Dems, Republicans Duke it Out in the Rat

While the Rat is typically known for its luncheon delicacies and Thursday night pub series, it may as well have been painted red and blue last night .

Rachel Lamorte, president of the College Democrats of Boston College (CDBC) and A&S '10, and Michael Reer, president of the College Republicans of BC (CRBC) and A&S '10, faced off in a debate sponsored by the Undergraduate Government of BC (UGBC), the CDBC, and the CRBC. The debate focused on several contemporary political, economic, and social issues – the environment, education, the war in Afghanistan, and health care reform.

The discussion was moderated by Kristoffer Munden, vice-president of CDBC and A&S '11, and by Elizabeth Ellerhorst, director of publicity for CRBC and A&S '11. Yousuf Shaikh, UGBC co-director of political action and A&S '10, said "We are at a great political moment in our country right now," Shaikh said. "I think this will give you guys a great example of the state of the debate on a number of different issues."

The first issue on the agenda for the night was the environment – more specifically the recently approved Waxman-Markey bill that would allow for a cap-and-trade system to alleviate environmental harm done by carbon emissions.

While Lamorte and Reer did represent the values of their respective ideologies, they did not toe the party line on every point, and did find some common ground.

Lamorte said she is in agreement with the free-market principles that are the basis of the cap-and-trade system. She also said that, if nothing is done, the United States could face serious economic repercussions. "It has been estimated that there will be a three percent decrease in U.S. GDP for a seven degree Fahrenheit increase in climate temperature by 2100, which would be a huge detriment to our economy right now."
In response to the Waxman-Markey bill issue, Reer proposed an approach that would view economic improvement and environmental sustainability as complementary. "Too often we think that economic growth and environmental responsibility can't go hand in hand," Reer said. One issue he raised with the bill was its affects on employment, which he said could be detrimental. "I don't think that's a soft blow to an economy that's already hurting from a depression," he said.

The debate became noticeably more heated when the topic transitioned to the role of social values in public education and the issue of sexual health in public schools. "We really need to look at the history of the topic, and particularly the relation between teenage pregnancy, STDs and the approach we take to sexual education," Lamorte said. "Why are we so afraid of teaching our children about STDs and safe sex?" After calling on statistics from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention to support a correlation between teenage pregnancy and abstinence only education, Lamorte said, "Abstinence-only education does not work."

In response, Reer addressed the issue of cultural illiteracy of America's students. "We need to focus on reading, writing, and math," Reer said. "A recent Oklahoma study found that 70 percent of high school students couldn't name the first president of the United States." Reer said a way to improve the current condition of America's schools would be to introduce a voucher system that allowed a broader choice for parents selecting schools for their children. He later said that until Americans focus on reading, writing and math, they should not focus on sex education.

Mirroring the current Congressional trends, both Lamorte and Reer agreed that the United States government should strive for policies to make health care more affordable than it is now. However, also mirroring current trends, the debate over a public option was hotly contested.

"I am incredibly encouraged that a bill has been passed that includes the public option," Lamorte said. "I hope the Senate does keep it."

Reer, on the other hand, said that a public option reduces national competition in the insurance industry and, because of government's inefficiency, can only harm the situation.

The two were able to find common ground again in their view of health care as a constitutional right. "No, it is not a right, it is not in the constitution," Reer said. "You have to look at what the Constitution says, not what you want it to say." Lamorte agreed. "My Democratic friends are going to hate me for this, but I have to say no," she said. "It's not in the Constitution. I'm a constructionalist and I think that when you start reading rights into the constitution that are not there, it can be dangerous."