The Instigator
visini
Con (against)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
Brenavia
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points

Republican deregulation of corporations

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,063 times Debate No: 18785
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (7)

 

visini

Con

(This is my first debate, so please excuse me if I am not that good at it)

Here is my statement:

The Republicans stances on deregulating corporations are killing Americans.
Brenavia

Pro

I will take this debate. I take the stance that the Republican stances on deregulating corporations are NOT killing Americans.

Definitions:

killing: the act of a person or thing that kills.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Republicans: a person who favors a republican form of government.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Stance: a mental or emotional position adopted with respect to something
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Deregulating: to remove government regulatory controls from (an industry, a commodity, etc.)
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Corporations: an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

Americans: a citizen of the United States of America.
http://dictionary.reference.com...

These are the definitions of the topic that I will use. Good luck to my opponent, and seeing as I have not made any arguments, the first argument will fall to Con. I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 1
visini

Con

The Republicans deregulation of corporations are killing American citizen. For example, Koch Industries, has been a constant offender, and have been directly linked to multiple deaths.

The Republicans wanting to, and successfully deregulating EPA, has led to these disasters:

In Arkansas, there is a small town, Crossett, with a road called Penn Road. There are 15 houses on that road, and there have been 11 deaths from cancer. These deaths are lung cancer, and the cancers are rare forms of lung cancer. These people who have died also have never smoked a day in their life. The town of Crossett is has ditches and natural streams that run through it as waste disposal sewers for Georgia-Pacific, owned by Koch Industries. These ditches transport heavy pollutions through the water, which has s even killed trees near the ditches giving of a toxic cloud. This is 100% illegal, not just because it is killing people, but it is going against the Clean Water Act.
Source: http://bluearkansasblog.com...

In Texas, two 17 year old teenagers(one female one male) were killed in an explosion after their truck stalled, and when they tried to restart the truck it exploded. A Koch Industries owned underground pipeline was leaking highly pressurized butane, which cause the explosion and deaths of the teens. Smalley later testified in a lawsuit he filed against the pipeline company, Koch Industries Inc. saying "I mean, it was like hell had opened up". The pipeline that killed the teens had a history of corrosion problems dating almost to the minute it was put into the ground, and that the electrical system intended to inhibit corrosion was not working right. This is just one incident of a pipeline. The U.S. Justice Department documented 300 leaks involving Koch pipelines between 1990 and 1997 that it said were caused mainly by unattended maintenance problems.
Source: http://www.statesman.com...

Koch industries have uncontrolled emissions of Benzene. (Benzene is a known carcinogen, and has been known that it leads to Leukemia since 1928, and 1948, the American Petroleum Institute officially reported a link between Benzene and cases of leukemia in their workers, and the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration say that Benzene causes cancer) Sally Barnes- Soliz has reported to the offices of Texas regulators in Corpus Christi, about how Koch industries had lied about the amount of benzene that it put into the air. Federal laws in the 90s required the refineries Koch owns in Corpus Christi to reduce benzene emissions to less than 6 metric tons a year. Soliz said, "The refinery was just hemorrhaging benzene into the atmosphere" Koch's refining unit told the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) that they had installed, what is called a Thermatrix, which was an anti-pollution device, that used heat to burn off the Benzene. It was reported to Koch that the machine lacked enough capacity for the job, and the refinery disconnected it within days of installation. Koch concealed that it had violated the emissions laws. Soliz found 91 metric tons of uncontrolled benzene emissions, more than 15 times higher than what the Federal law allowed. Koch reported to Texas regulators that its Corpus Christi plant had uncontrolled emissions of 0.61 metric tons, that is 1/149th of the amount that was actually uncontrolled. A Federal court gave Koch Industries a 97 count indictment for the uncontrollable benzene, that is a $350 Million fine. Yet they only had to pay $20 Million fine, or 1 count indictment, because Koch worked with George W. Bush for a plea bargain.
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com...

Koch Industries manipulate the political process by buying anti-environmental politicians, which the politicians return the favor by trying to deregulate the EPA, which make Koch Industries money.
Here is a list of a couple bought politicians who want to get rid of the EPA:
Rep. Dan Boren, OK (D) - $37,000 from Koch
Rep. Michele Bachmann, MN (R) - $25,000 from Koch
Rep. Shelley Moore, VA (R) - $20,500 from Koch
Sen, Kit Bond, MO (R) - $40,000 from Koch
Brenavia

Pro

Wow, this entire debate is ironic, for my father is a leading salesman for GP Cellulose (also known Georgia-Pacific), a company owned by the Koch brothers. I won't be bias towards corporations because this though.

Since my opponent failed to introduce his own definitions, I'll assume we'll use mine.

Here I will address his arguments arguments:

1st, my opponent uses only one corporation to justify his claim. Not only is he categorizing all corporation under the acts of one, but his points still only relate to Koch industries.
2d, all his points blame the company but not various other issues. Perhaps the truck stalling on the road cracked the pipeline enough so gas could escape. Perhaps the lung cancer was caused by something else other than pollutants. There are several coincidental arguments in this argument, and I would like Con to take account of them.
3rd, the blame is cast on the politicians accepting the funds, not the corporations. Giving donations to politicians is completely legal, but if the politicians choose to be corrupt then it is their fault.

Now, onto my own arguments.

1: Under my definition of "republican", all Americans are Republicans. We all are under a system of republicanism, meaning that we have representatives vote for us instead of ourselves. Essentially, Con is calling all of America murderers.
2. Corporations do plenty of great things for use. The computer you are using to read this argument? Made by a corporation. The sandwich you just ate? Its ingredients were made by a corporation. The car you use to get the ingredients for your sandwich? Made by a corporation as well. In order to aid corporations, the government deregulates corporations, aids them with tax breaks, and thus allows the company to prosper. Now, while one might think that corporations are to blame for all our problems, and Con most likely does, they do hire 90% of the people in America, and provide us with all sorts of great things.
3. If they do bad things, such as cause the death of people, there usually is a good cause. In the case of the Koch brothers and their corporations, a lack of proper company inspection is usually to blame, or that to save costs the company used cheaper materials. This is not the government's fault, as Con would have you believe, but stead the corporation's fault.

In conclusion, Con blames the government when he should really blame corporations. But he shouldn't even do that, because corporations provide us with jobs, goods, and services. But really, even that is not applicable because Con only uses one example to back his claims. This entire debate is flawed on Con's part. He even calls all of America murderers! While that notion may seem silly, it still applies to this debate. For the reasons previously stated, I urge the voters to vote Pro, and stand with me in believing that the stance that the Republican stances on deregulating corporations are NOT killing Americans.

I await my opponent's response.
Debate Round No. 2
visini

Con

Wow, that is ironic. So do you live in Arkansas too?

1) If you want, I can use other companies, like I said before your most recent post "For example, Koch Industries, has been a constant offender, and have been directly linked to multiple deaths." That was just one example.

2) Because if you would recall in my last post, all of the deaths were related to Koch Industries lack of mind for the welfare of the American people. You said that the truck could have caused the crack, yet that same pipeline was reported having a history of corrosion problems since it was installed, so the truck stalling would have nothing to do with the pipeline leaking butane, because the gas would already have to be leaking for a while for the gas to ignite. Like I said with the lung cancers, the people who got the rare cancers, were non smokers, and non alcoholic drinkers. Also what is the probability of 11 people on 1 road with 15 houses to all die from rare lung cancers?

3) The corporations do it because they know that if they give money to the politicians, they will help the corporation. It happens all the time. I blame the corporations, because they are heartless, souless entities that are only there to maximize profit.

1) The definition that I am using is Republican- a member of the Republican Party of the United Stated(or GOP). So I am not calling all Americans murderers.

2) I never said that Corporations are "EVIL", or anything, but they are heartless, souless entities that are only there to maximize profit. They are legally mandated to do that. They don't care for their workers or American citizens. They only care about making money for their shareholders. I like corporations in the sense that they employ massive amounts of people and mass produce items to reduce to cost of the item. What I don't like about corporations is that they don't care about their workers, and they will do anything to make money.
When the Government(mainly the Republicans) introduces and passes deregulations on corporations, it effects the American people. As I said in my last post with all of the disasters that Koch Industries caused, was due to Republican deregulations. The EPA is majorly understaffed, and getting smaller due to the Republican opposition of the regulations that the EPA enforces, and how they want to help their corporation buddies to maximize profit.

3) Nothing good ever can be if it comes from the death of another fellow human being, and I am surprised that anyone would say that. As I said corporations are just there to maximize profits, which is exactly what Koch Industries does. That is exactly what deregulation causes. Corporation using cheaper material which can cause damage. If not lead paint, then it would be e Coli in meat, which both harms Americans last time I checked. Deregulation is and has always been bad. The examples that I used with Koch Industries is just one out of many many corporations.

Republican have proposed and passed bills that includes legislation limiting the regulatory authority of the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), by prohibiting it from regulating carbon emissions from power plants, votes to defund enforcement of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and efforts to target federal agencies such as the Department of Interior and the Department of Energy.

If you want me to include more Corporation running a muck due to the lack of regulation, then alright:

Pelican Refining LLC has to pay $12 million for problems at its Lake Charles refinery,in southwestern Louisiana, including $2 million for air pollution monitoring and other environmental projects in the state. According to a plea agreement reached in federal court. A judge must approve the agreement. Federal authorities said they opened an investigation after state inspectors in 2006 discovered illegal releases of hydrogen sulfide(hydrogen sulfide can poison several different systems in the body, although the nervous system is most affected), improperly repaired or bypassed pollution monitoring and control equipment and oil stored in unrepaired tanks.

Transocean made, Deepwater Horizon(then owned by BP) oil rig explosion on April 20 in the Gulf of Mexico. It is another story of careless, reckless deregulation and corruption under the Bush administration which led to loss of life(11 dead), destruction of wildlife and the environment, loss of income to coastal regions, and the largest offshore oil spill in the US history(4.9 million barrels). The full impact of the oil spill is still unknown, but the environmental and economic fallout from the massive spill is mounting quickly. With all of the regulations that they don't have to follow, the total bonus for CEO Steve Newman was over $370,000. Isn't that odd that the CEO of the company that caused the largest offshore oil spill in US history, gets 6 digit bonus that same year, and it was after the events of the Deepwater Horizon. That proves that that corporation is just to make money, at any expense. It turns out that thousands of offshore rigs are barely regulated, a result of Dick Cheney's private energy meetings and interference with the Department of Minerals Management Services, which regulates the off shore drilling. The MMS is also responsible for collecting billions in royalties from the oil companies and is the same agency that was investigated and found to be doing cocaine and having sex with oil executives(not being sarcastic or joking). In 2006, regulators found, a blowout preventer failed, in part because of maintenance issues. That was exactly what caused the BP oil spill. The rigs that Transocean owned in the Gulf of Mexico from 2005-07 was about 30% of the total rigs, and from 2008-10 it went up to 42% of the total Gulf of Mexico rigs. The total Transocean incidents from 2005-07 was 33% of the total world incident (13 of the 39 deep-water drilling incidents). From 2008-10, the total Transocean incidents jumped to 73% of the total world incidents(24 of the 33 incidents). In 2006, Transocean's Discoverer Enterprise was drilling for BP in over 6,000 feet of water when a gauge suggested a leak from the blowout preventer. It took nearly an hour for a robot submarine to reach the valve and determine that it was leaking drilling fluid. The robot tried to shut down the well, but didn't have enough hydraulic fluid to add to the valve. A second robot shut down the well about five hours after the problem arose. Investigators estimated 54 barrels of fluid spilled into the Gulf.

BP's Texas City Refinery in Texas City, Texas, killing 15 workers and injuring more than 170 others. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration slapped BP with a then-record fine for hundreds of safety violations. BP was charged with criminal violations of federal environmental laws,and subsequently imposed an even larger fine after claiming that BP had failed to implement safety improvements following the disaster.

What about the Tesoro Corp.'s plant in Washington state that killed five employees in an explosion?

What about McWane Inc., a pipe manufacturer, convicted of covering up details of a worker's death at a New Jersey plant, was sued over an accidental death of another employee killed at the same foundry? The man died at McWane's Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Co. when a 700-pound pipe rolled onto his chest. The pipe rolled from an elevated platform known as a test deck when a safety device failed.

What about the 6 victims at the Kleen Energy Systems plant in Connecticut?

What about 11 oil platform workers who are presumed dead following an explosion of the Transocean Ltd. rig in the Gulf of Mexico

What about 1 worker killed, four others hospitalized on a Transocean gas drilling rig in Galveston Bay, Texas?

The AFL-CIO, reported that 5,000, workers will die on the job this year(14 per day), you cannot tell me that most of these aren't because of lack of regulations. Sources in the comments.
Brenavia

Pro

I don't live in Arkansas, but I do live in the South.

1. Please, use other companies.
2. That's the corporation's fault, not Republican stances.
3. It is the choice of the politicians to be corrupt. Companies can try to influence policy, but really it's on the shoulders of the statesmen to change policy. Blame corporations if you like, but it is NOT Republican stances that kill Americans.

1. You're supposed to list definitions in your first or second speeches. Since this is your first debate, I'll forgive you, but MY definition is still the one that applies. Voters, all of you who have stated definitions in the first speeches, take my definition as the one to be used in this debate. Con's failure to list definitions means the Con accepts mine for the debate. If you wanted to have your own definitions, you should have listed them. Thus, my definitions will be the definitions of the rest of the debate.
2. So, according to you, corporations are not evil but they are heartless entities? Wow, you just contradicted yourself.
3. So killing enemy combatants is wrong because they are human? Even when they are trying to kill our soldiers and win wars against the people of the United States? You claim to go against heartlessness, but you would rather have heroes killed than defend themselves.

I would address all of your points and arguments individually, but they all have the same issue: it was the fault of the CORPORATIONS, not the fault of REPUBLICAN STANCES on deregulation. While if we were debating the issue of corporate responsibilities and disasters caused by corporations, you would be right, but this is not the case. Republican stances try and establish a better form of government control of the people and entities of the people, such as corporations, they do not rule on a corporation's actions. That is the fault of the corporations, not the stances. Start a different debate if you want to debate that issue, but don't make this an issue on this debate. According to your resolution, this debate is non topical.

In conclusion, my opponent is off topic, states through the acceptance of my definitions that all Americans are murderers, and through his points of rejection of death supports militaristic failure. Though my opponent may reject my claims, I have tried my best to make the logical fallacies of the debate evident, my points clear, and make topicality a ruling issue. For the sake of proper debate, legitimate arguments, and a standard for all debate.org'ers, vote PRO!
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
Sources also need to numbered and the numbers referenced in the statement they support. It can't be just a reading list.
Posted by visini 5 years ago
visini
Yeah I know, but my post was to big to allow my sources.
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
Con claimed that the deaths resulted from violations of the Clean Water Act, which was in force at the time. So what Republican policy caused the deaths?

The Environmental Protection Agency was originated by President Nixon, and Republicans have supported legislation against toxic waste. The departure comes on nearly undetectable quantities that pose negligible risk.
Posted by Brenavia 5 years ago
Brenavia
You're supposed to put them in your arguments. Comments are for the non-debaters to discuss the topic, not the debaters to use the space for arguments or sources. Voters, if you see these comments, do not include them in your voting decision for the debate.
Posted by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
Let me guess how this will go. Democrats want to spend lebbety-lebben million billion dollars making the air more pure. Republicans say no. With less pure air, the life expectancy of one million people is shortened by twenty minutes. Therefore Republicans killed a million people through their unwillingness to regulate. It's better to destroy the economy and live twenty minutes longer in poverty.

That's the standard argument. Actually, a bad economy is worse for life expectancy. Prosperity dominates all else.
Posted by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
Killing as in making them physical die?
Posted by randolph7 5 years ago
randolph7
Interesting... wonder where this will lead?
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I am very against the republican stance on deregulating corporations, but to go as far as saying they are killing americans is a hell of a stretch, arguments go to pro even though my mind goes with con
Vote Placed by Crypto247 5 years ago
Crypto247
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Because pro seems to be wiser.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 5 years ago
1Historygenius
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro seemed to sweep Con. Con needed to use very specific policies that the Republicans have.
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did better all around.
Vote Placed by brian_eggleston 5 years ago
brian_eggleston
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: We must forgive visini for pressing 'Con' instead of 'Pro' and also congratulate Brenavia on an excellent debate, butvisini argues with more pasion and conviction - and had better sources.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: "Republican" means the Republican Party, no doubt about that. While calling himself "Con", Con made theassertion and has the burden to prove. The con case is not prima facia. He needed to show that specific Republican policies caused the specific deaths, and didn't even try to do that. He'dave to show Republicans repealed a law that prohibited toxic dumping, and that the deaths occurred as a result. He constructed a fantasy.
Vote Placed by TheRomanticist 5 years ago
TheRomanticist
visiniBrenaviaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro debated mostly word meanings. He claims that we should not regulate, but at the same time punish corporations, later turning around and saying not to punish corporations either. If regulation is not the way to keep the companies in check, an alternative should have been provided.