Last week, Student Council's Legislative Affairs Committee discussed plans to host an on-Grounds debate between the Fifth District congressional candidates during the coming semester. The candidates would be invited to a town-hall style debate in Old Cabell Hall, which would supplement three televised debates occurring elsewhere in the state during the month of October.
That the race includes an independent, third candidate makes scheduling particularly tricky. Republican nominee Robert Hurt has indicated in the past that he will not participate in a debate with Jeff Clark, an independent Tea Party candidate that Republicans fear may siphon off votes from Hurt. Council wishes to include Hurt, Clark and incumbent Democrat Tom Perriello in the debate. "Our policy is that we need to include everyone in the debate," Legislative Affairs Committee Co-Chair Matthew Cooper said.
Although it would be interesting to hear what Clark has to say, Council should not let his participation become a distraction or an impediment that keeps the debate from happening. The key here is to be flexible. According to the latest SurveyUSA poll, Clark is only capturing about 2 percent of the vote. If Hurt refuses to debate unless Perriello is the only other candidate in attendance, that should be acceptable. This should not be seen as a discounting of Clark's views, but rather as a practical matter. A line has to be drawn somewhere, otherwise any number of fringe candidates could claim a right to participate in such debates. Council need not deliberately exclude Clark, but it should be ready to make the necessary concessions. There are two candidates realistically in contention for the Fifth District seat - make sure students are able to hear from both of them, and only then worry about anyone else.
If the Committee is concerned about making a statement when it comes to third-party and independent candidates, it should consider scheduling other events that give these individuals a forum. Of particular interest could be an event that allows Clark to discuss his ideas about the two-party system and what role candidates like himself should play in elections.
But all told, the Committee's efforts to bring a congressional debate to Grounds are admirable. Debates are an opportunity for students to engage their civic leaders directly and see the political process in action.
For particularly high-profile debates, there is also the opportunity to draw attention to the University. As a long-term goal, the Committee could consider campaigning to host a presidential debate in the future. Of course, such an opportunity is a long shot. Nevertheless, ambitious, large-scale projects can be a powerful force for motivating students. Tackling a number of smaller initiatives can certainly lead to positive changes, but allowing committees to take on more substantial projects could go a long way in generating more buzz about Council.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | YesterdayUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 3 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
