NDAA DA

NEGATIVE
 1nc
The NDAA will pass now---it includes COVID response
Ebner 7-9-2020, JD, analyst @ Stinson LLP (Susan, “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 Passes Out of Committee
for Consideration by Full Senate,” JD Supra, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/national-defense-authorization-act-for-85201/)//BB

Preparing the defense budget is not an easy thing. Typically, the goal is to have the bills passed by the House and
Senate, and then to go into conference to resolve differences and develop a single bill that can pass
through both houses of Congress before the end of the current fiscal year and the start of the new one. It appears, at least for now , that
efforts to accomplish this budgetary requirement are in process . Both the House and Senate are working
on their versions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (NDAA). The House version is in committee markup. The
Senate version has been rolled out of committee and is being considered by the full Senate. Below are some key points regarding
the government contracting aspects of the current Senate bill: Assessments of Programs and Capabilities The proposed NDAA would require the Department of Defense (DoD) to conduct a
number of assessments of DoD programs. These include Sec. 111, Integrated Air and Missile Defense Assessment, requiring a targeted assessment and analysis to counter identified current and
emerging threats to “cruise, hypersonic, and ballistic missiles,” unmanned aerial systems, rockets, and indirect fire. In addition, Sec. 802 seeks an assessment of the National Security Innovation
base. Perhaps in response to the current COVID-19 environment, Sec. 231 provides for “an assessment and direct comparison of capabilities in emerging biotechnologies for national security
purposes, including material, manufacturing, and health, between the capabilities of the United States and the capabilities of adversaries of the United States” and recommendations to improve
and accelerate the U.S. capabilities. Other assessments covered by the bill relate to military personnel, management, end strength, and military justice and related matters. The bill also seeks
analysis of DoD infrastructure, facilities and assets that could be affected by “permafrost thaw” (Sec. 351) and extreme weather (Sec. 354). Research and Development The bill contains
numerous research and development programs. In connection with applying artificial intelligence (AI) to the National Defense Strategy, Sec. 213 asks DoD to identify five test cases for
prototyping the use of AI enabled systems to improve management of enterprise acquisition, personnel, audit, financial management or other management functions. Sec. 214 and following seek
to enhance innovation by: extending DoD laboratories’ pilot program authority; establishing programs and agreements on quantum computing; establishing R&D programs for DoD science and
technology reinvention laboratories and institutions of higher education; establishing water sustainment technology; and expediting the maturation and fielding of hypersonic technologies.
Supply Chain Risk Assessment and Management Supply chain risk lies at the heart of a number of initiatives proposed in the Senate version of the NDAA FY ’21. Sec. 801 includes policy
recommendations for implementing the Executive Order 13806, Assessing and Strengthening the Manufacturing and Defense Industrial Base and Supply Chain Resiliency. Sec. 803 also seeks to
improve the national technology and industrial base by identifying specific technologies, companies, laboratories, and factories, and factories of or located in the U.S. or non-U.S. members.
Notably the section provides for the National Technology and Industrial Base Regulatory Council to address issues with supply chain security and integrity throughout the development,
marketing, sale and use processes: “(A) address and review issues related to industrial security, supply chain security, cybersecurity, regulating foreign direct investment and foreign ownership,
control and influence mitigation, market research, technology assessment, and research cooperation within public and private research and development organizations and universities, technology
and export control measures, acquisition processes and oversight, and management best practices; and (B) establish a mechanism for national technology and industrial base members to raise
disputes that arise within the national technology and industrial base at a government-to-government level.” Sec. 804 also addresses supply chain risk assessment and management. It would
modify the framework for modernizing acquisition processes to ensure the integrity of the defense industrial base (DIB) by managing supply chain risk. The proposed provision would seek an
assessment of DIB policies, programs, procedures, limitations and acquisition guidance to manage supply chain risks. Programs and policies identified in this section for assessment include
Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR), Title III Defense Production Act (DPA), the Trusted Capital Marketplace Program, the Berry Amendment and others. Sec. 805 calls for the
development of a methodology for actual and continuing assessment of industrial base capabilities and capacity of the U.S. versus foreign adversaries technological and industrial bases – (1)
determining the competitive advantages sought by foreign adversaries with regard to regulation, raw materials, educational capacity, labor and capital accessibility; as well as (2) evaluating the
Sec. 806 would have DoD review and analyze the materials ,
competitive strengths and weaknesses of U.S. industry versus foreign adversaries.

processes and technology sectors of the DIB to address sourcing and industrial capacity, examining (1)
restrictive procurement processes , such as buying from the U.S. “national technology and industrial base ,” which as
defined in 10 U.S.C. § 2500(1) includes “the persons and organizations that are engaged in research, development, production, integration, services, or information technology activities
conducted within the United States, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Australia and Canada;” (2) buying from suppliers in other allied nations, (3) buying from other
suppliers; (4) actions to increase investment to expand capacity, diversify supply sources, develop alternative approaches through R&D or procurement; versus (5) taking no actions,
the foregoing analysis would be prioritized by looking at
implementing no restrictions, or refraining from additional investment. Not surprisingly ,

(a) goods and services covered under existing restrictions where Domestic Nonavailability Determinations (DNADs) have been issued finding that there was a lack of the

particular good in sufficient quantities and of the quality required from a U.S. source ; (b) critical
technologies identified in the National Defense Strategy; (c) DIB technologies and sectors; (d) microelectronics, printed circuit boards and other
electronics components; (e) pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and Personal Protective Equipment ( PPE ); (f) rare earth
materials, (g) synthetic graphite, and (h) coal-based rayon carbon fibers. On the manufacturing side of supply chain risk, Sec. 807 Microelectronics Manufacturing Strategy would bring back to
the U.S. the foundry and other industrial capabilities needed for the domestic manufacture of state-of-the-art integrated circuits.

New CJR measures get bogged down in partisanship and inertia

Binder 6-8-2020, PhD, professor of political science at George Washington University and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution
(Sarah, “Congress can’t easily pass police reforms,” News Times, https://www.newstimes.com/opinion/article/Congress-can-t-easily-pass-police-
reforms-15321834.php)//BB

Widespread national outrage over the brutal death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police has renewed
public demand for Congress to address police misconduct and remedy racial injustice in the United States. New polls
show strong bipartisan support for police reform and sympathy for nonviolent protesters. What’s more, there are green shoots of bipartisanship
for some policing reforms, such as weakening the legal shield that protects police accused of misconduct and curtailing transfers of excess
military equipment to local police forces. Still, reformers on Capitol Hill face a tough road , especially if and when media
attention to the protests wanes. Differences between and within the parties — coupled with the
underrepresentation of blacks in the Senate — raise barriers to legislative action. Even symbolic
measures that express outrage over Floyd’s death face a heavy slog . Media and public attention will probably wane
The news media have increasingly covered episodes of police misconduct in recent years. But even intense media focus — and public interest —
inevitably fades. Decades ago, economist Anthony Downs called this the “issue attention cycle”: A startling event — like police killing Michael
Brown, Eric Garner or George Floyd — provokes a surge in media attention and public demand for action. But when the difficulty of reform
becomes clear, reporters move on to the next big crisis and public interest wanes. Social issues that don’t directly harm most people are especially
prone to the cycle. That helps explain why coverage of past episodes of police misconduct against racial minorities usually dwindles and
Congress fails to act. True, a Republican-led Congress and President Donald Trump in 2018 enacted significant criminal justice reform that
addressed some racial disparities in sentencing, but that’s probably because conservatives — not street protesters — pushed Republicans to act.
The president could snuff out flickers of bipartisanship House Democrats are likely to move quickly this month; the Republican Senate, probably
not. The 53-member Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) is working (so far largely remotely, given the coronavirus pandemic) on dozens of
measures to address police misconduct, racial inequities in local policing and the deep roots of racial discrimination. Democratic leaders have yet
to decide how they will advance the measures. One option would package the reforms into a single “messaging” bill to signal Democrats’
commitment to addressing these issues. Alternatively, leaders could bring a series of narrower bills to the floor, a tactic that would both force
Republicans to go on record multiple times for or against each reform but also give any wavering swing-district Democrats a chance to break
with more liberal colleagues. But opposition from Trump would surely compel House Republicans to oppose the
Democrats’ measures, likely leaving the bills dead on arrival in the GOP-led Senate . True, there are glimmers of
GOP support for some measures, notably Sen. Tim Scott’s, R-S.C., push to create and fund a national registry of police misconduct. But absent
support from the president, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is less likely to put issues of police and race
on the Senate floor, especially if measures divide Republicans into rival camps. And although some Republicans rebuked the president for
his administration’s use of force against peaceful protesters to clear space for a photo op, few GOP senators appear eager to legislate. Nor is there
currently much electoral pressure on the House or Senate Republican conferences to act: One-quarter of GOP voters report that race relations will
be a major factor in their vote this fall (compared with half of Democrats and a third of independents). Black voices are diminished in the Senate
Racial disparities between the two chambers also raise obstacles. House lawmakers formed the CBC in 1971 with just 13 members. Today, the
racial makeup of the House reflects the proportion of blacks in the United States — roughly 13 percent. Lawmakers’ race and ethnicity matters in
how members represent their constituents, as evidenced by the CBC’s swift legislative efforts to address issues raised by the killing of Floyd and
other victims of police brutality. Not so in the Senate. Studies of Senate malapportionment typically emphasize the overrepresentation of rural
interests. And given the whiteness of rural states, black interests are decidedly unrepresented in the Senate. Just one Republican and two
Democrats are black. Racial disparities in the Senate make it less likely that issues addressing racial inequities
will make it onto the Senate’s agenda, particularly when Republicans control the chamber.

That eats up valuable floor time that’s needed for the NDAA
Raju & Foran 6-16-2020 (Manu Raju and Clare Foran, CNN reporters Key Senate Republican pushes back on GOP leaders: 'Bad decision'
to wait a month on police reform, CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/policing-reform-congress-latest/index.html)//BB

Senior Senate Republicans signaled on Monday that the chamber may have to wait at least a month to take up
policing overhaul legislation -- a timeline that sparked criticism from Tim Scott, the GOP senator leading the effort amid
demands across the country for urgent action in the wake of episodes of police brutality. GOP leaders suggested that there is little
time for the Senate to take up the bill, given that other major priorities -- such as an annual defense bill --
are bound to eat up precious floor time and since the policing bill has yet to be officially introduced, but they indicated after
meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell that they might still seek a vote before the July 4 holiday.

Effective federal response solves a devastating 2nd wave---there’s a small window to act
McIntire 6/2/20 Mary Ellen McIntire is a Staff Writer for Roll Call, Democratic govenors seek federal COVID-19 testing coordination,
June 2, 2020, https://www.rollcall.com/2020/06/02/democratic-govenors-seek-federal-covid-19-testing-coordination/

Governors told a House subcommittee Tuesday they need more predictability about how the federal government plans to
help provide testing supplies as they reopen their states while trying to minimize another spike of COVID-19 infections. The
testimony of a Republican and two Democratic governors came as the nation’s attention shifted this week from the pandemic, which has killed more than 100,000
Americans, to protests that broke out in cities nationwide following the death of George Floyd while in police custody in Minnesota. Still, the threat of the virus
remains as state officials decide how and when to lift additional restrictions and adjust to life with the virus that causes COVID-19. Some experts have raised concerns
that the protests could add to the number of cases and could further exacerbate how the virus has greatly affected African Americans. Democratic governors Jared
Polis of Colorado and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan both told the Energy and Commerce Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee that more transparency is
needed on how the federal government is providing testing materials for states, such as reagents and swabs that have at times been in short supply. “The most
important things that we can do better with on the federal side is transparency and really knowing what we’re going to get when,” Polis said. If states don’t have that
information, they can order their own materials and end up with too much of some items and net enough of others, he said. “If we’re going to plan in coordination
with our federal partners, we need to make sure we have all the cards on the table,” he said. “Everybody knows exactly what we’re going to get when and what we’re
not going to get when. And then the states try to fill in the holes.” Whitmer said Michigan has the capacity to conduct 25,000 COVID-19 tests per day, but the state
hasn’t been able to achieve that because it hasn’t been able to count on the related supplies needed to conduct those tests. “If supplies could be allocated more quickly
and if we had a detailed breakdown of what was actually in the shipment, we could mobilize and ensure that we make the best use of these supplies and hit our
capacity,” she said. Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, a Republican, told the panel that every governor acknowledged the supply chain was “weak” at the outset of
the pandemic, but said it has since gotten stronger. “I have confidence in that supply chain that has been built up, both in the private sector and through CDC,”
Hutchinson said, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Democratic governors' requests echo Democratic lawmakers who criticized the
Trump administration for the testing strategy the Department of Health and Human Services released last month as not being comprehensive enough. The three
governors each took different approaches to stopping the spread of the virus in their states. Hutchinson defended his decision not to issue a statewide shutdown order,
while Polis was one of the first governors to lift restrictions in Colorado and Whitmer lifted Michigan’s stay-at-home order later on Monday. They agreed that
continuing to test people in their states and do contact tracing to identify the contacts of infected people would be critical as states
further lift restrictions and try to prevent a second wave . Contact tracing, specifically, presents its own set of challenges, they said.
Hutchinson said states would have to train people to handle the sensitive nature of calling people and asking who they’ve been in contact with and telling people they
need to quarantine or self-isolate. “I think as time goes on, you’re going to get more resistance to that,” he said. “That’s a huge hit on people's lives and they’re going
to have some pushback on that.” Several lawmakers and governors also raised concerns about how a second wave of COVID-19 in the fall or winter could exacerbate
the flu season later this year. “It’s my belief that we
have a very small window to learn from our past missteps that you all have outlined
regarding supplies and testing and PPE and prepare for this second wave,” said Rep. Ann McLane Kuster, D-N.H., adding
that the nation will need to ramp up the availability of a flu vaccine and prepare for greater demands on health care providers.

A second wave will kill millions and mutations could cause extinction
Duzgun 5/5/20 Eren Duzgun teaches Historical Sociology and International Relations at Leiden University, Netherlands. Capitalism,
Coronavirus and the Road to Extinction, https://socialistproject.ca/2020/04/capitalism-coronavirus-and-road-to-extinction/

The Godzilla-like image of the virus Covid-19

has been haunting the world. Not only has the virus unraveled nightmarish
possibilities leading to the extinction of millions of people , but it has also served as a quintessential case revealing the
structural contradictions of and existential threats posed by capitalism on a global scale. Several researchers agree that Covid-19 is quite an
unprecedented virus. Unlike seasonal influenza, Covid-19 is ten times deadlier, and we have yet to develop a medical remedy or herd immunity
to slow it down; the best estimates for the development of a vaccine are at least three to six months away. The virus’s mortality rate seems much
lower than earlier pandemics (such as Ebola [1994], Avian flu [1997], SARS [2002], MERS [2012]); yet the manner in which Covid-19 spreads,
i.e., its mode of infectivity, seems radically different. Unlike earlier pandemics, the virus has proved infectious even before carriers display any
symptoms, which renders it often undetectable during the 14-day incubation period. Facts on the Ground Given that we are unable to detect or
cure it, we are completely helpless against the virus’s global march. Emergency measures such as compulsory quarantines, social-distancing and
improved hygiene standards may temporarily slow down the virus’s pace, yet once these measures begin to be relaxed – as they surely will be – it
is very likely that the
virus will be at our door again . This grim picture gets even more complicated by the fact that the virus is
likely to go through several mutations. The virus may increase its adaptability to new climatic and generational
circumstances, hence targeting not only the elderly, but a broader age group even when summer arrives in the northern
hemisphere. Covid-19 is not the first ‘modern’ pathogen with global consequences. The Spanish Flu (1918), for example, was sweeping in terms
of its geographical span as well as devastating in terms of its death toll. As Mike Davis notes, the Spanish flu broke out at a time when billions
were still in the process of being (forcibly) incorporated into the capitalist world market. The expansion of markets eliminated the very basis of
safety-first agriculture, undermining local reciprocities and solidarities that traditionally provided welfare to the poor during crises. Indeed, what
prepared the ground for its outbreak and exacerbated the impact of this early 20th century pathogen was the deterioration of nutritional standards
under market imperatives as well as the exigencies and scarcities caused by the Great War. Covid-19, by contrast, has begun its journey and taken
its biggest toll thus far in the most advanced and affluent parts of the world. This is to say, the contagion is no longer limited to the persistently
undernourished, underdeveloped, and war-torn parts of the world; its impact is no longer restricted to a distant wet market or a third world
country alone. Instead, it has emerged and expanded in the very heart of the capitalist world order at a time when capitalism has not only been
already firmly established across the globe but has been testing the eco-biological limits of the entire planet. Should things remain the same,
Covid-19 and its future cousins are likely to claim the lives of not just ‘some’ people as they did in the past, but
of humanity as a whole . In this sense, perhaps for the first time in modern history, the biological blitzkrieg activated by the
coronavirus has thrown into sharp relief the immediately existential and undeniably global contradictions and consequences generated by
capitalism.
 U – TOA
The NDAA vote is top of the agenda---it’s coming soon after the recess
Lesniewski 7-2-2020 (Niels, “Senators leave for first recess since Memorial Day,” Roll Call,
https://www.rollcall.com/2020/07/02/senators-leave-for-first-recess-since-memorial-day/)//BB

Senators on Thursday left Capitol Hill for their first recess since before Memorial Day . Even as the House and
much of official Washington has had limited operations because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Senate followed through on a five-week work
period in June. There will now be a two-week recess , which had been planned in part because of the original schedule for the
Democratic National Convention. Senators are expected back at the Capitol on Monday, July 20 . The chamber will only
convene for brief pro-forma sessions between now and then. Those short sessions meet the constitutional requirement for the Senate to convene
and will block President Donald Trump from making recess appointments. When the Senate returns, the first order of business
will be finishing up confirmation of the president’s choice of Russell Vought to be the Senate-confirmed director of the Office of
Management and Budget. Vought is the current acting director. The Senate's last roll call vote was on Senate Majority
Leader Motch McConnell's motion to limit debate on the Vought confirmation, which prevailed 47-44.
Once Vought is confirmed, it will be back to work on the fiscal 2021 defense authorization bill. “This
legislation has global reach. But as all my colleagues know, the NDAA is also a profoundly local bill for communities in all 50 states,”
McConnell said Thursday before highlighting provisions that would benefit his home commonwealth of Kentucky. The Senate on Thursday
adopted by unanimous consent a manager's package of amendments to that Pentagon policy bill, and provided for floor consideration of six
additional amendments. Armed Services Chairman James M. Inhofe, R-Okla., said the vote on final passage was
expected when the Senate returns from the recess . McConnell filed cloture to limit debate on both
Inhofe’s substitute amendment and the underling defense measure Thursday, which sets up the votes when senators
return .

The NDAA debate is soon, and it takes floor time

Carney 6-24 – reporter at The Hill (Jordain, "Senate pivots to defense bill after police reform setback," TheHill,
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/504379-senate-pivots-to-defense-bill-after-police-reform-setback, 6-24-2020)// gcd

The Senate is turning its attention to a mammoth defense policy bill after a GOP policing reform bill failed to
overcome a key test vote. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) teed up the National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) setting up an initial procedural vote as soon as Friday, unless senators agree
to move it up. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the No. 2 Senate Republican, told reporters that the chamber would be on the defense
bill "for the balance of this week and into next week." The Senate is scheduled to leave Washington, D.C. for a two-week
break starting July 3, leaving open the possibility that the Senate could have to finish its work on the defense
legislation after it returns to Washington in mid-July . It typically takes the Senate roughly two weeks to
debate and pass the NDAA. McConnell brought up the defense bill after Democrats blocked a GOP
police reform bill from advancing. Though he used a procedural tactic that could allow him to force a second vote on police reform he has not
indicated that he will try again before the July 4 recess. The defense bill passed out of the Armed Services Committee in a 25-2 earlier this month.

It's next up
Bender 6-25-2020 (Bryan, “Senate takes up NDAA today,” Politico, https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-
defense/2020/06/25/senate-takes-up-ndaa-today-788771)//BB

— The Senate begins consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act today , with a fight building over
Confederate names. — President Donald Trump says he will “probably” shift thousands of troops from Germany to Poland as his foreign friends
race to lock in gains. — Trump visits Wisconsin shipyard today where the Navy is building some of its latest warships. A message from Northrop
Grumman: The Northrop Grumman OmegA launch system will be the reliable workhorse for the National Security Space Launch program.
Building on Northrop Grumman’s legacy of 70+ years of expertise in space, we’re designing OmegA to be the right system for the Air Force’s
most critical payloads. Learn more HAPPY THURSDAY AND WELCOME TO MORNING DEFENSE, on the 124th anniversary of the Battle
of Little Big Horn, where Gen. George Armstrong Custer and his 7th Cavalry Regiment were routed by the Lakota, Northern Cheyenne and
Arapaho Native American tribes. But it looks like Custer’s last stand is still to come. Tips: bbender@politico.com, and follow on Twitter
@bryandbender, @morningdefense and @politicopro. ON THE HILL NDAA ON DECK: The National Defense Authorization
Act is up next on the Senate agenda after Democrats blocked debate on a GOP-led police
reform bill on Wednesday.

Vote is in near future

Maucione 7-7-2020 (Scott, “Defense cuts, cybersecurity and IoT: Five Senate NDAA amendments to know,” Federal News Network,
https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2020/07/defense-cuts-cybersecurity-and-iot-five-senate-ndaa-amendments-to-know/)//BB

The Senate is planning to vote on its version of the 2021 defense authorization bill in the near future .
This year’s package authorizes $741 billion for the military. The Senate Armed Services Committee added 62 bipartisan amendments to the bill
on its way to the floor. Six more amendments will be debated and voted on as possible additions to the bill. Federal News Network sifted through
the dozens of amendments to highlight the ones that matter most to you.
 U – will pass
NDAA will pass quickly now---limiting external controversies has kept lawmakers focused
Clevenger 6-29-2020, roll call congressional analyst (Andrew, “Less time, less drama: Congress steps up work on NDAA,” Roll Call,
https://www.rollcall.com/2020/06/29/less-time-less-drama-congress-steps-up-work-on-ndaa/)//BB

This week, lawmakers in both chambers will focus much of their attention on the massive annual defense policy
bill. And unlike last year, when markups and debates often devolved into partisan clashes, members sound optimistic that this
year’s efforts will be less acrimonious. On Monday, the Senate will resume floor debate of its version of the defense authorization
bill with a goal of finalizing and passing it before members leave Washington for the July Fourth recess. Two days later, the House Armed
Services Committee will hold its full committee markup of its bill, a marathon event that likely will run into the wee hours Thursday. The
annual bill, which adjusts military policy and in fiscal 2021 would authorize $731.6 billion in funding for national security, is one of a
handful of must-pass bills Congress handles each year. It has been enacted 59 consecutive years , typically with substantial
bipartisan majorities. But that doesn’t mean it has always been easy . Last year, upset with provisions that would have blocked
the deployment of a new, slightly less powerful sub-launched nuclear missile, House Republicans disavowed their chamber’s bill, which passed
without a single GOP vote. The coronavirus pandemic is partially responsible for the lack of partisan rancor on this bill, at least so far. Both
chambers lost substantial legislating time during the weeks they were forced to stay home during the
widespread shutdown in April and May. With time running short, both Armed Services committees focused on areas
of agreement while preparing their drafts. “I think it’s a pretty solid bill without a lot of the real flashpoint
controversies that have been in some of the bills in the past,” said Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, who sits on Armed Services. “I
think it could be fairly straightforward on the floor .” Sen. David Perdue, a Georgia Republican who is also a member of the
panel, agreed. “We had, for the most part, a bipartisan exercise in committee ,” he said. “And we ironed out most
of the controversial issues there.” During its closed-door markup earlier this month, the panel adopted an amendment by Sen.
Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., that would expunge Confederate names and symbols from military installations within three years. Republicans plan
to offer a counterproposal that would merely create a commission, while Warren has written language speeding up the timeline to one year. This
issue is sure to be debated and could prove contentious. But Senate GOP leaders have signaled they are open to Warren's original language.
Unlike previous years, when the bill took on big initiatives like military housing, sexual assault and acquisition overhauls, this year’s
outbreak kept lawmakers mostly focused on the basics: making sure the military has what it needs to
perform its duties during a pandemic and at a time of security challenges around the world . “That might
have tamped down some other things that could have been controversia l,” Kaine said. Race relations and other issues
Similarly, on the House side, lawmakers say they have worked to find areas of agreement . As a result, all six of the
House Armed Services subcommittee markups were adopted easily and with little debate, reflecting a desire to
avoid drawn-out disagreements. “ Both sides , I think, are doing a great job of trying to avoid
controversy ,” said Alabama Republican Bradley Byrne, who sits on the Seapower and the Strategic Forces subcommittees. House Armed
Services member Anthony G. Brown, D-Md., agreed that the constraints imposed by the pandemic have kept the
committee focused on passing a bill in a timely manner that will attract broad support from both sides of the aisle. “I
think it’s actually driven a greater commitment to bipartisan compromise,” he said.
 U – agenda packed now
The Congressional agenda is full now
Politico 5/25/20 Pandemic jumbles House agenda https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/25/coronavirus-house-agenda-273819
The House was already facing a deadline crunch this summer, with a slew of must-pass bills threatening
to overwhelm lawmakers for months. And that was before the coronavirus pandemic struck. Speaker Nancy Pelosi will summon
members back to Washington this week to begin work on an election year to-do list that has grown longer and more urgent amid the nation’s dual
economic and health crises. If Congress falters, the government could shut down, and millions of Americans facing unemployment amid the
pandemic could suffer more. “ We have a full agenda that people have been working on for a long time , so it’s a
continuation of that, but also an intensification,” Pelosi told reporters late last week, ticking off looming deadlines for appropriations and a
defense policy bill, on top of more pandemic recovery packages. It’s the start of a months long slog of spending and policy fights, with
Republicans and Democrats battling over everything from the border wall to expanding transit lines to transgender troops. The partisan warfare
will only ramp up as Democrats fight to keep their House majority, take back the White House and potentially flip the GOP-held Senate — all in
the uncertain political terrain of a global pandemic. In a typical election year both the House and Senate would hardly
be around in the waning weeks leading up to November. Instead, lawmakers would be campaigning for
themselves, other candidates and their party’s presidential nominee.
 U – AT second stimulus
UI expiration and election pressure make it easy to reach a deal quickly
Williams 7/12
Sean, The Motley Fool, “Did Mitch McConnell Spill the Beans on a Second Stimulus Package?” July 12, 2020
https://www.fool.com/taxes/2020/07/12/did-mitch-mcconnell-spill-the-beans-on-a-second-st.aspx
The biggest second stimulus issue that needs ironing out At this point, there's
certainly an incentive for lawmakers to get a
phase 4 deal done soon . Aside from the fact that the CARES Act simply didn't do enough for most people, enhanced unemployment
benefits -- i.e., the extra $600 a week -- are set to end on July 31, and it happens to be an election year. It would be a
definite feather in the cap for both parties if they were able to go to bat for their constituents during an
election year. But there's a significant hurdle that Democrats and Republicans will need to overcome, which McConnell alluded to while
speaking last week -- enhanced unemployment benefits. As of June 20, there were approximately 19.3 million continued claims (people receiving
unemployment benefits), which is up significantly from the 1.7 million continued claims at the end of February. Though this is down from a peak
of 24.9 million ongoing claims, it suggests that unemployment levels will remain high for some time to come. To most Democrats on Capitol
Hill, this data demands an extension of enhanced unemployment benefits. However, this extra $600 a week is a disincentive to return to work in
the eyes of Republicans. If a second stimulus bill is to pass muster in Washington, both parties will need to iron out their
differences very quickly on enhanced unemployment benefits. Once this domino falls, it shouldn't be
difficult to deliver a bipartisan bill that helps working Americans and seniors. Look for a more concrete outline of a phase 4 proposal
once the Senate reconvenes on July 20.
 U – AT police reform in Senate
No police reform now because of polarization and partisanship
----this ev also works as a link card
Taylor 7-10 – staff writer at AP (Andrew, "Congress Deadlocked on Policing Reform Bill," Skanner News,
https://www.theskanner.com/news/usa/30160-congress-deadlocked-on-policing-reform-bill 7-10-2020)//gcd

WASHINGTON (AP) — For a moment, Congress had a chance to act on a policing overhaul, mobilized by a
national trauma and overwhelming public support. Those efforts have stalled now and seem unlikely to be
revived in an election year. It’s latest example of how partisanship and polarization on Capitol Hill have
hamstrung Congress’ ability to meet the moment and respond meaningfully to public opinion . Major
changes in policing policy appear likely to join gun control and immigration as social issues where even with
Americans’ overwhelming support, their elected representatives are unable or unwilling to go along,
especially when President Donald Trump is indifferent or opposed. “In this moment, as it was with gun violence and
immigration reform, we don’t know where the president really is,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who weeks ago was expressing skepticism
weeks ago about a breakthrough. “If this were the first time we were in this situation, I’d be more hopeful,” he said then. Democrats don’t
trust McConnell The bipartisan outcry over the deaths of George Floyd and other Black Americans appeared to be a chance for Congress to
reshape its reputation. Polls showed nearly all Americans in a favor of some measure of change to the criminal justice system, and both chambers
moved quickly to draft legislation. There were common elements in the House Democratic proposal and the Senate Republican bill, including a
national database of use-of-force incidents by law enforcement and restrictions on police chokeholds. But efforts to bridge the divides bogged
down in a predictable fight over process and exposed again how little trust there is between the Senate’s leaders, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and
Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. McConnell said Democrats refused to take him at his word that he was willing to
negotiate over the final bill, and he pitched a supposedly fair and freewheeling floor debate. Schumer and
other Democrats saw little that was genuine in McConnell’s overtures, noting that during his tenure as GOP leader, the
sharp-elbowed Kentucky Republican has permitted almost no open floor debate on legislation. Deadlock
illustrates broken system The swift rise and fall of prospects for the police bill showed how lawmakers are often driven more by
the views of their parties’ hard-liners than overall public opinion. “The incentive structure is misaligned for compromise.
That’s the reality of it. Members are more likely to be rewarded electorally for representing their base primary
voters than for reaching out to voters in the middle,” said Michael Steel, who was a top aide to former House Speaker John
Boehner, R-Ohio. “The giants of yesteryear are remembered as such because voters rewarded them for successfully legislating. And that just
seems to be less and less the case.” Americans support change Public support for some kind of policing overhaul after Floyd’s death is
overwhelming. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll shows 29% of Americans say the criminal justice system
needs a complete overhaul, 40% say it needs major changes and 25% say it needs minor changes. There are other high-profile examples where
public support has been unable to overcome partisanship in Congress — most notably on gun control. An AP-NORC survey from March 2019
found 83% of Americans in favor of a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers. Trump has also supported the idea.
But gun control legislation has gone nowhere in Washington. The parties have also failed to make progress in overhauling immigration laws,
despite broad public support. The most overwhelmingly popular measure — granting legal protections to young people brought to the U.S.
illegally as children — has gotten caught in the fray, with hundreds of thousands of such “Dreamer” immigrants caught in legal limbo. Trump
missing from conversation This gridlock has been exacerbated by Trump’s reputation on Capitol Hill as an unreliable negotiating partner on
major issues. On policing, he spoke generally about supporting legislation but exerted little political capital when the process hit a roadblock. “To
do really hard things you always need a president leaning in and engaged,” said Brendan Buck, a top aide to former Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis.,
during Trump’s first two years in office. “And on the really hard things he has not shown a willingness to get engaged.” Democrats pin hopes on
November election The police debate also suffered from the realities of the political calendar. With the Congressional Black Caucus, progressive
activists and the civil rights community all calling the Republican bill too weak to be salvaged, some Democrats saw little incentive
to give ground now when they might be able to get more if their party has sweeping successes in the
November elections, now just over four months away.
 U – AT other controversies
Controversies will get resolved now
Cohen 6-30-2020 (Rachel, “Republicans, Democrats Find Common Ground with NDAA,” Air Force Mag,
https://www.airforcemag.com/republicans-democrats-find-common-ground-with-ndaa/)//BB

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), tried to pack Democratic priorities into his committee’s version of the fiscal 2021 defense policy bill—though not
enough, according to some progressives and policy advocates—and ultimately came up with legislation that will spark fewer fireworks than last
year. He argues it’s not because Democrats backed down, but because many of the hot-button issues either didn’t come up or weren’t
worth relitigating. “By and large, those have been resolved,” Smith told reporters during a June 30 Defense Writers Group event. “Not all
of them have been resolved to my satisfaction, but nothing has changed in terms of the control of the Senate, the control of the White House,
control of the House. We fought those battles, we see the outcome, and so there is not the necessity to fight
them again, in many instances.” Capitol Hill in 2019 fought over how robustly to fund the military and related agencies, after the
topline figure swung from $700 billion to $750 billion over the course of a few months. National security ultimately received $738 billion for
fiscal 2020. Some Republicans may think it’s still too low and some Democrats too high, but settling on the
overall spending number isn’t a problem this time . Congress agreed on a topline of about $741 billion for fiscal 2021 in a
funding deal last year. “I do understand and respect that progressives want to see that number cut,” Smith said. “That’s a conversation we will
have in the future, but for this year, that’s the number we’re marking to.” HASC’s 2020 legislation tried to shrink nuclear weapons funding, lower
spending on fighter jets, block the Trump administration from spending Pentagon dollars on a wall along the southern U.S. border, and more.
Those disagreements have largely dissipated in the name of cooperation. “We had differences of opinion on the low-yield nuclear weapon. That
battle has been lost, and that system has gone forward,” Smith said. “There is no money for the wall in FY ’21, so that fight did not present itself.
So it’s not so much a conscious choice to say, ah, let’s just not fight it. We fought it, we resolved most of those issues. And so I think there’s a
greater possibility of getting a bipartisan bill.” Still, certain issues, like how to deal with the family of industrial “forever chemicals” known as
PFAS, are expected to remain sticking points. Smith did not comment on the internal deliberations over how the committee ultimately decided to
allocate the $741 billion. Continuing the nearly six-decade-long tradition of passing an annual National Defense Authorization Act is more
important than sticking to partisan wish lists, he suggested, particularly in an era when the executive branch has an outsized influence over the
federal government. “I want to find a way to make sure that Congress continues to express its opinion by passing this bill every year,” Smith said.
Ranking Member Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) recently noted that the 2021 bill “is not the bill I would have written, but on the whole, it is
one I agree with and can support.” He touted provisions like a 3-percent pay raise for troops, creation of an Indo-Pacific Deterrence Initiative,
additional resources to deal with the coronavirus pandemic, and a boost in research and development spending. “Nothing in this bill or
its Senate companion is so controversial that we cannot come to an agreement before the end of the
fiscal year,” Thornberry said.

NDAA will avoid controversies now

Spinelli 4/16/20 Dan Spinelli is a reporter in Mother Jones’ DC bureau who covers national security. POLITICS APRIL 16, 2020
Progressives Are Going to Hate This Year’s Defense Spending Bill, https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/04/ndaa-coronavirus-pentagon-
pandemic/

But structural obstacles—including a lengthy, coronavirus-caused delay that is expected to push the passage of the bill into the next fiscal year—
will probably make any significant changes near impossible. “There will probably be a prejudice within the leadership and the
Congress to dispense with the NDAA as expeditiously as possible ,” Bill Hartung, director of the Center for
International Policy’s Arms and Security Program, told me. Hartung is one of many advocates for a slimmer defense budget who views the
pandemic as an appropriate moment to reset the eternal debate over how to spend the Pentagon’s money. But, because of the truncated
schedule lawmakers now face, he doesn’t expect reformers will have as many opportunities as last year to
attempt to amend the NDAA. Progressive advocates who are in touch with the committee staff crafting the House version of the bill
have also tempered their expectations. “It is very, very likely we’re going to see an NDAA that reflects business as usual,” a source affiliated with
a group that works on military issues told me, adding that this year’s legislation “is just not designed” to encompass the vision progressives had
for last year’s bill. The primary architect of the the House bill will be Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), who chairs the Armed Services Committee.
Last year was his first time shepherding the NDAA process, and he was evidently no fan of how the debate unfolded. Liberal lawmakers stacked
the bill with contentious policy provisions, resulting in a rare party-line vote in committee, zero Republican support from the rest of the House,
and a compromise negotiation with the Senate that left progressive leaders like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)
blasting the legislation’s “astonishing moral cowardice.” An exasperated Smith told Politico at the time that he would be “a lot more critical” in
the future of lawmakers trying to insert amendments that were “not within our jurisdiction.” While the delay in moving forward with the NDAA
could open the door to pandemic-related provisions that shore up the Pentagon’s response to the virus, it’s not likely the bill will be as expansive
as in previous years. “I think there
is a renewed resolve , certainly by both Adam and me, to confine our bill to our issues,
and not allow it to be a vehicle for lots of other wish lists that are not able to make it through” other committees, Rep. Mac
Thornberry (R-Texas), the committee’s top Republican, told Defense News earlier this month. “Having gone through last year, everybody has a
better understanding of what is and is not doable with a Democratic House and a Republican Senate and a Republican president.”
 U - AT Trump veto
AT Trump veto
Kamarck 7-2-2020 (Elaine, “Cracks in the Republican Party establishment are getting bigger,” Brookings,
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/07/02/cracks-in-the-republican-party-establishment-are-getting-bigger/)//BB

And with every drop in the polls, the

cracks in Trump’s solid Republican Party grow larger. Take the issue of
renaming military bases that were named after Confederate military leaders . In the wake of the George Floyd killing
and the protests that followed, this long-festering, under-the-radar issue suddenly became a national issue, and began to play out in Congress via
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The NDAA is an enormous piece of legislation funding the military and much of our national
security infrastructure. Senator Elizabeth Warren, (D-Mass.) proposed an amendment to the bill in committee that would
rename bases named after Confederate military commanders . Trump vowed to veto the bill because of that one
amendment. And yet, rather than falling in line, the bill passed out of the Senate Armed Services Committee, a committee
chaired by the conservative Senator Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), by a vote of 25-2. And many Republican senators predict that
the bill would pass with the amendment intact and have enough votes to override a presidential veto .
 L – CJR - NDAA-specific
CJR trades off with floor time for the NDAA
Raju & Foran 6-16-2020 (Manu Raju and Clare Foran, CNN reporters Key Senate Republican pushes back on GOP leaders: 'Bad decision'
to wait a month on police reform, CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/policing-reform-congress-latest/index.html)//BB

Sen. John Cornyn, a member of Senate GOP leadership, said

that he doesn't think there would be enough time to
consider new police reform legislation on the Senate floor before July 4, noting that the Senate will be
consumed with the annual defense authorization bill for about two weeks before the holiday break. The Senate is currently
considering a public lands bill and will vote on nominations this week. "I don't know whether there will be time" before July 4, Cornyn said. "So
it may be a comeback exercise when we return in July." Thune earlier on Monday similarly said that given "what we have to do and the fact that
it's not ready yet, I'd be surprised" if the policing bill comes to the floor before July 4. Thune said that could change if there's broad enough
momentum behind the soon-to-be-unveiled Senate GOP legislative proposal but added that "at this moment" the bill will be
considered on the floor "probably in the July work period."

This is as intrinsic as it’s going to get

Carney 6-16-2020 (Jordain, “McConnell signals he will not negotiate police reform with Democrats before bringing up bill,” The Hill,
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/503002-mcconnell-signals-he-will-not-negotiate-police-reform-with-democrats-before)//BB

Scott will unveil the GOP proposal on Wednesday, roughly a week after McConnell announced that he had tapped
the South Carolina senator, and only black Republican in the Senate, to lead negotiations within the caucus on
coming up with a police reform bill. When, specifically, McConnell will bring up the GOP police reform
proposal, which will be introduced on Wednesday, remains unclear. But he's expected to announce by Wednesday if the Senate

will turn to it or a defense bill after they wrap a lands package and two judicial nominations. "In the morning I'll announce where

we're going next. There are two paths that could be taken: One we could go to the NDAA, the other we
could go to the Tim Scott police bill, which is close to being finished," McConnell told reporters, referring to the National Defense
Authorization Act.
 L – CJR
Republican opposition stalls the bill and eats up floor time.
Carney, 18 [Jordain, reporter for the Hill, 11-16-18, “Cotton opposes Trump-backed criminal justice bill”, https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-
action/senate/417165-cotton-opposes-trump-backed-criminal-justice-bill, BP]

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said Friday that

he will not support criminal justice reform legislation despite
President Trump's endorsement of the effort. Cotton — who has opposed previous, broader versions of the legislation — argued
that the newly introduced legislation would result in the "early release for dangerous, repeat felons." “Unfortunately, the new text of this
legislation reveals that what started as a prison-reform effort has transformed into sentencing reductions and early-release for dangerous, repeat
felons, and I therefore cannot support this bill," Cotton said in a statement. Cotton's opposition to the legislation, which would pair
a House-passed prison reform bill with four sentencing reform measures, isn't
a surprise. He was one of four then-senators
who vocally opposed a broader criminal justice bill spearheaded by Grassley and Durbin in the previous
Congress. Cotton said in a tweet Thursday that the Judiciary Committee should hold a hearing on the
legislation, in what supporters viewed as an attempt to delay the bill . And he published a USA Today op-ed this week
writing that "so-called 'criminal-justice reform' ... is just a misguided effort to let serious felons out of prison." A White House official said this
week that Cotton had been an "ally" to the president on other issues but they believed they could get the votes needed to pass the bill in the Senate
without him. But his
entrenched opposition underscores the uphill battle the legislation faces in getting
scheduled for a vote in the Senate, where lawmakers are running out of time and GOP leadership has been
noncommittal about whether they will bring it up before the end of the year. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told reporters this week that
supporters needed to introduce the legislation, which they did on Thursday evening, and show that they had 60 votes to pass the bill. Then,
leadership would weigh the legislation against other issues that need to clear Congress in the lame duck
session. In addition to Cotton, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said Thursday that he will object if leadership tries to skip over procedural hurdles in
that would force McConnell to decide between eating up days of
scheduling a vote. If Kennedy follows through,
floor time during a tight schedule or kicking the issue to next year. And Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters on
Thursday that acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker has "problem areas" with the legislation, and that he shared his "concerns" with the
president. Grassley appeared to take aim at Whitaker on Friday, saying in a tweet that he expects the Justice Department to support his legislation.
"Now w Sessions out as AG + Pres Trump endorsing crim justice reform I expect DOJ to support the bipartisan/tough on crime/fair First Step Act
especially since Acting AG Whitaker told me he would support bill if Trump did," Grassley said.

The plan saps up floor time – presidential politics, prospective Senate elections, and
internal disagreement stifle legislation, even if it’s bipartisan.
Hulse 16 (Carl Hulse, Chief Washington Correspondent for the New York Times, “Why the Senate Couldn't Pass a Crime Bill Both Parties
Backed,” 09/16/16, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/politics/senate-dysfunction-blocks-bipartisan-criminal-
justice-overhaul.html, TM)
A major criminal-justice overhaul bill seemed destined to be the bipartisan success story of the year,
consensus legislation that showed lawmakers could still rise above politics. Then the election, Donald J. Trump's
demand for " law and order " and a series of other political calculations got in the way . Senate
Republicans divided on the wisdom of reducing federal mandatory minimum sentences. Other Republicans, unhappy that President Obama was
reducing hundreds of federal prison sentences on his own, did not want to give him a legacy victory. A surge in crime in some urban
areas gave opponents of the legislation a new argument . Now, the Senate authors of the legislation say it is effectively
dead. "I do believe it is over," said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, who put considerable effort into
difficult negotiations with Republicans to strike a compromise. "We missed an opportunity." What
remains is a stunning display
of dysfunction given the powerful forces arrayed behind legislation meant to provide a second chance
for nonviolent offenders facing long prison sentences while also saving tax dollars on prison costs . Speaker
Paul D. Ryan is on board. The quarrelsome Senate Judiciary Committee passed its bill on a strong bipartisan vote with the imprimatur of Senator
Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the Republican chairman. Mr. Obama considers the issue a top priority. The conservative Koch brothers were
behind it. So was the liberal Center for American Progress and just about every advocacy group in between. Polls show the concept has
broad public support. States both red and blue already have moved ahead with successful parallel
programs. A cross section of law enforcement groups backs it. Still, the legislation foundered . "It is one of
the things that makes this a frustrating place to work," said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, who became a
tumult of this
believer in a new approach to criminal justice after seeing the benefits in his home state. Mr. Cornyn concedes the
election year was a major factor given sharp disagreement among Senate Republicans reflected in the
decision by Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, to not allow a vote on a proposal most believe would
pass easily. "I think that Senator McConnell understandably did not want to tee up an issue that split our caucus right
before the 2016 election," said Mr. Cornyn, who noted that aspects of the legislation had been misconstrued by its critics.
Presidential politics were at work as well. Mr. Trump has been campaigning on warnings of a United States
at risk from sinister forces, even though violent crime is low compared with past decades. But crime surges in
some urban areas have given opponents of the legislation ammunition to challenge it. "I think he's
highlighted some of the crime surges we've seen, and I do think it should require proponents of the federal legislation to re-evaluate their
position," said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, referring to Mr. Trump. Mr. Sessions is both a chief ally of Mr. Trump on Capitol
Hill and a leading opponent of the criminal justice legislation, along with the Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of
Georgia. Mr. Cotton said this year that the United States suffered from an "under-incarceration" problem, not from too many people being in
prison. These critics have been supported by an association of federal prosecutors that has assailed the legislation. Frustrated supporters of the
proposal have pushed back, noting that even if violent crime is rising in some locations, the legislation is aimed at nonviolent criminals, mainly
clash created a political dissonance and made some Republicans reluctant to risk
drug offenders. But the
their tough-on-crime image immediately before an election . Democrats and progressive groups have been leery of an
insistence by conservatives that any final legislation include a provision that could make it more difficult to prosecute white-collar crimes.
Passage of a separate measure addressing the opioid crisis gave lawmakers an accomplishment to tout on the drug issue. Despite slim
chances for success this year, proponents of the criminal justice package are not surrendering . Supporters
have met with Mr. Ryan to press for a House vote on a package of three bills before lawmakers leave for the election. House backers of the
legislation have been conducting briefings for lawmakers and aides in hopes of winning enough commitments to persuade Mr. Ryan to move
ahead. "I think we are close," said Holly Harris, executive director of the U.S. Justice Action Network, a leading bipartisan coalition behind the
enemy is the clock ." Even if the House were to act in the next week or so -- a prospect top aides
legislation. "The
considered unlikely -- there
would be little opportunity for the Senate to follow suit, with senators eager to
return to campaigning in the battle for Senate control . Neither Mr. Cornyn nor Mr. Durbin sees criminal justice
legislation as the type of issue that could be sorted out in a chaotic postelection, lame-duck session, with other issues clamoring for immediate
attention. Both senators, as well as Ms. Harris, predicted that the criminal justice proposals would be back before Congress in 2017 if nothing
happened this year. "This is not a partisan issue ," Mr. Cornyn said. "No matter what happens in November, I think this is still very
much alive and achievable. Some things just take a while ." But this was one thing Congress was supposed to have done by now.
 L - CJR – AT plan popular
Even if it’s popular, pushing CJR causes different pieces of legislation to compete for time
and attention---exponentially magnifies the link
Carney, 18 [Jordain, reporter for the Hill, 5-30-18, “Senate grapples with prison reform bill”, https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/389801-
senate-grapples-with-prison-reform-bill, BP]
The White House, supported by a coalition of outside groups, is urging the Senate to bring a bill to the floor. But there
are obstacles in the upper chamber, as key members are pushing for different pieces of prison reform
legislation. Trump publicly called on Congress to work out a deal during a prison reform summit earlier this month, saying the legislation
would help “restore the rule of law, keep dangerous criminals off our street, and help inmates get a second chance on life.” “[The] strong
bipartisan vote paves a path for action by the Senate,” White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders added in a separate statement after
the bill passed the House. The House-passed prison reform legislation would provide funding for programs aimed at reducing the
likelihood of inmates committing new crimes once released from prison. Sen. John Cornyn (Texas), the No. 2 Senate Republican, and
Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.) introduced a companion bill in the Senate. However, Senate negotiators are warning
they are not close to a deal that would allow the prison reform bill to move quickly. Instead, the fight is pitting
two influential GOP senators — Cornyn and Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the Judiciary Committee chairman — against each other as they jockey for
competing bills. “We’ve got work to do here on building consensus … but right now we don’t have it,” Cornyn
said last week about what happens to prison reform in the Senate. The
GOP divisions could scuttle any chance that the
Trump-backed legislation becomes law this year, with leadership unlikely to bring up legislation that
would highlight divisions within their own party ahead of the midterm elections. Both Cornyn and Grassley are
signaling they plan to press forward with trying to build support for their own separate bills once the Senate returns to Washington, D.C., next
week. Asked if he would budge on his opposition to a prison reform–only bill, Grassley responded, “No .”
“We’re going to take up my bill. Or I should say, my bipartisan bill that’s got 28 co-sponsors — equal number Republicans and Democrats. ...
What the House does through that legislation is about the equivalent of a spit in the ocean compared to what the problem is of too much
imprisonment,” Grassley added. Grassley and Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Democrat, have introduced broad criminal justice reform
legislation that would pair prison reforms to changes in sentencing, including reductions in mandatory minimums for certain drug offenses while
increasing mandatory minimums for other offenses. Both senators say they’ve made a deal not to separate the prison and sentencing reform
components despite pressure from the White House. But that bill is unlikely to be taken up given GOP control of Congress
and opposition from key members of the Trump administration. Attorney General Jeff Sessions was an outspoken
opponent of the criminal justice reform bill when he served in the Senate. Grassley acknowledged that he has not convinced
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to bring the criminal justice reform bill to the floor. “You’ve got to
remember that McConnell doesn’t like the bill, and all I can say is that you ought to let a Republican president who needs a big, bipartisan victory
have a bipartisan victory,” he said. The Kentucky Republican did not move criminal justice reform legislation in
2015 or 2016 amid vocal pushback from four GOP senators. The then-Obama administration supported
the bill, and senators in both parties said they had 60 votes to pass it. Supporters of the narrower prison reform–only
legislation are seizing on the opposition from key Republicans and the Trump administration as they push for their bill. After a group of
Democrats, including Durbin, sent a letter ahead of the House vote to Democrats urging them to oppose the prison reform bill, Rep. Hakeem
Jeffries (D-N.Y.) argued they were ignoring political reality. Jeffries wrote the House-passed bill along with Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.). “We
have a Republican President. Republicans control the House of Representatives and the Senate. While the Senate authors of the opposition letter
support the all or nothing approach, the Majority Leader apparently does not. Those are the facts,” Jeffries wrote in a publicly released letter.
Cornyn added that the decision boils down to either passing prison reform or accepting that Congress will take no action for the foreseeable
future in the criminal justice space. But it’s unclear if McConnell would be willing to move a bill without
Grassley’s support. And prison reform is facing new hurdles from both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue. The
New York Times reported late last week that Mark Inch, appointed to oversee the Federal Bureau of Prisons, resigned amid a “turf war” between
Sessions and Kushner over the federal prison system. And on Capitol Hill, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), one of Trump’s closest allies in the Senate,
is privately raising concerns about the bill. A spokeswoman for the senator said Cotton has “concerns with provisions in the bill pertaining to
lenient treatment for heroin and fentanyl traffickers.” Cotton, Sessions and GOP Sens. David Perdue (Ga.) and Orrin Hatch (Utah) were a small
but vocal group of Republicans senators deeply opposed to broader criminal justice legislation that included both prison reform and changes to
mandatory minimum sentencing. Cornyn acknowledged that he has spoken to Cotton about trying to address his issues with the prison reform
bill. “I’ve told him we’re going to work with him and come up with something that I think he’ll be able to support,” Cornyn said, “but he did
express some concerns.”
 L - mandatory minimums
The plan saps up floor time – presidential politics, prospective Senate elections, and
internal disagreement stifle legislation, even if it’s bipartisan.
Hulse 16 (Carl Hulse, Chief Washington Correspondent for the New York Times, “Why the Senate Couldn't Pass a Crime Bill Both Parties
Backed,” 09/16/16, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/17/us/politics/senate-dysfunction-blocks-bipartisan-criminal-
justice-overhaul.html, TM)
A major criminal-justice overhaul bill seemed destined to be the bipartisan success story of the year,
consensus legislation that showed lawmakers could still rise above politics. Then the election, Donald J. Trump's
demand for " law and order " and a series of other political calculations got in the way . Senate
Republicans divided on the wisdom of reducing federal mandatory minimum sentences. Other Republicans, unhappy that President Obama was
reducing hundreds of federal prison sentences on his own, did not want to give him a legacy victory. A surge in crime in some urban
areas gave opponents of the legislation a new argument . Now, the Senate authors of the legislation say it is effectively
dead. "I do believe it is over," said Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, who put considerable effort into
difficult negotiations with Republicans to strike a compromise. "We missed an opportunity." What
remains is a stunning display
of dysfunction given the powerful forces arrayed behind legislation meant to provide a second chance
for nonviolent offenders facing long prison sentences while also saving tax dollars on prison costs . Speaker
Paul D. Ryan is on board. The quarrelsome Senate Judiciary Committee passed its bill on a strong bipartisan vote with the imprimatur of Senator
Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the Republican chairman. Mr. Obama considers the issue a top priority. The conservative Koch brothers were
behind it. So was the liberal Center for American Progress and just about every advocacy group in between. Polls show the concept has
broad public support. States both red and blue already have moved ahead with successful parallel
programs. A cross section of law enforcement groups backs it. Still, the legislation foundered . "It is one of
the things that makes this a frustrating place to work," said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, who became a
tumult of this
believer in a new approach to criminal justice after seeing the benefits in his home state. Mr. Cornyn concedes the
election year was a major factor given sharp disagreement among Senate Republicans reflected in the
decision by Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, to not allow a vote on a proposal most believe would
pass easily. "I think that Senator McConnell understandably did not want to tee up an issue that split our caucus right
before the 2016 election," said Mr. Cornyn, who noted that aspects of the legislation had been misconstrued by its critics.
Presidential politics were at work as well. Mr. Trump has been campaigning on warnings of a United States
at risk from sinister forces, even though violent crime is low compared with past decades. But crime surges in
some urban areas have given opponents of the legislation ammunition to challenge it. "I think he's
highlighted some of the crime surges we've seen, and I do think it should require proponents of the federal legislation to re-evaluate their
position," said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, referring to Mr. Trump. Mr. Sessions is both a chief ally of Mr. Trump on Capitol
Hill and a leading opponent of the criminal justice legislation, along with the Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and David Perdue of
Georgia. Mr. Cotton said this year that the United States suffered from an "under-incarceration" problem, not from too many people being in
prison. These critics have been supported by an association of federal prosecutors that has assailed the legislation. Frustrated supporters of the
proposal have pushed back, noting that even if violent crime is rising in some locations, the legislation is aimed at nonviolent criminals, mainly
clash created a political dissonance and made some Republicans reluctant to risk
drug offenders. But the
their tough-on-crime image immediately before an election . Democrats and progressive groups have been leery of an
insistence by conservatives that any final legislation include a provision that could make it more difficult to prosecute white-collar crimes.
Passage of a separate measure addressing the opioid crisis gave lawmakers an accomplishment to tout on the drug issue. Despite slim
chances for success this year, proponents of the criminal justice package are not surrendering . Supporters
have met with Mr. Ryan to press for a House vote on a package of three bills before lawmakers leave for the election. House backers of the
legislation have been conducting briefings for lawmakers and aides in hopes of winning enough commitments to persuade Mr. Ryan to move
ahead. "I think we are close," said Holly Harris, executive director of the U.S. Justice Action Network, a leading bipartisan coalition behind the
legislation. "Theenemy is the clock ." Even if the House were to act in the next week or so -- a prospect top aides
considered unlikely -- there would be little opportunity for the Senate to follow suit, with senators eager to
return to campaigning in the battle for Senate control . Neither Mr. Cornyn nor Mr. Durbin sees criminal justice
legislation as the type of issue that could be sorted out in a chaotic postelection, lame-duck session, with other issues clamoring for immediate
attention. Both senators, as well as Ms. Harris, predicted that the criminal justice proposals would be back before Congress in 2017 if nothing
happened this year. "This is not a partisan issue ," Mr. Cornyn said. "No matter what happens in November, I think this is still very
much alive and achievable. Some things just take a while ." But this was one thing Congress was supposed to have done by now.
 L – police reform – general controversy
The plan gets bogged down --- partisan accusations and electoral concerns
Carney and Bolton 6-24 – Alexander Bolton is a Senior Reporter and Jordain Carney is a Reporter at the TheHill ("Police reform
hits impasse in Senate," TheHill, https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/504219-police-reform-hits-impasse-in-senate, 6-24-2020)// gcd

Scott said he repeatedly tried to contact Harris, one of the lead sponsors of a joint Senate-House Democratic police reform bill,
but previously failed to connect. “I’ve tried to touch base with her on several occasions. We’ve been playing phone tag,”
Scott said, noting that four different meetings that had been scheduled “kept getting canceled.” Scott
said he has had exhaustive conversations with Booker but didn’t seem optimistic that a breakthrough is
possible anytime soon. “The fact of the matter is if it’s not working, then what is it that’s not working is a question
you should be asking them, not me,” Scott said, adding that Republicans have “done what we can do to put this bill in a position to be
What else are we supposed to do?” McConnell told reporters that if Democrats block the Republican bill
successful. ...
Wednesday, he will use a procedural tactic that would allow him to bring it back up for a second vote. But Republicans, including
close allies of the GOP leader, cast doubt that a failed vote would push both sides to the negotiating table.
“There probably is no path forward in this Congress if they block debate tomorrow,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told
reporters Tuesday. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), an adviser to McConnell, added that he wasn’t interested in
negotiating with “hostage takers.” Rubio, who attended the meeting with Democrats, said he doesn’t know what the
path forward would be if the motion to begin debate fails. “I don’t know what happens after that,” he said. “The only thing
that can become law is something that the Senate passes and that originates from here.” House Democrats have scheduled a vote for their police
reform package on Thursday. It’s expected to pass on a largely party-line vote. Senators
spent much of Tuesday trading
accusations of playing politics ahead of the 2020 election, where both the White House and Senate are
up for grabs. Cornyn predicted that Democrats would face political consequences if they block the GOP bill. “I
think there’s a price to be paid for it,” he said. “Hopefully there will be a backlash of public opinion.” Sen.
John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) added that he believed Democrats were “grandstanding” because “they would rather
have the issue to campaign on than finding a solution for the American people.” But Democrats believe they have
public sentiment on their side after weeks of protests and demands to overhaul law enforcement. On Tuesday, 138 civil rights and human rights
organizations sent a letter to the Senate urging them to oppose the GOP bill. Schumer predicted that McConnell would be forced to come to the
negotiating table, though he didn’t give a timeline. “The pressure will continue to mount on them. This isn’t going away,” he said. “We
believe the Republicans will face such pressure when they see the House passed a bill, their process has
failed [on] passing a bill in the Senate that they will come to the table.” Asked what he thought was
driving McConnell’s strategy, Durbin said it was President Trump. “I think they’ve gone as far as they
think they can politically go and defend the president’s position and if they go any further he will turn
on them,” Durbin said. “McConnell is the great enabler for Trump but he’s also always watching carefully that he
doesn’t cross him in terms of his political strategy.”

Police reform agreement is difficult and unlikely now

Carney 20 Jordain Carney is a reporter for the Hill, Skepticism looms over police reform deal - 06/15/20,
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/502547-skepticism-looms-over-police-reform-deal

Congress is facing a familiar enemy as it hunts for a deal on police reforms: the body’s own penchant for gridlock. Lawmakers want to reach a
bipartisan agreement that could respond to the calls from across the country for reforms after George Floyd’s death, but tackling big social
issues is something they’ve routinely failed at in recent years. Senators say reaching a deal won't be easy, and
some are already expressing skepticism given the deep differences underscored by competing proposals
circulating around Capitol Hill. “It’s hard, it’s really hard. The president said he’s a law and order president and
suggested sending in American troops to replace law enforcement. I mean, he is not creating an environment, a positive environment,
for the kind of change that’s needed, so I’m skeptical that we’ll come up with something, but we should try,” said
Sen. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the No. 2 Senate Democrat. Asked about the odds of a deal, Sen. Christopher Coons (D-Del.) told reporters that “if this
were the first time we were in this situation, I'd be more hopeful.” Lawmakers, facing pressure to act, have already introduced or are circulating
legislation. In a positive sign, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) declined this week to name a provision in the House
Democratic proposal that he disagreed with, telling reporters that “there’s a place where we can work together.” But deep divisions are
already emerging on key issues such as a ban on chokeholds and changes to “qualified immunity,” a legal doctrine that
helps shield police officers from lawsuits.

Police reform debates will be massively divisive in Congress

Carney 6/3/20 Jordain Carmey is a reporter for the Hill, Calls for police reform sparks divisions in Congress,
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/500809-calls-for-police-reform-sparks-divisions-in-congress

Calls for law enforcement reforms in the wake of George Floyd’s death are sparking divisions in Congress, raising early
questions about what, if anything, will be able to make it to President Trump’s desk. Lawmakers are grappling with
how to respond to days of protests fueled by the police killing of Floyd, an unarmed black man who died last week while detained by
Minneapolis police, that revived the national conversation about lingering racial inequality and the use of force by police officers. Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said “there may be a role” for lawmakers. “We’ll be talking to our colleagues about what, if anything,
is appropriate for us to do,” McConnell told reporters on Tuesday. Other GOP senators appeared more skeptical about
legislation, underscoring potential roadblocks in the Republican-controlled chamber. “I don’t think so,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.)
said, asked if he thought Congress would pass reform legislation . “I highly suspect it would be political.” Sen. John
Cornyn (R-Texas), an adviser to McConnell, said that law enforcement reform legislation was “opportunistic” and “misses the point.” “This idea
that we somehow are going to paint all of law enforcement with a brush of racism is outrageous in and of itself and it's obviously designed to
divide the country further,” Cornyn said about the prospects for legislation. But that’s likely to be met with fierce pushback from Democrats, who
want to pass legislation in roughly a month. In the House, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) estimated that up to 50 pieces of
legislation were under discussion and that the Congressional Black Caucus will take the lead on proposing a package. While the
House isn’t scheduled to hold votes until the end of the month, he didn’t rule out that they could return earlier if they come up with an agreement.
“We'll be coming together in support of those initiatives, and I expect that to happen in the near future. ... If, in fact, legislation is proposed by the
CBC, the Congressional Black Caucus, and is considered by the committee and ready to go, we will then call all the members back to pass ... that
legislation,” Hoyer told reporters. House Democrats held a call on Monday where they discussed various ideas and are expected to talk again on
Thursday. Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Wm. Lacy Clay (D-Mo.) are pushing legislation to require federal officers to resort to force only as a
last alternative. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Tuesday that rank-and-file Democrats disagree over whether the goal should be
sweeping legislation or a piecemeal approach, which might have a better chance of becoming law. “In a matter of just a short time, those
decisions will be made and I think the American people will be well-served," Pelosi said. Hoyer pointed specifically to legislation, sponsored by
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), to ban police “chokeholds.” And Pelosi said efforts to root out racial profiling
would be at the forefront. Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday introduced a series of 10 proposals designed to rein in police brutality,
particularly against African Americans. Dubbed the "Harlem Manifesto," the package includes measures to prohibit police departments from
using military-grade weapons, mandate that all law enforcers wear body cameras and bar private prisons and jails. In the Senate, Minority Leader
Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) is publicly urging McConnell to vote on legislation before the two-week July 4 recess, but the GOP leader’s outline
for the Senate’s agenda in June does not include police reform. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), one of three black senators, unveiled a framework for
legislation that includes making changes to “qualified immunity,” which shields police officers from having their actions challenged in court
unless an individual can prove that an officer violated a “clearly established” law when their rights were violated. Booker’s bill would also make
changes to police training and create a national registry to track police misconduct and require state and local officials to report use-of-force
incidents to the Justice Department. In addition to Booker, Schumer said several other senators, including Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and
Ben Cardin (D-Md.), are working on bills. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has tentatively
scheduled a hearing on the use of force by police officers for June 16, though he stopped short of pledging to offer legislation. “I don’t have
anything in mind right now. But hopefully as part of the hearing we can find some things to do together,” he said. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-
Alaska), one of the more moderate members of the GOP caucus, appeared undecided on what Congress's response should be. “I think these are
conversations that we need to have. ... Is there a right legislative response? I don't know," she said. Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said that he was
urging the Justice Department to reinstitute a pattern and practice review of local police departments, which he noted would be easier than getting
legislation passed in the Capitol. “I think it’s pretty hard to come up with national police reform measures,” Blunt said, “which is why I think it’s
better that the Justice Department work with individual police departments ... to help them determine what they could be doing better.” The
partisan divisions were on display Tuesday when Schumer and McConnell blocked each other’s
resolutions related to the protests. Schumer wanted to pass a resolution that, among other provisions, specifically condemned Trump for gas
and rubber bullets being used on protesters near the White House on Monday night. McConnell, objecting, offered his own resolution supporting
that the “legitimate grievances of peaceful protesters may be heard and considered” and the belief that “order must be immediately restored,” but
Schumer blocked it. Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) also tried to pass a bill that would provide grants for police training and require an
independent review of the use of force, but it was blocked by Graham. “With no animosity, I object at this time. I hope we can get it [as] part of a
broader agenda,” he said. Democrats are planning to force the issue during the upcoming debate over the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA). Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) has said he will introduce an amendment to end a program that “transfers military weaponry to local
police departments.”

Police Reform is contentious

Verbruggan 6/18/20 Robert VerBruggen is a policy writer for National Review., Don’t Count on the Feds to Fix Your Local Police
Force
June 18, 2020, https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/police-reform-federal-government-has-limited-role/

The federal government can redress the constitutional violations of lower levels of government, and it can also provide grants
that are conditioned on police departments’ being run in a certain way. But in order to do even that ,
federal policymakers need a consensus of the House, the Senate (60 votes in the event of a filibuster), and
the president. Since many specifics of police reform are controversial , and since many lawmakers hesitate to have the
federal government dictate policy to the states anyhow, such a consensus is often hard to come by .
 L – decarceration
Prison gerrymandering creates an incentive for conservatives to deeply resist change
Pfaff 18 (John Pfaff, Professor of Law @ Fordham University, “Why today’s criminal justice reform efforts won’t end mass incarceration,”
12/21/18, American Magazine, https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2018/12/21/why-todays-criminal-justice-reform-efforts-wont-
end-mass-incarceration, TM)

Or consider the impactof “ prison gerrymandering .” When drawing legislative districts, 44 states count prisoners as
residing in their prison, not their prior home—but do not let them vote. All across the country, state and local legislators know
that a decline in prison pop ulation means a decline in their district’s population for election purposes ,
putting their seats at risk of redistricting . Moreover, there is a particularly stark partisan bent to this
distortion. Prisoners are disproportionately p eople o f c olor from cities, which suggests they are
disproportionately Democrats. Prisons are increasingly located in more conservative rural areas. This “ prison
gerrymandering ” thus inflates Republican statehouse representation while simultaneously
suppressing Dem ocratic turnout , creating a powerful partisan resistance to deep changes . All of these
responses are perfectly rational. Yet so far, no effort has been made to address these and other defects that politicians and various interest groups
exploit. Reform efforts have opted to capitalize on favorable conditions (low crime, high prison populations, soaring
costs) topush reform bills through the same broken system that gave us mass incarceration and mass punishment in the first
place. As long as these political incentives remain in place, it will not take much of a rise in crime ,
whatever its causes, to see reforms start to crumble .
 L – pot
Weed legislation crowds out the agenda
Jaeger, 19 [Kyle, Marijuana Moment's Los Angeles-based associate editor, 4-4-19, “Lawmakers Roll Out ‘Landmark’ Bill To Protect Legal
Marijuana States From Federal Interference”, https://www.marijuanamoment.net/lawmakers-roll-out-landmark-bill-to-protect-legal-marijuana-
states-from-federal-interference/, BP]
The legislation would amend the Controlled Substances Act to protect people complying with state legal
cannabis laws from federal intervention, and the sponsors are hoping that the bipartisan and bicameral nature of the bill will
advance it through the 116th Congress. President Trump voiced support for a previous version of the legislation last year. “I’ve been working on
this for four decades. I could not be more excited,” Blumenauer told Marijuana Moment in a phone interview. While other legislation under
consideration such as bills to secure banking access for cannabis businesses or study the benefits of marijuana for veterans are “incremental steps
that are going to make a huge difference,” the STATES Act is “a landmark,” he said. The congressman said it will take some time
before the bill gets a full House vote, however. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) recently suggested that the legislation would
advance within “weeks,” but Blumenauer said it will “ be a battle to get floor time” and he
stressed the importance of ensuring that legislators get the chance to voice their concerns and get the
answers they need before putting it before the full chamber. “We want to raise the comfort level that people have. We want to do it right,”
he said. “There’s no reason that we have to make people feel like they’re crowded or rushed.”

Entrenched interests mean the plan moves glacially

Laslo, 18 [Matt, reporter, 5-29-18, “Pot for All: How Congress Is Trying to Make Weed Legal”,
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/pot-for-all-how-congress-is-trying-to-make-weed-legal-628538/, BP]

Over the past decade, marijuana legalization has happened at break-neck speed at the state and local level. And yet, pot-related reforms have
moved glacially at the federal level, especially since prohibitionist Jeff Sessions was confirmed as attorney general. But his staunch opposition
and attempt to roll back Obama-era protections for local marijuana businesses has actually attracted new support to a flurry of marijuana related
bills that have been picking up support in this Congress. There are more than 40 cannabis-related bills floating around the House of
Representatives alone in this Congress, along with countless others in the Senate. That’s a hard map to navigate, so below is Rolling Stone’s
guide to the kinds of marijuana bills that have the most support from Democrats and Republicans alike. Straight Decriminalization Senate
Minority Leader Chuck Schumer turned heads last month when he endorsed marijuana decriminalization, but he was slow to get to the party.
Vermont’s Bernie Sanders was there before him, along with most every Democratic senator floated as a potential 2020 presidential contender,
including Sens. Cory Booker (NJ), Kamala Harris (CA) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY). Still, the statement from Schumer – who has long vocally
opposed recreational marijuana – was witnessed as a dramatic move and is expected to trickle down the ballot to people running for Congress
across the nation. “This is something that is long overdue, and I would hope to see it happen,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer told
Rolling Stone when asked about his newfound support for decriminalization at a recent Capitol Hill press conference. While numerous
decriminalization bills already exist, Schumer’s office says he plans to introduce his own legislation on it, which they said would come on 4/20
and now they say will come at an unknown date. But Schumer is in the minority party, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who
currently controls floor time, isn’t budging on marijuana, even as he’s continuing his years-long push to legalize industrial hemp cultivation in the
U.S.
 L - vagueness
Vagueness magnifies the link---Congress would have to spend valuable time figuring out all
of the stuff that aff refused to defend
Johnson, 15 [Carrie, justice correspondent for the Washington Desk of NPR, 12-31-15, “Despite Bipartisan Effort, Window To Pass
Sentencing Reform May Be Closing”, https://www.npr.org/2015/12/31/461607863/despite-bipartisan-effort-window-to-pass-sentencing-reform-
may-be-closing, BP]
But the window for Congress to act on plans to reduce prison terms for nonviolent drug criminals may soon be
closing. And negotiations about the precise language of the proposals and the people they would help are a
long way from done. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill by a vote of 15-5 that would reduce some
federal mandatory minimum drug and gun sentences in October. Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, recently
ranked it as one of his priorities for the coming year, but the legislation still requires a vote by the full
Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., demurred earlier this month about the schedule for 2016. "I haven't
announced whether we're going to give it floor time or not but it obviously enjoys pretty strong bipartisan support," McConnell said. "And it's a
good candidate for being dealt with next year." There are only a few months to make that happen before lawmakers
begin a series of breaks and before the presidential campaign intensifies. "Hopefully they'll get it on the floor early in
the year because when we get into a, particularly a presidential election year, a lot of other things can come in
to distract Congress it seems," said Mark Holden, the general counsel for Koch Industries and one of the people pushing for changes
to the justice system.
 IL – causes NDAA delay
Empirically adding controversial issues delays passage of NDAA for months
McIntyre 4/29/20 Jamie McIntyre joined the Washington Examiner in 2016 as senior writer covering defense and national security,
Work begins on defense policy bill to address coronavirus readiness shortfalls at Pentagon,
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/work-begins-on-defense-policy-bill-to-address-coronavirus-readiness-
shortfalls-at-pentagon

NDAA IN THE TIME OF COVID-19: The leaders of the House Armed Services committee are pledging that a
spirit of bipartisanship will guide work on the National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA] of fiscal year
2021, the legislation that provides overall guidance for how the $740 billion defense budget will be allocated. Last year, partisan
wrangling over the bill delayed its passage until late December, but Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, a Democrat, and ranking member
Rep. Mac Thornberry, a Republican, are vowing to get the bill passed for the 60th time. “This milestone has been made possible by decades of
bipartisanship, regular order, and transparency,” the lawmakers said in a statement. This year’s NDAA will be used to address the
new budget needs of the Pentagon, including the military support to civilian agencies battling COVID-19 , recruiting and
training changes, and medical research and readiness issues associated with the impact the virus is having on military operations worldwide.

There are very few days available to vote in 2020

McPherson 5/29/20 Lindsey McPherson is a Staff writer for Roll Call, May 29, 2020 Updated House calendar has only one voting day
in June, 12 in July, https://www.rollcall.com/2020/05/29/updated-house-calendar-has-only-one-voting-day-in-june-12-in-july/
An updated House legislative calendar for 2020 has only one scheduled voting day in June, 12 in July and
none in August. The calendar House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer released Friday retains the previously scheduled month long
August recess and the October break for members to campaign ahead of the November general election.

Delay kills the bill---election year politicking

Politico 5/25/20 Pandemic jumbles House agenda https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/25/coronavirus-house-agenda-273819
But there’s far more to do in the coming weeks, with annual
chores like crafting spending legislation and the Pentagon policy
bill that will become far thornier — if not virtually impossible — in the middle of a heated presidential
campaign.
 IL – partisanship bad
Keeping away from other controversial bills during the NDAA is the key to passage
Chuzi 6/5/20 Amanda Chuzi is a 2020 graduate of Columbia Law School and a Political Partner with the Truman National Security
Project.., CAN CONGRESS’ ‘MOST SUCCESSFUL BILL’ FIX THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH?, https://warontherocks.com/2020/06/can-
congress-most-successful-bill-fix-the-legislative-branch/

How Has the NDAA Survived?

The NDAA stands as a striking exception to the two-step process’s decline. During my time as a policy staffer for Sen. Tim Kaine, from 2013-
2017, the Senate meaningfully debated and enacted five iterations of the NDAA. As the Senate inched towards the NDAA’s sixty-year milestone,
we knew that the NDAA had become Congress’s most regular and bipartisan legislation. Despite Congress’s growing
reputation for inaction and gridlock, the NDAA is routinely commended as “demonstrat[ing] how bipartisanship in Congress can work … to
responsibly authorize expenditures” and “perhaps the last bill, the last legislative process, that still actually works.” Some scholars have called for
Congress to use the two-step authorization-appropriations process as a way to rein in the administrative state. Constitutional law scholars
Jonathan Adler and Christopher Walker, for example, propose that Congress revitalize the temporary authorization process to ensure that
agencies’ broad powers only last for short periods of time before Congress revisits them and exercises critical oversight. As part of their
argument, they highlight eight reauthorizations that Congress continues to enact –– including the Farm Bill and FAA reauthorization –– as
examples that Congress might draw from if it were to reform the reauthorization process. This discussion and others bring much-needed attention
to an important subject. That said, commentators have overlooked the most important reauthorization bill: the NDAA. The NDAA is important
for several reasons. Most obviously, it passes every year and authorizes more than half of the government’s discretionary funding. Perhaps more
importantly, the NDAA process that plays out between Congress and the executive branch paints a picture of how congressional operations
would need to change if the regular reauthorization process were revitalized. Fewer Bills, More Structure For instance, the House and Senate
Armed Services Committees consider relatively few standalone bills as compared to other committees, opting instead to include most worthwhile
legislation into the NDAA. With
demand on congressional staff time increasing and salaries flatlining, this “ one bill at
a time ” approach enables committee staff to devote themselves to a single process and be free of the
pressure to act outside of the scheduled cycle. Another attribute of the NDAA is the Senate Armed Services Committee’s closed
“markup,” or the meetings in which members vote on amendments. This tactic has earned criticism from activists who oppose the reduced
transparency that comes with amending a bill behind closed doors. Proponents have argued that the closed markup process facilitates
bipartisanship, enabling the bill to survive the committee process. Indeed, bipartisanship might be the most critical element of
the NDAA’s annual passage over the last fifty-nine years. My experience observing and working on the NDAA always involved a
collective effort by members and staff of both parties to craft a bill that would win broad bipartisan support. Perhaps the bipartisanship
requirement stems from the examples historically set by committee leadership, or an understanding that the NDAA represents Congress’s
“fulfill[ment] of its constitutional responsibility to ‘provide for the common defense’.” In any event, the bipartisan commitment
remains essential to the NDAA’s passage. As Kaine told me recently: “Should other committees ever follow a similar model . . .
they need to follow the Armed Services Committee’s bipartisan, all-input-welcome example and not write that sole authorization in a one-sided
manner.”
 ! – turns heg
NDAA is key to deterrence and preventing war with China
Inhofe & Reed 5/28/20 Jim Inhofe is a U.S. senator from Oklahoma and is the chairman of the U.S. Senate Armed Services
Committee. Jack Reed is a U.S. senator from Rhode Island and is the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee., THE
PACIFIC DETERRENCE INITIATIVE: PEACE THROUGH STRENGTH IN THE INDO-PACIFIC, https://warontherocks.com/2020/05/the-
pacific-deterrence-initiative-peace-through-strength-in-the-indo-pacific/

The credibility of American deterrence rests on a simple foundation. America prevents wars by
convincing its adversaries they cannot win. Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said it succinctly: Deterrence is achieved when the enemy decides, “Not today.
You, militarily, cannot win it, so don’t even try it.” Currently, in the Indo-Pacific, that foundation of deterrence is crumbling as an
increasingly aggressive China continues its comprehensive military modernization. This is not a partisan issue. Five years ago, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter warned that China was
modernizing its military “to try to close the gap and erode our superiority in every domain.” Then, two years ago, Mattis assessed that’s exactly what happened, stating that America’s
“competitive edge has eroded in every domain of warfare … and it is continuing to erode.” Even more bluntly, the bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission report cautioned,
“America’s military superiority…has eroded to a dangerous degree ” to the point that “the U.S. military could lose the next state-versus-
state war it fights.” The best way to protect U.S. security and prosperity in Asia is to maintain a credible balance of military power. But America’s ability to do so is at risk. And it’s not just U.S.
interests at stake. Allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific are watching closely, and wondering whether they will be able to count on America. With the stakes so high, the time for action is now.
That’s why this year we intend to establish a Pacific Deterrence Initiative in the National Defense Authorization
Act [NDAA] for Fiscal Year 2021. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative will enhance budgetary transparency and oversight, and focus resources on key
military capabilities to deter China. The initiative will also reassure U.S. allies and partners , and send a strong signal to the Chinese Communist Party that the
American people are committed to defending U.S. interests in the Indo-Pacific. What the Pacific Deterrence Initiative Will Do The Pentagon is taking challenges in the Indo-Pacific seriously,
and has made some important progress implementing the National Defense Strategy in the region. That’s especially true when it comes to rebuilding readiness and investing in modernization.
Unfortunately, the progress to date has been insufficient to achieve the “urgent change at significant scale” that is required. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative will improve the implementation of
the National Defense Strategy in the Indo-Pacific, and incentivize the Pentagon to better prioritize the region in its annual budget process. First, the Pacific Deterrence Initiative will enhance
budgetary transparency and congressional oversight. The National Defense Strategy refocused the Pentagon on strategic competition with China and Russia, elevating the priority of the Indo-
Pacific and European theaters. But while translating regional priorities into budget priorities is a critical aspect of implementing the National Defense Strategy, it’s also a major challenge for the
current Pentagon budget process. The one notable exception is Europe. The European Deterrence Initiative, created in 2014 to respond to rising threats from Russia, provides a snapshot of the
key efforts the Defense Department is taking to deter aggression in the theater. The detailed budget justification materials for the European Deterrence Initiative allow Congress to track these
efforts over time, assess their progress, and make adjustments when necessary. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative would serve the same purpose, allowing Congress and the Pentagon to view the
defense budget through a regional warfighting lens while increasing the visibility of options to advance U.S. priorities in the Indo-Pacific. Second, the Pacific Deterrence Initiative will focus
resources on key capability gaps to ensure U.S. forces have everything they need to compete, fight, and win in the Indo-Pacific. The current budget process has been heavily tilted towards
investments in modernization and readiness. Both are absolutely necessary, but ultimately insufficient on their own to achieve the goals of the National Defense Strategy. In particular, the
Pentagon’s investments in modern platforms have not been sufficiently matched by investments in the joint and enabling capabilities those platforms require, especially as envisioned by new
operational concepts. Posture and logistics remain serious weak spots for credible American deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region, a major point of emphasis in the National Defense Strategy, as
well as a recent assessment submitted to Congress by the commander of Indo-Pacific Command, Admiral Phil Davidson. Investments in theater missile defense, expeditionary airfield and port
infrastructure, fuel and munitions storage, and other areas will be key to America’s future force posture in the Indo-Pacific. As one example, it doesn’t matter how many F-35s the military buys if
very few are stationed in the region, their primary bases have little defense against Chinese missiles, they don’t have secondary airfields to operate from, they can’t access prepositioned stocks of
fuel and munitions, or they can’t be repaired in theater and get back in the fight when it counts. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative will incentivize increased focus on posture and logistics, and help
measure whether these requirements are being matched with resources. More broadly, we hope that the Pacific Deterrence Initiative will help reorient the Pentagon’s approach to planning and
budgeting. The United States needs to shift the balance from the current focus on platforms and programs toward the specific missions its warfighters may be called upon to perform. A mission-
the Pacific Deterrence Initiative will
oriented approach will bring more attention to the joint and enabling capabilities that are essential to their success. Third,

reassure allies and partners of America’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific region. We hear over and over again from foreign
counterparts that they are hedging their bets for the future because they don’t know if they can count on the United States. Congress took a major step forward with the Asia Reassurance
Initiative Act, which clearly outlined U.S. policy and interests in the region on security, economics, and human rights and boosted resources for the State Department and U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID). The Pacific Deterrence Initiative will be a complementary effort focused on the Department of Defense to demonstrate that America’s commitment to the
region is bipartisan and enduring. By increasing security assistance resources dedicated to the Indo-Pacific, the Pacific Deterrence Initiative will help U.S. allies and partners build the capabilities
the
they need to protect their sovereignty. And the initiative will assure U.S. allies and partners that they will not face the threat of Chinese coercion or aggression alone. Fourth, and finally,

Pacific Deterrence Initiative will help deter Chinese aggression by strengthening the credibility of
American deterrence. The initiative will focus resources on efforts to convince the Chinese Communist Party that there is no quick, easy, or cheap victory to be had against the
American military. A well-distributed posture will complicate Chinese targeting of U.S. forces and infrastructure. More capable missile defenses at American bases will make them more difficult
and costly to strike. Greater numbers of combat-credible U.S. forces in the Indo-Pacific will make it harder for China to seize and maintain the advantage early in a conflict. More resilient
logistics will make it harder to take U.S. forces out of the fight or delay reinforcements. New land-based, long-range strike capabilities will provide a new source of resilient and survivable U.S.
power projection. The Pacific Deterrence Initiative will focus resources on these efforts and others with the aim of injecting uncertainty and risk into Beijing’s calculus, leaving just one
conclusion: “Not today. You, militarily, cannot win it, so don’t even try it.”
 ! – turns climate
NDAA is key to mitigate and adapt to climate change
Neal 6/5/20 Abby Neal is a Research Associate for the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, “Must-pass” National Defense
Authorization Act Is an Opportunity for Environmental Policies, https://www.eesi.org/articles/view/must-pass-national-defense-authorization-act-
is-an-opportunity-for-environmental-policies

As Congress continues to focus on responding to the coronavirus crisis, deadlines for several “must-pass” pieces of legislation grow closer. Over
a dozen bills authorizing federal agencies and programs must be passed by the end of the year, and many of these upcoming bills show
promise for improving the nation’s capacity to mitigate and respond to climate change. One bill that has
historically included climate, resilience, and environmental provisions is the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA), which authorizes and details the annual appropriations for the Department of Defense (DOD). The DOD recognizes climate change
as a threat multiplier, which worsens already existing security stress factors. Because of this intersection between climate and defense, the NDAA
has in the past been “a magnet for environmental policy fights” (E&E News). The coronavirus crisis has pushed the Senate and House Armed
Services Committees behind schedule on finalizing the NDAA. The Senate Armed Services Committee is set to begin its markup of the bill the
week of June 8, and has predicted that it will pass the full Senate before the Fourth of July. The committee plans to make the specific language of
the NDAA for FY2021 public when it is released from the committee. The House Armed Services Committee initially scheduled its markup in
April, but postponed the process due to COVID-19. Although the committee has not yet released an updated timeline, Chairman Adam Smith (D-
Wash.) has indicated that language will be finalized within the month and that the bill will pass through the House by October. Majority Leader
Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has also said that the bill will come to the House floor in June or July. Little information has been released regarding what
this year’s NDAA will contain. No text has been released by the Senate, and the bill introduced in the House at the end of March (H.R.6395) only
contains guidelines for DOD and military construction projects. However, a bipartisan group of Representatives have called for provisions to
build military bases’ resilience to climate impacts by lowering the risk of water shortages and reducing electric grid vulnerabilities. Indeed, if the
reauthorization follows the precedent of previous years’ NDAAs, there will likely be a number of climate and resilience
provisions in the final bill. For example, an EESI analysis of the NDAA for FY2019 identified six sections that directed the DOD to
focus on the resilience of its energy resources, infrastructure, and installations. The NDAA for FY2020 also included a number of provisions
directing the DOD to examine its contribution and vulnerability to climate change and other environmental impacts. Some highlights from last
year’s NDAA include: Sec. 319 updated requirements for energy resilience programs and directed the Secretary of Defense to improve water
conservation and management on DOD installations. Sec. 327 directed the Secretary of Defense to develop an adaptation plan, to be updated
every four years, to address the impact of climate change on the DOD and identify potential actions to build resilience. Sec. 2402 authorized
funds for energy conservation projects on DOD installations. Sec. 2801 required master plans for DOD installations to address risks from
“extreme weather events, mean sea level fluctuation, wildfires, flooding, and other changes in environmental conditions.” Sec. 2806 required the
DOD disclose when new installations will be affected by projected fluctuations in sea level. This was an update from requirements established in
the 2019 NDAA, which required the DOD to disclose when installations are sited within 100-year floodplains. Title LXXIII sought to mitigate
the issue of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which have been associated with adverse human health effects. Title LXXIII, along with
other sections within the NDAA, required drinking water monitoring and detection, nationwide sampling, and guidelines for disposal of materials
containing PFAS. Acknowledging environmental and energy issues and continuing to fund programs aimed at mitigating
impact and building adaptive capacity is a necessary step in the DOD appropriations process. The threat that climate change
poses for national security is not going away, so lawmakers must continue strengthening the nation’s response. Despite the pandemic dominating
much of the nation’s attention, the process of finalizing a series of must-pass bills continues. These bills have been, and continue to be, an
opportunity for Congress to recognize the wide-reaching implications of climate change and the need to address the issue from a variety of
angles.
SECOND WAVE MECHANICS
 IL – NDAA k2 covid
NDAA is key to covid response---it includes defense production and sourcing of PPE,
medical equipment and pharmaceutical---that’s Ebner.
NDAA will include billions for covid to prevent a 2nd wave
Gould 6/10/20 Joe Gould is reporter for Defense News, Defense bill to include billion dollars for pandemic response and preparedness,
https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-bill-to-include-billion-dollars-for-pandemic-response-and-preparedness/

A key House Democrat will propose a billion-dollar pandemic response and preparedness fund in the annual defense policy
bill, Defense News has learned. The bill would help boost production of key medical equipment sought by states amid the
country’s fight against the coronavirus pandemic. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., will include the
measure in his committee’s version of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA] as a means to strengthen the
Department of Defense and the country’s ability to respond to a potential COVID-19 resurgence and other future
infectious diseases, according to a House aide familiar with the proposal. The proposal comes as Smith and other Democrats have criticized
President Donald Trump as neither sufficiently marshaling American industry to produce medical equipment like swabs, masks and ventilators,
nor coordinating with states on their needs. Still, Trump has partially invoked the Defense Production Act, and the Pentagon has had a central role
awarding millions of dollars in contracts to address shortages for these items. “Looking forward, I intend to include in this year’s National
Defense Authorization Act an effort to proactively look beyond the response to COVID-19 and increase preparedness and resilience for future
pandemics,” Smith said in prepared remarks for Wednesday’s HASC hearing on the DoD’s efforts to mitigate the effects of the coronavirus
pandemic. The U.S. military, Smith said, “has a unique ability to lead” in efforts to ramp up domestic production
of key equipment, “given its experience in acquisition and stockpile management that has already been a deep resource to the federal
government response.”

It’s key to testing

ADC 20 (Association of Defense Communities, “Smith: NDAA to Prioritize COVID-19 Testing and Response,” Defense Communities,
https://defensecommunities.org/2020/04/smith-ndaa-to-prioritize-covid-19-testing-and-response/)

Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Adam Smith said Tuesday that the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
will
incorporate elements that boost production of coronavirus testing materials , CQ reports. “It’s going to
require a massive amount of testing before we can safely allow people to go back to work ,” said Smith. He
pointed to the Department of Defense’s logistic capability and production scalability to ramp up availability
of COVID-19 tests, which currently are in low in supply.

NDAA is an integral part of restoring supply chains

Sisk 6/11, (Richard Sisk, “Senate's $740 Billion Defense Bill Includes Pay Raise, Controversial Changes”, June 11 th
, 2020,
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/06/11/senates-740-billion-defense-bill-includes-pay-raise-controversial-changes.html)
To combat COVID-19, the bill focuses on improving and modernizing DoD supply chains to enhance
the timely delivery of personal protective equipment and gear , and promote their manufacture in the
U.S. "The ongoing pandemic exposed and exacerbated weaknesses in the supply chain, and the NDAA works to repair these gaps,
improve resiliency of the supply chain and strengthen the Defense Industrial Base as a whole ," according to
the summary. In testimony Wednesday to the House Armed Services Committee, Ellen Lord, the undersecretary of defense for acquisition and
sustainment, said that upward
of $10 billion in separate supplemental funding would be needed to reimburse
defense contractors for their COVID-related costs.

Defense production is key

Clevenger 4/7/20 Andrew Clevenger is reporter for Roll Call https://www.rollcall.com/2020/04/07/coronavirus-response-to-take-priority-
in-ndaa-house-armed-services-chairman-says/ Coronavirus response to take priority in NDAA , House Armed Services
chairman says,
Ramping up production of testing materials for COVID-19 will be a top priority for this year’s annual
defense policy bill, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Tuesday. Widespread testing will play a major role in
getting people back to work, Washington Democrat Adam Smith told reporters during a press call. And some components of testing,
like swabs, are already in short supply. The Defense Department, Smith said, has a lot of experience and expertise in
logistics and contracting and could lead government efforts to ensure the availability of extensive testing .
And Smith wants to use his committee’s bill to push the Pentagon to drive that effort. “It’s going to require a massive amount of
testing before we can safely allow people to go back to work ,” he said. Knowing who has COVID-19 — and, crucially,
who might have developed immunity — will allow informed decisions about keeping people safe. “ We cannot get there if we don’t
manufacture the components of that test,” he said. “Nobody in the United States of America is better at mass
production in a crisis than the Department of Defense.” From tanks to cotton swabs The Pentagon has stepped up quickly
before in times of need to mass-produce ships and tanks or, more recently, heavily armored mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicles after the
use of improvised roadside bombs became more prevalent during the war in Iraq. But now the need is for cotton swabs. “I would love to use that
logistical, innovative, problem-solving approach that DOD uses to solve this problem,” he said. “The scale that we’re dealing with here, DOD
could be a big partner in that.” Readily available testing is central to moving beyond the social distancing
restrictions that are currently in place across the country, particularly with a vaccine still 12 to 18 months away.

Supply-chain analysis [also listed in Ebner] solves shortages

Feldman 3/28/20 Jonathan M. Feldman has been a Corliss Lamont Fellow in Economic Conversion and Disarmament at Columbia
University and received a PhD in Regional Economic Development from Rutgers University and He is presently a Docent at the Department of
Economic History, International Relations unit at Stockholm University, The Corona Virus and the Limits of the Market: Convert Defense and
Other Industries to Fight New Security Threats, https://portside.org/2020-03-28/corona-virus-and-limits-market-convert-defense-and-other-
industries-fight-new-security

Cutting interest rates won’t provide a meaningful alternative to these supply and demand problems. Instead, we must ask basic questions about
how resources are organized in society. The basic questions center on the role which security policies and globalization have played in diverting
nations from priorities in health, welfare and equitable economic development. The health crisis is partially a production crisis .
On the one hand, governments have invested in obsolete “hard power” military missions that increasingly waste resources needed to combat
environmental and health crises. On the other hand, a team of writers at The New York Times have explained how globalization and outsourcing
sustain the production crisis: “a shortage of masks has become a bottleneck slowing the rollout of testing, which
experts say is crucial to containing the virus.” Various “companies are struggling to quickly expand
their mask-making capacities, in part because of broken overseas supply chains and some countries’
restrictions on exporting protective gear during the crisis .”

It'll include test swabs, protecting masks and other PPE

Weisgerber 4/6/20 Marcus Weisgerber is the global business editor for Defense One, where he writes about the intersection of business
and national security., US Military Can Do More to Help with Coronavirus, House Armed Services Chief Says,
https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2020/04/military-can-do-more-coronavirus-response-top-house-lawmaker-says/164452/

The top House Democrat says the Pentagon needs to “get creative” in its response to the coronavirus pandemic. In particular, Rep. Adam Smith,
D-Wash., wonders whether the military could use its diverse set of contractors to make desperately needed COVID-
19 test swabs, protective masks and other equipment . Smith, who leads the House Armed Services Committee, said Tuesday
that the military should respond to the novel coronavirus as it does when quickly developing new technology or weapons for unexpected
situations on the battlefield. “I would love to use that logistical, innovative problem-solving approach that DoD uses to this problem,” Smith said.
“We’re talking about a disease and theoretically, that’s more CDC and FEMA, but the scale that we’re dealing with here is something that DoD, I
think, could be could be a big partner in that.” Smith pointed to the military’s rapid acquisition of tens of thousands of armored MRAP trucks in
2007 to better protect troops in Iraq from roadside bombs. “We don’t need to mass-produce an MRAP or a tank or an aircraft carrier; we need to
mass-produce a cotton swab. We ought to be able to figure that out,” Smith said. “I would love to find ways to use existing structures within DoD
to take a leadership role in that.” Smith said the military could help jumpstart production of other urgently needed
supplies as well. He also said he’s exploring ways of legislating — through the under-construction 2021 National Defense
Authorization Act [NDAA]— ways the military could do more in its coronavirus response. “DoD shouldn’t necessarily be producing
this stuff for every civilian to use,” Smith said. “But if they took the lead on producing it — [so] that the DoD has what they needed
— that could also spur” commercial “development later on.”
 IL – delay bad
Any delay risks a second-wave catastrophe---that’s a narrow window to prepare, so even a
weeks delay might be the difference between successful containment and a broad
pandemic---that’s McIntyre.
Even small delays have a significant impact
Taylor 6-19-2020 (Mark, “This math-trained Harvard professor is helping hospitals cope with a potential second wave of Covid-19,”
Market Watch, https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-math-trained-harvard-professor-is-helping-hospitals-cope-with-a-potential-second-
wave-of-covid-19-2020-06-16)

‘Narrow window’ to act

The threat of a Covid resurgence means now is the time to act , according to Litvak. “In many places the
pandemic is waning and hospitals may have a narrow window to reduce their backlog of elective surgeries and strengthen
their financial future for a second surge this fall,” he said.

We’re on the brink of a second wave

Dunn and Fitzpatrick 6/12’ (Lauren Dunn and Sarah Fitzpatrick, “Few N95 masks, reused gowns: Dire PPE shortages reveal
COVID-19's racial divide” June 12, 2020, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/few-n95-masks-reused-gowns-dire-ppe-shortages-reveal-
covid-n1229546)
“Whether it's the elderly, minority populations, populations affected by structural racism and historical injustice, those are the very groups that
have the most difficult time getting adequate PPE for their workers,” Dr. Megan Ranney, an ER physician at Brown
Emergency Medicine in Rhode Island, said. Adding to the stress is the fear that the United States is on
the brink of a second wave of the virus. Between some states perhaps reopening too soon, mass protests around the country and a
possible reemergence of the virus this fall, facilities are under pressure to build up their supplies. Dr. Patrice
Harris, president of the American Medical Association, said she’s concerned that over the next few
weeks, hospitals and doctors offices will see a surge of patients who were forced to delay care and those
health care workers will need even more PPE. “They delayed cancer and other screenings as well as surgeries, so it’s critical that
practices reopen but we are hearing from our colleagues across the country that they are having challenges,” she said. Ranney, who is also a co-
founder of #GetUsPPE, a nonprofit dedicated to securing PPE for those in need, said getting more supplies is nearly impossible for many of these
facilities. “The biggest issue is that the supply chain is still really broken,” said Ranney, whose organization currently has close to
12,000 requests for PPE from around the country. For example, she said, N95 respirators typically cost anywhere from 50 to 70 cents a piece.
Now, the cost for each respirator is between $3 and $5. “Few health care facilities have those kinds of financial
resources,” she said. “We're in a scarcity situation. When there's something that's in high demand, they're supposed to charge
more for it. That's the whole idea of capitalism, but it doesn't work for something like this.”

There’s a nation-wide scramble to secure PPE before the second wave

Wan 6/8’, (William Wan, Education: University of Chicago, BA in English literature; University of Maryland, MA in Journalism. William
Wan is The Washington Post's health & science correspondent, “America is running short on masks, gowns and gloves. Again.” Washington
Post, July 8, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/08/ppe-shortage-masks-gloves-gowns/)
Health-care workers on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic are encountering shortages of masks,
gowns, face shields and gloves — a frustrating recurrence of a struggle that haunted the first months of
the crisis. Nurses say they are reusing N95 masks for days and even weeks at a time. Doctors say they can’t reopen offices because they lack
personal protective equipment. State officials say they have scoured U.S. and international suppliers for PPE and
struggle to get orders filled. Experts worry the problem could worsen as coronavirus infections climb,
straining medical systems. “A lot people thought once the alarm was sounded back in March surely the federal government would fix
this, but that hasn’t happened,” said Deborah Burger, a California nurse and president of National Nurses United, a union representing registered
nurses. Like many health-care workers, Burger blamed the Trump administration for the lack of equipment, noting the administration has insisted
the responsibility falls to state and local officials, with the federal government playing only a supporting role. The specter of equipment shortages
comes as other issues that plagued the country’s early response to the pandemic return: surging cases, overwhelmed hospitals, lagging testing and
contradictory public health messages. But the inability to secure PPE is especially frustrating, health-care workers
say, because it is their main defense against catching the virus. For weeks, nurses have posted online testimonials about a
lack of PPE, with some given surgical masks instead of N95 masks because of shortages. In a video posted last week, a Florida nurse said she
breaks the oath she took “to do no harm” every time she goes to work without protection and worries constantly she may be infecting her patients,
co-workers and family. In interviews, White House officials said concerns over PPE shortages are overblown. They said U.S. manufacturing and
stockpiles of protective equipment have improved dramatically and are adequate in most states. “I’m not going to tell you we’re able to meet all
demand, but there’s significantly less unfulfilled orders today than in April,” said Rear Adm. John Polowczyk, whom President Trump put in
charge of coronavirus-related supplies. “I have not found a hospital system that is in threat of running out. … I don’t have the sense of there being
severe shortages.” Polowczyk said the Trump administration has helped increase domestic manufacturing of PPE and that demand continues to
outstrip supply because hospitals, states and the federal government are trying to stockpile supplies. He blamed some of the concern about
shortages on outdated letters to Congress from March and April. But the administration’s reassurance contrasts with growing alarm from medical
associations, governors, nursing homes and members of Congress — all of whom have pleaded for federal help within the past month.
Demand for protective equipment has soared, but unlike in March, when efforts focused on getting PPE
for major hospitals — especially in New York, Detroit and Chicago — supplies now are desperately
needed by primary care offices, nursing homes, prisons and psychiatric and disability facilities. As many
states continue to reopen their economies, demand has also surged from the construction industry and other sectors. With soaring demand, prices
have skyrocketed. Some hospitals say much of the PPE they have acquired has been exorbitantly priced. At a legislative hearing, a hospital
association executive detailed how one Maryland hospital that spent $600,000 on PPE last year expects to spend $10 million this year. The
struggles have been especially acute for smaller and rural providers that can’t compete with bigger health systems on price and large-scale orders,
experts say. In a letter last week, the American Medical Association told the Federal Emergency Management Agency that doctor’s offices
outside big systems — including those providing primary care, chemotherapy and minor surgeries — have struggled to reopen because they are
unable to secure PPE. The association, which pleaded for transparency and a coordinated national strategy, said it is unclear “whether the
central problem is in the availability of raw material, production backlogs, gaps in the distribution
systems, or some combination of all three.” In a second letter, the medical association urged the White House to invoke the
Defense Production Act to compel manufacturers to increase supplies of N95 masks and gowns. A Washington Post-Ipsos poll in May found
two-thirds of front-line health-care workers were still experiencing insufficient supplies of face masks that filter out airborne particles. And
dmore than 4 in 10 were seeing shortages of less protective surgical masks. National nurse unions and associations say their members are almost
all asked to reuse masks designed for single use. In Washington state, Gov. Jay Inslee (D) said state officials have struggled to find domestic and
international suppliers. In a letter to Trump last month, Inslee said he has tried to buy $400 million in equipment, but only 10 percent of orders
have been filled. “It is clear that the status quo is not working,” Inslee said, pointing to an inadequate federal stockpile, reliance on foreign
suppliers and limited domestic production. He described a counterproductive and “unnecessary, chaotic, 50-state scramble to
secure badly needed PPE” and cited the continued lack of a coordinated federal response. “It is akin to fighting a war in which each
state is responsible for procuring its own weapons and body armor.” As the virus has rampaged through America, it has
pummeled the ranks of health-care workers, infecting at least 94,000 and killing at least 500, according to
an incomplete count by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The true number is believed to be
much higher. A study of U.S. and British medical workers found their risk of testing positive for the coronavirus
was 12 times higher than the general public’s. The researchers from Massachusetts General Hospital and King’s College London
found that workers with inadequate PPE access were at even higher risk. “ The limited availability of adequate PPE, such as
masks, gowns and gloves, has raised concerns about whether our health care system is able to fully
protect our health care workers,” senior author Andrew T. Chan, chief of the Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Unit at
Massachusetts General, said in a statement. Last month, Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) successfully pressed FEMA to release an internal report
that showed alarming shortages of medical gowns and no meaningful increase in their production since March, when nurses and doctors in New
York resorted to wearing trash bags. The FEMA report states bluntly, “The demand for gowns outpaces current US manufacturing capabilities.”
The report also suggests health-care workers will need to keep reusing N95 masks for months to come.
 IL – second wave coming – winter
A second, more devastating wave is coming in the winter – only preparedness now solves.
Sun, 20 [Lena H., national reporter for the Washington Post, 4-21-20, “CDC director warns second wave of coronavirus is likely to be even
more devastating”, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/04/21/coronavirus-secondwave-cdcdirector/, BP]
Even as states move ahead with plans to reopen their economies, the director of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention warned Tuesday that a second wave of the novel coronavirus will be far more dire
because it is likely to coincide with the start of flu season. “There’s a possibility that the assault of the
virus on our nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through,”
CDC Director Robert Redfield said in an interview with The Washington Post. “And when I’ve said this to others, they kind of put their head
back, they don’t understand what I mean.” “We’re going to have the flu epidemic and the coronavirus epidemic at the
same time,” he said. Having two simultaneous respiratory outbreaks would put unimaginable strain on the
health-care system, he said. The first wave of covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus, has already killed more than 42,000 people
across the country. It has overwhelmed hospitals and revealed gaping shortages in test kits, ventilators and protective equipment for health-care
workers. In a wide-ranging interview, Redfield said federal and state officials need to use the coming months to prepare
for what lies ahead. As stay-at-home orders are lifted, officials need to stress the continued importance of social distancing, he said.
They also need to massively scale up their ability to identify the infected through testing and find everyone they
interact with through contact tracing. Doing so prevents new cases from becoming larger outbreaks. Asked about protests against stay-at-home
orders and calls on states to be “liberated” from restrictions, Redfield said: “It’s not helpful.” The president himself has tweeted encouragements
of such protests, urging followers to “LIBERATE MINNESOTA!” and “LIBERATE MICHIGAN!” Redfield said that he, along with other
members of the White House coronavirus task force, have emphasized the importance of social distancing “and the enormous impact that it’s had
on this outbreak in our nation.”

Public health officials anticipate second wave in the winter

Khazan 4/24, (Olga Khazan, staff writer at The Atlantic and the author of Weird: The Power of Being an Outsider in an Insider World,
“The Scariest Pandemic Timeline”, The Atlantic, April 24th 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/could-there-be-another-
coronavirus-quarantine/610630/)
If you held out a glimmer of hope about life returning to normal this year, that hope may have been thoroughly extinguished this week by the
director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Robert Redfield.“ There’s a possibility that the assault of the virus on our
nation next winter will actually be even more difficult than the one we just went through,” Redfield told The
Washington Post on Tuesday. “We’re going to have the flu epidemic and the coronavirus epidemic at the same time.” President Trump later tried
to claim that Redfield had been misquoted, but Redfield clarified that he was quoted accurately. He’s also far from the only person who
believes that the United States is in for a bleak winter. Numerous public-health experts are concerned that
COVID-19 might make a comeback this fall (assuming that total case numbers even drop to begin with). In combination with the
normal, October-through-March flu season, the disease could strain hospital capacity even more than it did this spring, when flu season was
petering out. “It’s going to be a very difficult fall and winter this year coming up,” says Ashish Jha, the
director of the Harvard Global Health Institute.

The US is ill-prepared for the second wave due to a lack of PPE now.
Dai and Tang, 20 [Tinglong Dai is an Associate Professor of Operations Management and Business Analytics at the Johns Hopkins
Carey Business School with joint faculty appointments at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing and Institute for Data-Intensive Engineering and
Science, Christopher S. Tang is a University Distinguished Professor and Edward W. Carter chair in business administration at the UCLA
Anderson School of Management, 6-23-20, “Opinion: The U.S. Medical Supply Chain Isn’t Ready for a Second Wave”,
https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/the-u-s-medical-supply-chain-isnt-ready-for-a-second-wave-51592953230, BP]
If a second wave of the coronavirus emerges in the United States, the nation’s medical supply chain is not
prepared to handle it, says Johns Hopkins Carey Business School Associate Professor Tinglong Dai in an op-ed that he co-authored for
the business publication Barron’s. The June 23 op-ed notes evidence of a resurgence in the growing number of reported coronavirus cases in
southeastern and southwestern states. While some debate whether this amounts to a second wave of COVID-19, “one thing is clear: The
U.S. health care system is still struggling,” says Dai and co-writer Christopher Tang, a University Distinguished Professor and
Edward W. Carter chair in business administration at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. Dai, a Carey faculty member since 2013, is an
expert in operations management and business analytics. His research interests include health care, marketing-operations interfaces, and human-
AI interaction. The lack of solid preparation for the pandemic “resulted in prolonged shortages of [personal
protective equipment], especially N95 masks, which have been linked to over 300 deaths and 60,000 infections
among U.S. health care workers as well as nearly 120,000 COVID-19 deaths across the country as of this
writing,” Dai and Tang write. “Will the U.S. health care system have enough critical medical supplies to tame
the first wave and prepare for the next pandemic (or the next wave of a pandemic)?” they ask. “The answer
is sadly no … “ Dai and Tang conclude their op-ed with a note of hope: A successful response to a second wave will depend on “creating
better visibility at the provider level, while … improving supply chain transparency through information exchange among providers.”

A second wave is inevitable later in the year – preparedness with PPE is key.
Grey, 20 [Heather, reporter for National Trust Magazine and Healthline, 5-20-20, “What a Second Wave of Coronavirus in the Fall Could
Look Like”, https://www.healthline.com/health-news/what-a-covid-19-wave-in-the-fall-could-look-like, BP]
As temperatures and humidity levels rise, there are hopes that infection rates of the new coronavirus may
drop in the spring and summer — following a similar seasonal pattern as the flu and common cold.
However, experts are warning that the virus will continue to pose a public health threat throughout the spring and summer. Even if we do see
a drop in infection rates, history suggests the pandemic may surge again later on. Dr. Robert Glatter, an emergency
physician at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, told Healthline that he expects a second wave of infections to hit in the
fall. If that second wave arrives as he expects, it will coincide with flu season. That means there may be a
lot of people who become sick in the fall and winter, compounding the pressure on the healthcare system.
“It will likely be worse than the initial wave we experienced this spring ,” Glatter predicted. “Combined with
influenza, the intensity of both viruses combined could make our initial COVID-19 look benign.” Educated
guesses about the future Scientists are just beginning to understand SARS-CoV-2, the new strain of coronavirus that’s responsible for COVID-19.
A lot of questions remain about the virus’s transmission dynamics, which make it difficult to predict how the virus will behave. “Any projection
is really more of a guess, going from pandemic experience in the past,” Dr. Eric Cioe-Pena, an emergency physician and director of global health
at Northwell Health in New Hyde Park, New York, told Healthline. “The big reason why I think a lot of people talk about two peaks — one being
in the fall, one being in the spring — is that traditionally, that’s what happened with influenza,” he continued. When the 1918 flu
pandemicTrusted Source hit the United States, the first wave of infections occurred in March. A second and more lethal wave followed in
October, when most of the deaths from the disease occurred. Many respiratory viruses follow similar patterns, with infection rates peaking in the
fall and winter. Those seasonal viruses include some but not all strains of coronavirus. Clues from other coronaviruses SARS-CoV-2 is related to
other strains of coronavirus, including several viruses that cause the common cold and viruses that caused outbreaks of severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS) in 2002 and Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS) in 2012. The coronavirus strains that cause the common cold are
transmitted more readily at colder temperatures and lower humidity levels than in warm, dry conditions. As a result, they cause more illness in the
fall and winter than the spring or summer. On the other hand, the coronavirus strains that caused outbreaksTrusted Source of SARS in 2002 and
MERS in 2012 don’t appear to follow the same seasonal patterns. This variability makes it hard to know how SARS-CoV-2 will behave. “We’ve
seen coronaviruses act in very different ways,” Cioe-Pena said. “Some of them are very seasonal, some of them are not,” he continued, “so we
don’t know what the pattern is going to be with this one.” Lessons from the Southern Hemisphere Although it’s possible that SARS-CoV-2
infections may ebb in the spring and summer, evidence from the Southern Hemisphere suggests the virus is readily transmissible in warm
weather. “There’s a lot of discussion right now about how the virus will do with heat and humidity — but we’ve seen some evidence in the
Southern Hemisphere that it’s replicating just fine at the equator and below the equator,” Cioe-Pena said. Experts north of the equator are
watching southern countries closely to learn how seasonal shifts may affect the spread of the virus here. The unfolding dynamics of the pandemic
in southern countries may also shed light on how COVID-19 and influenza will interact in the fall. “We can learn many valuable lessons from the
behavior of influenza with COVID-19 from our colleagues in the Southern Hemisphere, as they experience both of these entities with their winter
approaching,” Glatter said. Questions about immunity The body’s immune response to SARS-CoV-2 will also influence how the pandemic
affects Americans in coming months. Early studies have found that people who contract the new coronavirus begin to develop antibodies against
it within about 12 days. However, questions remain about the strength and durability of that immune response. “There’s two questions,” Cioe-
Pena said. “Number one, are those antibodies effective in preventing another infection?” “And the second question,” he continued, “is how long
do those antibodies last?” If the body’s immune response to the virus is strong and durable enough, a person may only be able to contract it once.
As a result, infection rates may fall as more people become immune to the disease after contracting the virus. If the body’s immune response isn’t
strong or durable enough, a person who’s already had an infection will be able to get it again. This may contribute to high rates of infection in the
fall and winter. Preparing for what may come To prepare for a potential second wave of infections in the fall, Glatter
emphasizes the importance of increasing healthcare capacity. “We need to continue to prepare our
hospitals for this reality, ramping up efforts to secure [personal protective equipment], and making sure we have
adequate staffing and [intensive care unit] capability,” he said. “A vaccine cannot arrive soon enough,” Glatter added. In the meantime, Cioe-
Pena encourages people to strike a safe balance between enjoying the warm weather while continuing to practice physical distancing. He doesn’t
think it’s a good idea to gather in large groups to play games of soccer, for example. But he does think we should take advantage of the nice
weather to build up our mental health reserves for a tough fall. “We have to maintain our social distancing to keep the virus at bay,” he said, “but
I also think that we need to take a little bit of a mental health break, go outside, enjoy the weather, and enjoy being outdoors.”

The next wave will be much harder to manage unless preparedness measures are taken
now.
Specktor, 20 {Brandon, senior writer for Live Science and previously for Reader's Digest, 4-23-20, “Flu and coronavirus will launch dual
'assault' on America next winter if we don't prepare now, CDC chief warns”, https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-second-wave-flu-
season.html, BP]
A resurgence of COVID-19 next winter could hit the United States health care system even harder than
the original outbreak has, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has warned. If the virus has a
second wave that coincides with the start of flu season — which is responsible for thousands of American deaths per year —
then the nation's health care system will likely be even more overwhelmed and under-supplied than it has
been during the current outbreak of coronavirus in the U.S. , CDC Director Robert Redfield told The Washington Post on
Tuesday (April 21). "There's a possibility that the assault of the virus on our nation next winter will actually be
even more difficult than the one we just went through," Redfield said. "We're going to have the flu epidemic and the
coronavirus epidemic at the same time." The first wave of COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2,
has already killed nearly 46,000 people across the country since the first known U.S. case was reported in January. The
outbreak has overwhelmed hospitals and exposed huge shortages of test kits and personal protective
equipment like masks and gowns for health care workers. Fortunately , Redfield said, the epidemic arrived
toward the end of flu season, which usually peaks between December and February, and creates an annual
strain on the U.S. health care system. According to official CDC estimates, the flu killed nearly 32,000 Americans in the 2018-2019
season and resulted in half a million hospitalizations. If flu season had peaked at the same time as the COVID-19
outbreak, "it could have been really, really, really, really difficult in terms of health [care] capacity, "
Redfield said. That may well be the case this winter , he cautioned, if a second wave of coronavirus hits near the beginning of flu
season. Because a widely available coronavirus vaccine is likely still 12 to 18 months away, preventing a
deadly double-outbreak of respiratory viruses from ravaging the country will depend on a combination of
other actions. First, Redfield said, state and federal officials must continue to push for social distancing this summer as more businesses and
public spaces reopen. Social distancing has had an "enormous impact … on this outbreak in our nation" since the pandemic began, Redfield said,
and that will hold true until coronavirus vaccines are widely accessible. Second, the country needs to massively scale up testing
and contact tracing (individuals exposed to infected people) so
that new COVID-19 cases can be identified before they
become larger outbreaks. And finally, Redfield said, U.S. health officials must spend the summer months persuading citizens about the
importance of getting flu shots in the fall, in order to minimize the number of flu-related hospitalizations. As Redfield puts it, getting a flu
vaccination this year "may allow there to be a hospital bed available for your mother or grandmother that may get coronavirus." Updated April 22
at 8:00 p.m. ET: During the President's daily coronavirus briefing, director Redfield clarified his comments to the Post, saying: "I think it's really
important to emphasize what I didn't say. I didn't say [the next wave of COVID-19] was going to be worse. I said it was going to be more more
difficult and potentially complicated because we'll have flu and coronavirus circulating at the same time. I want to emphasize we continue to
build the nation's public health infrastructure to ensure that we have the capacity to stay in the
containment mode."

A vaccine is not in the books anytime soon – PPE is key to lessen the effects of the second
wave
Chavez, 20 [Nicole, writer for CNN Digital, 5-2-20, “Another wave of coronavirus will likely hit the US in the fall. Here's why and what
we can do to stop it”, https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/02/health/coronavirus-second-wave-fall-season/index.html, BP]
(CNN The coronavirus pandemic may have slowed down in many parts of the country because of social
distancing efforts but don't plan your parties, vacations or trips to the office just yet. Experts say the virus
won't be a thing of the past any time soon. A second round of Covid-19 cases is "inevitable" come fall , the
nation's top infectious disease doctor said, as people increasingly try to resume regular life and more states ease or lift
their stay-at-home orders. "I'm almost certain it will come back, because the virus is so transmissible and
it's globally spread," said Dr. Anthony Fauci during an Economic Club of Washington webinar earlier this week. Americans could
be in for "a bad fall and a bad winter" if the country is unprepared , said Fauci, who is the director of the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Here's what we know about the possibility of a second wave of the virus and the reasoning behind it.
Why in the fall? There are many aspects of the virus that remain unknown for scientists but older viruses are offering some clues. People usually
get infected by four common coronaviruses that were first identified in the mid-1960s, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. And those tend to peak in the winter months. Dr. Greg Poland, a professor of medicine and infectious diseases at the Mayo Clinic,
said that SARS-CoV-2, the technical name for the novel coronavirus that causes Covid-19, is likely to follow that pattern. If that happens, a
second wave of the virus would return just in time for the start of flu season . The flu has been a constant threat for
Americans and devastating in recent years. The CDC estimates there were at least 39 million cases of the flu in the US and at least 24,000 deaths
during the 2019-2020 season. Poland, the director of the Mayo Clinic's Vaccine Research Group, says the combination of a second
wave of Covid-19 with flu season could create "a lot of confusion" because of their overlap in symptoms
and put a heavy strain on the health care system. It wouldn't be the first pandemic to come back in force. In 2009, the US
experienced a wave of cases of the H1N1 influenza virus, known as swine flu, in the spring. Months later, a second wave was reported in the fall
and winter, the CDC says. "Often, not always ... often the second wave of a pandemic is worse ," Poland said, adding that the
coronavirus pandemic spread in the US well into the flu season. Another example is the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed 50 million people
globally and about 675,000 Americans. At the time, there was an initial mild spring wave in the US but a lethal second wave hit the country in
September. It appears that the novel coronavirus is likely to keep spreading for at least another 18 months. There are several possible scenarios
for the course of the pandemic but the worst of them is a second wave of infections just like the 1918 influenza pandemic, according to a report
by the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota. "This thing's not going to stop until it infects 60 to 70
percent of people," said Mike Osterholm, the CIDRAP director, in an interview with CNN. "The idea that this is going to be done soon defies
microbiology." Osterholm coauthored a CIDRAP report released Thursday that recommended the US prepare for a worst-case
scenario that includes a second big wave of coronavirus infections in the fall and winter. What can be done
about a second wave of infection? Health experts say the coming months would be a good time to prepare for a
potential second outbreak of the virus. Hospitals and clinics should replenish their stocks of personal
protective equipment and testing supplies. People should try to get healthier if possible, continue using face masks for the time
being and keep gatherings to no more than 10 people, several experts told CNN. As cities reopen, local officials should make plans to quickly
reissue stay-at-home orders or other strict social distancing measures in the future if needed, Poland said Health officials across the country must
continue focusing on expanding coronavirus testing, contact tracing and treatment, said Dr. Helen Boucher, chief of the geographic medicine and
infectious diseases division at Tufts University Medical Center. "We hope we'll have more tools in our toolbox, maybe we'll have some
treatments for Covid-19 by then, maybe we'll have better diagnostics," Boucher said. The Trump administration has estimated a
vaccine is 12 to 18 months away, though some leaders in the field say that timeline could be too fast.
Improving the way health workers handle the coronavirus pandemic will be key , Boucher says, so the country
is "as prepared as we can be" when it's time to face an outbreak of both the coronavirus and the flu. While
most experts believe that people who have recovered from the virus will have some sort of immunity, Poland says it's unclear how strong that
immunity might be, how long it might last and the accuracy of antibody tests is inconsistent. "We are placing a lot of hope on that but we don't
have answers yet," Poland said. "This (virus) is only 16 weeks old so there's a lot we don't know yet." The experimental anti-viral drug remdesivir
was approved on Friday by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat hospitalized Covid-19 patients in severe condition. The drug, which is
the first authorized treatment for Covid-19, is far from a cure, according to a government-funded study, but patients who took it recovered faster
than patients who did not. "We have work to do. We are looking for other therapies. This trial is going to continue," Dr. Andre Kalil, the principal
investigation behind the clinical trial, told CNN's Elizabeth Cohen earlier this week. Has the virus made a comeback elsewhere? Yes. In recent
weeks, Singapore has seen a dramatic spike in coronavirus infections, with thousands of new cases linked to clusters in foreign worker
dormitories. Singapore had initially been praised for its response and apparent ability to suppress infections in the first three months of the
coronavirus pandemic. Then the number of cases exploded in April. Since March 17, Singapore's total cases grew from 266 to more than 17,000,
according to data from Johns Hopkins University. To control the spread, the government has attempted to isolate the dormitories, test workers
and move symptomatic patients into quarantine facilities. It's a daunting task because workers live in cramped conditions that make social
distancing near impossible. The government also instituted what it is calling a "circuit breaker," a package of restrictions and new rules,
combined with harsh punishments. The semi-autonomous Chinese city of Hong Kong had a relatively small number of cases when it saw a spike
after it relaxed restrictions in March. Many cases were imported from overseas as Hong Kong residents who had left -- either to work or study
abroad, or to seek safety when the city seemed destined for a major outbreak earlier this year -- returned, bringing the virus back with them.

All indicators point for a second wave in late fall – preparedness is the only way to solve
Khan, 20 [Amina, staff writer for Los Angeles Times, 4-23-20, “How will we know whether the coronavirus will come back stronger in the
winter?”, https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-04-23/will-there-be-a-coronavirus-second-wave-this-winter, BP] ***edited for ableist
language
Even as policymakers discuss potentially reopening state and local economies, state and federal officials are
warning of the need to be prepared for a potential “second wave” of the coronavirus outbreak once the initial
one dies down. But is a second wave inevitable? The answer depends on the nature of the virus itself, our own
behavior and the degree to which we prepare for another surge , experts said. While scientists are still trying to
understand the ins and outs of the virus that has infected more than 2.6 million people around the world and caused more than 186,000 COVID-
19 deaths, they can make some educated guesses about how long it will remain a menace by studying the
behavior of other coronaviruses. There are actually several types that can infect humans, including four that are responsible for about
a quarter of our common colds. Though the new SARS-CoV-2 variety is more dangerous, the fact that it’s a
coronavirus suggests it may have characteristics in common with its older cousins. The cold-causing
viruses are in fact pretty seasonal — the number of people they sicken spikes in the winter and spring, then
transmission declines during the summer, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease specialist at Johns Hopkins University. There’s no
reason, at least biologically, to think that SARS-CoV-2 would buck that seasonal pattern . “I suspect this will
come back [and] if we do get any kind of lull in the summer that this will likely pick up in the fall, just like other coronaviruses do,” Adalja said.
One reason for those summer lulls is that coronaviruses are not all that hardy in the environment, he said. Generally speaking, they don’t do well
in hotter, more humid, sunnier weather, in part because they’re vulnerable to ultraviolet light and wrapped in a lipid envelope that can dry out as
the temperature climbs. That doesn’t necessarily mean COVID-19 cases will peter out to the same extent as coronavirus-induced colds, he added,
since immunity would be more of a factor for viruses that have been in circulation for a long time. SARS-CoV-2 is so new that this kind of buffer
doesn’t really exist — at least, not yet. When summer comes, “the environmental conditions might not be conducive to its spread,” but the virus
is “not going to have a hard time finding people to infect,” Adalja said. Dr. George Rutherford, an epidemiologist and infectious disease expert at
UC San Francisco, also warned against pinning too much hope on a sharp warm-weather slump. After all, he said, the virus was circulating in the
Southern Hemisphere in January, which was the height of summer there. “So that’s one strike against it,” he said. A second strike, he added,
comes from a report of likely coronavirus transmission at a bathhouse about 430 miles from Wuhan, China. A customer who had been to Wuhan
visited the facility in January, a day before he developed symptoms of COVID-19. Seven other customers who used the same shower, sauna and
swimming pool were subsequently infected, as was an employee. The virus seems to have been able to spread even though temperatures in the
bathhouse ranged from 77 to nearly 106 degrees Fahrenheit, and humidity was as high as 60%, according to the report in the journal JAMA Open
Network. “If it transmitted there, there’s not a lot of hope for the summer,” Rutherford said. Humans could make things even easier for the
coronavirus if they relax social distancing measures and other restrictions too hastily, said Dr. Robert Kim-Farley, a medical epidemiologist and
infectious disease expert at UCLA. “It’s possible that this second wave won’t even wait until the fall — it could be that simply we relax our
physical distancing too soon,” said Kim-Farley, who led the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s Division of Communicable
Disease Control and Prevention for 14 years. “We may have to, from time to time, reimpose a few physical distancing measures to make sure that
we continue to beat it back,” he added. Keep in mind, the coronavirus outbreak began in the United States partway through a typical cold and flu
season, which begins in the fall. If the virus resurges, it will have more time to spread under more hospitable conditions. That said, the next
seasonal peak for other coronaviruses is still several months away , experts said. How we use those months
could make all the difference between whether a second wave can be managed or will make the losses
we’ve seen so far seem small by comparison. To prepare, health officials must make coronavirus testing — both to diagnose
active infections and to identify people who have recovered — more robust and widespread. With a better handle on how many people have
survived the infection, scientists can more accurately determine SARS-CoV-2’s transmission patterns, the possible level of herd immunity and
where communities are on the epidemic curve. The national strategic stockpile of personal protective equipment will
need to be replenished, as will states’ own stockpiles of ventilators and other necessary medical equipment. Hospitals must develop surge
capacity plans and be ready to implement them. The goal, Kim-Farley said, is to ensure “that we don’t get blindsided [caught
off guard] the second time around.”

Tons of health care leaders a calling for a stockpiling of PPE in order to prevent the second
wave.
Murphy, 20 [Matt, State House News Service, 6-30-20, “Providers Urge State To Stock Up On PPE For Second
Wave”, https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2020/06/30/senate-health-care-listening-protective-equipment-coronavirus, BP]
Physician groups, hospitals and nurses told senators Monday that as policy leaders prepare for a possible
second wave of the coronavirus in the fall the state should be thinking about how it can play a role in
ensuring personal protective equipment isn't in short supply. The health care leaders told legislators that
in addition to the state developing a stockpile that could be bought into by providers if supplies run low,
the state should also be thinking about securing a supply chain now to avoid the bidding wars that
providers and states fought early in the pandemic. "For medical practices right now, PPE is the utilities
and although it's not what the state has done in the past, it's an important one ," said Dr. David Rosman, president of
the Massachusetts Medical Society. "This is our moment," Rosman said, pointing out the lull in the spread of the virus. The Senate convened a
health care listening session on Monday to hear from providers, hospitals and others about the impact of COVID-19 and ways the Legislature
could help. Lawmakers were told that making the expanded use of telehealth permanent and codifying an executive order that waived the need
for prior authorization from insurers before doctors could treat patients were top priorities. But at least a half dozen hospital
executive and physicians all circled back to personal protective equipment. Dr. Steven Strongwater, president and
CEO of Atrius Health, said smaller practices have a lot more trouble securing the PPE they need than larger
hospitals. "We need to move away from real time inventory management to having a reserve capacity and
the ability to surge," Strongwater said. "I'd like to point out the state had as much trouble as you did finding PPE, and it's wasn't for lack of
trying," said Sen. Cindy Friedman.
 IL – PPE key
New PPE sourcing is key to the entire fight against coronavirus---without it, the entire
frontline is eviscerated
Wan 6/8’, (William Wan, Education: University of Chicago, BA in English literature; University of Maryland, MA in Journalism. William
Wan is The Washington Post's health & science correspondent, “America is running short on masks, gowns and gloves. Again.” Washington
Post, July 8, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/07/08/ppe-shortage-masks-gloves-gowns/)
Health-care workers on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic are encountering shortages of masks,
gowns, face shields and gloves — a frustrating recurrence of a struggle that haunted the first months of
the crisis. Nurses say they are reusing N95 masks for days and even weeks at a time. Doctors say they can’t reopen offices because they lack
personal protective equipment. State officials say they have scoured U.S. and international suppliers for PPE and
struggle to get orders filled. Experts worry the problem could worsen as coronavirus infections climb,
straining medical systems. “A lot people thought once the alarm was sounded back in March surely the federal government would fix
this, but that hasn’t happened,” said Deborah Burger, a California nurse and president of National Nurses United, a union representing registered
nurses. Like many health-care workers, Burger blamed the Trump administration for the lack of equipment, noting the administration has insisted
the responsibility falls to state and local officials, with the federal government playing only a supporting role. The specter of equipment shortages
comes as other issues that plagued the country’s early response to the pandemic return: surging cases, overwhelmed hospitals, lagging testing and
contradictory public health messages. But the inability to secure PPE is especially frustrating, health-care workers
say, because it is their main defense against catching the virus. For weeks, nurses have posted online testimonials about a
lack of PPE, with some given surgical masks instead of N95 masks because of shortages. In a video posted last week, a Florida nurse said she
breaks the oath she took “to do no harm” every time she goes to work without protection and worries constantly she may be infecting her patients,
co-workers and family. In interviews, White House officials said concerns over PPE shortages are overblown. They said U.S. manufacturing and
stockpiles of protective equipment have improved dramatically and are adequate in most states. “I’m not going to tell you we’re able to meet all
demand, but there’s significantly less unfulfilled orders today than in April,” said Rear Adm. John Polowczyk, whom President Trump put in
charge of coronavirus-related supplies. “I have not found a hospital system that is in threat of running out. … I don’t have the sense of there being
severe shortages.” Polowczyk said the Trump administration has helped increase domestic manufacturing of PPE and that demand continues to
outstrip supply because hospitals, states and the federal government are trying to stockpile supplies. He blamed some of the concern about
shortages on outdated letters to Congress from March and April. But the administration’s reassurance contrasts with growing alarm from medical
associations, governors, nursing homes and members of Congress — all of whom have pleaded for federal help within the past month.
Demand for protective equipment has soared, but unlike in March, when efforts focused on getting PPE
for major hospitals — especially in New York, Detroit and Chicago — supplies now are desperately
needed by primary care offices, nursing homes, prisons and psychiatric and disability facilities. As many
states continue to reopen their economies, demand has also surged from the construction industry and other sectors. With soaring demand, prices
have skyrocketed. Some hospitals say much of the PPE they have acquired has been exorbitantly priced. At a legislative hearing, a hospital
association executive detailed how one Maryland hospital that spent $600,000 on PPE last year expects to spend $10 million this year. The
struggles have been especially acute for smaller and rural providers that can’t compete with bigger health systems on price and large-scale orders,
experts say. In a letter last week, the American Medical Association told the Federal Emergency Management Agency that doctor’s offices
outside big systems — including those providing primary care, chemotherapy and minor surgeries — have struggled to reopen because they are
unable to secure PPE. The association, which pleaded for transparency and a coordinated national strategy, said it is unclear “whether the
central problem is in the availability of raw material, production backlogs, gaps in the distribution
systems, or some combination of all three.” In a second letter, the medical association urged the White House to invoke the
Defense Production Act to compel manufacturers to increase supplies of N95 masks and gowns. A Washington Post-Ipsos poll in May found
two-thirds of front-line health-care workers were still experiencing insufficient supplies of face masks that filter out airborne particles. And
dmore than 4 in 10 were seeing shortages of less protective surgical masks. National nurse unions and associations say their members are almost
all asked to reuse masks designed for single use. In Washington state, Gov. Jay Inslee (D) said state officials have struggled to find domestic and
international suppliers. In a letter to Trump last month, Inslee said he has tried to buy $400 million in equipment, but only 10 percent of orders
have been filled. “It is clear that the status quo is not working,” Inslee said, pointing to an inadequate federal stockpile, reliance
on foreign suppliers and limited domestic production. He described a counterproductive and “unnecessary, chaotic, 50-state
scramble to secure badly needed PPE” and cited the continued lack of a coordinated federal response. “It is akin to fighting a war
in which each state is responsible for procuring its own weapons and body armor.” As the virus has rampaged through America,
it has pummeled the ranks of health-care workers, infecting at least 94,000 and killing at least 500,
according to an incomplete count by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The true number is
believed to be much higher. A study of U.S. and British medical workers found their risk of testing positive for
the coronavirus was 12 times higher than the general public’s . The researchers from Massachusetts General Hospital and
King’s College London found that workers with inadequate PPE access were at even higher risk. “The limited availability of
adequate PPE, such as masks, gowns and gloves, has raised concerns about whether our health care
system is able to fully protect our health care workers,” senior author Andrew T. Chan, chief of the Clinical and
Translational Epidemiology Unit at Massachusetts General, said in a statement. Last month, Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) successfully pressed
FEMA to release an internal report that showed alarming shortages of medical gowns and no meaningful increase in their production since
March, when nurses and doctors in New York resorted to wearing trash bags. The FEMA report states bluntly, “The demand for gowns outpaces
current US manufacturing capabilities.” The report also suggests health-care workers will need to keep reusing N95 masks for months to come.

Increasing supplies of proper PPE are key to stop the virus

Ballard 5/4/30 Madeleine Ballard, is an Assistant Professor at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. She holds a PhD in evaluation
science (EBSI) from the University of Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar , She COVID-19: It Ain’t Over Until There’s PPE All Over,
https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/covid-19-it-aint-over-until-theres-ppe-all-over

In a widely circulated white paper published in March, the Community Health Impact Coalition articulated priorities for the global COVID-19
response. We argued that community health workers—lay people who are trained to provide health services in their neighborhoods—
are poised to play a pivotal role in fighting the pandemic and outlined the targeted actions needed at different stages of the
pandemic to (i) protect health-care workers, (ii) interrupt the virus, (iii) maintain existing health-care services while surging their capacity,
and (iv) shield the most vulnerable from socioeconomic shocks. It is now clear that decisive action to blunt the
impact of the pandemic in countries about to be hit the hardest is facing a critical bottleneck: community health workers—despite being
a critical part of the response—are not receiving personal protective equipment (PPE). COVID-19 spreads primarily through droplets
emitted while coughing, sneezing, or even speaking. PPE (e.g., facemasks, goggles, gloves) is essential to keep health workers safe and prevent
them from potentially spreading the disease to others. Without PPE, community health workers can neither maintain
existing health services nor conduct the additional services required to interrupt and control the virus . Since the
COVID-19 outbreak began, global demand for PPE has grown by a factor of twenty. While a global shortage of PPE is affecting all health
workers, the brunt has fallen on low- and middle-income countries and community health workers in particular. In a time when every nation that
has planked the curve has recruited community health workers to conduct aggressive community testing and contact tracing, the collective failure
to provide adequate PPE to community health workers in emerging COVID-19 hotspots will be catastrophic. The alternatives are grim.
community health workers in many countries are receiving instructions from the health system to either stay home, stop working, and cease
providing essential health-care services to their communities—or keep working with no protection, putting themselves, their families, and the
people they serve at risk. COVID-19 is not over for anyone until it is over for everyone. Community health workers are ready for the fight, but
they quickly need to be equipped with the proper quantity and quality of PPE. Quantity: Counting the Uncounted Community health workers
cannot get PPE if they are not included in national planning and projections. Several countries have excluded or deprioritized community health
workers in PPE projections because the “COVID-19 Critical Items” guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO) advises, “Priority for
PPE provision is given to health-care workers treating critical and severe COVID-19 patients only.” This is a disconnect. Community health
workers encounter the critically ill as part of their routine service delivery, and all it takes is one such encounter to get infected and potentially
spread the infection to others. In fact, recent estimates indicate that 44 percent of secondary transmission could occur in presymptomatic patients.
Without PPE, community health workers must attempt to treat patients from six feet away. For many services (e.g., malaria testing,
immunizations, screening for malnutrition) this is impossible. Limiting the care community health workers provide also has the potential to
increase the burden on health facilities with cases that could otherwise be managed at home. This additional pressure to already-stressed health
systems places patients and other health cadres at further risk. For community health workers to continue to provide lifesaving care face to face,
PPE is required. Critically, this is true of all community health workers—formal or informal. Although the WHO COVID-19 Essential Supplies
Forecasting Tool used by many ministries of health to quantify PPE includes community health workers, its use of International Standard
Classification of Occupations (ISCO) codes excludes the hundreds of thousands of hidden volunteer community health workers who do not meet
the ISCO criteria but are nonetheless tasked with delivering health-care services in homes and communities. Ministries and partners should
therefore act quickly to adjust their PPE forecasts, effectively counting the uncounted so all community health workers can be equipped. If
community health workers' rolls are inaccurate or nonexistent, funders, civil society, and norm-setting institutions should support ministries to
make the best estimates possible of community health workers numbers, services, and distribution so that none are left behind. Quality: Same
Standards for All Not all PPE is the same, and community health workers deserve quality PPE just like any other health worker. Cloth
masks, for example, are not equivalent to respirators (N95s) and surgical masks: rigorous studies show that
cloth masks do not provide adequate protection for health-care workers , yet around the world community health
workers are being asked to use them.

Shortage of PPE equipment now

Martin, 20 [Naomi, Globe Staff, 6-21-20, “‘It’s like pulling teeth’: There’s still a PPE shortage — and a second wave could send medical workers
into crisis mode”, https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/06/21/nation/dangerous-shortages-protective-gear-persist-mass-hospitals-clinicians-say/,
BP]
Even as the rate of new coronavirus cases has ebbed across Massachusetts, medical workers say they still face
shortages of gear to protect themselves, their families, and their patients. Many are taking matters into their
own hands, while worrying that a second wave of infections, which some experts consider likely, would
again send them into crisis mode. “There truly was a supply chain crisis in March. ... But that was March
and this is June, and me and my co-workers are still working in substandard equipment that we’re using
multiple times that were supposed to be used only once, ” said Jillian Brelsford, a nurse at Cambridge Health Alliance, where
she says colleagues must wear face masks designed for single use for five shifts before receiving a new one. “Our health and safety and lives have
been made expendable.” The problem seems worse at smaller community hospitals, doctors say, but even the most
well-funded systems are struggling. Hospitals say supply chains remain unreliable amid unprecedented
worldwide demand, with vendors often delivering late or sometimes just a small fraction of the order.
Materials managers at Mass. General Brigham have “literally scoured the world,” and “no penny has been
spared,” said Ann Prestipino, a senior vice president who helps oversee the pandemic response for the 14-hospital system. But the supply
lines are still “a little fragile, as they are for everybody.” As the state continues to gradually reopen the economy, doctors
and nurses worry that non-health-care industries will buy the coveted personal protective equipment, or
PPE, for employees, or that it will be used up by medical personnel performing elective procedures, now
that such surgeries have resumed. They fear, too, that leaders may not see the problem as urgent now that
the state’s coronavirus case numbers have fallen.
 ! – covid – 200 million
2nd wave will directly kill 200 million people
Harden & Ivers 3/29/20 R. David Harden is managing director of the Georgetown Strategy Group and former assistant administrator
at USAID’s Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance, where he oversaw U.S. assistance to all global crises. Louise C. Ivers
MD, MPH, DTM&H is the executive director of Massachusetts General Hospital Center for Global Health, associate professor of Global Health
and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, Anticipating the next waves of COVID-19, https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/490028-
anticipating-the-next-waves-of-covid-19

Today politicians, public health officials, and economists debate whether to roll back social distancing and other containment measures by Easter
in order to open the economy. Our nation faced similar challenges in 1918. The start of the influenza pandemic began in March 1918,
with more than 100 reported cases at Camp Funston in Fort Riley, Kansas. That pandemic, the worst in modern history, occurred in three
waves, infecting a third of the world’s population and killing 50 million people, including 675,000 in the United
States alone. The movement of troops at the end of World War I contributed to the spread of influenza, with the second wave in the fall of 1918
being the most deadly. The third wave subsided in the summer of 1919, 15 months later. The lessons of the 1918 influenza
pandemic remain relevant to a COVID-19 response today for three reasons. First, the costs of an unmitigated
pandemic overwhelms. More people died of the 1918 pandemic in 15 months than from four years of conflict in World
War I. To put that early 20th Century pandemic in perspective, a proportionally rough equivalent pandemic today would
kill 200 million people, including 2 million in the United States . Second, pandemics may have multiple
waves until a sufficient number of individuals become immune, either by surviving infection or through effective vaccination. How the global
community’s current approach to slowing the novel coronavirus pandemic will result in future waves remains to be seen, but the risk is real.
China, for example, has reported their caseload shift from sustained community transmission to ongoing imported cases, requiring continued
high-level alertness to detect, contain and prevent a large second wave. Having initially been considered a model for containment efforts, Hong
Kong recently reported an increase in cases, largely the result of imported cases from overseas. Waves of pandemic disease are
typical in many infections. The seventh pandemic of cholera, for instance, began in 1961 and continues to cause outbreaks today, sometimes
with devastating consequences as was the case in Haiti in 2010 and Yemen in 2017-2018. Third, a domestic approach to blunt
pandemic disease must align with international containment and mitigation efforts more broadly; not only is this
the right thing to do, but subsequent waves can be more deadly than the first, as America experienced in 1918. In other infectious diseases, this is
often the case. Studies of the genomic lineage of cholera in Africa, for example, demonstrate that since the infection was introduced to the
continent in 1969, it is not inherently entrenched there, but has been repeatedly re-introduced from Asia. As a result, public health interventions in
Asia are essential to cholera control in Africa and, likely, globally. It is nearly impossible to contain a pandemic by addressing an outbreak in
only one nation. There are significant structural deficits in global public health that will accelerate
transmission of COVID-19 and put the U.S. at risk of future waves . First, like the 1918 influenza, war will continue to
facilitate the transmission of today’s pandemic. The grinding conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan, and the Democratic Republic of the
Congo represent potential unmitigated hot spots for innocents caught in the war zones. These countries do not have central governments or
functional health systems. There is often damaged health infrastructure, a lack of laboratory capacity, and few skilled health workers serving
populations with low literacy rates and pervasive food and water insecurity. Second, social distancing is not feasible for any prolonged period of
time in many instances. As a result of war and insecurity, millions of people are forced to migrate to internal displacement camps or to cross
borders as refugees. Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Bangladesh, and Ethiopia for example, all host large refugee populations. These refugees, living in
dense, insecure camps and temporary shelters will find it materially impossible to self-quarantine or socially distance themselves to mitigate the
spread of COVID-19. The undomiciled and incarcerated face similar challenges to self-quarantine and social distancing. Approximately 1.4
million Americans will spend some time in a shelter in a given year. Worse yet, given the economic collapse, there may well be a surge in
homelessness in the months ahead. Third, health care systems and public health systems in most low- and middle-income countries will be unable
to cope with the capacity demands of the pandemic because of chronic neglect of surveillance and outbreak response infrastructure, and a major
deficit in both the built environment and the health workforce. While some progress has been made in creating platforms for diagnosing and
treating HIV globally, other pandemic diseases like tuberculosis (TB) demonstrate the failures of public health delivery, despite longstanding
diagnosis and treatment protocols. This failure has consequences: 1.5 million people die from TB each year – making it the world’s top infectious
killer. India, China, Indonesia, Philippines, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and South Africa account for two thirds of these new tuberculosis
cases, illustrating the limitations of existing global health systems. COVID-19 could devastate many countries in Africa and South Asia, creating
massive and unmitigated hotspots across continents and much of humanity. Military not accepting new recruits who've recovered from COVID-
19 Walla Walla County officials warn against COVID-19 parties to expose... Given the likelihood of emerging hotspots and the lack of
aggressive containment measures, there is a real risk that multiple waves of COVID-19 could extend throughout
this year and into 2021. The United States has become the current epicenter of the pandemic with the world’s
highest caseload. The administration must better control the current spread, reduce the risk of subsequent
waves, and help lead a global response not only to alleviate the suffering of the world’s most vulnerable but also to protect the
homeland.
 ! – covid – war
A 2nd wave would trigger a global war—the time frame is quick
Gopman 4/16/20 Gregory Gopman is the founder of AngelHack, VR Worldwide, and the Akash Network. He started the A Better San
Francisco community organization, which brought ShelterTech and The Downtown Streets Team to San Francisco. Preparing for the Global
Great Depression, https://medium.com/@GregGopman/preparing-for-the-global-great-depression-d365fdc482cd

When COVID-19 first struck America, I knew we were headed for a recession level event. However, I thought it would be a black swan
event, allowing the economy to quickly recover. However, it is quite clear now that social distancing will last until months after a vaccine is out.
Meaning the global economy won’t recover until at least 2022 . And that’s assuming things don’t start to break, which they
will. Even if the US economy opens back up again, consumers will not be spending like they used to. Bars/Restaurants sales will be down 50%,
as well as business working in tourism, travel, and entertainment (down 80%). A growing lack of consumer confidence will
affect all companies, even those in tech who will see double-digit drops in customers and revenue. No one will be shopping, so retail sales
will drop more than 50% and discretionary spending will be cut out from most budgets. Companies will stop hiring, additional large layoffs will
begin, and then people will start defaulting on rents and mortgages, causing residential and commercial real
estate to plummet. And this is under the assumption is that we can open up the economy again in May, albeit with everyone wearing
masks. Somehow, stock market investors haven’t thought this through and are expecting some form of an economic recovery. I expect by June it
will be clear there is no going back to the normal we all knew and the true recession cycle will begin. Now, that’s an optimistic scenario. Under a
worst-case scenario, the Wuhan Coronavirus has another big outbreak, and we have to completely shut the economy
down again with another 2T+ stimulus to try and hold off the inevitable. This could happen in June/July/August or really
anytime before a vaccine is found. The absolute worst-case scenario is that we create a vaccine, and the virus mutates again, causing this
recession cycle to last even longer. The only glimmer of hope we have is that we find an effective treatment
measure that will allow people to go back to consuming goods without fear again. Or something that would allow us to socialize in public
again. That would help a lot! But it still won’t give people back the savings and confidence they used to have pre-coronavirus. Pretty much any
way you look at it, the economy is completely fucked. What we had in 2019, we will never have again. And if you think it’s bad for America,
things will almost certainly be worst for almost every other country in the world. In the coming years you can expect the Euro to fail,
the CCP to self-destruct, and a new global war to come as countries struggle with limited resources, unimaginable
unemployment, and economic hardships that will cripple most nations.

Superpower war--The second wave this fall may generate conflict between the U.S. Russia
and China
Kitfield 5/22/20 James Kitfield is a senior fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress. Previously he was a senior
correspondent for National Journal. A three-time winner of the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on National Defense, Will
COVID-19 Kill The Liberal World Order? https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/will-covid-19-kill-the-liberal-world-order/
For a brief moment it seemed that the worst global pandemic in a century might lead to increased comity between the United States, China and
Russia after years of geopolitical eye-gouging. As the virus spread there were early signs of a pause in the escalating cycle of military
brinksmanship, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and trade wars that has badly shaken the rules-based international order in this era of
great power competition. Beijing seemed to initially embrace a spirit of cooperation when it donated protective gear and testing equipment to
hard hit countries in Europe. President Trump for months was uncharacteristically effusive in his praise of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s efforts
to combat the virus. Russian President Vladimir Putin got into the soft power act in early April when he dispatched an An-124 military transport
to New York filled with donated masks and ventilators. (Of course, you can also argue it was a highly effective information operation designed to
undermine U.S. standing in the world.) That moment was short lived. “Unfortunately, this crisis is likely to unfold in three
consecutive waves, with a public health crisis followed by an economic crisis, quite possibly followed by a
security crisis,” said David Kilcullen, author of the recent book “The Dragons and Snakes: How the Rest Learned to Fight the West,” and a
former special adviser to Gen. David Petraeus in Iraq, and the U.S. Secretary of State. The United States is already experiencing high levels of
domestic unrest at a time of paralyzing partisan rancor, he noted, and the discord will certainly increase as the presidential election nears in
November. Adding to that combustible mixture is likely to be a second wave of the virus expected to hit in
the fall, and foreign actors like Russian and China determined to use disinformation to stoke domestic divisions during the election. “Given the
likelihood of internal instability and anti-government anger here and around the world, there will be a huge incentive for leaders
who personalize politics like Trump, [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and [Chinese President] Xi Jinping to look for
external scapegoats for their domestic troubles, which has already started to happen, ” said Kilcullen. “This crisis
also comes at a point when the international system that we’ve known since the end of World War II was already rotting and weaker than it
appears. It may only take one big shock to bring that whole structure down, and, if we’re not very careful, the pandemic could be that shock. So
this is the most dangerous geopolitical dynamic I have seen in my entire career.”
It can escalate to inadvertent war among the worlds 3 largest nuclear power
Kitfield 5/22/20 James Kitfield is a senior fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress. Previously he was a senior
correspondent for National Journal. A three-time winner of the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on National Defense, Will
COVID-19 Kill The Liberal World Order? https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/will-covid-19-kill-the-liberal-world-order/
History is rife with cautionary examples of natural disasters or economic crises conflating with
geopolitical tensions, with cataclysmic results. The catastrophic 1918 Spanish flu pandemic, which killed more
than 20 million victims worldwide, was accelerated and spread by troop movements during World War I. With many Americans
disillusioned by the war and loss, the United States turned insular and isolationist during the 1920s, rejecting the League of Nations, dramatically
curtailing immigration and erecting steep tariff barriers to trade. Much of the rest of the world followed suit. The U.S. stock market
crash of 1929 was compounded the next year by one of the worst droughts in history. When the Japanese invaded China two years later, and
Adolf Hitler became German chancellor soon after, there was no League of Nations nor stabilizing trading systems to contain the war fever that
swept the globe and became World War II. “When you think back to 1918 and the Spanish flu, it’s worth remembering that more
people died in the second wave than the first, and the Great Depression and the 1930s taught us that bad economic conditions can be
transformative,” said Joseph Nye, a professor emeritus and former Dean of the Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, speaking recently on a
videoconference organized by The National Interest. “The point is, in the current pandemic we’re likely only in Act 1 of a multi-act play.”
Combustible Leadership The very real potential for the pandemic crisis to propel the major powers towards
outright military conflict was noted recently by the Chinese Ministry of State Security, Beijing’s top intelligence agency. In a report for
Xi Jinping and the senior Chinese leadership it reportedly concluded that global anti-China sentiment being stoked by the Trump administration
has reached its highest peak since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown, and as a result China needs to be prepared for a worst-case scenario of
armed confrontation with the United States. Despite the warnings, Xi Jinping has doubled down in recent months on
provocative military maneuvers in its neighboring seas, sending its Liaoning carrier battle group and military flights off the coast of
Taiwan; conducting anti-submarine exercises in contested areas of the South China Sea; ramming and sinking a Vietnamese fishing boat near the
disputed Paracel Islands; dispatching a fishing boat “militia” to harass Philippine counterparts near the contested Spratly Islands; and harassing a
Malaysian drillship. The littoral combat ship USS Montgomery conducts operations near drillship, the West Capella, in Malaysian waters. Some
analysts see those moves as an attempt by Xi Jinping to show strength and bolster his image at home among a Chinese populace wearied by the
pandemic shutdowns and economic disruptions. Those provocations are exactly the kind of saber-rattling that can escalate dangerously in a time
of crisis. George Beebe is a former director of the CIA’s Russia analysis section , and author of the book “The Russia Trap:
How Our Shadow War with Russia Could Spiral into Catastrophe.” “My concern is that the
major power leaders Putin, Xi and
Trump all tend to personalize international relations and politics . They are all going through severe economic and
political distress. Each of them is convinced that their rivals are trying to exploit the pandemic crisis, and not
one of them is dealing from a position of strength and confidence ,” he told me. Putin has long felt betrayed and
threatened by the United States, Beebe noted, and Xi Jinping is convinced that America is trying to thwart China’s rise. One of the few constants
in Trump’s worldview is the conviction that China has taken advantage of the United States with trade going back decades. “So there’s a lot of
fear and emotion and very little trust in the relationships between these leaders during a time of great strain, and their communications and
diplomatic mechanisms to manage a crisis if one occurs have atrophied,” said Beebe. “Given that personalities and personal relationships among
national leaders are far more important in international affairs than a lot of people appreciate, I do worry that we’re entering a very
dangerous period when cooler heads may not prevail among the great power leaders.”
 ! – covid – turns protests
Activists halt protests due to increased infections
Shammas et al. 6/22’ (Brittany Shammas, Chelsea Janes, Lateshia Beachum and Lenny Bernstein, “ Activists halt street
protests in South Carolina as some demonstrators become infected” , The Washington Post, June 22, 2020,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/22/coronavirus-live-updates-us/)
South Carolina racial justice activists said they would postpone future demonstrations or move them online
after at least 13 people who took part in previous protests tested positive for the coronavirus. As the number of
cases across the country continued to climb ominously Monday, organizers of “I Can’t Breathe” protests in South Carolina urged
participants to get tested for the virus. In a video posted Sunday on Facebook, organizer Lawrence Nathaniel said demonstrators
who marched in Columbia, S.C., between May 30 and June 17 have tested positive. He said four organizers were confirmed
infected, along with three photographers and six protesters.
 ! – covid – turns inequality
2nd wave expands racial inequality
Picchi, 20 [Aimee, CBS News, 7-7-20, “Unemployment could worsen in a COVID-19 second wave”,
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/unemployment-covid-coronavirus-economic-hit-second-wave-oecd/, BP]
Employers are rehiring furloughed workers, helping reduce the double-digit unemployment rate in May
and June. But those gains are at risk if a second wave of the coronavirus pandemic hits the U.S. this year,
according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Still, there is some good news: A second wave — and its economic
impact — could be minimized or even avoided if the nation relies on widespread use of masks , banning large
gatherings and increasing testing until a vaccine becomes available later this year or next year, the OECD said. "Countries can prevent a second
pandemic wave, and a consequent lockdown, if they implement comprehensive packages of public health
interventions," the OECD said in a report issued Tuesday. Among those are "enhancement of hygienic measures such as frequent handwashing and deep
cleaning to decrease the probability of being infected by contaminated objects, and use of masks," it added. Globally, the jobs hit of the COVID-
19 crisis has been 10 times larger than the first few months of the Great Recession in 2008, based on the drop in
employment and the reduction in hours worked among people who kept their jobs, the OECD said. The intergovernmental group called the
numbers "stark" and its projections "bleak." Even if the nation avoids a second wave, unemployment in the U.S. will remain high in 2020,
ending the year at 10.4% compared with 11.1% in June, the OECD forecast in a Tuesday report. The warning about the economic damage
from a second wave comes as coronavirus cases are rising in dozens of states, with Texas and Florida each surpassing
200,000 cases on Sunday. Already, there are signs that states now seeing explosive growth in coronavirus cases are taking an economic hit,with slowdowns in
restaurant bookings and consumer spending. A
second wave could reduce U.S. employment at the end of 2020 by 15%
compared with a year earlier, or almost double the 8% hit to employment from the initial wave, the OECD
projects. "Countries now need to do everything they can to avoid this jobs crisis turning into a full-blown
social crisis," said OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría in a statement. The U.S. and other countries should maintain supportive macroeconomic policies "to
minimize the risk of a prolonged slump and a lost generation of young people whose labor market prospects are durably harmed," he added. "Low-cost opportunities"
The crisis could hurt already marginalized workers more than those in positions of privilege, such as
higher-earning workers and men, who are more likely to work in jobs that can be done remotely . Self-
employed workers, young Americans, women and minorities are among those feeling the brunt of the
crisis, which could spiral into greater inequalities , the OECD said. Almost 6 in 10 U.S. workers in the top earnings quartile could
work from home in April, compared with about 3 in 10 workers in the bottom income quartile, the report noted. Masks are one of the "fairly low-
cost opportunities for the U.S. to eventually achieve both a reduction in virus spread and further
reopening of the economy," Goldman Sachs analysts said in a Saturday note to clients, pointing out that only about half of U.S. states have put a masks
mandate into effect. Texas joined those states last week, which Goldman noted indicates "that state authorities are willing to making politically controversial policy
changes to address the current health crisis."
 ! – covid – turns economy
A 2nd wave will lead to a Long term depression
Simmons 4/7/20 Mitchell E. Simmons Ph.D. MSA MSME, Lieutenant Colonel, United States Air Force (Retired) is the Program Director
in the School of Science and Technology Intelligence at the National Intelligence University in Bethesda, Maryland. COVID-19: The Economic
Impact, Possibility of Second Wave, and Culture Shift, https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/pandemic-biohazard/covid-19-the-economic-
impact-possibility-of-second-wave-and-culture-shift/
On March 31, President Trump in a COVID-19 briefing stated that it’s going to be a “very, very painful two weeks” before we see “some real
light at the end of the tunnel.” The U.S. has now become the epicenter of the worst pandemic in a hundred years .
His comments were centered on simulations and analysis that indicated between 100,000 to 240,000 people in the U.S. may
die as a result of COVID-19 by the end of the year . COVID-19 has established a foothold in the U.S. population, and it has
the potential to become far more explosive. The human and economic toll occurring in the U.S. is almost
incalculable. Most concerning is the already strained healthcare system, which now has to stand up against what is anticipated to be a
growing tidal wave of more cases and patient fatalities in certain parts of the country. Faced with near depletion of personal protective equipment,
orders of magnitudes fewer ventilators than needed, and a healthcare system that has already been running at a marathon pace and now is asked to
run wind-sprints, this tidal wave is going to sweep over our healthcare clinicians, nurses, and administrative staffs in profound ways. In the
coming weeks, the U.S. is likely to see thousands of people dying daily on top of the typical morality. Sadly, the light at the end of the tunnel that
President Trump mentioned is still very far away for many. Briefings by the administration’s task force indicate that it hopes the fatality curve
will flatten, and it’s likely to in time – however, not widely discussed is research indicating COVID-19 is likely to be a persistent issue through
the summer.[1] Even though research has shown that temperature increases lower case rates of other coronaviruses[2], it is still uncertain how
COVID-19 will react. So far, the U.S. has tried to manage the COVID-19 pandemic on many fronts with the most obvious being stay-at-home
orders and social distancing. A growing problem from an economic perspective is that the U.S. needs to get back to work to stave off a major
economic recession predicted to be worse than the 2008 global financial crisis, which could even lead to a depression not unlike the decade-long
depression brought on by the 1929 stock market crash.[3] A modern society like the U.S. simply cannot be shut down for months at a time as we
rage a medical war against COVID-19. Those within the medical community advise that the population should be isolated until this pandemic
runs its course, but they aren’t economists, and this isn’t a feasible long-term approach as illustrated by the historical unemployment rates we are
experiencing and the threat of a devastating global recession or depression. The U.S. and world are suffering an economic crisis and many
industries are being impacted directly and others through the ripple effects. Guidance to allow the U.S. population to go back to work may come
from President Trump in May or June depending on the states’ governors and severity of COVID-19. But going back to work will have its
challenges and costs. The harsh reality is that mass transit buses, subways, rideshares, taxis, pedestrian traffic, elevators, office space, workplace
collaboration, and customer interface don’t always lend themselves easily to social distancing. Furthermore, even if personal protective
equipment like masks were made available and workers were educated on their use, many would not wear them, not wear them correctly, or
would inadvertently contaminate them. What would give the U.S. a greater handle on what is occurring is an accurate and fast blood antibody test
to determine if someone has already been infected and recovered from COVID-19. That would not only allow the U.S. to send back those
workers, hopefully now immune to the disease, but also identify the uninfected so they can take extra precaution. In the context of the U.S.
population going back to work, recent research has shown that approximately 40-45 percent of people infected with COVID-19 may be
asymptomatic.[4] [5] This is highly problematic as those who return to work and become newly infected during the summer months, but
asymptomatic, will begin to spend more time indoors as cooler temperatures begin in September. Most viruses thrive indoors due to cooler and
dryer air, and the reduced social distancing of a home environment will drive person-to-person transmission. Assuming that the U.S population
must return to work to prevent a disastrous economic recession or depression, assuming persistent transmission of COVID-19 during the summer
will occur, and assuming a lack of significant respite of an overly strained healthcare system in certain parts of the country, we are likely to
experience a second pronounced wave of mortality in the fall . Many have likened the fight against COVID-19 as being at
war with a determined adversary. To put it bluntly, all wars have casualties and fatalities but it’s a strong working economy that has allowed the
U.S. to emerge from the turmoil of war. In addition to the blood antibody test, and until a vaccine is developed and administered to the U.S.
population, what is needed are antivirals to prevent infection, and treatments to lessen the impact on those infected. A viable vaccine with tested
efficacy that can be administered is unlikely to occur for the next 12-18 months unless a breakthrough occurs. Bottom line is that this scourge
is probably going to return in a pronounced second wave this fall and then continue to wreak havoc well
into 2021. But a U.S. workforce can’t sit idle at home for another two months struggling to get by on mortgage deferments, unemployment
benefits, or stimulus checks because continued economic stagnation will result in more shuttered businesses, increasing unemployment rates,
bankrupted industries, delayed capital investments, greater logistical lags, lost jobs/careers, lost retirement savings, increased mental health issues
and suicides, increased domestic violence, greater alcoholism and illegal drug use, greater foreclosures and homelessness, primary/secondary
school closures and corresponding home-school and child-care burdens (see graphic), postponed life events (e.g. graduations, birthday parties,
family trips, weddings, job changes, retirements, etc.), closed vocational schools and universities, and a depressed economy across
most all infrastructure sectors that will last years and potentially hurt our national security. The calculus of lives lost in the U.S.
versus the economic devastation of putting the U.S. workforce back to work is exceptionally difficult. The premature loss of hundreds of
thousands of lives in the U.S. is unfathomable and would be a national tragedy; however, a 2008-like global recession would be devasting and a
21st century repeat of the 20th century Great Depression could cause a lasting U.S. economic catastrophe that
might be generational. It is unknown how quickly the U.S. would recover from prolonged economic stagnation, but it is noteworthy to
say that the ripple effects of the Great Depression are still being felt today. The counter-argument is that as a global society we should not turn
our backs on humanity in their darkest hour and trade away their lives for economic prosperity. Either way, at the end of the day, our elected
leaders will be forced to make difficult decisions in which there are no win-win solutions.
2nd wave devastates the economy
Reinicke, 20 [Carmen, is a reporter covering the US economy and markets at Business Insider, 6-8-20, “A 2nd wave of COVID-19
infections poses the biggest threat to the US economy this year, economist survey shows”, https://www.businessinsider.com/economy-biggest-
threat-second-wave-coronavirus-infections-us-covid19-survey-2020-6, BP]
Even as the US reopens from sweeping lockdowns to contain the spread of coronavirus, economists
worry about what a second wave of the illness would do to the economy. Tha National Association for Business Economics
June Outlook survey released Monday showed that 87% of economists said a second wave of COVID-19 infections is the
top risk for the US economy this year. In addition, 80% of the 48 panelists said that risks to the outlook are tilted to the downside, the survey
showed. In just a few months, more than 100,000 Americans have died from COVID-19. In addition, it's wreaked havoc on the
labor market — more than 40 million Americans have applied for unemployment insurance as layoffs
persist, and US employers erased a record 20.7 million jobs in April. Since, the economy appears to have
rebounded slightly. The May jobs report Friday showed that the US added 2.5 million jobs in the month, and the unemployment rate declined to 13.3%
from 14.7% a month earlier. Still, rushing to reopen could increase chances of a second wave of COVID-19 and
lead to another lockdown, which would have further devastating affects on the economy . For the entire year, NABE
economists expect that US gross domestic product will slump 5.9%, the sharpest annual decline in
economic output since World War II. The revised GDP slump of 5% from January to March is expected to be followed by a record 33.5% plunge
in the second quarter of this year, reflecting the worst months of the coronavirus pandemic, according to the survey.
AFFIRMATIVE
 2ac---theory
Plan is immediate no debate. Solves the link
“Floor time” DAs are bad --- they contrive fiat to maximize neg link. They get other politics
DAs, which solves any education warrant.

OR, plan isn’t immediate, which means it’s after the NDAA. Their UQ argument proves
McConnell is pushing off other issues to prioritize the NDAA, it’s reasonable he would do
that with the plan.
 2ac---NU---delay now
Aff --- it’s already delayed until November
Weingarten 7-2-2020 (Dwight, “House NDAA Advances Out of Committee; Senate to Vote after July Recess,”
https://www.meritalk.com/articles/house-ndaa-advances-out-of-committee-senate-to-vote-after-july-recess/)//BB

The House Armed Services Committee advanced their version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) out of committee shortly
before midnight July 1, in a unanimous 56-0 vote. The bill heads to the House floor after the July recess. In a nod to the bipartisan work of the
committee, the bill will be named after Ranking Member Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, who is retiring from Congress at the end of the session.
“It is only fitting that we name this year’s defense bill after [Rep. Thornberry] to commemorate his service on the House Armed Services
Committee and his more than 20 years of dedication to his constituents,” said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the committee’s chairman, in a
statement. The Senate NDAA, which advanced out of committee last month, will be picked up with additional amendments for a vote on the
Senate floor after the July 4 recess, according to Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “I’m glad we
were able to reach a bipartisan path forward to complete consideration of this bill right after recess ,” said
Sen. Inhofe, on the Senate floor July 2. The final bills passed by the two chambers will then enter a reconciliation

process. “Very likely it could be November before we actually end up passing this bill ,” said Sen.
Inhofe, on Thursday. Last year’s NDAA was not signed into law until December 20 .

The bill will be delayed now

Carney 7-7-2020 (Jordain, “Grassley: Senate would 'probably' override Trump veto of defense bill amid base renaming fight,” The Hill,
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/506167-grassley-senate-would-probably-override-trump-veto-of-defense-bill-amid-base)//BB

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is warning that Congress would likely override President Trump if he vetoes a mammoth defense policy bill amid
the fight over a plan to rename Army bases named after Confederate figures. Grassley, during a call with Iowa reporters on Monday, said
he hoped Trump wouldn't veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which is set to pass the Senate later this month,
over the base renaming. "If it came to overriding a veto, we’d probably override the veto," Grassley told Iowa reporters on a conference call this
week. A spokesman for Grassley confirmed the remarks, which were reported by the Des Moines Register and the Waterloo-Cedar Falls Courier.
Trump has issued eight vetoes since taking over the White House in 2017. Neither the House nor Senate has been able to successfully override
one. Trump has warned that he will veto the bill , which has passed Congress for 59 consecutive years, if it includes a provision,
which is currently in the Senate version, on renaming military installations named after Confederate figures. “I will Veto the Defense
Authorization Bill if the Elizabeth ‘Pocahontas’ Warren (of all people!) Amendment, which will lead to the renaming (plus other bad things!) of
Fort Bragg, Fort Robert E. Lee, and many other Military Bases from which we won Two World Wars, is in the Bill!” Trump tweeted last week.
The Senate's bill includes a provision that states that within three years the Defense secretary "shall implement the plan submitted by the
commission ... and remove all names, symbols, displays, monuments, and paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of
America ... or any person who served voluntarily with the Confederate States of America from all assets of the Department of Defense." The
House Armed Services Committee separately voted to include a provision in its NDAA requiring the names to be changed within a year. Once
the House and Senate pass their versions of the defense bill, they'll need to hash out an agreement on a final version of the legislation. Ernst:
Renaming Confederate bases is the 'right thing to do' despite... Overnight Defense: Top general says military must take 'hard look' at... GOP
senators, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.), have urged Trump to back down from his veto threat
isn't expected to reach his desk until after the
of the defense bill, which
November election .
 2ac---NU---second stimulus
Ideological divides ensure there will be heated debates over second stimulus bill
Elis 6/16
Niv, and Naomi Jagoda, The Hill “Congress set for fight over expiring unemployment relief” June 16, 2020
https://thehill.com/policy/finance/502832-congress-set-for-fight-over-expiring-unemployment-relief
Congress is under pressure to extend expiring unemployment benefits as COVID-19 infections continue to rise in some
states and as jobless rates remain at levels not seen in decades. The expanded benefits included in March's CARES Act helped tens of millions of
workers get through coronavirus-related lockdowns but are set to go away in August. Republicans object to continuing to add an
extra $600 to weekly benefits for all unemployment recipients , noting that it could make unemployment more lucrative
than working for a large percentage of recipients. That, they say, could provide a disincentive for people to return to
work as the economy reopens. But Democrats are worried that cutting or reducing the benefit would leave
poor people without a safety net. A Friday report from the Federal Reserve noted that recipients could find themselves in a dire
situation without the expanded benefits. "The supplementary UI [unemployment insurance] will end this summer. At that point, it will be difficult
for many families to meet their financial commitments — rent, food, utilities, and other payments — if the economic downturn continues and the
benefits are not renewed," the report said. They also argue that if Republicans curb the enhanced unemployment benefits, low-wage workers will
feel like they have to return to working, regardless of whether it’s safe to do so. Lawmakers agreed to increase weekly unemployment benefits by
$600 across the board in the CARES Act because that amount is the difference between the average weekly wage and the average weekly state
unemployment benefit. Lawmakers increased benefits by a flat dollar amount rather than limiting them to a percentage of prior earnings so that
states could easily administer the change. But some Republicans have been criticizing the boost as too generous since
before the CARES Act became law. The $600 per week increase is currently scheduled to expire on July
31, and its fate is set to be one of the key questions facing lawmakers and the administration when they
negotiate a subsequent coronavirus relief package . Recent health and economic developments could shape the response.
Although the unemployment rate fell in May, it is still very high, at 13.3 percent, levels not seen since World War II. At the same time, the
number of Americans who permanently lost their jobs increased in May. Many states, including some such as Texas and Florida that began
reopening their economies earlier on, are seeing COVID-19 infections rise dramatically, raising the prospect of potential new restrictions and
another wave of unemployment. The increase in coronavirus cases in a number of states has rattled investors, with stocks falling last week after
steady gains in April and May, though the Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 158 points on Monday. White House economic adviser Larry
Kudlow said Sunday on CNN that the $600 weekly boost to unemployment benefits is a “disincentive.” He predicted that the enhanced benefits
will end in July but that President Trump is looking at some type of bonus for people who go back to work. GOP lawmakers also say
that the economy has been improving, requiring a different approach to unemployment benefits. “States are reopening, employment
recently turned positive, and we need to shift our focus to helping people safely return to work, making sure businesses are able to come back
quickly and put the country back on a path to economic growth,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said during a
hearing last week. He also called the $600 per week boost “poorly targeted.” Doug Holtz-Eakin, a former Congressional Budget Office director
who is now president of the right-leaning American Action Forum, said that policymakers should let individuals drive decisions about going back
to work as much as possible, since some groups are more at risk from the coronavirus than others and people have varying tolerance levels for
risk. “The $600 benefit gets in the way of that” because it’s too large, he said. He predicted that Congress would provide some type of enhanced
unemployment benefit after July 31 that’s less than $600 a week. But Democrats say that now isn’t the time to let up on
federal assistance. House Democrats last month passed a bill that would extend the $600 weekly increase until Jan. 31. “It would be
extremely irresponsible for Congress to take a step back at the first sign of improvement,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard
Neal (D-Mass.) said in a statement on the day the May unemployment report came out. “If they dial back [unemployment insurance] support,
these folks will have to go back to work, even in unsafe workplaces,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the left-leaning Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities who is informally advising former Vice President Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. The recent increase in coronavirus
cases in some states “just increases the risks,” Bernstein added. There
are several policy questions lawmakers have to
wrestle with beyond whether to provide some type of boost to weekly unemployment benefits after July
31.
 2ac---NU---police debates
Police reform debates thump
Touchberry 7/7 (Ramsey Touchberry, Washington Correspondent for Newsweek, “ Could Democrats' Push for Police
Reform Force a Government Shutdown ,” 07/07/20, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek.com/could-democrats-push-police-
reform-force-government-shutdown-1516035, TM)
Fresh off Congress' crushing failure to overhaul the country's policing practices, Democrats are about to
force another debate on racial injustice . But this time, the stakes are much higher : a potential government
shutdown . House Democrats are attempting to curb police brutality by including provisions of its police
reform legislation in the federal government's yearly budget proposal —a back-door strategy frequently used by
both political parties to force negotiations over divisive issues . However, the move to tie the appropriations
process to police reform could exacerbate lawmakers' ability to avoid a government shutdown and reach
an agreement on annual spending that runs dry October 1. Congress has repeatedly struggled in recent years
under President Donald Trump to keep money flowing and federal agencies running amid contentious policy
disagreements , a procedure that will only become more strenuous in the shadow of the looming election .
"If Republicans want to shut down the government so police can choke people to death, they would have to explain that to the American people,"
Evan Hollander, a spokesperson for Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee, told Newsweek. The funding bill, which is for fiscal
year 2021 for the Departments of Commerce and Justice, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation
and other related agencies, would provide more than half a trillion dollars for criminal justice reform measures supported by Democrats.

Police reform debates have already delayed the NDAA

Bender 6/18/20 Bryan Bender is a senior national correspondent for POLITICO, where he focuses on the Pentagon, NASA, and the
defense and aerospace industries. NDAA delayed in Senate 06/18/2020, https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-
defense/2020/06/18/ndaa-delayed-in-senate-788611

NDAA SLIPS: The National Defense Authorization Act

[NDAA] will take a little longer to go before the full Senate as
the chamber pivots to GOP-backed police reform legislation , our colleague Connor O'Brien reports. The NDAA
was expected to be the next major bill to be considered before Majority Leader Mitch McConnell announced the
policing bill will come to the floor next week.
 2ac---veto
Trump will veto NDAA due to the renaming of confederate monuments
Olson 7/1’ (Tyler Olson, Fox News, “Trump threatens veto of defense bill over amendment renaming bases that honor Confederates”, July
1st, 2020, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-threatens-veto-of-defense-bill-over-amendment-renaming-bases)
President Trump late Tuesday night threatened to veto the must-pass bill to fund the military for the 2021
fiscal year if it includes an amendment introduced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., aimed at renaming
military assets named after Confederate leaders and generals. Warren on Tuesday gave a floor speech on the matter, and
the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier this month approved the measure's inclusion in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
The Senate on Tuesday voted 89-4 on a motion to proceed on the bill, which takes it one step closer to passage — but it might be forced to
remove Warren's amendment if Trump decides to hold fast to his veto threat. "I will Veto the Defense Authorization Bill if the Elizabeth
'Pocahontas' Warren (of all people!) Amendment, which will lead to the renaming (plus other bad things!) of Fort
Bragg, Fort Robert E. Lee, and many other Military Bases from which we won Two World Wars, is in the
Bill!" Trump tweeted. Trump earlier this month made clear he opposed renaming military bases and other assets that are named after
those who fought with the Confederacy, and White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany began a press briefing by reading a statement from
the president on the topic. "These Monumental and very Powerful Bases have become part of a Great American
Heritage, and a history of Winning, Victory, and Freedom,” Trump also tweeted. “Therefore, my
Administration will not even consider the renaming of these Magnificent and Fabled Military
Installations. Our history as the Greatest Nation in the World will not be tampered with. Respect our
Military!"
 2ac---too-unique
It is must pass legislation and it passes easily every year no matter what else happens
Reuters 6/11/20 Senate panel would bar use of military against peaceful protests
By REUTERS JUNE 11, 2020, https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/senate-panel-would-bar-use-of-military-against-peaceful-protests-
631144

The NDAA, which determines how the Pentagon spends its money – this year $740 billion – is one of the few pieces of major
legislation that passes every year. The bill governs everything from soldiers' pay rates to how many fighter jets are bought to which
bases are closed. Since it is seen as "must-pass" legislation , members of Congress also typically use the NDAA as a vehicle for a
wide range of policy matters. However, the legislation announced on Thursday is several steps from becoming law.
 2ac---prepared now
Preparedness now solves second wave.
Franck, 20 [Thomas, reporter for CNBC, 6-22-20, “Larry Kudlow says a second wave of coronavirus cases ‘isn’t coming’”,
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/22/larry-kudlow-says-a-second-wave-of-coronavirus-cases-isnt-coming.html, BP]
White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told CNBC on Monday that a “second wave” of coronavirus cases isn’t
coming and that lawmakers will likely develop another stimulus package by the end of next month. Asked by “Squawk Box” co-host Becky
Quick how he’s thinking about resurgences of Covid-19 cases in several states, Kudlow said he isn’t too concerned. “There is no second
wave coming. It’s just hot spots. They send in CDC teams, we’ve got the testing procedures, we’ve got
the diagnostics, we’ve got the PPE. And so I really think it’s a pretty good situation, ” said Kudlow, director of the
National Economic Council and chief economic advisor to President Donald Trump. “Actually, I think nationwide the positivity rate
is still quite low, well under 10%.” His comments came after the U.S. reported more than 30,000 new
infections on Friday and Saturday, the highest daily totals since May 1, according to Johns Hopkins University data.
New cases are rising in states in the South, West and Midwest, including Florida and South Carolina, which last week broke their single-day
totals three days in a row. Health officials have warned that upswings in new cases appear clustered among younger people who are flocking to
bars and social gatherings. The World Health Organization on Friday warned that the pandemic has entered a “new and dangerous phase” as the
disease accelerates in new locations globally and rises in areas that have begun to ease protective rules. But Kudlow reiterated that the
resurgence in the national numbers is concentrated in a handful of “hot spots” including Florida, Arizona
and Nevada, and said he isn’t worried about a broader return of the virus. “There are some hot spots.
We’re on it. We know how to deal with this stuff now, we’ve come a long way from last winter ,” he said.
 2ac---doesn’t solve covid
NDAA doesn’t solve COVID
Valeriano 6-2020, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the Bren Chair of Military Innovation at the Marine Corps University (Brandon,
“The Senate’s Defense Authorization Bill Ignores Our New Reality,” Defense One,
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/06/senates-defense-authorization-bill-ignores-our-new-reality/166208/)//BB

The annual policy bill takes almost no notice of a pandemic that has already wrought more destruction than
most of our country’s wars. A summary report of the Senate Armed Services Committee’s proposed version of
the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act reveals a disconcerting disconnect between the U.S.
government’s approach to national security and the impact of COVID -19 on America’s economy and society. The
novel coronavirus has killed more Americans than all but two of the country’s wars . It has undermined the
prosperity of most of the rest of its population. It has laid bare the country’s racial inequalities and devastated the global economy. Relief efforts
are incurring federal debt on a scale certain to reduce funding for other purposes. And yet the SASC’s 20-page report barely
mentions the coronavirus. It trims Trump administration proposals for end strength “due to the current outlook regarding potential
impacts of COVID-19 on recruitment and basic training capacity,” and it touts unspecified “steps to secure the supply chain.” But it makes no
mention, say, of the U.S. aircraft carrier sidelined for two months by the coronavirus, and the meager dollar amount attached to a pandemic-
related legislative proposal is $44 million for “vaccine and biotechnology research supported by DOD.” Instead, the June 11 report reflects the
pre-pandemic thinking of the 2018 National Defense Strategy and Defense Secretary Esper’s desire for “irreversible” momentum towards its
goals ahead of a possible change of administration in January. Geopolitically, the Senate NDAA report continues to focus on China and Russia,
adversaries who, it says, “seek to shift the global order in their favor, at our expense.” True enough, yet the Committee evinces no concern for
U.S. actions that do the same, such as alienating allies, withdrawing from treaties, and quitting international institutions like the World Health
Organization. The pandemic shows how desperately we need to rebuild institutions, particularly those that are
focused on the challenge of public health and collaborative research to solve societal challenges . The
report displays an insistence on seeing great power competition through a military lens . For example, it
would create a Pacific Deterrence Initiative to bolster U.S. military power and American deterrence in the
region. Yet this expenditure of a few billion dollars will not help rebuild institutions to respond to the next
pandemic. Nor will it address supply-chain vulnerabilities laid bare by COVID-19 , vulnerabilities that can plugged
by less by military power and more by a reengagement with tradition institutions and collaborative agreements to ensure a reduction of economic
harm. The report does contain some promising provisions to spur innovation and the development of useful new technologies, particularly
automation and quantum computing; and funding for efforts to attract and retain talent, particularly in cyber security — the latter all the more
important in coronavirus-imposed remote work. But these welcome developments cannot obscure that the Senate’s NDAA proposal
does not represent a true prioritization. Nothing major is being sacrificed to free up resources for other
lines of effort. Even the total amount remains static: the SASC markup would authorize $740.5 billion, down from last year’s $750 billion
request but up just a bit from the $738 billion actually authorized. Instead the Senate is trying to cover as many of its existing bets as possible in
pursuit of overmatch, which was already elusive before the pandemic wreaked havoc on the U.S. economy. This approach is out of
touch with fiscal and strategic reality. Moreover, a critical conversation about racial disparities and the legacy of racism in the
armed forces is required. The SASC report calls for a three-year study of the names and symbols of the Confederate States of America on U.S.
bases, a remarkably slow timeline against the swift action of service leaders in recent weeks to address some dark chapters of American history.
The desire to leave the trauma of the COVID-19 pandemic behind is leading the U.S. defense
establishment to forget some hard lessons . Spending more on new weapons will not ward off viral
threats to Americans’ health and economic wellbeing , nor heal the deep social divisions that must be
addressed to have a coherent foreign policy. Congress has a large job to do, and it can’t start by trying to make flawed strategies
“irreversible.”
 Case outweighs
Health officials place racial injustice higher on an impact level than Corona
Powell 7/6’, (Michael Powell, “Are protests unsafe? What experts say may depend on who’s protesting what”, THE NEW YORK TIMES,
JUL 06, 2020, https://www.mcall.com/coronavirus/sns-nyt-experts-say-about-protests-depends-20200706-5mzu4iqm3nhgnghbmtizuezj24-
story.html
That reaction, and the contrast with the epidemiologists’ earlier fervent support for the lockdown, gave rise to an uncomfortable question: Was
public health advice in a pandemic dependent on whether people approved of the mass gathering in question? To many, the answer seemed to be
“yes.” “The way the public health narrative around coronavirus has reversed itself overnight seems an awful lot like … politicizing science,”
essayist and journalist Thomas Chatterton Williams wrote in The Guardian last month. “What are we to make of such whiplash-inducing
messaging?” Of course, there are differences: A distinct majority of George Floyd protesters wore masks in many cities, even if they often
crowded too close together. By contrast, many anti-lockdown protesters refused to wear masks — and their rallying cry ran directly contrary to
public health officials’ instructions. And in practical terms, no team of epidemiologists could have stopped the waves of impassioned protesters,
any more than they could have blocked the anti-lockdown protests. Still, the divergence in their own reactions left some of the country’s
prominent epidemiologists wrestling with deeper questions of morality, responsibility and risk. Catherine Troisi, an infectious disease
epidemiologist at The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, studies COVID-19. When, wearing a mask and
standing at the edge of a great swell of people, she attended a recent protest in Houston supporting Floyd,
a sense of contradiction tugged at her. “I certainly condemned the anti-lockdown protests at the time, and
I’m not condemning the protests now, and I struggle with that, ” she said. “I have a hard time articulating why that is OK.”
Mark Lurie, a professor of epidemiology at Brown University, described a similar struggle . “Instinctively, many of us in public
health feel a strong desire to act against accumulated generations of racial injustice,” Lurie said. “But we have to
be honest: A few weeks before, we were criticizing protesters for arguing to open up the economy and saying that was dangerous behavior. “I am
still grappling with that.” To which Ashish Jha, dean of Brown University’s School of Public Health, added: “Do I worry that mass protests will
fuel more cases? Yes, I do. But a dam broke and there’s no stopping that.” Some public health scientists publicly waved off the conflicted
feelings of their colleagues, saying the country now confronts a stark moral choice. The letter signed by more than 1,300 epidemiologists and
health workers urged Americans to adopt a “consciously anti-racist” stance and framed the difference between the anti-lockdown demonstrators
and the protesters in moral, ideological and racial terms. Those who protested stay-at-home orders were “rooted in white nationalism and run
contrary to respect for Black lives” the letter stated. By contrast, it said, those protesting systemic racism “must be supported.” “As public health
advocates,” they stated, “we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission. We support
them as vital to the national public health.” There is as of yet no firm evidence that protests against police violence led to
noticeable spikes in infection rates. A study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found no overall rise in infections, but could
not rule out that infections might have risen in the age demographic of the protesters. Health officials in Houston and Los Angeles have suggested
the demonstrations there led to increased infections, but they have not provided data. In New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio has instructed
contact tracers not to ask if infected people attended protests. The 10 epidemiologists interviewed for this article said near-daily marches and
rallies are nearly certain to result in some transmission. Police use of tear gas and pepper spray, and crowding protesters into police vans and
buses, puts people further at risk. “In all likelihood, some infections occurred at the protests; the question is how much,” Lurie said. “No major
new evidence has emerged that suggests the protests were superspreader events.” The coronavirus has infected 2.89 million Americans and at
least 129,800 have died. The virus has hit Black and Latino Americans with a particular ferocity, hospitalizing those populations at more than
four times the rate of white Americans. Many face underlying health issues, and are more likely than most Americans to live in densely populated
housing and to work on the front lines of this epidemic. As a result, Latinos and Black people are dying at rates well in excess of white
Americans. Mary Travis Bassett, who is African American, served as the New York City health commissioner and now directs the FXB Center
for Health and Human Rights at Harvard University. She noted that even before COVID-19, Black Americans were
sicker and died more than two years earlier, on average, than white Americans. And she noted, police
violence has long cast a deep shadow over African Americans . From the auction block to plantations to centuries of
lynchings carried out with the complicity of local law enforcement, blacks have suffered the devastating effects of state power. She
acknowledged that the current protests are freighted with moral complications, not least the possibility that a young person marching for justice
might come home and inadvertently infect a mother, aunt or grandparent. “If there’s an elder in the household, that person should be cocooned to
the best extent that we can,” Bassett said. But she said the opportunity to achieve a breakthrough transcends such worries about the virus.
“Racism has been killing people a lot longer than COVID-19,” she said. “The willingness to say we all
bear the burden of that is deeply moving to me.” Others take a more cautious view of the moral stakes. Nicholas A. Christakis,
professor of social and natural science at Yale University, noted public health is guided by twin imperatives: To comfort the afflicted and to speak
truth about risks to public health, no matter how unpleasant. These often-complementary values are now in conflict. To take to the street
to protest injustice is to risk casting open doors and letting the virus endanger tens of thousands, he said.
There is a danger, he said, in asserting that one moral imperative overshadows another.