Item 19 PRO

INTRO: An estimated 589,430 Americans will die from some sort of cancer in the 3
year 2015 and Liquid Biopsies can detect cancer early in up to 90% of patients
Will help Prevent Future Deaths
Daily Mail May 11, 2015
Liquid biopsies, capture cancer cells or DNA that tumors shed into the blood,
instead of taking tissue from the tumor itself. A lot is still unknown about the value
of these tests, but many doctors think they are a big advance that could make
personalized medicine possible for far more people.
They give the first noninvasive way to repeatedly sample a cancer so doctors can
profile its genes, target drugs to mutations, tell quickly whether treatment is
working, and adjust it as the cancer evolves.
Many studies suggest that liquid biopsy results largely mirror those from tissue
ones, and sometimes find more mutations. A study Kopetz presented in April at an
American Association for Cancer Research meeting found the blood tests detected
cancer mutations in the vast majority of 105 colorectal cancer patients. For 37
percent of them, doctors thought a drug could target a mutation that was found.
Doing so through liquid biopsies
Will help Guide Treatment to Cancers
The Oncology Practice January 6, 2016 Cohort Study of Genitourinary Cancers
Symposium
Investigators analyzed CTCs in 221 blood samples from 179 patients with metastatic
prostate cancer about to begin either hormonal therapy among patients given
hormonal therapy, those whos CTCs exhibited high versus low scores for
phenotypic heterogeneity had poorer radiographic progression-free survival.
In other key findings, the heterogeneity score increased with each additional line of
therapy patients received in the metastatic setting.
Morally correct
Other than my past points about scientific validity, it is overall the morality of one
to help identify a problem and possibly put an end to it before it causes more harm.
Cancer is something that does exactly this, and is why it is all of our moral calculus
to make sure liquid biopsies are provided.

Item 19 CON
Intro:
Despite moral need, they are too expensive
Daily Mail 2015
Whether liquid biopsies will be cost-effective is unknown. Guardant's test costs
$5,400; some insurers cover it for certain types of patients. Gene profiling from a
tissue biopsy costs about the same. The promise of liquid biopsies is that they can
be done periodically to monitor care, but more tests means more cost.
A traditional lung biopsy is thousands of dollars. Many cost $10,000 to $15,000 a
month.
Technology Review January 10, 2016
$690 for a single scan
Many scans have been proven inaccurate and Unhelpful
Technology Review January 10, 2016
The hardest part is not only demonstrating the ability to detect cancer early, but
being able to say this knowledge is in fact meaningful in terms of patient
outcomes, says J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer of the American
Cancer Society. I cant tell you how many times weve said, Oh, all we have to do
is find every cancer early and we would solve the problem.

Flatley agrees that most screening tests have failed to help patients and that many
companies developing them had suffered reversals as a result. If you look at this
business, its littered with failures. With a few exceptions, screening tests have been
invariably horrible, he says. Its a big challenge.
The test is essentially telling you Youve got cancer! But because the particular
abnormalities detected by this test can be found in several different types of cancer,
it cant be linked to a particular site in the body or how problematic the cancer may
be now or in the future.

ITEM 28 PRO
Only two rescue Operations to recover Hostages have failed
Reuters December 7, 2014 Mohammed Ghobari and Mukhashaf
Out of all the operations the Obama Administration has made, only two have
actually failed in bringing back hostages. Both in Yemen, in which 13 and 2 died,
respectively.
-

Due to militant attacks and stronghold

If the US can carry out most missions effectively, then there is absolutely no feasible
reason to reverse President Obamas existing policy.
Overall, we must focus money on saving them rather than
Passing this bill would prevent future kidnappings
Taking from my last point, and applying common sense in this situation, it is feasible
enough to make the statement that by keeping this resolution, the fear imprinted
into terrorists minds will help prevent future kidnappings.
The more supported reason of this is shown in a Newsweek Article on August 23,
2015 by D. Cohen
Of course, the United States efforts to counter kidnapping for ransom go well
beyond our no-concessions policy. They begin before any US citizen is taken
hostage, and they continue beyond the resolution of any hostage crisis. To be clear,
President Barack Obama has demonstrated that the United States is committed to
fighting kidnapping for ransom. US policy is to actively deny hostage takers the
benefits of ransom, prisoner releases, policy changes, or other acts of concession.

Put plainly, the US Treasury Department works with vulnerable states to ensure that
they criminalize the financing of terrorism according to international standards, and
that they are able to identify and freeze terrorist transactions and assets. We do this

because we know that the financial tools necessary to identify, trace, and even
intercept terrorist funds are vital to combating kidnapping for ransom.

ITEM 24
INTRO:
We are emptying our pockets for farmers
CATO INSTITUTE April 27, 2012
During the past twenty years, farm programs have cost Americas non-farm
households a cumulative $1.7 trillion. That is how much non-farm households would
have in the bank today if they had been allowed to save and invest what they have
been forced to surrender to favored farmers through our never-ending farm
programs. We need to insure that Americans are not on the hook for another $1.7
trillion during the next 20 years.
Denver Post March 7, 2016
The U.S. Government Accountability Office found that this reform would affect just 4
percent of agribusinesses, but would save taxpayers $9.3 billion over the next
decade.
The Economist February 14, 2015
This new system was meant to save around $23 billion over a decade ominously,
on February 10th the USDA predicted that net farm income would decline by 32%
between 2015 and 2016.
They are only helping bigger farms
Denver Post March 7, 2016
Current agricultural subsidy policy is now a bloated relic of its original purpose as a
safety net for small farms. Since 1995, taxpayers have shelled out $277 billion in
agricultural subsidies. Of that, 74 percent has gone to just 4 percent of farms. That
means billion-dollar companies like Cargill and Monsanto slurp up most of the

dollars, while small farms that could actually use the help get almost nothing. In
fact, only 38 percent of farms collect any subsidy payments at all.
Heritage Foundation 2013
Farm subsidies are intended to help struggling family farmers. Instead, they harm
them by excluding them from most subsidies, financing the consolidation of family
farms, and raising land values to levels that prevent young people from entering
farming.
Farm subsidies are intended to alleviate farmer poverty, but the majority of
subsidies go to commercial farms with average incomes of $200,000 and net worth
of nearly $2 million.
Furthermore, this bill only allows the further continuation of Farmer Poverty

Item 16 PRO
INTRO: It is not a privilege, but a right, for our citizens to be able to know exactly
how much money is going into any politicians campaign. They were the ones who
put us into office, and the least we can do for them is to disclose how much money
is going into and being spent on our campaigns.
Transparency is becoming more and more prevalent in todays world
Countries are becoming more transparent
Many countries dont follow this: EX: Brazil and Nigeria etc.
For those countries who do, such as Great Britain and France, it is becoming a trend
and if other countries are starting to do so, why arent we?