recession, will competition for resources and economic rivalries with the Middle East, Asia, or South American cause another world war? Add in nuclear weapons and Islamic fundamentalism and things look even worse. Hopefully the economy gets better before it gets worse and the terrifying possibility of World War III is averted. However sometimes history repeats itself.

Advantage Two – Leadership

National FiTs key to bolstering US renewable leadership.
Holmes ’12 [Tara, Renewable Energy Leaders of the World Unite,http://www.care2.com/causes/renewable-energy-leaders-of-the-world-unite.html]

The United States lags significantly behind other nations when it comes to renewable energy production. This is not new news to those who follow current energy policy, but if you’re not one of those people, it’s an issue to actively consider as the Rio+20 Earth Summit in Brazil kicks off. Even though U.S. renewable electricity production over the past decade has actually increased by 300%, that figure is still far lower when compared to the European Union and Germany in particular, which remains far ahead of many nations, obtaining an impressive 30% of its electricity from solar power alone. The U.S., on the other hand, obtained only 2.7% of its electricity in 2011 from renewable sources including solar, wind and geothermal. It’s important to note that waste-to-energy power plants and biomass are often included in renewable energy portfolios, but opponents cite the burning of wood products as contradictory to decreasing GHG emissions. Nevertheless, why does Germany have such a strong renewable energy base when compared to the U.S. and many other countries? One important reason are the feed-in tariffs the German government has traditionally used to help stimulate the growth of this industry. The U.S. does not subsidize renewable energy projects as frequently or as robustly and it shows, but tax rebates and other incentives do exist for residential solar panel installation depending upon the state.

US renewable leadership key to global environmental protection.
The Wilderness Society ’12 [Western leaders speak on renewable energy done right, accessed 9/12/12]

Balancing our energy needs, the environment and wildlife protection—while creating jobs and boosting rural economies—is something we can achieve. Clean, renewable energy has the opportunity to be a catalyst for change in how America plans for our energy future. These messages and others were reinforced by western energy leaders who paid a visit to Washington recently. Just days after the President released his FY13 Budget that proposes increased investment in renewable research, planning, and incentives, state voices spoke about why getting renewable energy done right matters for special places and for the economy the West. Former Colorado Governor Bill Ritter, Director of the Center for the New Energy Economy (CNEE) at Colorado State University was one of three leaders who spoke at a press briefing and at a bi-partisan event on Capitol Hill sponsored by Representatives Polis (D-CO), Lujan (D-NM) and Gosar (R-AZ). Ritter was joined by two former public utility commissioners, Kris Mayes—Chairwoman of the Arizona Corporation Commission from 2003-2010 and now faculty at ASU’s Global Institute of Sustainability, and Timothy Hay, a former Commissioner to the Nevada Public Utilities Commission. Hay was also Nevada’s Consumer Advocate, working on behalf of ratepayers. Ritter, Mayes and Hay have been instrumental in implementing state renewable portfolio standards that have created market incentives to get projects on the ground. An aggressive focus on energy conservation and efficiency in all three states has also been part of strategies to put people back to work and to save money. These western leaders are attune to what voters care aboutconserving wild landscapes, while bolstering the economy by transitioning to renewables and investing in energy efficiency. A few themes emerged from their remarks, including the need for consistent financing and greater certainty for siting projects, as well as key state and federal market drivers such as a national plan for greenhouse gas emissions. Governor Ritter made a request from Washington for more investment certainty for renewable energy projects, stating “there are a lot of people who are still very willing to invest in clean energy and clean energy development .… there’s too much investment uncertainty.” Kris Mayes echoed that these investments can pay dividends down the road in reduced costs for electricity; citing Arizona’s aggressive 22% energy efficiency standard by 2020 that will save Arizona ratepayers $9 billion dollars. Mayes also hit on another important point—that renewable energy should continue to be a bi-partisan issue. Her call to action was directed at members of her party who “are opposing renewable energy and have seemed to come to the conclusion that this is something Democrats support. They couldn’t be more wrong. My colleagues on the Hill need to understand that their constituents overwhelmingly believe we need to move to a clean energy economy and that this is our economic destiny.” Wind and solar incentives have received more bi-partisan support as of late because renewable energy manufacturing and projects have become important drivers in the American economy. Nearly all members of the Colorado delegation sent a letter to House and Senate leadership recently encouraging the extension of the Production Tax Credit, which has been largely responsible for a growth in investment in wind and has the potential to create thousands more wind manufacturing jobs in the state. A similar bi-partisan letter was penned by all representatives from Iowa the following week. Getting projects built relies on more than bi-partisan support for renewables and fiscal certainty; it also takes good planning, upfront environmental review, and early stakeholder engagement. Efforts to tackle these three issues have been underway since 2009 through the BLM’s solar energy programmatic EIS. When asked about this solar planning effort, Nevadan Tim Hay offered that “the PEIS process is critically important to us … making sure that [our] county and local regulatory bodies are plugged in in a way they can engage in the dialogues early on, particularly on transmission issues. It is a large task to coordinate the various entities but the federal government taking the lead on that has certainly been helpful.” The Wilderness Society has advocated in forums across the West that the best way to protect wild places is to identify resources conflicts early in the process. TWS also supports alternatives to new energy development such as efficiency, conservation and demand-side solutions. The visit to Washington by these important western leaders was a re-affirmation that western citizens recognize that good planning, increased financial certainty, and market drivers are important and connected paths to getting environmentally-responsible renewable energy permitted and built.

Failure to protect the environment leads to all-out global wars over resources.
Homer-Dixon ’98 [Thomas Homer-Dixon, assistant professor of political science and director of the Peace and Conflict Studies Programme at the University of Toronto, associate fellow of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, 1998, World Security: Challenges for a New Century, Third Edition, edited by Michael Klare and Yogesh Chandrani, p. 342-3]

Experts have proposed numerous possible links between environmental change and conflict. Some have suggested that environmental change may shift the balance of power between states either regionally or globally, causing instabilities that could lead to war.4 Another possibility is that global environmental damage might increase the gap between rich and poor societies, with the poor then violently confronting the rich for a fairer share of the world’s wealth.5 Severe conflict may also arise from frustration with countries that do not go along with agreements to protect the global environment, or that “free-ride” by letting other countries absorb the costs of environmental protection. Warmer temperatures could lead to contention over more easily harvested resources in the Antarctic. Bulging populations and land stress may produce waves of environmental refugees, spilling across borders and disrupting relations among ethnic groups. Countries might fight among themselves because of dwindling supplies of water and the effects of upstream pollution.6 A sharp decline in food crop production and grazing land could lead to conflict between nomadic tribes and sedentary farmers. Environmental change could in time cause a slow deepening of poverty in poor countries, which might open bitter divisions between classes and ethnic groups, corrode democratic institutions, and spawn revolutions and insurgencies.7 In general, many experts have the sense that environmental problems will “ratchet up” the level of stress within states and the international community, increasing the likelihood of many different kinds of conflict—from war and rebellion to trade disputes—and undermining possibilities for cooperation.

Advantage Three - Child Fatalities

Low-income families forego food, medical, and dental care in order to meet the demands of home energy bills.
Smith et. al. ’07, MD & MPH – Chairperson of Child Health Impact Assessment Working Group [Lauren A., April, Unhealthy Consequences: Energy Costs and Child Health,http://www.hiaguide.org/sites/default/files/ChildHIAofenergycostsandchildhealth.pdf]

High energy costs place increased economic demands on low-income households with limited budgets. These demands result in trade-offs between fixed costs, such as housing and heating, and other basic needs. Nationally, low-income families spend approximately 14% of their budget on home energy compared to 3% for more well off families. 3 11 According to a survey performed by the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA) in 2005, a significant proportion of LIHEAP participants in the Northeast reported making precisely these kinds of budget trade-offs due to high energy costs: 2 „ 73% reported that they reduced expenditures on household necessities because they did not have enough money to pay their energy bills; „ 20% went without food; „ 28% went without medical or dental care; and „ 23% did not make a full rent or mortgage payment at least once. 5 These data illustrate that current LIHEAP benefits, targeted to especially vulnerable populations, are clearly helpful but not sufficient in buffering families from the impact of high heating costs. These data also suggest that their situation would be even more precarious without this important assistance.

These forced trade-offs lead to unhealthy housing situations and child deaths.
Smith et. al. ’07, MD & MPH – Chairperson of Child Health Impact Assessment Working Group [Lauren A., April, Unhealthy Consequences: Energy Costs and Child Health,http://www.hiaguide.org/sites/default/files/ChildHIAofenergycostsandchildhealth.pdf]

The available evidence reveals that unaffordable home energy has preventable, potential consequences on the health and well-being of the more than 400,000 Massachusetts children living in low-income households. 1 Low-income families are caught in the gap between rising energy prices and available energy assistance. Energy assistance falls far short of the need, especially when there is a spike in energy prices, such as following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. In addition to the exceedingly high housing costs in Massachusetts, our climate means low-income families spend more of their income on home energy (energy burden) to keep warm than families in other regions of the U.S. „ Low-income families facing disproportionately high energy costs are forced to make household budget trade-offs that jeopardize child health. Families with a high energy burden often spend less money on food and health care. Seasonal food insecurity resulting from high energy costs has a substantial impact on child health. In addition, families may miss rent or mortgage payments to pay energy bills, resulting in housing instability. „ Families facing high heating costs resort to alternative heat sources that jeopardize child health and safety. In an effort to reduce home heating costs, families use alternative heat sources, such as kerosene space heaters or fireplaces. Up to 25% of families that lose their primary source of heating use space heaters or ovens and stoves, risking contact burns, carbon monoxide exposure, and especially deadly house fires. „ High energy costs combined with unaffordable housing create important budget constraints that force low-income families to endure unhealthy housing conditions that threaten child health. The constraints that high energy costs place on low-income families reduce their ability to afford appropriate housing, increasing the likelihood that they and their children experience unhealthy housing conditions, such as rodent infestation, water leaks, mold, and lead paint.

The lives of children should be our first priority – key to all future peace.
Nelson ’13, author, speaker & spiritual life coach [Jason, Children Are The First Priority, http://www.jasonnelson.info/blogarticles/51-empowering-our-children/299-children-are-the-first-priority.html]

During a radio interview last week, a passage from my Divinely communicated book: Empowering Our Children: God's Call to Parents, How to Heal Yourself and Your Children came to mind. Here is the passage: “Children are the first priority as they will build any hope of your soul returning to this planet again. The fate of the world lies in the hands of today’s children who will be the leaders and parents of tomorrow. The youth exemplify qualities adults have lost like innocence, vulnerability and unconditional acceptance. They offer innate, simplified wisdom for new ways to live as a unified world. So thank them for their kindness in offering this world assistance . . .”

Scenario 2 – Disease

Chronic disease in low-income communities is at a crisis point.
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco ’09 [Building Healthy Communities Through Equitable Food Access, http://www.frbsf.org/publications/community/review/vol5_issue3/bell_standish.pdf]

The crisis of obesity and chronic illness has combined with the dire economic needs of low-income communities and communities of color to create a perfect storm that harms public health, threatens the financial viability of our health-care system, and undermines the future productivity of the nation. Yet this storm is also propelling a powerful movement for change. After decades of work to increase access to healthy foods, we know what works. We understand what strategies benefit those most in need as well as those willing to invest in solutions. Promising programs and policies across the country demonstrate that the challenges to increasing access to healthy foods in underserved communities—from businesses’ misperceptions about local purchasing power, to corner-store owners’ fears about stocking new food items that might not sell, to the need for funds to hire a coordinator for a farmers’ market—can be overcome. Now is the time to bring this knowledge and experience to scale—the national scale. We must lift up what works and shine a light on those neighborhood, community, and statewide innovations that have the potential to create enduring solutions. By ensuring that all communities have access to healthy foods, we can make a significant contribution to reducing chronic disease and improving the health of all.

We have a moral obligation to fight chronic diseases.
SlimKinetic ’12 [Change Mandate, http://www.slimkinetic.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=83&Itemid=81, accessed 9/7]

It’s time to put our health, our families, our country and our moral character before our stomachs. The risks of our decadent overweight and sedentary lifestyle are simply too costly. It’s time to eat less and exercise more in exchange for less disease, a longer life with better quality, a better environment, lower health care costs and taxes, fewer sick days and a better economy. These are powerful benefits that can transform each one of us individually. A healthy diet and exercise can also transform our Nation. Although change is difficult, we know it’s possible – we did it with smoking. We also know how to change by adapting the successful smoking model. And we know we must change or risk our lives, our family’s well-being and our Nation’s security and integrity.

INTERPERSONAL VIOLENCE 1ac

Solar FiT’s 1AC

Observation One – The Status Quo

The federal government is embracing solar as a viable form of energy production, but their plans for expansion are limited to 6 states and utility scale projects.
US Dept of Interior ’12 [http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Obama-Administration-Approves-Roadmap-for-Utility-Scale-Solar-Energy-Development-on-Public-Lands.cfm]

The Administration’s recent decision to fast-track large-scale solar was a pivot point in our nation’s relationship with solar energy – it was a matter of choice, and the United States Federal Government chose to fund programs that will increase the cost of electricity for the majority of rate payers while guaranteeing a boost in revenue for utilities.
Union Bulletin ‘13 [1/3, Small-scale solar's big potential goes untapped, by Julie Cart,http://union-bulletin.com/news/2013/jan/03/small-scale-solars-big-potential-goes-untapped/]

Thus, we offer the following plan: The Unites States Federal government should implement a feed in tariffs system for solar projects with a project size cap of 500 kilowatts, a program cap of 375 megawatts by 2020 at a "regular annual pace" with a term minimum of 20 years.

Observation Two – Solvency

A small-scale FiT structure will facilitate solar installation in low income communities.
Cervas ’12, Coordinator @ California Environmental Justice [Strela, 1/19, Solar for All,http://caleja.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SmallScaleRDGfitProposal_FINALv4.pdf]

These small scale projects will revitalize low income communities and give people control over their energy future.
Cervas ’12, Coordinator @ California Environmental Justice [Strela, 1/19, Solar for All,http://caleja.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/SmallScaleRDGfitProposal_FINALv4.pdf]

Specifically, and empirically, small-scale feed-in-tariff systems cut utility bills in half.
Evo Energy ‘11 [4/12,http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/04/solar-feed-tariffs-uk-clarification/]

It has been a frantic few months in the short-lived life of the feed-in tariff, with rates cut in half 5
the tariff was designed to encourage the growth of micro-generation from renewable sources like wind and solar. In some ways it has been a victim of its own success: solar power quickly emerged as the most popular technology for micro-generation, so much so that it led to frantic efforts by the government to slow down the growth. When the tariff began in April 2010, the rate was set at 41.3 pence per kilowatt hour for solar installations up to four kilowatts. That was considered the maximum size of an installation on an average home. The rate was guaranteed for twenty-five years, and would rise each year with inflation and was tax-free for homeowners.

Observation Three – Forced Out

The insanely high cost of energy forced upon low income communities by unequal access to solar strains their already limited budgets – forcing the choice between paying energy bills and every other necessary cost of living, including mortgages and rent.
Smith et. al. ’07, MD & MPH – Chairperson of Child Health Impact Assessment Working Group [Lauren A., April, Unhealthy Consequences: Energy Costs and Child Health,http://www.hiaguide.org/sites/default/files/ChildHIAofenergycostsandchildhealth.pdf]

Specifically, high utility bills in low income communities are a leading cause of individuals’ & families’ inability to maintain the habitability of their home.
Smith et. al. ’07, MD & MPH – Chairperson of Child Health Impact Assessment Working Group [Lauren A., April, Unhealthy Consequences: Energy Costs and Child Health,http://www.hiaguide.org/sites/default/files/ChildHIAofenergycostsandchildhealth.pdf]

It is well documented that high energy costs can result in unpaid bills, leading to substantial arrearages and subsequent utility disconnections. These high energy costs can lead to eviction and homelessness in two major ways. First, families may not be able to pay both their energy bills and their entire rent or mortgage. The 2005 survey by NEADA reported that 25% of the LIHEAP-recipient households surveyed had made a partial rent or mortgage payment or missed an entire payment altogether because of unaffordable energy bills. 5 This situation is even more dire among respondents in the Northeast: „ 42% reported not paying or paying less than their entire home energy bill because of not having enough money; and „ One in four reported receiving a notice of disconnection of electricity or heating fuel in the past year. 5 Second, families who have unpaid energy bills develop substantial arrearages that can result in utility service disconnection. Once this occurs, a family whose utility service is disconnected may be evicted for failure to maintain the habitability of their home. 66,67 Although many states, including Massachusetts, prohibit winter utility disconnection for households experiencing financial hardship, these shut-off protections usually end in the spring, resulting in disconnections in late spring. 68 During the shut-off moratorium period, families continue to accrue debt for their utility bills.

3.5 million people are on the brink of losing their home as we speak.
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty ‘12(4/16, “Law Center Launches “All-In to End Homelessness” Campaign” < http://homelessnesslaw.org/2012/04/law-center-launches-%E2%80%9Call-in-to-end-homelessness%E2%80%9D-campaign/>)

The “All-In” campaign commemorates the Act’s 25th Anniversary – recognizing its many achievements and the work yet to be done. The first major federal legislation to address homelessness, and for which Law Center Executive Director Maria Foscarinis was a lead advocate, McKinney-Vento has helped millions of homeless and poor Americans access housing, emergency services, and education since 1987. But McKinney-Vento was only meant to be a first step toward ending homelessness, this national crisis persists. In fact, it’s now growing dramatically. We expect more than 3.5 million people will be living in public places, shelter or transitional housing in 2012 – 1.6 million of them children. Family homelessness has increased by 20 percent since 2007. Almost seven million people are living doubled up due toeconomicnecessity. And while the need for emergency service is rising, cities across the country are slashing budgets. With so many Americans homeless or on the brink, we can’t wait any longer to act. It’s time to fulfill the promise of McKinney-Vento.

Scenario 1 – Cycle of Trauma

The forced move from experiencing low-income housing to homelessness specifically pushes women into a spiraling crisis of ongoing sexual assault layered on top of constant struggle to meet basic survival needs. Women experiencing homelessness are trapped in a traumatic lifestyle of perpetual and repeated battering, including rape – they are confined to this violence by their own transience as all avenues for remedy require a fixed contact location and shelters are the breeding ground for the types of violence they are trying to flee. Addressing this transience is the only way to begin to address the impact of this trauma and to stop the cycle before it starts.
Goodman et.al. 11 [Lisa A. Goodman, Ph.D., Katya Fels, & Catherine Glenn, M.A. With contributions from Judy Benitez, No Safe Place: Sexual Assault in the Lives of Homeless Women]

Although prevalence rates of homelessness have been estimated at up to seven to eight percent among adults (Haber & Toro, 2004), these statistics are based on studies of the ìliterally homelessî (Toro, 1998); that is, people who have spent nights in homeless shelters, on the street, or in other settings not intended for human habitation. This narrow definition leaves out the much larger population of the hidden homeless: women and children who may stay on friends', neighbors', and family members' couches night after night (ìcouch surfingî) or return to their abusers when emergency shelters are full, women in rural areas where no shelters are available, and women who trade sex for a place to sleep (Evans & Forsyth, 2004). As cuts to welfare and social services have deepened over the last decade, the hidden homeless population has grown steadily, with African-American women and female heads of households at greatest risk (Wolch & Li, 1997). Although most research on sexual assault among homeless women focuses on the narrower definition of homelessness, we will include information on the hidden homeless where possible in this review. General prevalence of sexual assault and its consequences among homeless women There are many limitations to the available research on homeless women who have experienced sexual assault (Nyamathi, Wenzel, Lesser, Flaskerud, & Leake, 2001; Wenzel, Leake, & Gelberg, 2000), We focus on recent studies that are methodologically sound and that approach the issue with an awareness of the complex and inter-related factors so often present in homeless women's lives. The most comprehensive and rigorous studies on homeless women conducted to date continue to note the extraordinarily high levels of abuse and victimization that homeless women endure before, during, and after episodes of homelessness. In fact, although rates of victimization in this country have decreased overall, rates of victimization among homeless women remain relatively unchanged (Lee & Schreck, 2005). Research also highlights the grim finding that homeless women often report multiple episodes of violent victimization at the hands of multiple perpetrators, beginning in childhood and extending into adulthood (Browne & Bassuk, 1997; Goodman, 1991; Goodman, Dutton & Harris, 1995; Felix, 2004; Lee & Schreck, 2005; Stermac & Paradis, 2001; Wenzel et al., 2004). Indeed, homeless women have been described as enduring a ìtraumatic lifestyleî (Goodman, et al., 1995)ñ one in which traumatic incidents such as sexual assaults are layered upon ongoing traumatic conditions such as struggling to meet basic survival needs and living with ongoing dangers and threats. Many large-scale studies report findings that repeatedly emphasize the violent and traumatic lives of homeless women. One of largest and most in-depth studies on this topic found that 92% of a racially diverse sample of homeless mothers had experienced severe physical and/or sexual violence at some point in their lives, with 43% reporting sexual abuse in childhood and 63% reporting intimate partner violence in adulthood. Over half (57.6%) reported experiencing violence in at least two out of four age periods (0-5; 6-12; 13-18, 18+) (Browne & Bassuk, 1997). In another study, 13% of homeless women reported having been raped in the past 12 months and half of these were raped at least twice (Wenzel, et al., 2000). In yet another study, 9% of homeless women reported at least one experience of sexual victimization in the last month (Wenzel, Koegel & Gelberg, 2000). Women who do not have children with them are at particularly high risk for sexual violence after the age of 18 (Zugazaga, 2004), in part because they are more likely to sleep outside than are women with children, who might fear for their children's well being or worry about the intervention of child protective services. Also disturbing is the finding that compared to their low-income housed counterparts, the sexual assault experiences of homeless women are more likely to be violent, and to include multiple sexual acts (Stermac & Paradis, 2001). Homeless women who experience sexual assault may suffer from a range of emotional and physical challenges (D'Ercole & Streuning, 1990; Goodman, Saxe & Harvey, 1991; Ingram et al, 1996; Padgett & Streuning, 1992; Rayburn, Wenzel, Elliot, Hambrasoomians, Marshall, & Tucker, 2005; Salomon, Bassuk, & Huntington, 2002). In one study of homeless women who had been victimized (Browne & Bassuk, 1997; see also Bassuk, Buckner, Weinreb, Browne, Bassuk, Dawson, & Perloff, 1997) most participants reported mental health problems ranging from suicide attempts (45%) and depression (47%) to alcohol or drug dependence (45%) and posttraumatic stress disorder (39%). Other studies report similar types of psychological difficulties (e.g., Nyamathi et al., 2001; North & Smith, 1992; North, Smith & Spitznagel, 1994; Wenzel, Leake, and Gelberg, 2000). Sexual assault also effects homeless women's physical health. For example, in one study of homeless women, those who reported a rape in the last year were significantly more likely than nonvictims to suffer from two or more gynecological conditions and two or more serious physical health conditions in the past year (Wenzel et al., 2000). They were also significantly more likely to report that although they needed to see a physician during the past year, they could not manage to do so, and that although they desired treatment for substance abuse they were unable to obtain appropriate services. Homeless victims of sexual assault must contend with these psychological and physical difficulties within the context of poor access to legal, mental health and medical resources, social alienation and isolation, unsafe living environments, constant exposure to reminders of the experience, and lack of transportation and information about available services (Goodman, Saxe, and Harvey, 1991). Homeless women of color, lesbians and bisexuals, and women with physical, emotional, and developmental disabilities face even greater barriers. Those who are mothers must take care of their children in chaotic situations while under the scrutiny of a range of social service providers in shelters, food pantries, and other settings. It is no wonder, then, that homeless women are at high risk for state involvement in their parenting, and the potential removal of their children (Cowal, Shinn, Weitzman, Stojanovic, & Labay, 2002; Zlotnick et al., 2003). Question of Causality A range of factors increase homeless women's risk of adult sexual victimization, including childhood abuse, substance dependence, length of time homeless, engaging in economic survival strategies (such as panhandling or involvement in sex trade), location while homeless (i.e. sleeping on the street versus sleeping in a shelter) and presence of mental illness (Kushel, Evans, Perry, Robertson, & Moss, 2003; Nyamathi, Wenzel, Lesser, Flaskerud, & Leake, 2001; Wenzel, Koegel, & Gelberg, 2000; Wenzel, Leake, & Gelberg, 2001). Many of these factors, discussed in more detail below, coexist, interact with, and exacerbate each other over time, creating a complex and distinctive context for each woman. It is important to note that all of these factors would have a much more tenuous connection with sexual assault if social institutions were in place to prevent homelessness, to protect vulnerable women, and to help them recover and become safe following an initial assault while addressing the myriad other challenges they face. And yet to date, no research has been conducted on the impact of institutional failures on the prevalence or correlates of sexual assault among homeless women. For example, research has not yet examined the unsuitability of traditional sexual assault crisis services, such as hotlines and in-office counseling, for individuals who lack access to a telephone, transportation, literacy skills, and safe housing. Sexual Assault Prior to Homelessness The relationship between sexual assault and homelessness is complex, with either experience potentially laying the groundwork for the other. Indeed, given the traumatic lifestyles of so many homeless women, sexual abuse may precede and follow from homelessness in a vicious cycle downward. In the next two sections, we take a closer look at existing research on two different types of sexual assault (child sexual abuse and sexual violence at the hands of a partner) as precursors to adult homelessness and subsequent victimization. Childhood Sexual Abuse A number of studies have emphasized the correlation between childhood sexual abuse and homelessness among adult women (Bassuk and Rosenberg, 1988; Davies-Netzley & Hurlburt, & Hough, 1996; Simons & Whitbeck, 1991; Stermac & Paradis, 2001; Wenzel et al., 2004; Zugazaga, 2004). For example, one study of women seeking help from a rape/sexual assault crisis center found that childhood sexual abuse was reported by 43% of the homeless participants, compared to 24.6% of the housed participants (Stermac et al., 2004). Another study that took a qualitative approach found that homeless women identified child sexual victimization as a cause of their homelessness (Evans & Forsyth, 2004). Childhood sexual abuse is also correlated with adult victimization among homeless women (Nyamathi et al., 2001; Terrell, 1997; Tyler, Hoyt, & Whitbeck, 2000; Whitbeck, Hoyt, & Ackley 1997). One study found that homeless women with histories of childhood sexual abuse were twice as likely to experience adult violent victimization as those without such histories (Nyamathi et al., 2001). For homeless women with serious mental illness (SMI), the connection between child sexual abuse and adult victimization is even stronger. In one study of women with serious mental illness and histories of homelesness, the chance of revictimization for women who had experienced child physical or sexual abuse was close to 100% ñ difficult odds to beat (Goodman, Dutton & Harris, 1995; Goodman, Johnson, Dutton, & Harris, 1997). A number of explanations have been offered for the relationship between child sexual abuse and subsequent homelessness and sexual assault, respectively. It is possible, for example, that child sexual abuse survivors may find it difficult to trust others, so they develop fewer of the sustaining and supportive relationships necessary to avoid homelessness (Bassuk, 1993). Also, the posttraumatic stress disorder that often results from child sexual abuse can cause women to miss danger cues in their environments due to hypervigilance (attending to everything as a threat) or dissociation (shutting down when faced with threatening situations), resulting in risk for further victimization (Salomon, Bassuk, & Huntington, 2002; Tyler, Hoyt, & Whitbeck, 2000; Whitbeck, Hoyt, & Ackley, 1997). Finally, women who experience childhood sexual abuse have been shown to be at increased risk for developing substance abuse disorders, which put women at increased risk for both assault and homelessness (Burnam, Stein, Golding, Siegal, Sorenson, & Telles, 1988; Salomon, Bassuk, & Huntington, 2002; Simmons & Whitbeck, 1991; Tyler, Hoyt, & Whitbeck, 2000). However, these explanations alone do not tell the whole story. A much fuller explanation for these devastating correlations emerges from an exploration of the complex array of historical and current contextual factors many women face, including multiple oppressions, lack of appropriate, culturally relevant, and timely resources, and growing up in unsafe settings without sufficient material and emotional support. Rather than one causing the other, we suggest that the contextual factors that often precede child sexual abuse (and repeated victimization) also precede homelessness. For example, poor families; people of color; and immigrants, refugees, and victims of sex trafficking may experience systems such as law enforcement, social services, foster care, or welfare not as sources of care and assistance, but of neglect or punishment. Childhood sexual abuse survivors in particular may have experienced caregivers acting appropriately in public and inappropriately in private, and therefore may be reluctant to trust people whose job it is to help them. As children and as adults, they may be reluctant to seek help from people in ìthe systemî and therefore remain particularly vulnerable to ongoing victimization and homelessness, in addition to self-medication through substances and isolation. Abuse by Partners Not surprisingly, a number of studies point to abuse~~including rape~~at the hands of a current or former partner, as a risk factor for homelessness among women (Toro, Bellavia, Daeschler, Owens, Wall, Passero, & Thomas, 1995). This is particularly evident for women who experience partner violence at the more severe end of the continuum, and who have been isolated by their abusers from family and friends who might have offered to help them (Baker, Cook, & Norris, 2003). Indeed, it is estimated that half of all homeless women and children have become homeless while trying to escape abusive situations (Browne & Bassuk, 1997, as cited in Evans & Forsyth, 2004). Experiences of partner violence have also been shown to predict risk of repeat homelessness and shelter use (Metraux & Culhane, 1999). Yet, there are few studies documenting the impact of partner violence on women who are currently homeless, how the threat of such violence might shape women's decision-making while homeless, or the nature of the complicated tradeoffs many partner violence victims make to survive on the streets. For example, a homeless woman may stay in a relationship with a person who abuses her physically or sexually because the risks associated with leavingóhomelessness, hunger, poverty, violence on the streets, lack of resources for children, risk of further abuse by additional perpetrators óseem worse than the abuse. Furthermore, the abusive partner may also provide protection and companionship some of the time. Homelessness as Risk Factor for Sexual Assault Although childhood sexual abuse and intimate partner violence often precede, and may contribute to women's homelessness and risk for revictimization, the condition of homelessness itself dramatically increases women's risk of being sexually assaulted. Women on the streets do not enjoy the same degree of safety as women who have four walls and a roof to protect them. Despite being in very close quarters with many others, women staying in shelters often lack robust and nurturing social connections, as people in crisis have fewer resources to dedicate to developing mutual trust than those who feel safer and more grounded (Goodman, 1991). The need to serve a maximum number of people with limited dollars, combined with some communities' unwillingness to host shelters in their neighborhoods, often leads shelters to locate within or close to high-crime areas (Burt, et al., 2001; Wenzel, Koegel & Gelberg, 2000). Moreover, as discussed in subsequent sections, many homeless women have little choice but to participate in activities that place them at further risk for sexual assault, such as panhandling or trading sex for needed resources (Kushel, et al., 2003; Lee & Schreck, 2005). Individual vulnerabilities also play a role. Homeless women are more likely than non-homeless women to suffer from substance abuse (Toro et al., 1995; Wenzel et al, 2004), a mental illness that may include psychosis (Toro et al., 1995; Wenzel et al, 2004), domestic violence (Toro et al., 1995), or severe physical health limitations (Wenzel, Leake & Gelberg, 2000) that make self-defense in a dangerous situation harder. In one of the most rigorous studies of antecedents of sexual assault while homeless, Wenzel, Koegel, and Gelberg (2000) found that women who were dependent on drugs or alcohol; who received income from survival strategies such as panhandling, selling items on the street, or trading sex for drugs or other items; who lived outdoors; who experienced mania or schizophrenia; or who had physical limitations were especially likely to have endured a recent (at most, 30 days prior) sexual assault. The next sections review our knowledge of some of these factors in more detail. Survival Sex and Prostitution Survival for some homeless women is contingent on trading sex for money, goods (food, shelter, clothes, medicine, drugs), services, transportation, and protection on the street (Wenzel et al, 2001). It is debatable whether sex under these circumstances is ever really a choice; certainly, it is often a requirement last resort strategy for survival. Further, outright sexual violence is a common occurrence for women who engage in sex trade (Dalla, Xia, & Kennedy, 2003; Nyamathi, et al., 2001). Wenzel, Koegel and Gelberg (2000) found that over the course of a year, homeless women who panhandled or traded sexual favors for drugs or money were three times more likely to experience sexual assault and other forms of violence relative to their homeless peers who did not engage in sex trade. Indeed, 84% of women who use prostitution as an income strategy report current or past homelessness ñ which can mean living with abusive pimps or ìcustomersî in the absence of a more stable option (Farley & Barkan, 1998); and homeless prostituted women are at much greater risk for sexual assault than their non-homeless counterparts (El Bassel, Witte, Wada, Gilbert, & Wallace, 2001). When substance use (often ìpaid forî by sex) is a factor, the risk of sexual assault increases further, as described in the next section. Because these assaults often occur in the context of an illegal act (prostitution) and among drug users, victims may be seen by perpetrators as attractive targets, as they are less likely to report the crime or to be believed or seen as worthy of services and protection by authorities. Substance Use Homeless women are more likely to have substance abuse problems and to engage in substance use than low-income housed women (Wenzel et al., 2004). Although substance use and abuse among homeless women may represent their best method of coping with the chaos, unpredictability, and isolation of homelessness, as well as previous victimizations, it is also strongly associated with risk for further sexual assaults. One study found that homeless women who had experienced either physical or sexual victimization in the past month were three times more likely to report both drug and alcohol abuse or dependence than homeless women who were not victimized (24.3% vs. 7.9%) (Wenzel, Leake, & Gelberg, 2000). As with so many aspects of homeless women's lives, the causal relationships between substance abuse and victimization are far less clear than the correlation itself. Nevertheless, substance abuse and dependence may put women at risk for victimization in a number of ways, such as by altering women's perceptions of what is dangerous; leading them to engage in risky survival strategies; causing disorientation that may make it difficult to ward off an attacker; making them a target for assault because authorities will be less likely to believe them; or putting them in an environment that involves interactions with criminals. Indeed, offenders often rely on drugs and alcohol to incapacitate their victims (Lisak & Miller, 2002). Furthermore, drug and alcohol services and rape crisis services largely remain fragmented, which can make it difficult for individuals to receive the services they need to recover. Severe Mental Illness (SMI) Homeless women with serious mental illnesses such as major depression, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder are highly vulnerable to victimization. Indeed, in one in-depth study 97% of the participants, all of whom were homeless and had a mental illness, reported experiences of violent victimization at some point in their lives (Goodman, Dutton & Harris, 1995; Goodman, Johnson, Dutton, & Harris, 1997), with an astonishing 28% reporting at least one physical or sexual assault in the month preceding the interview. Another large-scale study of 1,839 ethnically diverse, homeless women and men with mental illnesses from 15 cities across the US found that 15.3% of the women participants reported being raped in the past 2 months (Lam & Rosenheck, 1998), compared to 1.3% of the men. For homeless women with mental illnesses, rape appears to be a shockingly normative experience. This is deeply troubling, as no one should ever become ìusedî to being raped or assaulted. To the contrary, there is evidence that the cumulative effects of multiple victimizations may be far deeper than single rape events (Goodman & Dutton, 1996). Moreover, these women's ability to get help are greatly compromised by social attitudes that people with mental illnesses do not experience violation as searingly as others; that their accounts of the abuse and assault are ìmade upî (Goodman & Dutton, 1996; Goodman, et al., 1999); or that women with mental illnesses cannot clearly communicate a lack of consent. Homeless women with mental illnesses who are also victims of sexual violence shoulder the burden of three forms of social stigmaóagainst poor or homeless people, people with mental illnesses, and victims of rape. Barriers to Accessing Institutional Support Although more research is needed to understand the relationship between sexual assault and homelessness, especially research that explores the social and institutional contributions to this enormous social problem, action is also needed. In this section, we provide an overview of situational, contextual and systemic barriers homeless women face in finding the support they need to heal in the wake of sexual assault. Homelessness often involves spiraling crises, which means that homeless women might not deal with, attend to, or process sexual assault in the same way as housed women do. For example, a rape may be followed only weeks later by a notice of loss of social security disability benefits because the victim failed to appear at a hearing scheduled the day after she was raped. This new crisis may shift the woman's attention temporarily, but the impact of the previous crisisóthe rape becomes interwoven with the impact of other crises. It is important, therefore, that the sexual assault be addressed in culturally sensitive ways as part of a complex context of trauma and crises. Unfortunately, few services available to homeless victims of sexual assault are set up to deal with these compounding crises. This complexity presents a range of challenges both to staff at programs responding to the homeless, who are rarely trained to detect and respond appropriately and sensitively to trauma or sexual violence, and to rape crisis counselors, who are often unequipped to deal with the multiple challenges brought on by homelessness. By their very nature, homeless shelters can worsen women's psychological distress and compromise their ability to do what is necessary to regain residential stability and increased quality of life. Homelessness is inherently chaotic, internally and externally, with others controlling access to such basic resources as food, clothing, and shelter. Indeed the very process of accessing the variety of programs necessary to rise out of homelessness may itself create a chaotic situation. There is little privacy, and entering many programs requires subjecting the private details of one's life to regulation and/or scrutiny. This lack of privacy and power differential can mirror and exacerbate the impact of the violence many homeless women have survived. This combination of chaos, power dynamics and feeling watched can trigger traumatic memories or symptoms that, in turn, make it more difficult to abide by shelter rules or stay ìin controlî as shelters require. Many shelters are neither culturally sensitive nor ìtrauma-informed,î and have not provided staff adequate training to, for example, deal with women's angry outbursts therapeutically rather than punitively, or recognize the differences between flashbacks and psychosis. Overburdened staff must balance the needs of the individual with the needs of many. A woman whose trauma-related nightmares wake up an entire dorm, for example, may be told to leave. At the same time, many of the options for self-care and self-soothing following a sexual assault are not available to homeless women. As noted earlier, homeless women lack telephones, making hotlines irrelevant. A woman may become alienated from a traditional sexual assault support group when she cannot make weekly meeting times or finds that unlike her peers, her history includes so many assaults when others report significantly fewer. To make matters worse, general shelters are often full to capacity and may have to turn women away, while battered women's shelters rarely offer beds to women who fear violence from people who are not traditional partners, leaving them no choice but to return to dangerous and out-of-the-way places to sleep (Amster, 1999, as cited in Evans & Forsyth, 2004). There is a widespread, although increasingly disputed, belief that trauma must not, indeed cannot, be addressed before a woman is in a stable situation with regard to food, shelter, physical safety, and housing (Herman, 1992) Yet, few rape crisis centers are equipped to help provide the stability that they prescribe, making services fragmented at best, and possibly even irrelevant. Furthermore, stability may be elusive until the trauma is named and at least partially explored. Fragmented services that force an individual to separate problems that are inextricable can exacerbate existing trauma. The relationship between homeless sexual assault victims and law enforcement is equally complex. Sexual assault and rape reporting rates are very low in general (Rennison, 2002). Homeless women may lack someone, whether peer, volunteer or advocate, to support them through the often-intimidating process of reporting an assault. Homeless women, already turning to bureaucracies for even their most basic needs (e.g. food stamps, housing vouchers and the like), may be reluctant to engage with yet one more system that they expect will be unresponsive. Homeless women may not see the police in particular as providing protection and safety. They may be afraid to report a rape because they are involved in illegal activities (e.g. drug related, prostitution) or have outstanding warrants from other activities. They may distrust police officers because their only contact with them is when they are kicked off park benches and forced to sleep under bushes that are far from the public eye and therefore more dangerous. For women who engage in street-based sex trade, harassment and abuse by police is so commonplace that many women no longer perceived police as sources of help. Homeless women of color, immigrants, refugees, and victims of sex trafficking may be even more skeptical about law enforcement and less likely to turn to them for help or protection. Further, law enforcement personnel are not immune from general social attitudes about stigmatized groups such as homeless, mentally ill, prostituting, or substance abusing women, resulting in discriminatory behavior. Last, because homeless women are highly transient, they generally make poor witnesses in victimization cases; and the very public nature of life on the streets means that few women have a place to hide if an abuser or rapist learns she has ìrattedî on him. These obstacles result in shared feelings of helplessness between even the most sympathetic criminal justice personnel and homeless women. Suggestions for System Improvements Given that homeless women are raped more than housed women, addressing the grave shortage of affordable housing in the United States would not only reduce the rates of homelessnessóit would reduce the incidence of sexual assault. Yet, there are severe shortages of affordable housing, supported housing, and housing vouchers across the country (Clampet-Lundquist, 2003). Beyond housing, substance abuse and mental health treatment programs are severely under-funded; rape crisis programs are struggling to meet the needs of those who already come to them for help and often are not funded to provide shelter to victims and shelters for homeless women have long waitlists. Further, all of these services have developed independently and are now invested in maintaining their ìsiloedî services in order to hold onto standard funding streams. These gaps are creating a growing number of ìspecial needsî victims whose needs are grossly neglected.
Women experiencing precarious housing situations are uniquely vulnerable to violence – this demands our immediate attention.
Goodman et.al. 11 [Lisa A. Goodman, Ph.D., Katya Fels, & Catherine Glenn, M.A. With contributions from Judy Benitez, No Safe Place: Sexual Assault in the Lives of Homeless Women]

Despite over two decades of media and public policy attention, homelessness remains an enormous social problem in the United States, due in large part to the continual closings of institutions for people with mental illness, persistent poverty, a shortage of affordable housing, changes in welfare and mental health policy, and economic trends that favor the wealthy (Burt, Aron, Lee, & Valente, 2001; Evans & Forsyth, 2004; Haber & Toro, 2004; Lee & Schreck; Wolch & Li, 1997). Although women without custodial children and mothers taking care of young children represent two of the most rapidly growing subgroups of this population (Burt, Aron, Douglas, Lee & Valente, 2001; National Coalition for the Homeless, 2001; Urban Institute, 2000; U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1990, 2000), their needs remain relatively unexplored and largely unmet. Furthermore, these women are particularly vulnerable to multiple forms of interpersonal victimization, including sexual and physical assault at the hands of strangers, acquaintances, pimps, sex traffickers, and intimate partners on the street, in shelters, or in precarious housing situations. All forms of victimization endured by homeless women and children deserve our immediate attention and action. In this paper, we summarize available research on sexual violence in particular ~~that is, unwanted sexual activity that is forced, coerced or manipulated~~ and we suggest ways of understanding and responding to the varied, critical needs of homeless survivors of such violence. We focus on adult women only, leaving for another paper the enormous problem of violence against runaway children and teenagers. Our goals are to consolidate knowledge about the damaging interplay between homelessness and sexual violence, and clarify what steps researchers, policy-makers, and service providers might take to intervene with victims and prevent future sexual assaults from occurring.

Scenario 2 - Visibility
Loss of daily shelter forces people into absolute vulnerability and leads to unspeakable, inescapable violence against them - we must take steps to pull people out of this trap.
Norton ’09 [Larry, 8/19, Dehumanizing the homeless: violence and hate, http://blog.oregonlive.com/oldtown/2009/08/dehumanizing_the_homeless_viol.html]

What is the effect of dehumanizing the homeless? Vulnerability. Previously (Part II) in commenting on the hate and violence against the homeless I suggested that there is an environment that dehumanizes the homeless and that it leaves them vulnerable. "Vulnerability, especially in the homeless situation, means that an attacker is likely feel that he or she can get away with it because the thought is that the "homeless people aren't important, that homeless people are nobodies." [Orlando Sentinel]. And, to make it even easier to get away with it is the fact that many of the attacks go unreported by the homeless; most likely because of the role the police play, i. e., enforcers of laws that are perceived as anti-homeless. From the NYT piece and the NCH Report as well as a Google search, it appears that many of the homeless that are being attacked are the chronic homeless who are the most vulnerable and would offer the least resistance. And, one has to recognize that it is unlikely that the attacks would occur against anyone but the very vulnerable. I would liken these attackers to those who would harm a cat or dog just for the thrill of it. Something is wrong with these attackers that even full employment or no homelessness would cure. These are predators that for a host of reasons seek out vulnerable people to harm. For a composite of the "who" and the "why"of 'homeless' violence see the Oregonian's article about the twin brothers that were responsible for five incidents of attacks. E. g., in the article, Portland Detective Kevin Warren states that the twin brothers were "always picking on people who are older and frailer. There's no fair fights here. For the most part, it's just a beat-down. They're just beating people up because they're thinking they'll get away with it." Given the vulnerability who takes advantage of it? "The assailants are outsiders, mostly teenagers "who punch, kick, shoot or set afire people living on the streets, frequently killing them, simply for the sport of it, their victims all but invisible to society." [NYT]. The "National Coalition for the Homeless . . . says in its new report that 58 percent of assailants implicated in attacks against the homeless in the last 10 years were teenagers [13 to 19]." [NYT, NCH Report ]. But take a look at the NCH Report graph page 20. These are young assailants. 78% of them were 25 and younger. Of the 58%, 24% were 18 & 19 years old with 24% being 13 -19. Portland's Precinct Commander Reese in an Oregonian opinion would seem to agree when he identifies one group of offenders responsible for downtown problems: They are transient "young adults between 18 and 30 years of age. They're the ones engaged in aggressive panhandling and intimidating behavior in downtown. [....] Most are addicted to heroin or alcohol." "They have made a lifestyle choice to live on the streets, and they consistently refuse housing, treatment or other services." Why do they do it? "A lot are thrill seekers," a quote by Brian Levin, a criminologist who runs the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. [NYT]. From another New York Times article pointing to youths as mostly to blame: "He [15 years old] does not know why. He was high, does not remember much and wants to forget the rest." And questioning motives in another incident: "What could possibly be in the mind of a 10- or 12-year -old that would possess them to pick up a rock and pick up a brick and beat another human being in the head?" But, in the NYT, a Texas State Representative sees it as a status issue: "More and more, we're hearing about homeless people being attacked for no other reason than that they're homeless . . ." Frankly I don't buy that. It is an illogical proposition to attribute violence towards an individual or similarly situated persons merely because he or she is homeless. It is a blame the victim approach. These crimes, and they are that, are not akin to racial or sexual orientation discrimination. It is the vulnerability of those being attacked isn't it? Without belaboring this too much, the 'hate' is not hate of the homeless it is a sociopathic attack on the vulnerable. Attacking a vulnerable person, e. g., homeless, means that because the "homeless people aren't important, that homeless people are nobodies" he or she feels they can get away with it. [See Orlando Sentinel]. And, to make it even easier to get away with it is the fact that many of the attacks go unreported by the homeless; most likely because of the role the police play, i. e., enforcers of laws that are perceived as anti-homeless. From the NYT piece, the NCH Report , and a Google search, it appears that many of the homeless that are being attacked are the chronic homeless who are the most vulnerable and would offer the least resistance. And, one has to recognize that it is unlikely that the attacks would occur against anyone but the very vulnerable. I would liken these attackers to those who would harm a cat or dog just for the thrill of it. Something is wrong with them that even full employment or no homelessness would cure. These are predators that for a host of reasons seek out vulnerable people to harm. For a composite of the "who" and the "why"of 'homeless' violence see the Oregonian's article about the twin brothers that were responsible for five incidents of attacks. The NYT points to 'bum movies' and articles like the one found in Maxim - "Hunt the Homeless" as examples of encouraging attacks on the homeless. Attacks by young adults and teenagers on vulnerable people because they can get away with attacks on nobodies will not be stopped by continuing to blame the victim. As noted, physical attacks are not a known problem in Portland, verbal attacks are heard on the streets and read all too often in the local media. But can physical attacks be far behind? Aren't the means to resolve the violence readily available and easy to implement? 1st is to separate out the criminal element from the homeless category. This is important so that there is a clear definition of homeless they are not criminals. Being poor, being without a job is not a criminal offense. 2nd is to implement social, not criminal, solutions to homelessness. Criminalization of unintended conduct is anti-democratic and certainly doesn't fit the liberal image of Portland. Social solutions get to the root of the problem, criminal solutions begat criminals. 3rd is to arrest, prosecute and appropriately sentence those culprits who would attack the homeless. This will send a deterrent message to the attackers and a relief message to the many homeless victims. Well so much for day dreams.

People experiencing homelessness, even as they are brutalized are literally invisible in our society – our 1ac is an attempt to bring them back into our collective field of vision. Simple recognition is the first step.
Jean ’10 (Abby, August 5, 2010, “Vulnerability: Indexes, Homelessness and Disability”< http://disabledfeminists.com/2010/08/05/vulnerability-indexes-homelessness-and-disability/>)

This population is considered extremely difficult to serve, as lots have tried to engage with services in the past and not found it useful, so are considered “service resistant.” This is a nice way to say that most people and agencies have pretty much given up on them and don’t have any hope of bringing them into services, much less into stable housing. This is also a nice way to say that these homeless folks have correctly figured out that most homeless services aren’t appropriate or beneficial for them, so there’s little point in trying to engage with service organizations. This is partly because homeless services are not really set up for people with disabilities – getting necessary accommodations in a shelter is enormously difficult because of the already extremely limited resources available. If you have PTSD and need a door that locks in order to sleep, a shelter is not for you. If you have a service animal, shelters are not for you. If you need even a minimal level of nursing or medical care, shelters are not for you. (Not that the streets are better at accommodating disabilities.) These chronically homeless people are, unfortunately but frankly, likely to die. thevulnerability index looks at factors that “place them at heightened risk of mortality,”including 3 or more hospitalizations or ER visits in the last year, aged 60 or above, cirrhosis of the liver or end stage renal disease, HIV+ or AIDS, or co-occurring psychiatric, substance abuse, and chronic medical conditions (tri-morbidity). When this tool has been used in communities, the most vulnerable person identified by the tool usually has all of those risk factors and has been homeless for 20+ years. Can you imagine how difficult it would be for a 62 year old man who is HIV+ and has a physical and mental disability and an active substance abuse problem to enter a shelter, especially after over 20 years of street homelessness? Traditionally, this group of the chronically homeless is a group that people have given up on. Not just the public, but even homeless service providers. But the first iteration of this program, in the Times Square area of NYC, has produced before and after stories that are flooring. A woman who lived on the streets for 20+ years as a heroin addict is now housed and working as the concessions manager at the movie theater in Times Square. Looking at the before and after pictures seemed like she’d moved backwards in time – she looked 20 years younger. These are the people who we walk by on the street and feel like they’re beyond help and beyond hope. We just don’t think people can come back from that – and these programs are proving that assumption to be absolutely wrong.

Tags:

Created by Abi Williams on 2013/02/13 19:03

Elechyan-Parker Aff

Quick Links

Schools