Resolved: To alleviate income inequality in the United States, increased spending

on public infrastructure should be prioritized over increased spending on meanstested welfare programs.
<Introduce yourself> Today, we stand resolved that to alleviate income inequality in the United
States, increased spending on public infrastructure should be prioritized over increased
spending on means-tested welfare programs.

Framework
Definitions:
1. Alleviate: is best defined by the MacMillan Dictionary as to make something less
painful, severe, or serious
2. Income: as money that someone gets from working or from investing money
3. Infrastructure: is best defined by the Oxford Dictionary, The basic physical and
organizational structures and facilities needed for the operation of a society or
enterprise.
4. Prioritized: as Designate or treat (something) as more important than other
things
5. And finally Means Tested Welfare Program is best defined by Heritage as:
federal programs providing cash, food, housing, medical care, social services, training,
and targeted education aid to poor and low-income Americans.
Criteria: Net Benefits. Whichever team can prove has a better impact towards Americans should
win this round.

Contention 1: Means Tested Welfare

Link: Improved Infrastructure limits the means-tested welfare programs
Evidence:

Csar Caldern and Luis Servn, Infrastructure, Growth, and Inequality, http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/, September 2014
Infrastructure reform may lead to price and/or supply responses that reduce the
access and affordability of services for the poor. For example, removing subsidies may
lead to higher post-reform prices, new private providers may charge higher
connection fees than government owned providers, or they may be reluctant to
reach poorer areas (Estache, Foster and Wodon, 2002). As a result, infrastructure services may become
unaffordable to lower-income groups. The likelihood of this outcome depends on the overall design of the reforms. In practice,
however, there are numerous episodes in which the access by the poor improved after reforms involving private participation.

Impact: 109,631,000 Americans lived in households that received benefits from one or more
federally funded "means-tested programs" also known as welfare as of the fourth quarter of 2012, according to data released Tuesday by
the Census Bureau.

Government assistance programs seek to provide only the barest minimum amount of help.
Blue-collar wages in America are simply not high enough to support workers in todays
economy.
People on welfare are hardworking, taxpaying citizens, just like the rest of us. Or they are
impoverished children, elders, or folks with disabilities.
Welfare programs are instrumental in helping people get back on their feet and quickly.

Terence P. Jeffrey, August 20, 2014, CNS News,

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/354-percent-109631000-welfare
Danica Johnson, November 26, 2014, EF Magazine,
http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/11/common-myths-people-welfare/

Contention 2: Means Tested Welfare and Public Infrastructure

Link: We need public infrastructure to be improved.

Evidence: The two can exist together because only increasing spending on public infrastructure
will lead to failure, and means-tested welfare provides different and more important necessities.
Though they both should exist, means tested welfare should be prioritized.
Robert Rector, 2012, Examining the Mean-tested Welfare State: 79 Programs and $927 in
Annual Spending, http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/2012/05/examining-themeans-tested-welfare-state

About half of means-tested spending is for medical care. Roughly 40 percent goes to
cash, food, and housing aid. The remaining 10 to 12 percent goes to what might be called enabling
programs, programs that are intended to help poor individuals become more self-sufficient. These
programs include child development, job training, (and) targeted federal education aid,
and a few other minor functions. Means-tested welfare spending or aid to the poor consists of government programs that provide assistance deliberately and exclusively to poor

food stamps, public

housing, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families are means-tested aid
programs that provide benefits only to poor and lower-income persons. On the other hand, Social Security,
and lower-income people.[1] By contrast, non-welfare programs provide benefits and services for the general population. For example,

Medicare, police protection, and public education are not means-tested; they provide services and benefits to persons at all income levels.

Means-tested programs are anti-poverty programs: they are intended to increase the living
standards or improve the capacity for self-support among the poor and near-poor.
Unlike many other government programs, means-tested welfare programs do not
require a prior fiscal contribution to establish eligibility.
Bertrand Badre, 2015, Long Term Finance for Infrastructure Essential to ending Poverty,
http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/long-term-finance-infrastructure-essential-ending-poverty
As Los Angeles approaches the 21st century, any population growth is expected to be primarily a result of resident births. To support population growth, Los Angeles needs a
strong, expanding economy, healthy neighborhoods, and a tax base that can support the basic public services necessary to maintain and improve its quality of life. In order for
the City to provide services that the public expects, it must embrace the vision of becoming a sustainable city: one which manages its infrastructure and public services in a
manner that avoids depletion or permanent damage of its natural resources. The City must then take four interrelated actions: (a) reexamine the viability of the existing
infrastructure relative to its sustainability (Is it cost effective from a maintenance and life-cycle perspective?); (b) maintain a balance between the rate of population and
economic growth and the infrastructure and public services necessary to support that growth; (c) correct deficiencies in these support systems (as identified in part in (a) above);

.Infrastructure improvements will be

required to support the needs of the City's growth and, at the same time, to replace
existing facilities that have deteriorated due to age or have become obsolete.
and (d) coordinate the work of policy implementing agencies so they may better support each other

Impact: It is no secret that Americas infrastructure , along with those of many other countries, is aging
and failing, and that funding has been insufficient to repair and replace it. Engineers of the
21st century face the formidable challenge of modernizing the fundamental structures that support civilization. The problem is particularly
acute in urban areas, where growing populations stress societys support systems,
and natural disasters, accidents, and terrorist attacks threaten infrastructure safety and security. And urban infrastructure is not just a U.S. issue; special challenges are posed by

basic infrastructure
needs are still problematic, and engineers will be challenged to economically provide such services more broadly. Furthermore,
solutions to these problems must be designed for sustainability, giving proper
attention to environmental and energy-use considerations (though cities take up just a small percentage of the
Earths surface, they disproportionately exhaust resources and generate pollution), along with concern for the aesthetic
elements that contribute to the quality of life.
the problems of megacities, with populations exceeding 10 million, which are found mostly in Asia. In many parts of the world,

Contention 3: Income Inequality is Good

Link: Income inequality is necessary for a successful economy.
Evidence:
Ellyatt, 2013

Holly Ellyatt, January 8, 2013, CNBC, Income Inequality: Is it Good for Everyone?,
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100361302
Income inequality has been on the rise for three decades in the United States, according to the Congressional Budget Office, with the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots"
currently at its widest point since 1967.

experts argue that income inequality is not

such a bad thing. They even go as far as saying that America's economy functions on the basis of it.
But as Democrats and Republicans wrangle over fiscal "fairness" and taxation, some

The debate on income inequality has featured heavily in U.S. politics. Prominent Republican and former runner for the GOP's presidential nomination, Rick Santorum said last
February that income inequality was part of the fabric of American society, and long should it be so.

"There is income inequality in America. There always has been and hopefully, and I do
say that, there always will be," Santorum said during a speech to the Detroit Economic Club. "Why? Because
people rise to different levels of success based on what they contribute to society and to
the marketplace, and that's as it should be," he added.
their
greatness and innovation, yes - they created wealth, but they created wealth for
everybody else. And that's a good thing, not something to be condemned in America," he said.
"We should celebrate like we do in the small towns all across America. You celebrate success. Why? Because in

Harvard economist Arthur Okun argued that

inequality was the price to be paid for an efficient economy. The view became the backbone of
In his 1975 work "Equality and Efficient: The Big Trade-Off," the
conservative policy.
Thomas Garrett, assistant vice president at the St. Louis Federal Reserve, wrote in 2010 that income inequality in the U.S. was "not so bad."

it is important to understand that income

inequality has many economic benefits and is the result of and not a detriment to a well-functioning
economy," Garrett wrote, insisting that U.S. Census statistics "exaggerate the degree of
income inequality."
"Although many people consider income inequality a social ill,

George F. Will, March 25, 2015, How Income Inequality Benefits Everyone, The Washington
Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-income-inequality-benefitseverybody/2015/03/25/1122ee02-d255-11e4-a62f-ee745911a4ff_story.html

REBUTTAL EVIDENCE:
Private Infrastructure
Link: Private Infrastructure is More Beneficial
Evidence:

AN economy depends on infrastructure to facilitate the flow of goods, people,

information and energy. Accordingly, ports, roads, bridges, railways, airports, communication networks, power lines, waterworks and many other
infrastructure systems represent important inputs into an economy.

costs but

Poor infrastructure - either in terms of its quantity or quality - not only increases

can literally bring an economy to its knees. India and many other Asian nations have been severely handicapped by

poor infrastructure. Even the US is not without infrastructure problems. For example,

the number of vehicle miles traveled in

the US has doubled since 1980, but the total road capacity has only increased by
6%. The result has been a dramatic increase in congestion costs (lost time, extra fuel, etc. In the US and
elsewhere, investments in infrastructure and its maintenance are projected to be enormous. Indeed, for the East Asia-Pacific and South Asia regions, the projected expenditures
on infrastructure investment and maintenance in the 2005-2010 period account for 6.6% and 6.9% of GDP, respectively (see table). A critical question:

Should

infrastructure be provided by the private or public sector? Adam Smith answered

this question in the Wealth of Nations (1776). He concluded as follows: No two characters seem more inconsistent than
those of trader and sovereign, since people are more wasteful with the wealth of others than with their own.

ADAM SMITH:
Smith saw the responsibilities of the government being limited to the defense of the nation, universal education, public works (infrastructure such as roads and bridges), the
enforcement of legal rights (property rights and contracts) and the punishment of crime. The government would step in when people acted on their short-term interests, and

there is no art
which one government sooner learns of another, than that of draining money
from the pockets of the people." His focus on universal education was to counteract the negative and dulling effects of the division of
would make and enforce laws against robbery, fraud and other similar crimes. He cautioned against larger, bureaucratic governments, writing, "

labor that was a necessary part of industrialization.

They said that we said that public infrastructure solves this but we said private
infrasutrucutre solves this. We did link the resolution in that we support means tested
welfare and pricate infrastrucutre .

Who Receives Benefits

Mitt Romney is correct that about half of all Americans now live in a
household that receives some sort of federal government benefit. And that number has risen
during the Obama years. On the other hand, a large chunk of this money goes toward the elderly and disabled. And most entitlement benefits flow to the
Below are a few facts and charts to consider.

middle classwhich, judging by polls, tends to split evenly between Obama and Romney.

1) In 2011, about 49 percent of the population lived in a household where at least

one member received a direct benefit from the federal government. A big chunk of
these households are retirees. And about 27 percent households benefited from a means-tested
poverty program. A quick breakdown:
--Last year, about 29 percent of households received Medicare benefits and 31.6 percent
received Social Security. (Obviously there's a lot of overlap between those two, since those
programs mainly benefit retirees.)
--Meanwhile, about 32 million households, or 27.1 percent, benefited from at least one meanstested poverty program. The biggest benefits here were Medicaid (19.5 percent), food stamps
(12.7 percent) and subsidized lunches (11.2 percent). Again, there's some overlap.
--Smaller benefits include public housing (5 percent of households), unemployment (4 percent),
and veterans' compensation (2.6 percent). Only 7 percent of households receive some sort of
direct cash assistance, such as the TANF welfare program.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-fromthe-federal-government-in-six-charts/

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2009/09/obama-to-spend-103-trillion-onwelfare-uncovering-the-full-cost-of-means-tested-welfare-or-aid-to-the-poor

Total means-tested welfare spending in FY 2008 amounted to around $16,800 for each
poor person in the U.S.; however, some welfare spending goes to individuals who have
low incomes but are not below the official poverty line (about $22,200 per year for a
family of four). Typically, welfare benefits are received not just by the poor, but also by
persons who have incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level ($44,400 per
year for a family of four). Around one-third of the U.S. population falls within this lower
income range. On average, welfare spending amounts to around $7,000 per year for
each individual who is poor or who has an income below 200 percent of the poverty
level. This comes to $28,000 per year for each lower-income family of four.
Kinds of means tested welfare programs:
12 programs providing food aid;
12 programs funding social services;
12 educational assistance programs;
11 housing assistance programs;
10 programs providing cash assistance;
9 vocational training programs;
7 medical assistance programs;
3 energy and utility assistance programs; and,
3 child care and child development programs.
http://www.heritage.org/research/testimony/2012/05/examining-the-means-testedwelfare-state

PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE IS GOOD

Ryan Holeywell, Public-Private Partnerships are Popular, but are they Practical?, November
2013, Governing, Governing.com
Americas infrastructure is struggling, but the private sector can help. No one wants another
bridge to collapse, as did the I-35W Mississippi River Bridge, testified a Morgan Stanley
official. That tragedy, which killed 13 people, underscores the need for expanded new, federally
subsidized financing tools, he told Congress. Many people see P3s as a game-changer: the best,
and possibly only, way to repair and replace the countrys public works.
plenty of P3 projects are seen as successes. For example, Virginias High Occupancy Toll lanes,
which opened last year just outside Washington, D.C., were financed, designed and built by
private firms, which will now operate them and collect tolls from drivers. Working with private
partners allowed the state to complete the project far more quickly than it could have on its own