Last night, the candidates for the Fourth District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives went head to head on campus in a debate that covered a wide variety of issues, including tax cuts, education, social security, foreign relations and prescription drugs.
Congressman David Price, the Democratic incumbent, and Republican candidate Jess Ward answered four questions prepared by moderator and political science professor Paula McClain, followed by 15 questions posed by the 50-member audience of Duke students and residents of the Fourth District. In addition to describing their leadership experience and character, the candidates strove to emphasize the differences between their positions on a wide array of subjects.
The candidates differed sharply on Social Security, essentially siding with their respective parties' candidate for president. In support of Texas Gov. George W. Bush's partial privatization plan, Ward said, "I believe that with the looming crisis, we have to do something different and allow young people to invest [part of their Social Security benefits] in personal accounts."
Price, on the other hand, echoed Vice President Al Gore's view of the looming Social Security insolvency, saying, "I believe the best way to prevent [failure of the system] is to get rid of the national debt." He contended that reducing the debt would save billions on interest payments, which could then be used to keep Social Security afloat.
The rest of the debate followed this general trend. In response to a question regarding education, the candidates voiced opinions consistent with the platforms of the presidential candidates. Price, the Democratic candidate, favored the federal government playing an important and targeted role in public education, specifically mentioning a national program to hire 100,000 new teachers.
In contrast, Ward favored reduced taxes, saying, "My plan says, 'Give people their money back.'" That way, the Republican candidate contended, people could control the education of their own children. He broke from Bush, however, in announcing that he was against school vouchers.
The candidates also discussed foreign relations, with Ward erring on the side of caution when examining military intervention abroad and Price acknowledging the necessity of intervention. "We are the world's pre-eminent power and with that power comes a responsibility to get involved in international affairs," he said, making clear, however, that the United States should not over-extend the military.
Unlike Price, Ward was quick to say that other forms of American influence are necessary in situations not directly affecting the United States.
One of the most striking differences between the two candidates was their position on campaign finance reform. Price, in support of the McCain-Feingold bill, which aims to limit campaign spending, said, "Soft money is the unaccountable, unlimited money that is taking campaign finance to unheard of levels."
In stark contrast, Ward declared, "I believe we should allow anyone to give any amount of money as long as it's public." This "full disclosure" would allow the public to decide for itself if money donated to campaigns was suspicious or could pose a significant conflict of interest.
Despite all of these differences of opinion, and the candidates' tendency to speak the party line, they did agree on several issues. They both recognized the need for a prescription drug benefit for seniors, as well as the necessity of the death penalty. They also agreed that a tax cut is appropriate, although they differed on how large a cut is possible.
Throughout the debate, though the political ideologies of the candidate remained clearly partisan. While Price pledged to direct the government to aid Triangle families in education, transportation, housing and clean air and water, Ward focused on leaving power to people. "It's a clear choice: More government or more power to the people. I believe in empowering people."
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.