There's nothing better than a heated political discussion, although we can all agree that presidential candidate debates are getting a little stale. Thankfully, for Fall Family weekend, the College Democrats and College Republicans held their own debate on Saturday in Norman James theatre, discussing the important issues associated with the 2008 President Election.
Debates in general come with both the good and the bad. On the one hand, debates can be messy: there is no way to fact-check an opponent's argument, and the time constraints force participants to omit or edit parts of their arguments for the sake of condensing.
On the other hand, it provides an open forum in which pertinent political issues can be volleyed between opposing ideologies, which has the potential to be both intellectually stimulating and highly entertaining -especially when sophomore Tim Danos is starting an argument with charismatic jokes about the air conditioning and senior Kim Proctor is arguing against points no one even brought up.
The first topic addressed was that of Social Security. This issue is a serious and pressing concern more than ever now that the Baby Boomers' offspring are transitioning to retirement. There are going to be more people withdrawing from the system than there are contributing to it-according to junior Rory Carlin, this "simple math" spells crisis for the nation.
Although this is true, the figures in Carlin's math are drawn from the currently existing system. Senior Andy Abbott made the point, and rightly so, that if government budgets and spending were properly redistributed, the catastrophe could be easily avoided. Of course the middle-aged generation cannot support the retiring elders which outnumber it-however, if government money is added to the social security fund, there will be a significantly reduced chance of disaster.
Health care has been a longstanding issue in this country-both parties agree it is not a perfect system, but the means to reach that perfect end are highly debatable. Unfortunately, the moderate stance of bowtie-clad senior Josh Ackerman left him with little about which to disagree in regards to the future of health care.
Ackerman's centrist views prompted Proctor to construct her own opposition, citing a commonly used argument for right-wing Republicans, which she then also denounced. Universal health care should not be a question when we live in one of the wealthiest nations on the planet-it is, as Proctor noted, a human right. Ethics aside, it's also pragmatic. Emergency room visits, however, accumulate a tab which the nation as a whole is inevitably forced to cover.
The Fast Track issue was one with which I was not familiar prior to the debate. Carlin's defense of Fast Track relied in large part on his statistics about the approval of congress, though it should be noted that congress's disapproval was increasing exponentially, and his figures tapered off around 1994-something from the past decade would in all likelihood have been a stronger buttress for his argument.
Sophomore Lauren Jakubowicz cited the extensive power Fast Track grants the president, and criticized it. After a president like Bush, how can anyone be expected to feel comfortable handing the commander-in-chief a blank power check?
Environmental concerns, the final topic discussed, are more pressing than ever. This issue, unlike the others, was well matched. The Republicans made the point that the transition from coal and electricity to naturally occurring, cleaner burning energy sources is a long one, and a significant amount of time must be allotted for the change to transpire. However, they also said that the environment should come second to the economy-meaning, whatever can be wrung from a tight budget should be enough for the deteriorating atmosphere. How is it that the republican president can extend the national capacity for debt in war time and yet the Republican Party considers extensive renovations for the betterment of the earth fiscally irresponsible? Danos was right-it was cold in there.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed the debate. The issues were interesting, the representatives were clearly knowledgeable, and the forum was conducted nicely. Unfortunately, the College Republicans, sans Senior Jenny Wilson and relying far too heavily on the novelty of the bow tie, never stood a chance. In addition to being better speakers, the College Democrats had a better grasp on the concepts, active plans for the future and were generally more passionate about the discussion.
300 Washington Avenue, Chestertown, Maryland 21620 | 410-778-2800 | 800-422-1782