A2: Perm – Do the CP - Nms cp national Military Strategy cp – 1NC

A2: Perm – Do the CP

-- Severs all the plan –


Nothing in the CP mandates action. It only recommends it, then says the plan will be adopted as a result.


It’s an effect. It’s not “certainty” like consult – no world of the CP fiats the plan. Here’s evidence.


Claudle 9

– Texas A&M University (Sharon L., “National Security Strategies: Security from What, for Whom, and by What Means,” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 6(1) Article 22, Galileo, RG)

Third, it is unclear who is to ensure that implementation occurs and there is accountability for results. The national strategies are not legal documents with mandates and sanctions. Their goals and actions cut across levels of government and sectors, and involve a large number of organizations and entities, including international and nongovernmental, each with their own priorities – planned or mandated. The authority and capacity of public and private organizations to direct, implement, and be held accountable for the strategies varies: Who is in charge? Who should be? Who should pay? Under what authority? With what partners? In the United States’ system of government and arrangement of public and private spheres, no one central entity or process has “control” of implementation, accountability, oversight, and coordination. Cornish (2008) might argue, however, that a national strategy should not be a policy blueprint to replace senior leadership experience and judgment. Moreover, a national strategy clearly means cross-governmental action that could run counter to departmental independence.

Voting issue – lets them dodge all ground


-- Not topical –


“Reduce” must be a permanent mandate


Reynolds 59

– Judge (In the Matter of Doris A. Montesani, Petitioner, v. Arthur Levitt, as Comptroller of the State of New York, et al., Respondents [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department 9 A.D.2d 51; 189 N.Y.S.2d 695; 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7391 August 13, 1959)

Section 83's counterpart with regard to nondisability pensioners, section 84, prescribes a reduction only if the pensioner should again take a public job. The disability pensioner is penalized if he takes any type of employment. The reason for the difference, of course, is that in one case the only reason pension benefits are available is because the pensioner is considered incapable of gainful employment, while in the other he has fully completed his "tour" and is considered as having earned his reward with almost no strings attached. It would be manifestly unfair to the ordinary retiree to accord the disability retiree the benefits of the System to which they both belong when the latter is otherwise capable of earning a living and had not fulfilled his service obligation. If it were to be held that withholdings under section 83 were payable whenever the pensioner died or stopped his other employment the whole purpose of the provision would be defeated, i.e., the System might just as well have continued payments during the other employment since it must later pay it anyway.  [***13]  The section says "reduced", does not say that monthly payments shall be temporarily suspended; it says that the pension itself shall be reduced. The plain dictionary meaning of the word is to diminish, lower or degrade. The word "reduce" seems adequately to indicate permanency.

A2: Perm – Do the CP


“Should” means “must” and requires immediate legal effect


Summers 94

(Justice – Oklahoma Supreme Court, “Kelsey v. Dollarsaver Food Warehouse of Durant”, 1994 OK 123, 11-8, http://www.oscn.net/applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?CiteID=20287#marker3fn13)

¶4 The legal question to be resolved by the court is whether the word "should"13 in the May 18 order connotes futurity or may be deemed a ruling in praesenti.14 The answer to this query is not to be divined from rules of grammar;15 it must be governed by the age-old practice culture of legal professionals and its immemorial language usage. To determine if the omission (from the critical May 18 entry) of the turgid phrase, "and the same hereby is", (1) makes it an in futuro ruling - i.e., an expression of what the judge will or would do at a later stage - or (2) constitutes an in in praesenti resolution of a disputed law issue, the trial judge's intent must be garnered from the four corners of the entire record.16
[CONTINUES – TO FOOTNOTE]
13 "Should" not only is used as a "present indicative" synonymous with ought but also is the past tense of "shall" with various shades of meaning not always easy to analyze. See 57 C.J. Shall § 9, Judgments § 121 (1932). O. JESPERSEN, GROWTH AND STRUCTURE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (1984); St. Louis & S.F.R. Co. v. Brown, 45 Okl. 143, 144 P. 1075, 1080-81 (1914). For a more detailed explanation, see the Partridge quotation infra note 15. Certain contexts mandate a construction of the term "should" as

more

than merely indicating preference or desirability. Brown, supra at 1080-81 (jury instructions stating that jurors "should" reduce the amount of damages in proportion to the amount of contributory negligence of the plaintiff was held to imply an obligation and to be more than advisory); Carrigan v. California Horse Racing Board, 60 Wash. App. 79, 802 P.2d 813 (1990) (one of the Rules of Appellate Procedure requiring that a party "should devote a section of the brief to the request for the fee or expenses" was interpreted to mean that a party is under an obligation to include the requested segment); State v. Rack, 318 S.W.2d 211, 215 (Mo. 1958) ("should" would mean the same as "shall" or "must" when used in an instruction to the jury which tells the triers they "should disregard false testimony"). 14 In praesenti means literally "at the present time." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 792 (6th Ed. 1990). In legal parlance the phrase denotes that which in law is presently or

immediately effective

, as opposed to something that will or would become effective in the future [in futurol]. See Van Wyck v. Knevals, 106 U.S. 360, 365, 1 S.Ct. 336, 337, 27 L.Ed. 201 (1882).
1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 23
literatura-150-stranica-18.html
literatura-150-stranica-19.html
literatura-150-stranica-2.html
literatura-150-stranica-20.html
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат
Реферат