Gonzaga Debate Institute 2010



Download 179.2 Kb.
Page5/12
Date conversion15.02.2016
Size179.2 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12

XO Solvency: SOFA’s


We solve the case—XO’s can establish time limits of occupation through the use of Status of forces Agreements

Mason 9

R. Chuck Mason, Legislative Attorney, June 18, 2009, Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA):What Is It, and How Has It Been Utilized?, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34531.pdf,


The last group of SOFAs discussed are agreements entered as sole executive agreements without a specified activity or exercise. These agreements contain broad language of applicability. Some of the agreements apply to U.S. personnel “present” in a country, others apply to U.S. personnel “temporarily present” in a country. In addition to time limitations, most of the agreements contain language which attempts to frame the scope of activities. The activities described may be as broad as “official duties” or specific to a particular class of activities (i.e., humanitarian, exercises, and/or training).
SOFA’s are done as executive agreements

Mason 9

R. Chuck Mason, Legislative Attorney, June 18, 2009, Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA):What Is It, and How Has It Been Utilized?, http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL34531.pdf,



The United States has been party to multilateral and bilateral agreements addressing the status of U.S. armed forces while present in a foreign country. These agreements, commonly referred to as Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs), generally establish the framework under which U.S. military personnel operate in a foreign country, addressing how the domestic laws of the foreign jurisdiction shall be applied toward U.S. personnel while in that country.
Formal requirements concerning form, content, length, or title of a SOFA do not exist. A SOFA may be written for a specific purpose or activity, or it may anticipate a longer-term relationship and provide for maximum flexibility and applicability. It is generally a stand-alone document concluded as an executive agreement. A SOFA may include many provisions, but the most common issue addressed is which country may exercise criminal jurisdiction over U.S. personnel. Other provisions that may be found in a SOFA include, but are not limited to, the wearing of uniforms, taxes and fees, carrying of weapons, use of radio frequencies, licenses, and customs regulations.
SOFAs are often included, along with other types of military agreements, as part of a comprehensive security arrangement with a particular country. A SOFA itself does not constitute a security arrangement; rather, it establishes the rights and privileges of U.S. personnel present in a country in support of the larger security arrangement. SOFAs may be entered based on authority found in previous treaties and congressional actions or as sole executive agreements.


XO Solvency: Generic


Executive Orders are a tool of the presidency-no real boundaries

Mayer 01 (Kenneth, Proff. Of Polt. Science Univ. of Wisconsin, Princeton Univ., “With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power”, p. 65, http://www.questiaschool.com/read/103282967?title=With%20the%20Stroke%20of%20a%20Pen%3a%20Executive%20Orders%20and%20Presidential%20Power) CBC

Executive orders are a potent instrument of presidential authority. Their importance stems from the ambiguities of the president's constitutional powers, the deference to the president shown by the judiciary, and both legal doctrines and political realities that give the president a significant edge in disputes with Congress. No one is quite sure how far the executive power reaches; although the broad boundaries are clear enough, it has proved impossible to construct precise guideposts along those boundaries that allow us to predict with any certainty whether a president is about to step over the line. But what we do know—or should recognize—is that executive orders provide a window into the exercise of presidential power. Presidents think about them; staffers wrangle over them; executive branch officials worry about them. It makes sense, then, to survey the landscape in more detail to analyze how presidents have used them.
The president has the power to issue executive orders on anything

Mayer 01 (Kenneth, Proff. Of Polt. Science Univ. of Wisconsin, Princeton Univ., “With the Stroke of a Pen: Executive Orders and Presidential Power”, p. 11, http://www.questiaschool.com/read/103282967?title=With%20the%20Stroke%20of%20a%20Pen%3a%20Executive%20Orders%20and%20Presidential%20Power) CBC

The politics of the presidency is about getting control of the institutions that create and implement policy. Rational choice institutionalism permits a framework that more closely tethers presidential behavior to statutory and constitutional origins, at the same time that it introduces a dynamic element into the evolution of presidential power. In the struggle for institutional control the president has two main advantages, both of which stem from the president's unique legal powers. The first of these presidential advantages is the formal vestment of executive authority in the office, something far more important than most studies of the presidency have allowed.“ The simple fact that presidents are the nation's chief executives endowed by the Constitution and stature with certain formal powers, is of great consequence. For those powers enable them to make lots of important structural choices on their own without going through the legislative process…. They can organize and direct the presidency as they see fit, create public agencies, reorganize them, move them around, coordinate them, impose rules on their behavior, put their own people in top positions, and otherwise place their structural stamp on the executive branch.” The importance of executive power is enhanced by its inherent ambiguity, and by an increasing level of congressional delegation to the executive branch. Together, these give the president the ability to interpret his responsibilities flexibly and also to shape how statutes are implemented and enforced. In this way executive power is akin to what economists call residual decision rights, which in the private sector “are rights an actor may possess under a contract or governing arrangement that allow him to take unilateral action at his own discretion when the formal agreement is ambiguous or silent about precisely what behaviors are required. Since statutes inevitably leave discretion to the executive, often by design, the president has many opportunities to exercise this residual authority.

1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   12


The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page