1Gonzaga Debate InstituteMexico Renewables Neg***NEG***Solvency***

Solvency Integration Fails 1NCBarriers to integration environmental standards, intermittent power, certification, and economic barriersGarrison, Environment and Climate Change Advisor for U.S. Agency for International Development, 2010John L., April 30, Clean Energy & Climate Change Opportunities Assessment for USAID/Mexico, U.S. Agency for International Development, p. 27, EB)Existing crossborder transmission is limited with only 800 MW of transmission capacity through two 230kV lines. At present, Sempra is seeking a permit from DOE to build a crossborder transmission line to carry electricity from its wind turbines at La Rumorosa to the Southwest Powerlink in Imperial County, California with a potential for 1,250 MW. The California Independent SystemOperator(CAISO) Has reportedly submitted interconnection applications for both La Rumorosa and Santa Catarina. Nevertheless, four additional transmission lines will be needed if Baja Californias wind potential is to be Fully met. For future cross border renewable energy trade to grow, however, a number of barriers must be overcome. For one, power exported from Mexico and sold to California under its RPS must show that it meets Californias environmental quality standards and that it protects the environment to the same extent as if it were located in California. 44 The RPS environmental requirements are not clear and need to be better defined. Also of concern is the potential impact that intermittent wind energy might have on CFEs and Imperial Irrigation District(IID) electrical grids even if not directly connected to them. Such impacts must be identified and addressed to CFEs satisfaction prior to its concurrence of the CREs issuance of an energy export permit. The integration of 5,000 MW of wind from Baja California, for example, may require CFEs 230kV EastWest corridor to be significantly reinforced raising the question, who will pay. CAISO is in contact with CFE and IID to study the impact that the regions renewable energy cluster might have on the irrespective systems. Nevertheless, remediation of potential impacts will need to be addressed between the developer and CFE and/orIID.45 Another barrier to crossborder renewable energy trade is the biennial recertification requirement. The designation of Baja California border area as an Energy Resource Area under the RETI process will also be important for future renewable energy development as will the expansion and strengthening of the transmission grid on the California side to reach highly populated areas. Given the current economic climate, the transmission expansion envisioned by RETI may not materialize.Solvency Say No 1NCOil overwhelms renewable energy for Mexico- TBA proves and solved relationsThe Hill 6-5-13, (Neil Brown and Carl Meacham, 6-15-13, Foreign Affairs Analysts, http://thehill.com/opinion/op-ed/303739-time-for-us-mexico-transboundary-agreement, accessed 7-12-13, LLM)The United States-Mexico Transboundary Agreement (TBA) would enable cooperation between our two federal governments and our companies to unlock the potential for oil and natural gas reserves that extend across our Gulf of Mexico maritime boundary. Congressional approval of the TBA would enrich U.S.-Mexico relations in the near term while laying the foundation for improved energy security and enhanced environmental protection for the Gulf Coast. Bilateral relations with Mexico have improved dramatically in recent years, yet energy cooperation has lagged. Oil holds a privileged position of national pride and constitutional protection in Mexico, historically putting it off limits for domestic reform and bilateral cooperation with the U.S. The TBA is, therefore, more than just an energy agreement. Its approval by the Mexican government is a political statement opening a window to richer relations. While the area under future jurisdiction of the TBA could provide incremental domestic oil production, a far greater prize for the U.S. oil portfolio is the prospect of more reliable oil trade with our ally Mexico. The TBA would, for the first time, allow oil majors to work in joint production arrangements with PEMEX and support the confidence building necessary to enable those arrangements more widely in Mexico. That is not only good for oil major shareholders, it is good for our nations energy security.

Solvency Say No 2NCMexico says no-PEMEX reform and a laundry list of tasks are higher prioritiesWashington Post 5-7-13, (Nick Miroff and William Booth, Contributors, March 7th, 2013, The Americas, To power Mexico forward, Pea Nieto looks to energy reform, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-05-07/world/39073749_1_energy-industry-foreign-oil-petroleos-de-mexico, accessed 7/12/13, LLM)Mexico remains the third- largest source of foreign oil for the United States after Canada and Saudi Arabia. But the countrys easy-pump crude is quickly running dry, and the company lacks the technology and know-how to drill for the vast stores of tougher-to-reach deposits that are thought to exist beneath Mexicos deserts and seas. Fixing the company, formally known as Petroleos de Mexico, has become a top priority for Mexicos new president, Enrique Pea Nieto. With an overhaul plan expected by late summer, U.S. and other global energy companies are waiting to see whether Mexico will once more give outsiders a crack at the countrys hydrocarbon treasures, including the massive, virtually untapped beds of shale gas south of the Texas border. For now, though, Mexicos oil exports to the United States are falling, dropping below the million-barrel-per-day mark for the first time since 1994. For Pea Nieto, who began his six-year term in December, opening up the energy industry is the most ambitious task on a hefty to-do list that includes fixing the education system, telecommunications and tax collection, areas viewed as major hurdles to Mexicos development into a more modern, democratic, middle-class society.

Mexico would say no- laundry list of other priorities the government is focused onSeelke, Specialist in Latina American Affairs, 1-16-13, (Clare R., Congressional Research Service, Mexicos New Administration: Priorities and Key Issues in U.S.-Mexican Relations, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42917.pdf,p.6, accessed 7/12/13, LLM) Upon his inauguration, President Pea Nieto announced a reform agenda with specific proposals under five broad pillars: reducing violence; combating poverty; boosting economic growth; reforming education; and fostering social responsibility. Somewhat surprisingly, leaders from the conservative PAN and leftist PRD signed on to President Pea Nietos Pact for Mexico containing legislative proposals for advancing that reform agenda. While some opposition legislators have since balked at their leaders decisions to endorse the PRI-led pact, the Congress already approved an education reform bill, one of the 13 measures based on the pact that Pea Nieto had identified as short-term priorities.13 Analysts predict that despite the constraints discussed below (see: Constraints Facing the New Administration), the prospects for implementing Pea Nietos agenda are good because the PAN and the PRI in particular agree on many of the structural reforms that need to be enacted.14

***Mexico Econ Advantage***Mex Econ Econ High 1NCUS natural gas boom supporting Mexicos economy nowFB Industries, 7-3, (FB Industries Inc. The Unsurpassed Solution for Frac Sand Handling & Storage. 7-3-2013, U.S. natural gas revolution helping advance Mexican economy Accessed: 7-9-2013, BK)

Thanks to hydraulic fracturing, the United States is in the middle of a natural gas boom. Production from shale formations is increasing around the country, and a recent report from the Energy Information Agency showed the nation has the largest recoverable reserve of shale gas in the world at 1,161 trillion cubic feet. While this increased supply is undoubtedly directly boosting the U.S. economy, studies show it is also benefiting Mexico to quite a large extent. According to OilPrice.com, Mexican imports of U.S. natural gas have grown 92 percent since 2008. Plus, the United States' export capacity is expected to increase to over 7 billion cubic feet per day, so Mexico's share of the nation's production could become even greater. In order to transport enough gas to meet demand, companies are already planning new pipelines between the United States and Mexico. For example, Pemex, the latter's state-owned oil company, is spending $3.3 billion on a new 750-mile pipeline from Los Ramones, Mexico, to Agua Dulce, Texas, Quartz reported. The boom gives Mexico a competitive edge Mexico's access to so much inexpensive natural gas is already giving the country quite a competitive edge over other emerging economies. Last year, manufacturing labor costs in China surpassed Mexico's because of the Asian country's high wage inflation rates, The Financial Times reported. Moreover, China's energy costs are much higher than Mexico's, and the proximity of the latter to the United States further reduces expenses. A recent study by global management consulting firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG) determined the average total manufacturing costs in Mexico could be as much as 6 percent less than in China by 2015. In this way, Mexico is poised to have an extremely competitive, successful manufacturing industry in the near future. Reports also show it's possible the current energy situation could increase Mexico's manufacturing exports enough to bring the country $20 to $60 billion in output a year by 2017. Fortunately, such improvements can also be hugely beneficial to the United States. "Mexico is in a strong position to be a significant winner from shifts in the global economy," said Harold Sirkin, a senior partner at BCG. "That is good news not only for Mexico, which relies on exports for around one-third of its GDP. It's also good for America, since products made in Mexico contain four times as many U.S.-made parts, on average, as those made in China."

Mex Econ Econ High 2NC

Mexicos Economy is High NowPadgett, Miami-based journalist and TIME contributor, 2013 [Padgett, March 2013, TIME Magazine, Mexicos New Boom: Why the World Should Tone Down the Hype, http://world.time.com/2013/03/08/mexicos-new-boom-why-the-world-should-tone-down-the-hype/, 7/10/13, AR]

I couldnt be happier that Mexicos economy is rebounding. After barely 2% average annual growth between 2000 and 2010, the countrys GDP expanded almost 4% in 2011 and 2012. Investment is booming and the middle class is enlarging. Mexicos manufacturing exports lead Latin America, and its trade as a share of GDP tops Chinas. Its No. 53 spot on the World Banks ease-of-doing-business rankings far outshines the No. 126 grade of its main regional rival, Brazil; it has signed more free trade agreements (44) than any other country, and its enrolling more engineering students than any south of the Rio Grande. As I noted a year ago, its a trend well worth applauding.

Mexicos economy is the strongest among developing nations-Manufacturing costs, reforms, and energy costsMonnin, Journalist, 6-25, (Abbey Monnin, Mexico: A Growth Story in the Global Economy 6-25-2013. Accessed: 7-9-2013, BK)

Macro-Economic Context With Europe in a slow-motion train wreck that shows little signs of redirection, and the marked slowdown in China, the US seems likely to be the least ugly of the big babies in the global economy for the near term future. Concerns remain over the USs budget deficits, persistently high unemployment rate, political gridlock, and the Federal Reserves impending exit from its position of easy monetary policy since the financial crisis. Nevertheless, there are few signs that the US dollar will be replaced as the worlds reserve currency anytime soon, and comparatively-speaking, the US seems likely to remain a primary driver of global growth among the major industrialized countries. Mexico, more than any other economy, stands to ride this macro-economic tide along with it. A Mexican Growth Story Mexico shows signs of being the next great growth story in Latin America. Although its economy hit a rough patch at the turn of 2013, it still has the lowest unemployment rate of the large Latin American countries at 5.1%, and consensus forecasts predict 3% GDP growth in 2013, as published in The Economist on June 22nd, 2013. There are good reasons to be optimistic about Mexico when viewed through the lens of the US economy. Among other dynamics, Mexico is poised to contribute to and benefit from the manufacturing resurgence in the US. Increased labor and energy costs in China are a major driver behind this dynamic. According to data from the Boston Consulting Group, as published on June 11, 2013 in The Wall St. Journal article A Change in the Cost Equation, manufacturing costs in Mexico remain at the same 11% discount to the US as a decade ago. By comparison, Chinas discount to the US has become only 7%, from 18% in 2003. There are also reduced transportation costs of US firms relocating more of their supply chains to Mexico, and added benefits from better real-time supply chain capabilities. The likelihood of real immigration reform in the US could also contribute greatly to increased integration and cooperation between the two economies. Internally in Mexico, signs of reform have been emerging. The election of Enrique Pea Nieto in 2012 appeared to represent a consolidation of the status quo, with the return to power of his PRI party, which has held the reigns for most of the past century. However, Pea Nieto and the PRI have been enacting some reforms that show promise of improving competition in the economy and shaking up institutionalized power structures. In February, the arrest for embezzlement of Elba Esther Gordillo, the president of Mexico's influential national teachers' union, shocked many in the country who believed she was untouchable, along with the powerful union. Earlier in June, Pea Nieto signed into law a broad reform of the telecommunications industries that should have the effect of increasing competition and restricting the leverage wielded by monopolists like Carlos Slim and the companies he controls, like Amrica Mvil SAB (NYSE: AMX) which controls 70% of both Mexicos wireless subscriber base and its fixed phone lines. Grupo Televisa SAB (NYSE: TV) itself controls 70% of the broadcast television market. A recent government survey indicated that only 26% of Mexican homes had internet access. Reforms such as these to bring its population of 112 million online and otherwise empower their increased productivity are long overdue and very welcome signs for economic growth. The reforms should help stimulate broad based growth, including for the nearly 50% of Mexicans still living below the poverty line. Enabling this population to emerge into the middle class could drive the Mexican economy for years to come. Pea Nietos administration is also pushing Congress for an end to PEMEXs 75-year monopoly this year, which would reinvigorate investment in energy industries and open up space for domestic and foreign firms to come in and innovate, and create well paying jobs. The glaring risk of dealing with the drug trafficking cartels who operate throughout the country and along the border remains a major risk however, and could continue to hold back increased economic integration with the US. Pea Nietos administration has made a marked shift away from the militarized approach to the cartels used by his predecessor, Felipe Caldern, and time will tell if it is more effective.Mexican unemployment decreasing in the status quo, bodes wellTaborda, Journalist, 6-24, (Joanna Taborda, 6-24-2013, MEXICO MAY UNEMPLOYMENT RATE DOWN TO 4.93% Trading Economics, Accessed: 7-9-2013, BK)

In May of 2013, Mexican unemployment rate declined to 4.93 percent, from 5.04 percent in the previous month. Compared with the same month last year, the jobless rate went up by 0.1 percentage point. The unemployment rate for men dropped in May to 4.93 percent, from 5.17 percent in April. In contrast, the jobless rate for women increased to 4.93 percent from 4.83 percent in the previous month. Urban unemployment, based on the countrys 32 largest cities, decreased to 5.54 percent in May, from 6.42 percent in April. Compared with May of 2012, urban unemployment also declined by 0.5 percentage point. On a seasonally adjusted basis, the jobless rate decreased to 5.07 percent in May, from 5.14 percent in April.

Mexicos manufacturing is expected to skyrocket past China by 2015 therefore growing the economy and subsequently massively boosting the US economyBCG 6-28, (Boston Consulting Group: a global management consulting firm and the world's leading advisor on business strategy. Mexicos Growing Cost Advantage over China, Other Economies Will Boost Its Exportsand U.S. Manufacturers June 28th 2013, Accessed: 7-9-2013, BK)

CHICAGO, June 28, 2013Within five years, higher manufacturing exports due to a widening cost advantage over China and other major economies could add $20 billion to $60 billion in output to Mexicos economy annually. And thanks to the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), U.S. manufacturers of components for everything from automobiles to computers assembled in Mexico also stand to benefit, according to new research by The Boston Consulting Group (BCG). The key drivers of Mexicos improving competitive edge are relatively low labor costs and shorter supply chains due to the country's proximity to markets in the U.S. Another important advantage is that Mexico has 44 free-trade agreementsmore than any other nationallowing many of its exports to enter major economies with few or no duties. A tipping point was reached in 2012, when average manufacturing costs in Mexico, adjusted for productivity, dropped below those of China. By 2015, BCG projects, average total manufacturing costs in Mexico are likely to be around 6 percent lower than in China and around 20 to 30 percent lower than in Japan, Germany, Italy, and Belgium. Mexico is in a strong position to be a significant winner from shifts in the global economy, said Harold L. Sirkin, a BCG senior partner. That is good news not only for Mexico, which relies on exports for around one-third of its GDP. Its also good for America, since products made in Mexico contain four times as many U.S.-made parts, on average, as those made in China. The research is part of BCGs ongoing Made in America, Again series on the changing global economics of manufacturing, produced by its Operations and Global Advantage practices. BCG has previously released research predicting that rising U.S. exports, combined with production reshored from China, could create up to 5 million new U.S. jobs in manufacturing and related services by the end of the decade, thanks largely to significant labor- and energy-cost advantages over Western Europe and Japan and rising costs in China. Global companies are expected to continue moving production to Mexico despite concerns over crime and safety. Research by the World Economic Forum has found that companies view violence and corruption as the most problematic factors of having operations in Mexicoas well as significant costs of doing business. Another drawback is the perception that Mexico lacks enough skilled workers. But the cost advantages of producing in Mexico are becoming so attractive that many companies are finding ways to mitigate these perceived risks. When the economics are a wash, U.S. manufacturers often keep production in the U.S., said Michael Zinser, a BCG partner who leads the firms manufacturing work in North America. But when the economics are compelling, companies will invest in additional security and training to address these issues. Mexicos labor costs are especially competitive when productivity differences with other economies are factored in. By 2015, for example, average manufacturing-labor costs in Mexico are projected to be 19 percent lower than in China, where wages are rising rapidly, and around 30 percent lower when adjusted for output per worker. In 2000, Mexican labor was 58 percent more expensive than in China. Mexico will also have lower energy costs than many other economies. Average electricity costs are around 4 percent lower in Mexico than in China, for example, while the average price of industrial natural gas is 63 percent lower.Mex Econ Alt Cause 1NC

Faulty credit, informality, elite control, ineffective education, vulnerability to shocks are Alt Causes to Mexicos EconHanson, Pacific Economic Cooperation Chair in International Economic Relations at UC San Diego, 2012 [Hanson, August 2012, Regional Migration Study Group, Understanding Mexico's Economic Underperformance, http://www.migrationpolicy.org/pubs/rmsg-mexicounderperformance.pdf, 7/10/13, AR]

Any discussion of growth and development in Mexico ends up resembling a Diego Rivera mural, overstuffed with historical characters that collide in repeated and unexpected ways. In effect, Mexicos underperformance is overdetermined. The faulty provision of credit, persistence of informality, control of key input markets by elites, continued ineffectiveness of public education, and vulnerability to adverse external shocks each may have a role in explaining Mexicos development trajectory over the past three decades. Still, the relative importance of these factors for the countrys growth record is unknown.

Mex Econ Collapse Inevitable 1NCCorruption makes collapse inevitable

O'Neil, Douglas Dillon Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations,2009(Shannon, July/August, The Real War in Mexico, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 88, Iss. 4; pg. 63, 16 pgs, 2009)

Mexico's Achilles' heel is corruption - which in an electoral democracy cannot be stabilizing the way it was in the days of Mexico's autocracy. Under the pri, the purpose of government policy was to assert power rather than govern by law. The opacity of court proceedings, the notorious graft of the police forces, and the menacing presence of special law enforcement agencies were essential elements of an overall system of political, economic, and social control. Rather than acting as a check or balance on executive power, the judiciary was often just another arm of the party, used to reward supporters and intimidate opponents. Law enforcement, too, was used to control, rather than protect, the population. The decline of the pri and the onset of electoral competition transformed the workings of the executive and legislative branches quite quickly, but the changes have had much less influence over the judicial branch or over law enforcement more generally. Instead, even after the transition to democracy, accountability mechanisms remain either nonexistent or defunct. Most of Mexico's various police forces continue to be largely incapable of objective and thorough investigations, having never received adequate resources or training. Impunity reigns: the chance of being prosecuted, much less convicted, of a crime is extremely low. As a result, Mexicans place little faith in their law enforcement and judicial systems. And as today's democratic government struggles to overcome this history through legislative reform, funding new programs for vetting and training and creating more avenues for citizen involvement, it faces a new threat: increasingly sophisticated, well-funded, and autonomous criminal organizations intent on manipulating the rule of law for their own benefit.

Mex Econ No Impact Econ 1NC

No war from Economic Decline - Studies prove.Miller, Governance Professor, University of Ottawa, 2000Morris, Centre on Governance professor University of Ottawa, 2k[Poverty as a Cause of Wars?, http://www.management.uottawa.ca/miller/poverty.htm]It seems reasonable to believe that a powerful "shock" factor might act as a catalyst for a violent reaction on the part of the people or on the part of the political leadership. The leadership, finding that this sudden adverse economic and social impact destabilizing, would possibly be tempted to seek a diversion by finding or, if need be, fabricating an enemy and setting in train the process leading to war. There would not appear to be any merit in this hypothesis according to a study undertaken by Minxin Pei and Ariel Adesnik of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. After studying 93 episodes of economic crisis in 22 countries in Latin America and Asia in the years since World War II they concluded that Much of the conventional wisdom about the political impact of economic crises may be wrong ..The severity of economic crisis - as measured in terms of inflation and negative growth bore no relationship to the collapse of regimes.(or, in democratic states, rarely) to an outbreak of violenceIn the cases of dictatorships and semi-democracies, the ruling elites responded to crises by increasing repression (thereby using one form of violence to abort another.)

Mex Econ No Impact Econ 2NC

No war from decline preventative measures like WTO proveBarnett, Wikistrat military chief analyst, 9 (Thomas P.M., 8/24/2009, The New Rules: Security Remains Stable Amid Financial Crisis http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/4213/the-new-rules-security-remains-stable-amid-financial-crisis, date accessed 7/1/13 IGM)

Can we say that the world has suffered a distinct shift to political radicalism as a result of the economic crisis? Indeed, no. The world's major economies remain governed by center-left or center-right political factions that remain decidedly friendly to both markets and trade. In the short run, there were attempts across the board to insulate economies from immediate damage (in effect, as much protectionism as allowed under current trade rules), but there was no great slide into "trade wars." Instead, the World Trade Organization is functioning as it was designed to function, and regional efforts toward free-trade agreements have not slowed.

Mex Econ No Impact Drugs 1NCDrug Trade InevitableFriedman, chief executive of STRATFOR, a private global intelligence firm he founded in 1996, 2010 (George, 4/6, The Political Machine, Drugs and Pinata: Mexico, failed state? http://www.politicalmachine.com/article/379548/Drugs_and_Pinata_Mexico_failed_state)

From Mexicos point of view, interrupting the flow of drugs to the United States is not clearly in the national interest or in that of the economic elite. Observers often dwell on the warfare between smuggling organizations in the northern borderland but rarely on the flow of American money into Mexico. Certainly, that money could corrupt the Mexican state, but it also behaves as money does. It is accumulated and invested, where it generates wealth and jobs. For the Mexican government to become willing to shut off this flow of money, the violence would have to become far more geographically widespread. And given the difficulty of ending the traffic anyway and that many in the state security and military apparatus benefit from it an obvious conclusion can be drawn: Namely, it is difficult to foresee scenarios in which the Mexican government could or would stop the drug trade. Instead, Mexico will accept both the pain and the benefits of the drug trade. Mexicos policy is consistent: It makes every effort to appear to be stopping the drug trade so that it will not be accused of supporting it. The government does not object to disrupting one or more of the smuggling groups, so long as the aggregate inflow of cash does not materially decline. It demonstrates to the United States efforts (albeit inadequate) to tackle the trade, while pointing out very real problems with its military and security apparatus and with its officials in Mexico City. It simultaneously points to the United States as the cause of the problem, given Washingtons failure to control demand or to reduce prices by legalization. And if massive amounts of money pour into Mexico as a result of this U.S. failure, Mexico is not going to refuse it. The problem with the Mexican military or police is not lack of training or equipment. It is not a lack of leadership. These may be problems, but they are only problems if they interfere with implementing Mexican national policy. The problem is that these forces are personally unmotivated to take the risks needed to be effective because they benefit more from being ineffective. This isnt incompetence but a rational national policy.

Mex Econ No Impact Heg 1NC

Data disproves hegemony impactsFettweis 11 Christopher J. Fettweis, Department of Political Science, Tulane University, 9/26/11, Free Riding or Restraint? Examining European Grand Strategy, Comparative Strategy, 30:316332, EBSCOIt is perhaps worth noting that there is no evidence to support a direct relationship between the relative level of U.S. activism and international stability. In fact, the limited data we do have suggest the opposite may be true. During the 1990s, the United States cut back on its defense spending fairly substantially. By 1998, the United States was spending $100 billion less on defense in real terms than it had in 1990.51 To internationalists, defense hawks and believers in hegemonic stability, this irresponsible peace dividend endangered both national and global security. No serious analyst of American military capabilities, argued Kristol and Kagan, doubts that the defense budget has been cut much too far to meet Americas responsibilities to itself and to world peace.52 On the other hand, if the pacific trends were not based upon U.S. hegemony but a strengthening norm against interstate war, one would not have expected an increase in global instability and violence. The verdict from the past two decades is fairly plain: The world grew more peaceful while the United States cut its forces. No state seemed to believe that its security was endangered by a less-capable United States military, or at least none took any action that would suggest such a belief. No militaries were enhanced to address power vacuums, no security dilemmas drove insecurity or arms races, and no regional balancing occurred once the stabilizing presence of the U.S. military was diminished. The rest of the world acted as if the threat of international war was not a pressing concern, despite the reduction in U.S. capabilities. Most of all, the United States and its allies were no less safe. The incidence and magnitude of global conflict declined while the United States cut its military spending under President Clinton, and kept declining as the Bush Administration ramped the spending back up. No complex statistical analysis should be necessary to reach the conclusion that the two are unrelated. Military spending figures by themselves are insufficient to disprove a connection between overall U.S. actions and international stability. Once again, one could presumably argue that spending is not the only or even the best indication of hegemony, and that it is instead U.S. foreign political and security commitments that maintain stability. Since neither was significantly altered during this period, instability should not have been expected. Alternately, advocates of hegemonic stability could believe that relative rather than absolute spending is decisive in bringing peace. Although the United States cut back on its spending during the 1990s, its relative advantage never wavered. However, even if it is true that either U.S. commitments or relative spending account for global pacific trends, then at the very least stability can evidently be maintained at drastically lower levels of both. In other words, even if one can be allowed to argue in the alternative for a moment and suppose that there is in fact a level of engagement below which the United States cannot drop without increasing international disorder, a rational grand strategist would still recommend cutting back on engagement and spending until that level is determined. Grand strategic decisions are never final; continual adjustments can and must be made as time goes on. Basic logic suggests that the United States ought to spend the minimum amount of its blood and treasure while seeking the maximum return on its investment. And if the current era of stability is as stable as many believe it to be, no increase in conflict would ever occur irrespective of U.S. spending, which would save untold trillions for an increasingly debt-ridden nation. It is also perhaps worth noting that if opposite trends had unfolded, if other states had reacted to news of cuts in U.S. defense spending with more aggressive or insecure behavior, then internationalists would surely argue that their expectations had been fulfilled. If increases in conflict would have been interpreted as proof of the wisdom of internationalist strategies, then logical consistency demands that the lack thereof should at least pose a problem. As it stands, the only evidence we have regarding the likely systemic reaction to a more restrained United States suggests that the current peaceful trends are unrelated to U.S. military spending. Evidently the rest of the world can operate quite effectively without the presence of a global policeman. Those who think otherwise base their view on faith alone.

Mex Econ No Impact Heg 2NC

Hegemony is no longer stabilizingBandow 11 -- Senior Fellow @ the CATO Institute (Doug, " Solving the Debt Crisis: A Military Budget for a Republic," Jan 31st, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=12746)More than two decades after the Cold War dramatically ended, the U.S. maintains a Cold War military. America has a couple score allies, dozens of security commitments, hundreds of overseas bases, and hundreds of thousands of troops overseas. Yet international hegemonic communism has disappeared, the Soviet Union has collapsed, Maoist China has been transformed, and pro-communist Third World dictatorships have been discarded in history's dustbin. The European Union has a larger economy and population than America does. Japan spent decades with the world's second largest economy. South Korea has 40 times the GDP and twice the population of North Korea. As Colin Powell exclaimed in 1991, "I'm running out of demons. I'm running out of enemies. I'm down to Castro and Kim Il-sung." Yet America accounts for roughly half of the globe's military outlays. In real terms the U.S. government spends more on the military today than at any time during the Cold War, Korean War, or Vietnam War. It is difficult for even a paranoid to concoct a traditional threat to the American homeland. Terrorism is no replacement for the threat of nuclear holocaust. Commentator Philip Klein worries about "gutting" the military and argued that military cuts at the end of the Cold War "came back to haunt us when Sept. 11 happened." Yet the reductions, which still left America by far the world's most dominant power, neither allowed the attacks nor prevented Washington from responding with two wars. And responding with two wars turned out to be a catastrophic mistake. Evil terrorism is a threat, but existential threat it is not. Moreover, the best response is not invasions and occupations as the U.S. has learned at high cost in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Rather, the most effective tools are improved intelligence, Special Forces, international cooperation, and restrained intervention. Attempts at nation-building are perhaps even more misguided than subsidizing wealthy industrialized states. America's record isn't pretty. The U.S. wasn't able to anoint its preferred Somali warlord as leader of that fractured nation. Washington's allies in the still unofficial and unstable nation of Kosovo committed grievous crimes against Serb, Roma, and other minorities. Haiti remains a failed state after constant U.S. intervention. The invasion of Iraq unleashed mass violence, destroyed the indigenous Christian community, and empowered Iran; despite elections, a liberal society remains unlikely. After nine years most Afghans dislike and distrust the corrupt government created by the U.S. and sustained only by allied arms. The last resort of those who want America to do everything everywhere is to claim that the world will collapse into various circles of fiery hell without a ubiquitous and vast U.S. military presence. Yet there is no reason to believe that scores of wars are waiting to break out. And America's prosperous and populous allies are capable of promoting peace and stability in their own regions. Indeed, U.S. security guarantees are profoundly dangerous. Intended to deter by making American involvement automatic, they ensure American participation if deterrence fails. Moreover, Washington's defense promises discourage friendly states from defending themselves while encouraging them to take more provocative positions against their potential adversaries.

***Relations Advantage***Relations Increasing Now 1NC

The relations between the US and Mexico have been growing, and President Nieto intends to increase bilateral cooperation while in officeSeelke, Specialist in Latin American Affairs, 2013(Clare, Jan 16, Congressional Research Service, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42917.pdf, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)Congress has maintained significant interest in Mexico and played an important role in shaping bilateral relations. Recently, the centrist Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) that governed Mexico from 1929 to 2000 retook the presidency after 12 years of rule by the conservative National Action Party (PAN) in the July 1, 2012 elections. The party also captured a plurality (but not a majority) in Mexicos Senate and Chamber of Deputies. PRI President Enrique Pea Nieto, a former governor of the state of Mexico, took office on December 1, 2012, pledging to enact bold structural reforms and broaden relations with the United States beyond security issues. U.S. policymakers are closely following what the return of a PRI government portends for Mexicos domestic policies and relations with the United States. Upon his inauguration, President Pea Nieto announced a reformist agenda with specific proposals under five broad pillars: reducing violence; combating poverty; boosting economic growth; reforming education; and fostering social responsibility. He then signed a Pact for Mexico agreement with the leaders of the PAN and leftist Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) containing legislative proposals for implementing an agenda that includes energy and fiscal reform. Although the pact may ease opposition in Mexicos Congress, Pea Nieto could face other constraints such as violence perpetrated by Mexicos powerful criminal organizations and the performance of the U.S. and global economies. Some analysts maintain that the prospects for reform under this administration are good, while others are more circumspect. U.S.-Mexican relations grew closer during the Felipe Caldern Administration (2006-2012) as a result of the Mrida Initiative, a bilateral security effort for which Congress has provided $1.9 billion. Some Members of Congress may be concerned about whether bilateral relations, particularly security cooperation, may suffer now that the party controlling the presidency has changed. Although the transition from PAN to PRI rule is unlikely to result in seismic shifts in bilateral relations, a PRI government may emphasize economic issues more than security matters. President Pea Nieto has vowed to continue U.S.-Mexican security cooperation, albeit with a stronger emphasis on reducing violent crime in Mexico than on combating drug trafficking; what that cooperation will look like remains to be seen. He has also expressed support for increased bilateral and trilateral (with Canada) economic and energy cooperation.

Relations Increasing Now 2NC

The US and Mexico have a strong relationship with little risk of it decliningRozental, former deputy foreign minister of Mexico , 2013(Andres, Feb 1, The Brookings Institution, Have Prospects for U.S.-Mexican Relations Improved?, http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2013/02/01-us-mexico-rozental, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)

The Mexico-U.S. relationship won't substantially change; there are too many ongoing issues to expect any major shift in what has become a very close and cooperative bilateral partnership in economic, security and social aspects. There will be a change of emphasis from the Mexican side as far as the security relationship goes, with Pea Nieto's declared intention to focus much more on the economy and public safety. He has already moved away from the constant statements made by his predecessor extolling the number of criminals apprehended and 'successes' in the fight against organized crime. The change of message comes as a relief to many Mexicans tired of hearing about violence and crime on a daily basis.There are two issues on the bilateral agenda, however, that portend significant changes if President Obama is able to fulfill his latest commitments: gun control and immigration reform. The latter seems to be headed toward a bipartisan agreement that might fundamentally change the situation for the thousands of Mexicans who are in the United States without proper documents. If Congress passes a comprehensive reform that allows them to normalize their situation and have a path to legal residency and eventual citizenship, it would have a huge positive impact on the relationship. As for gun control, Mexico would obviously favor a total ban on the sale and possession of assault weapons as the best way to prevent them from crossing the border, but even universal background checks and limits on the number and type of weapons an individual can purchase would be a welcome development. On trade ties, Mexico reached a quarter trillion dollars of total exports and imports in 2012 a hefty portion of that unprecedented amount was with the United States. As Mexico becomes an increasingly important part of the global supply chain and U.S. companies continue to invest heavily south of the border, the economic relationship has nowhere to go but up. And if Pea Nieto is able to fundamentally reform the country's energy sector, there promises to be even more investment.

The Mexican public has a favorable view towards the US, relations are highHorowitz, senior researcher at the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project, 2013(Juliana, May 1, Pew Research Global Attitudes Project, How Mexicans See America, http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/05/01/how-mexicans-see-america/, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)

When U.S. President Barack Obama travels to Mexico this week, he will encounter a Mexican public that has far more positive attitudes about the United States than at any time in the last several yearsAmericas image south of the border fell sharply in 2010, when Arizona passed a show me your papers law aimed at identifying, prosecuting and deporting immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally. But Mexican views have rebounded since then, and U.S. favorability ratings are now at their highest point since 2009. The prospects for U.S. immigration reform may be, at least in part, the source of renewed Mexican approval of their neighbor to the north.A new Pew Research Center poll found that 66 percent of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of the U.S., up 10 percentage points from a year ago and up 22 points from May 2010, immediately following the enactment of Arizonas immigration law. The last time Americas image was as strong among Mexicans was in 2009, when 69 percent said they had a favorable opinion.

In Obamas recent visit to Mexico, relations between the two countries were improved exponentially due to a laundry list of agreements Eagle Pass Business Journal, a business journal for positive and professional journalism on the United States-Mexico Border, 2013(May 2, Eagle Pass Business Journal, President Barack Obama visit to Mexico improves U.S.-Mexico relations, http://www.epbusinessjournal.com/2013/05/president-barack-obama-visit-to-mexico-improves-u-s-mexico-relations/, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)In his meeting earlier today with President Enrique Pea Nieto of Mexico, President Obama underscored the strategic nature of the bilateral relationship, and the two leaders discussed the broad range of bilateral, regional, and global issues that bind the United States and Mexico and touch the daily lives of citizens of both countries. The Presidents discussed ways to deepen the economic and commercial relationship and reaffirmed their commitment to conclude a high-standard Trans-Pacific Partnership this year. President Obama noted the importance of people-to-people connections, including greater educational exchange as part of the 100,000 Strong in the Americas Initiative. President Obama reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to work in partnership with Mexico on the security challenges facing both countries. President Obama pledged to continue to use Merida Initiative resources to support efforts to reduce violence in Mexico and ensure respect for human rights. In particular, the two leaders discussed the importance of working together to strike at the financial underpinnings of criminal enterprises that operate in both countries, while ensuring the integrity of our financial systems for legitimate trade and commerce. President Obama also expressed support for Mexicos transition to an accusatory system of justice. The leaders affirmed their commitment to work together to promote a secure and efficient border. High Level Economic Dialogue. To further elevate and strengthen the U.S.-Mexico bilateral commercial and economic relationship, President Obama and President Pea Nieto agreed to establish a High Level Economic Dialogue (HLED). The HLED, which will be led at the cabinet level, is envisioned as a flexible platform intended to advance strategic economic and commercial priorities central to promoting mutual economic growth, job creation, and competitiveness. It is expected to meet annually, starting this fall, to facilitate dialogue and joint initiatives and to promote shared approaches to regional and global economic leadership. It will build on, but not duplicate, a range of existing successful bilateral dialogues and working groups. Bilateral Forum on Higher Education, Innovation, and Research. Building on a long history of educational collaboration between the United States and Mexico, President Obama and President Pea Nieto announced the formation of a Bilateral Forum on Higher Education, Innovation, and Research. The Forum is intended to expand economic opportunities for citizens of both countries, develop a shared vision on educational cooperation, and share best practices in higher education and innovation. Renewed Commitment to the 21st Century Border Management Initiative. The two Presidents underscored their commitment to a secure and efficient shared border and reaffirmed the importance of the 21st Century Border Management Initiative, noting the recently concluded first meeting under President Pea Nietos tenure of the Initiatives Executive Steering Committee. During that meeting, both governments agreed to support key projects and initiatives that improve infrastructure, facilitate the secure flow of legitimate commerce and travel, and enhance law enforcement cooperation along the border. Parallel cabinet-level discussions have focused on the need to enhance joint security efforts on both sides of the border and further integrate our response to natural disasters. USAID-AMEXCID Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in Third Countries. As part of an increased commitment to cooperate on common goals in Central America and elsewhere in the world, the two Presidents welcomed a recently signed Memorandum of Understanding between the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Mexican Foreign Secretariats Agency for International Development Cooperation (AMEXCID) on international cooperation. The MOU facilitates U.S.-Mexico cooperation in third countries in areas such as economic growth, environment and climate change, disaster management, governance and rule of law, and science, technology, and innovation. U.S.-Mexico Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement. President Obama welcomed positive steps the U.S. Congress has taken recently toward implementing the Transboundary Hydrocarbons Agreement, which is designed to enhance energy security in North America and support our shared duty to exercise responsible stewardship of the Gulf of Mexico. The Agreement establishes a cooperative process for managing the development of oil and gas reservoirs that cross the international maritime boundary between the two countries in the Gulf of Mexico. USPTO-IMPI Memorandum of Understanding on IPR Cooperation. Recognizing the importance of protecting intellectual property to our broader goals of economic growth and innovation, President Obama welcomed the recent signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its counterpart, the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI). The MOU will deepen cooperation between the two entities in a range of areas, including: public awareness of the importance of intellectual property; expert exchanges; and sharing best practices on intellectual property office administration.

The US and Mexico have an important, long-standing bilateral relationshipNieto, the president of Mexico, 2012(Enrique, Nov 23, The Washington Post, U.S., Mexico should build on their economic ties, http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-11-23/opinions/35511831_1_energy-independence-renewable-energy-energy-resources, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)Both Mexico and the United States held presidential races this year, and the results offer an opportunity to redirect our countries bilateral relationship. The U.S. election demonstrated the growing demographic bonds that connect our countries futures. The election in Mexico heralded a new era of change and reform, as much as a new style of governing, based on pragmatism and results. To build a more prosperous future for our two countries, we must continue strengthening and expanding our deep economic, social and cultural ties. It is a mistake to limit our bilateral relationship to drugs and security concerns. Our mutual interests are too vast and complex to be restricted in this short-sighted way. When I meet with President Obama on Tuesday just days before my inauguration I want to discuss the best way to rearrange our common priorities. After all, our agenda affects millions of citizens in both countries. Perhaps the most important issue is finding new ways to bolster our economic and trade relationship to attain common prosperity in our nations. The United States is already Mexicos largest trading partner. As a result of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), our economic ties have grown to an unprecedented degree. NAFTA links 441 million people producing trillions of dollars in goods and services annually, making it the largest trading bloc in the world. Consequently, in NAFTA we have a solid foundation to further integrate our economies through greater investments in finance, infrastructure, manufacturing and energy. Together, we must build a more competitive and productive region. Another relevant bilateral issue relates to Mexicos status as an increasingly desirable and dependable manufacturing location. My country is the second-largest supplier of electronic goods to the United States. Coca-Cola, DuPont, GM, Nissan, Honda, Mazda, Audi and many others are seizing the opportunity to manufacture within our borders. We seek to continue offering U.S. consumers better products and better prices. Energy production is another emerging area that can enhance our nations potential. I plan to open Mexicos energy sector to national and foreign private investment. Mexico holds the fifth-largest shale gas reserve in the world, in addition to large deep-water oil reserves and a tremendous potential in renewable energy. We will not surrender Mexicos ownership over its energy resources, and we will not privatize our state-run oil company, Petroleos Mexicanos (Pemex). We will, however, welcome new technologies, new partnerships and new investments. Together with the United States and Canada, this may well contribute to guaranteeing North American energy independence something from which we would all greatly benefit. Above all, our mutual interest lies in our intertwined peoples. More than 1 million U.S. citizens live in Mexico, and my country remains the largest source of immigrants to the United States. Some analysts detect new momentum for comprehensive immigration reform since the U.S. presidential election. All Mexicans would welcome such a development. Both of our nations are seriously affected by organized-crime activities and drug trafficking. Working against them must be a shared responsibility. I will continue the efforts begun by President Felipe Caldern, but the strategy must necessarily change. I set as a public goal slashing violent crime significantly, proposing a sizable increase in security spending and doing away with redundant police levels. I will improve coordination among crime-fighting authorities, expand the federal police by at least 35,000 officers and bolster intelligence-gathering and analysis. It is also important that our countries increase intelligence-sharing and crime-fighting techniques and promote cooperation among law enforcement agencies. I am visiting Washington and President Obama because our nations share a long-standing and important relationship. The 2012 elections mark the beginning of a new era for the United States and Mexico. This is a great time to join efforts and capitalize on that momentum. We must build a more prosperous North America, on the basis of an alliance for a further competitive and productive integration of our economies.US Mexico relations are increasing due to a decline in violence Wood, Director of the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, & Wilson, Associate at the Mexico Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, 2013Duncan & Christopher, January 2013, Woodrow Wilson Center, New Ideas for a New Era: Policy Options for the Next Stage in U.S.-Mexico Relations, http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/new_ideas_us_mexico_relations.pdf, 7/10/13While economic issues are likely to see increased attention, much of the day to day work in the bilateral relationship will remain focused on security. There are signs that overall levels of organized crime related violence in Mexico finally began to decline in 2012 after several years of growth, though much work remains to be done on issues of public security and criminal justice reform in Mexico, drug consumption in the United States, and the trafficking of weapons, drugs and illicit funds between the two countries. Fortunately, over the past six years an unprecedented level of cooperation between the U.S. and Mexican governments and their many law enforcement and national security agencies has been achieved, leaving a legacy of increased understanding and trust. Efforts must now be made by both sides to consolidate these gains in the context of the new security strategy being defined by the Mexican administration, the change in personnel in Mexico after the election, and the institutional adjustments seen with the strengthening of Mexicos Secretariat of Internal Affairs (Gobernacin) and the organization changes affecting the Secretariat of Public Security.US Mexico security cooperation is close and effectiveStarr, Professor of International Relations and Public Diplomacy at the University of Southern California and Director of the U.S.-Mexico Network, 2012Pamela K., June 28, 2012, the Council of Foreign Relations, What Mexico's Election Means for the Drug War,http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137757/pamela-k-starr/what-mexicos-election-means-for-the-drug-war, 7/10/13U.S.-Mexico security cooperation has been strikingly close and effective during the tenure of Mexican President Felipe Caldern. A country that had traditionally seen the United States as the principal threat to its national security has come to accept its northern neighbor as a partner in the battle against organized crime. Mexican intelligence agencies and naval units now collaborate closely with U.S. security personnel despite the historic reluctance of Mexicos highly nationalistic military establishment to do so. At the same time, the United States, a country that had traditionally seen Mexico as a weak and unreliable counterpart, has learned to see its southern neighbor as an increasingly trusted associate. The United States now willingly shares sensitive intelligence with Mexican officials, playing a critical role in improving the effectiveness of Mexican counternarcotics operations. Just a generation ago, this would have been unthinkable.US and Mexico are already deeply engaged in bilateral co-operation over the drug war, SQ solves US-Mexico relationsSmith, Writer at Stop the Drug War 2013(Phillip, April 30, 2013, Stop the Drug War Mexico to Rein In US Agencies in Drug War http://stopthedrugwar.org/topics/drug_war_issues/source_countries/mexican_drug_war NMS)Mexico has had a historically prickly relationship with US drug law enforcers, but under former Mexican President Felipe Calderon, whose term ended in December, US law enforcement and security cooperation with Mexican agencies expanded dramatically. The DEA, as well as the FBI, CIA, and Border Patrol, had agents working directly with units of the Mexican Federal Police, the army, and the navy. US law enforcement and security agencies worked closely with their Mexican counterparts on a strategy that aimed at arresting or killing top cartel figures, and managed to eliminate dozens of them, but at the same time, prohibition-related violence only mounted, with the death toll somewhere above 70,000 during Calderon's six-year term. The incoming Pena Nieto administration has previously signaled that it wants to shift away from high-profile target strategy to one centered on crime prevention. The Pena Nieto administration also represents a reversion to governance by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), which had famously ruled Mexico as "the perfect dictatorship" for most of the 20th Century before falling to conservative National Action Party (PAN) presidential candidate Vicente Fox in 2000. Like Fox, Calderon ran under the PAN banner and cultivated closer relations with the US, especially on drug enforcement, than the PRI ever had. The PRI's relationships with US drug enforcers could be characterized as one of mutual suspicion and distrust, with occasional bouts of cooperation. As the Washington Post reported, high-ranking incoming PRI officials who met with US DEA, CIA, FBI, and other security representatives in December were stunned and "remained stone-faced as they learned for the first time just how entwined the two countries had become during the battle against narco-traffickers, and how, in the process, the United States had been given near-complete entree to Mexico's territory and the secrets of its citizens." Now, the Pena Nieto government is moving to get a better grip on the assistance it gets from its neighbor to the north. It was in the interest of Mexico to do so, Alcocer said. "The issue before is that there was a lack of coordination because there was not a single entity in the Mexican government that was coordinating all the efforts," he told the AP. "Nobody knew what was going on." The DEA and other agencies declined comment, leaving it the State Department, which said it looks forward to "continued close cooperation" with Mexico. Status quo solves the aff. Economic, security, and democracy talks currently increasing US-Mexico relationsSelee, Vice President for Programs and Senior Advisor to the Mexico Institute at the Wilson International Center for Scholars 2012(Andrew, July 2, 2012 CNN How will PRI's win change the U.S.-Mexico relationship? http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/02/how-will-pris-win-change-the-u-s-mexico-relationship-not-much/ NMS)At the same time, Mexico's expanding economy has allowed it to become the second destination for U.S. exports. States ranging from Texas to Nebraska, Michigan, Tennessee and New Hampshire depend heavily on the trading relationship with Mexico. Indeed, the growing Mexican economy is helping to fuel the expansion of jobs in these states in the midst of an economic crisis at home. Policymakers in both countries have a vested interest in managing these economic ties responsibly, and a new administration in Mexico is sure to make this a priority. There have also been suspicions that the PRI would renew its old ways in dealing with drug traffickers and jettison the growing security cooperation relationship with the United States. This also seems unlikely to happen, and the new government will almost certainly want to deepen cooperation against drug traffickers. In the past, PRI governments "managed" the traffickers to keep them under control, and scandals and allegations of relationships with cartels hound some former and current state PRI governors. However, the new government in Mexico has enormous incentives to tackle the violence that has beset parts of the country, and it cannot do that without extensive intelligence sharing, equipment and training from the U.S. government. We are likely to see cooperation against trafficking organizations deepen in the coming years as the new government tries to get control of areas in the north and along the coasts where criminal groups have established themselves. The main criminal groups are now too big to be dealt with through negotiations and deals as the PRI did in the 1980s and 90s. Inevitably, the new government will have to continue outgoing President Felipe Calderon's policy of confronting these groups, although it may find ways of prioritizing the protection of civilians in the process. Suspicions will, nonetheless, remain in the United States, as in much of Mexican society, about the PRI's honesty and transparency. A party that ruled through corrupt bargains in the past is unlikely to have been born again overnight. Indeed, the allegations of several creative means for vote buying by the PRI during this election worries many that the old ways of doing business are alive and well still in 2012. But even here there is hope. What has changed is not the PRI but Mexican society and the challenges it faces. Mexicans today have become used to a flourishing democracy with competitive elections, freedom of the press, and greater (if still imperfect) transparency in governance. Mexicans expect politicians to be accountable, police to do their jobs well and courts to be independent. They are often disappointed, to be sure, but their expectations have changed dramatically since the late 1990s when Mexico's democratic process began. The PRI is, in the end, a party that wants legitimacy and to show that it can govern in a democratic era. The new government is almost certain to continue reforms to the courts, police and public services as a way of winning public trust. The United States has a substantial interest in seeing Mexico's democracy flourish, its security situation improve and its economy grow. Making sure that we have a secure and prosperous neighbor next door, with solid democratic institutions, will provide a buffer in an often hostile world and produce enormous tangible benefits for U.S. workers who depend on exports to Mexico. Deepening our partnership with Mexico is key to the future of U.S. security and prosperity. There will be legitimate doubts about the new government in Mexico, but there will be even more pressing reasons to move forward in strengthening the relationship with our neighbor next door.

Relations Alt NRG Now 1NCThe US and Mexico have been cooperating on clean energy projects for yearsUPI, a leading provider of critical information to media outlets, businesses, governments and researchers worldwide, 2012(March 29, United Press International, Mexico buoyed by renewable energy boost, aims for solar project, http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2012/03/29/Mexico-buoyed-by-renewable-energy-boost-aims-for-solar-project/UPI-59891333048596/, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)

MEXICO CITY, March 29 (UPI) -- Mexico, buoyed by success in wind energy expansion, is launching a giant solar energy project that sees a U.S. firm's role in its primary development. Soaring crude oil prices have skewed national budgets throughout Central and Latin America and the ongoing row between Argentina and Spain's YPF Repsol is an indication of tension over rising energy costs. Mexico will aim to circumvent the challenge of punishing oil prices by installing high-capacity solar power generation systems, company data indicated. Californian solar systems provider SolFocus, Inc. said Thursday it joined with Mexican land and real estate developer Grupo Musa and U.S. energy developer Synergy Technologies LLC to work on a landmark solar power plant in Baja California, near Tecate, Mexico. The plant is planned to have a 450-megawatt capacity but will be built in 50-megawatt phases. Construction on the first phase will begin this year and that part of the plant will be operational next year. The plant will use the SolFocus Concentrator Photovoltaic equipment, but will be owned and operated by SolMex Energy S.A. de C.V., a new Grupo Musa and Synergy Technologies company focused on solar energy in Mexico. Officials said Mexico's solar energy aims met with the objectives of both Mexican and U.S. energy planners. "The project is in direct alignment with the Mexico and U.S. bilateral clean energy agenda," said David Munoz, director general of the Baja California State Commission of Energy. "The countries share a common goal of achieving strong economic growth and energy security while addressing climate change and increasing the reliability of energy infrastructure," Munoz said. "Mexico has been successful with wind energy, and now this large solar project will support our energy infrastructure and economic development efforts in the very near future," he said.

Relations Alt NRG Now 2NC

The US and Mexico joined a joint agreement to facilitate an interconnected grid with clean energy technologiesENS, , 2012(April 3, Environmental News Service, U.S., Canada, Mexico Vow Continental Energy Grid, http://ens-newswire.com/2012/04/03/u-s-canada-mexico-vow-continental-energy-grid/, accessed 7/6/13, CBC)

WASHINGTON, DC, April 2, 2012 (ENS) The leaders of the United States, Mexico, and Canada today pledged to develop continental energy, including electricity generation and interconnection across national borders and welcomed increasing North American energy trade. Meeting in Washington, U.S. President Barack Obama, Canadas President Stephen Harper and Mexicos President Felipe Calderon committed their governments to enhance their collective energy security, to facilitate seamless energy flows on the interconnected grid and to promote trade and investment in clean energy technologies. They will cooperate in expanding cooperation to create clean energy jobs and combat climate change, the leaders said in a joint statement. Enhanced electricity interconnection in the Americas would advance the goals of the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas to reduce energy poverty and increase the use of renewable sources of energy, the three leaders said.

Cooperation on renewable energy is highDonnelly, associate with the Mexico Institute at the Woodrow Wilson Center, 2010(Robert, June 28, New Security Beat, U.S.-Mexico Cooperation on Renewable Energy: Building a Green Agenda, http://www.newsecuritybeat.org/2010/06/u-s-mexico-cooperation-on-renewable-energy-building-a-green-agenda/#.UdnKbjs3u8B, accessed 7/7/13, CBC)A U.S.-Mexico taskforce on renewables was recently formedan announcement timed to coincide with President Felipe Calderons April 2010 state visit to Washingtonand there has been high-level engagement on the issue by both administrations. Collaboration between Mexico and U.S. government agencies through the Mexico Renewable Energy Program has enabled richer development of Mexicos renewable resources while promoting the electrification and economic development of parts of rural Mexico.US and Mexico are already engaged in a tri-pronged approach to increasing relationsShoichet and Rodriguez, Writer and editor for CNN Digital, Associate Editor at The Huffington Post Latino Voices 2013 (Cathernine and Cindy. May 1, 2013, CNN Key issues on Obama's Mexico trip: Trade, immigration and drug war http://edition.cnn.com/2013/05/01/world/americas/mexico-obama-visit NMS)1. Trade and economic ties The situation: The United States is Mexico's largest trading partner, and Mexico is America's third-largest trade partner, after China and Canada. Imports and exports between the two countries totaled nearly $500 billion last year. Officials on both sides of the border have said they want economic relations to be a focal point during Obama's visit. Obama's trip comes as Pea Nieto's government has said it's on the verge of pursuing reforms in the country's state-run oil company -- a politically divisive issue in Mexico and something U.S. and global investors are watching closely. Obama's take: "We spend so much time on security issues between the United States and Mexico that sometimes I think we forget this is a massive trading partner, responsible for huge amounts of commerce and huge numbers of jobs on both sides of the border," Obama told reporters on Tuesday. "We want to see how we can deepen that, how we can improve that, and maintain that economic dialogue over a long period of time." Pea Nieto's take: "We should reconsider greater integration of North America to achieve a region that is more competitive and capable of creating more jobs," Pea Nieto told Obama during a meeting at the White House in November. Public opinion: Most Mexicans think the deep economic ties between the two countries are good for Mexico, according to survey results released this week by the Pew Research Center. But when the 1,000 people surveyed in March were asked about the influence the United States currently has on economic conditions in Mexico, views were mixed. One-third of Mexicans say the United States is having a positive impact on national economic conditions in Mexico, while 28% think the United States is having a negative impact. 2. Immigration The situation: The United States and Mexico are bound by a border which has made for a dysfunctional relationship over the years, especially when it comes to immigration. However, both governments have the issue high on their list of priorities. In the United States, a bipartisan group of senators have proposed an immigration reform bill, with U.S.-Mexico border security at its foundation. There are more than 11 million Mexicans living in the United States, including the 6 million estimated to be living there illegally as of 2010. But the migration rate from Mexico fell to zero in 2012, meaning the number of Mexicans coming to the United States -- and those going the other way -- was virtually identical. Obama's take: "We've got to have more effective border security; although it should build on the great improvements that have been made on border security over the last four or five years," Obama said in a news conference this week. "We should make the legal immigration system work more effectively so that the waits are not as burdensome, the bureaucracy is not as complicated, so we continue to attract the best and the brightest from around the world to our shores in a legal fashion." President Enrique Pea Nieto and President Barack Obama meet in 2012. Pea Nieto's take: "We fully support your proposal for this migration reform," Pea Nieto told Obama in November. "More than demanding what you should do or shouldn't do, we do want to tell you that we want to contribute. We really want to participate with you. We want to contribute toward the accomplishment, so that of course we can participate in the betterment and the well-being of so many millions of people who live in your country." Public opinion: According to the Pew Research Center, Mexicans are divided on whether this is good or bad for their country; 44% say it's good for Mexico that many of its citizens live in the United States, and an equal share say this is bad for Mexico. And, perhaps the most surprising find from the study said that 61% of Mexicans would not move to the United States even if they had the means to do so. However, 35% say they would move to the United States if they could, including 20% who say they would emigrate without authorization. A little less than a third of the Mexicans questioned (30%) say they personally know someone who went to the United States but returned to Mexico because the person couldn't find work, according to the Pew Research Center. About a quarter (27%) know someone who has been deported or detained by the U.S. government for immigration reasons in the last 12 months. 3. Security and the drug war The situation: The battle against drug cartels has played a dominant role in U.S.-Mexican relations in recent years. Officials on both sides of the border have said that drugs traveling north from Mexico to consumers in the United States and weapons traveling south from the United States to cartels in Mexico are an increasingly deadly combination. High-profile cartel takedowns were a hallmark of former President Felipe Calderon's tenure. Pea Nieto has vowed to take a different approach, focusing more on education problems and social inequality that he says fuel drug violence. The details of his policies are still coming into focus, and analysts say his government has deliberately tried to shift drug violence out of the spotlight. Critics have expressed concerns that Pea Nieto's government will turn a blind eye to cartels or negotiate with them -- something he repeatedly denied on the campaign trail last year. On Tuesday -- two days before Obama's arrival -- his government arrested the father-in-law of Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, head of Mexico's Sinaloa cartel and one of the country's most-wanted drug lords. While both Obama and Pea Nieto have said they're committed to working together on security issues, it's unclear whether the U.S. role will change as Mexico's government shifts its strategy. Obama's take: The U.S. president has repeatedly said the United States will work to reduce demand for drugs and to stop the illegal flow of weapons to Mexico. But there's one approach he says isn't on the table -- drug legalization

Relations Relations Inevitable 1NCUS- Mexico relations inevitableRopp, Latin American Politics and Society, 2011Steve C., Autumn 2011, Distributed byWileyon behalf of theCenter for Latin American Studies at the University of Miami, Inevitable Partnership: Understanding Mexico-U.S. Relations, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3177152, 7/10/13

In the introduction, he suggests that several recent developments and trends have made partnership between the United States and Mexico inevitable. First, there is the easy movement of peoples and their associated cultures (not to mention economic goods) across a common two-thousand-mile border. From a neofunctional theoretical perspective, these flows can be seen as creating incen- tives for leaders of the two respective states to work more closely and cooperatively. Indeed, Smith predicts that the eventual result will be a degree of institutionalized friendship and cooperation that can be referred to as a partnership. Mexico's domestic changes are a second contributing factor. Smith views Mexico's fundamental political, social, and economic restructuring over the past several decades as greatly increasing the probability of continuing improvement in interstate relations. Smith's underlying premise seems to be one of system convergence. Just as students of Soviet politics once argued that structural changes in the Soviet political and economic system would render it more like the United States and thus less of an adversary, Smith argues that changes in Mexico's political economy will inevitably produce a durable partnership.

Relations Relations Inevitable 2NC

NAFTA made US-Mexico relations inevitable

Farnsworth, Vice President of the Council of the Americas since early 2003 and an expert on hemispheric affairs and U.S. foreign and trade policy, 2012 Eric, 12-6-12, Huffington Post, What should the top priority for US-Mexico Relations, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-farnsworth/top-priority-us-mexico_b_2245025.html, 7-6-13 KB

On Dec. 1, Enrique Pea Nieto was inaugurated as Mexico's president. With a new leader taking the reins in Mexico and Barack Obama's reelection the United States, what should the two leaders focus on in terms of bilateral ties? Americas Society/Council of the Americas asked nine prominent experts to share what they consider top priorities. Responses ranged from expanding trade through the Trans-Pacific Partnership to U.S. immigration reform. My response was as follows: "Should be" and "will be" have frequently been two very different things in the U.S.-Mexico bilateral relationship. The coming year offers the opportunity for a new approach. For the4ir own domestic purposes and in the wake of their respective elections, the United States should quickly tackle immigration reform while Mexico should liberalize its energy sector. In terms of the bilateral relationship, however, both governments (including their legislatures) should recognize the nature of economic integration that has occurred since NAFTA, making our two economies virtually inseparable, along with Canada, as a joint production platform. This new reality should both be celebrated and also enhanced. Joint approaches within the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations can be a means to achieve NAFTA 2.0. If coupled with a North American approach to potential trade negotiations with the EU, North American economic integration can advance to a point unthinkable even a few short years ago. With continued economic and commercial pressure from China, India, and elsewhere, this approach will support the long-term economic well-being of the United States and North America more broadly. A joint economic agenda is now more achievable than before. The Hispanic community in the United States has found its voice politically, manufacturing is returning to the United States due to lower prices for natural gas, and, despite ongoing concerns about violence and the drugs trade, Mexico is doing well enough economically to entice investors back from China. Now is perhaps the best opportunity in recent memory to intensify economic collaboration. It should be the top bilateral priority. US/Mexico relations are resilient- Drug war provesClinton, US Secretary of State, 2010(Hillary, Diplomats speak after U.S.-Mexico high level consultation group meeting, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Office of the Spokesman, March 23, 2010, http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2010/03/138963.htm)

Well, good afternoon. And let me begin by thanking the Foreign Secretary and the Government of Mexico for hosting these very important discussions today. We have had the opportunity to delve into many areas of common concern that lie at the heart of the Merida Initiative and our shared responsibility to combat and defeat organized transnational crime. We're looking forward to continuing this conversation in the weeks and months ahead. We will be seeing President Calderon later today because the United States strongly supports his courageous campaign against violent criminal organizations on behalf of the Mexican people. And we honor the service and sacrifice of Mexico's men and women in uniform in the military and in the police forces. The relationship between our two nations is so comprehensive and complex and deep and broad. It is not bound by borders or bureaucratic divisions. And what we are focused on today is a part of that relationship, but a truly significant part. We are working in our two governments together to solve the problem posed by the criminal cartels that stalk the streets of your cities and ours, that kill and injure innocent people, and spread a reign of terror and intimidation, and use the trafficking of drugs to addict people, the trafficking of persons to degrade them, and who are truly an insult and a rebuke to the common values that our two nations share. It's an honor to be joined here in Mexico by a very significant delegation from the Obama Administration. Defense Secretary Gates, Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Mullen, Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair, Deputy National Security Advisor John Brennan, Acting Deputy Attorney General Grindler, Acting Administrator of the DEA Michele Leonhart, Director of the Office of Foreign Assets in the Treasury Department Adam Szubin, Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy Gil Kerlikowske, Ambassador Pascual, and a wide range of senior officials, all of whom are committed to this unique partnership that we are exhibiting today. Our broad engagement allows us to come at these problems from many different angles, to devise cross-cutting solutions, to ensure that our two governments are working hand-in-hand, not just at the ministerial level but all the way down our bureaucracies.

Relations Relation Collapse Inevitable 1NCHistory proves relations collapse inevitable Purcell, Managing Director of the Council of the Americas Vice President of the Americas Society, editor and co-author of EUROPE AND LATIN AMERICA IN THE WORLD ECONOMY and JAPAN AND LATIN AMERICA IN THE NEW GLOBAL ORDER, 97 Susan, The Changing Nature of US-Mexican Relations, page 137, KB

The past few decades have seen profound changes in the bilateral relationship between the United States and Mexico. The interests of the two countries, which often diverged during the Cold War years, increasingly began to converge following collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989. With this convergence, bilateral relations seemed to enter a more cooperative stage. The signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993 was deemed a fitting symbol of the new, mutually beneficial relationship between the two countries. It was not long, however, before familiar conflicts over traditional issues - such as immigration, drugs and trade - began to resurface. The December 1994 devaluation of the peso, followed shortly thereafter by the heating up of the US presidential campaign, shifted the focus of the bilateral relationship away from the much anticipated benefits of the NAFTA to the costs of that agreement. In fact, by increasing the interdependence between the United States and Mexico, NAFTA served to blur even further the distinction between foreign and domestic issues, which had already been weakening for some time. As a result, after NAFTA, it became increasingly difficult to delink the various bilateral issues from each other. This made the solution of formerly manageable problems more intractable. It is not clear whether the increased, and growing, economic interdependence between the United States and Mexico will continue to magnify conflicts between them by automatically transforming domestic conflicts into bilateral ones and vice versa. There is reason to believe that the current situation may be transitional as both the United States and Mexico adjust to, and come to terms with, the new global economy and the ever-increasing links between the two countries. There is even some evidence that, on balance, NAFTA will prove more of a solution for, than a source of, bilateral friction and tensions. Much, of course, will depend on how the various actors on both sides of the border choose to manage their relations in this difficult period. The 2,000 mile shared border between the United States and Mexico has always made for a "special relationship" between the two countries. Each country's concept of the kind of special treatment it wanted from the other, however, was quite different. As a superpower with global security concerns, the United States wanted Mexico to be a stable, reliable ally against hostile powers interested in expanding their influence in Washington's "backyard." Mexico, in contrast, believed that a special relationship with the rich and powerful United States should provide it with economic advantages that would help it to transform itself from a developing to a developed country. Not surprisingly, each country ended up by disappointing the other. Mexico came to look upon the border shared with the United States more as a threat than as an opportunity. This was not surprising, given the history of US-Mexico relations. Every Mexican child knew that the United States had "taken" half of Mexico's territory during the 19th century while, during the 20th century, outright military intervention had been replaced by less tangible forms of intervention or interference. New technologies, such as television, combined with the growing importance of US multinational corporations in Mexico's economy, had fed Mexican politicians, and intellectuals in particular, to focus their attention instead on the threats these posed to Mexico's culture, identity, and sovereignty.Relations No Internal Heg 1NCRelations not keymilitary spending Perlo-freeman, a senior researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme, 10 (Sam, June 3rd 2010, Global Issues, World Military Spending, http://www.globalissues.org/print/article/75 DM, accessed 7/10/13, JA)However, the fact that military expenditure is continuing to increase even as other areas are cut suggests a clear strategic choice:the fundamental goal of ensuring continued US dominance across the spectrum of military capabilities, for both conventional and asymmetric warfare, has not changed.

Relations No Internal Heg 2NCRelations not key to US heg-- military leaders Mullen, admiral of the U.S. navy and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. The National Military Strategy of the United States of America, Joint chiefs of staff, 2011 (M.G., 2/8/11, United States Air Force at Air Univeristy, Leadership, Bravery and Justice: the United States Military, http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/nms/nms.pdf DM, accessed 7/10/13, JA)Defeat Aggression: The core task of our Armed Forces remains to defend our Nation and win its wars. To do so, we must provide capabilities to defeat adversary aggression. Military force, at times, may be necessary to defend our Nation and allies or to preserve broader peace and security. Seeking to adhere to international standards, the United States will use military force in concert with allies and partners whenever possible, while reserving the right to act alone if necessary. Across a wide range of contingencies, military leaders will provide our Nations leadership with options of how the military can help achieve the Nations objectives.

Relations No Internal Drug 1NCMexico is not an important ally with the US- not cooperating on the drug warNoriega, Ambassador to the Organization of American States from 2001-2003 and Assistant Secretary of State from 2003-2005. He is a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and managing director of Vision Americas LLC, which represents U.S. and foreign clients, and contributes to www.interamericansecuritywatch.com, 2011(Roger, August 30, 2011, Fox News, Is Mexico Our Ally or Our Enemy?, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/30/is-mexico-our-ally-or-our-enemy/, accessed 7/10/13, JA)

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/30/is-mexico-our-ally-or-our-enemy/#ixzz2YhOO1HZbFormer Mexican president Vicente Foxs dramatic declaration last Friday that his nation should seek a truce with vicious narco-trafficking gangs draws attention to a critical issue as Mexicans consider what kind of country they want to leave their children. Foxs suggestion also should serve as a wake-up call to our country that we should not take for granted the extraordinary sacrifice of Mexicans who are fighting the same transnational crime syndicates that threaten U.S. security and well-being. His provocative words may also ensure that Mexicos 2012 presidential campaign will include a healthy debate on whether its citizens are committed to building a modern, law-abiding society or prefer to tolerate drug corruption that stunts its economic and political growth. Vicente Fox is no radical. He is the charismatic democrat who led his center-right National Action Party (PAN) to a historic victory in 2000, ousting the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) that had held power for over 70 years. Indeed, at the outset of his mandate, Fox battled the powerful narcotrafficking syndicates that control the transit of cocaine and other illegal drugs through Mexican territory to insatiable consumers in the United States. However, he backed off quickly as he realized that his security forces could not go toe-to-toe with the bloodthirsty criminals.

Relations No Internal Crime 1NCUS Latin American relations cant solve for organize