By: Lindsey Campbell Photo by: Lindsey Campbell
The Sub 7 was at capacity on Tuesday night as a panel of faculty members discussed the 2012 presidential election issues.
“The idea is to get more people interested in politics,” said Amy Edmonds, assistant professor of political science. “Some challenges are so big, everyone needs to be involved.”
The event, sponsored by the new political science major, showcased a panel consisting of six faculty members including Mark Peacock, Pat Magness, Bob Mahan, Jim Dahlman, Dave Campbell and Jeff Harbin. Campbell, Peacock, and Mahan represented “conservatives,” while Magness, Dahlman, and Harbin represented “liberals.”
“I thoroughly believe they couldn’t have chosen a better panel. Each one was well informed,” said Luis A. Trevino, a sophomore Political Science major. “I learned a lot tonight. I respect their opinions, and I have my own.”
Edmonds served as the moderator for the panel. Discussion topics included the economy, bailouts of big companies, healthcare, gay marriage, foreign policy, and education.
Edmonds asked that the audience not speak out to the panelists or openly ask questions. Audience members were allowed to write questions on pieces of paper and send them to Edmonds, who later asked a few of the audience’s questions.
Discussion about the economy began with Edmonds asking Campbell, assistant professor of Economics, his thoughts on the current situation.
Campbell said the problem began in the 1980s when the federal government created a “moral hazard” by bailing out banks. The banks then dropped interest rates, causing people to buy houses they could not afford.
“Booms are never sustainable,” said Campbell. “We need to stop pursuing policies that don’t help.”
Questions arose from Campbell’s comments, but discussion remained cordial.
Edmonds asked for opinions on the bailout of General Motors. Mark Peacock, associate professor of legal studies, said that GM would have benefited more by filing for bankruptcy instead of being bailed out by the government.
“Bankruptcy would have been painful, but GM could have came out better poised to be profitable in the future,” Peacock said.
Jeff Harbin, user services librarian, responded by pointing out the jobs created were a positive outcome of the bailout. Peacock was quick to argue that the government does not bail out all big companies that are in trouble. By bailing out GM, the government seems to send out a message, “if you have enough lobbyists, don’t worry about winning and losing, you’ll be taken care of.”
The topic of health care was discussed at length with a variety of opinions. The Affordable Care Act, also referred to as “Obamacare,” was met with mixed reviews.
Pat Magness, former professor of Humanities, was the first to speak on this topic. She shared a personal experience about dealing with her father’s insurance. She said people need access to discounts, because without it, bills would be too expensive.
“I understand that the bill (Obamacare) is incredibly complex and I believe very strongly everyone in the country needs access to insurance,” she said.
Campbell had a very different position on this matter. He said that the cost of healthcare would greatly decrease if there were no third party insurance, costs would fall.
Other panelists asked if this was extreme. Campbell pointed out that this was just something to think about.
On the complete opposite end of the spectrum, Harbin said he preferred a universal healthcare system where everyone is paying in for everyone.
One thing most of the panelists agreed on was that there is so much focus on the short term that the long term is only getting worse.
A moral discussion about gay marriage was next on the agenda. Campbell, Harbin, and Bob Mahan, professor of Accounting, all agreed that the less interference of government in this, the better. They proposed a civil union without the religious sacraments and with a legal contract.
“Maybe it’s time the government got out of the marriage business,” said Harbin. “It’s the only sacrament that the government is involved in.”
Dahlman mentioned different views on marriage. He said that American culture has changed to a point where “we might need to rethink these things.”
“I have a definition of marriage. That is my definition,” Dahlman said. “That is not necessarily the definition of my fellow Americans.”
A question raised by the talk of morals brought the question, should the government mess in someone’s religion, whatever it may be? Should the laws of America and morality not correlate together?
Peacock said this could be a risky situation.
“It’s dangerous to say law and morality are unrelated,” said Peacock. “I think you can argue that our laws are based on morality, of things that are right and wrong behavior.”
Edmonds’ last question asked about foreign policy, specifically what is the proper relationship between the United States, Israel, and Iran.
Magness, who said she is “passionate” about this topic, said at one point in her life she was very much in favor is Israel. Now, she said, the situation has become “very complicated.”
According to her, the Israeli government has been persecuting Palestinians and that the United States should support Israel “very, very carefully.”
The Obama administration has been accused of being “soft” on Israel. Dahlman said this is not entirely true.
“Obama has called Israel out on some things, which is not necessarily criticism,” he said.
When the topic of fighting for Israel or stopping the nuclear advancements of Iran, Mahan took an “isolationist policy” and said the United States should “back off.”
“How involved are we going to get in other countries? We just need to stop intervening,” said Mahan.
In a difference of opinion, Peacock said the threats from Iran to annihilate Israel “bother” him. He feels that the United States should intervene and support Israel any way except for “boots on the ground.”
Perhaps the most concerning topic for the college-aged generation is the national debt.
“If I was a young person, I would care deeply about the national debt,” said Peacock.
The debt is currently at approximately $16 trillion and growing. This amount is unsustainable and eventually, people will have to pay for that.
Trevino, the political science student, shares that concern for the future.
“One of the biggest issues for our generation and the generation after us is the national debt,” he said. “Debt doesn’t get paid, someone has to pay for it.”
The audience seemed to stay engaged for the duration of the discussion, much to the delight of Edmonds.
“Turn out was much higher than I anticipated,” said Edmonds. “I think the audience was very interested in the discussions.”
milliganstampede
