College Republicans sweep the polls in the third and final ASUCI debate

The College Republicans took home the last and final win in polls at the last campus debate hosted by ASUCI “60 by 16” Commission and HQ: Student Commentary in the Crystal Cove Auditorium on February 23rd.

Both organizations on campus encourage social and political dialogue on campus and the debate series’ goal is to provide voter education and engagement among the student body. The debate topic was “Whose Side Are You On?” and each pair of student representatives from the BernEaters (Anteater for Bernie Sanders), College Republicans at UCI, College Democrats at UCI, and the Young Americans for Liberty at UCI debated on a range of topics from immigration to gun control to promote their political party. The questions would address with two rivaling political parties or all the parties on the panel. The audience was relatively small but all very engaged and passionate about the debate. The debate was moderated by two professors on campus and “60 by 16” commissioner Tracy La.

“The Campus Debate Series has been successful because of the support from the political organizations on campus. Each political group did great tonight and really encouraged a political and social dialogue,” said “60 by 16” staffer Emily Cope.

Photo courtesy of Tracy La

The debate started with opening statement, the BernEaters, represented by Callum lamb and William Leonard, said that Vermont Senator, Bernie Sanders and their team stands firmly in “We the people not, we the cooperation.”

The Young Americans for Liberty, represented by Mitchell Stern and Tyler Walker, stated their party “believes the most socially tolerant and fair society can stand without the government interference in our lives.”

The College Democrats at UCI were represented by Ana Duran and Luis Aleman and stated that “The history of America is a group of people diverse in their opinion, outcast in their countries coming together to make a country where your not afraid to speak your opinion and if you work had enough anything is possible…and today the best society is where we all work together to pull each other up.” The College Republicans at UCI, represented by Robert Petrosyan and George Novshadyan, states “Our party stand for individual freedom, civil rights, constitutionalism and it stands for American values.”

The first question addressed each party’s stance on the replacement of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and the constitutionality of the Republicans intentions to prevent President Obama’s nomination.

The Bern Eaters and the College Democrats both agreed it is his right appoint a new justice since it’s in the constitution, and The College Republicans agreed but noted the Senate’s right to deny a nomination. The Young Americans for Liberty didn’t agree and questioned its constitutionality and also it’s fairness because both sides are “playing politics.”

The next question was on the subject of gun control, which put the Berneaters and College Republicans were at odds.

Berneater’s stood for second amendment rights but called for a ban in semiautomatic weapons.

“We should be able to maintain our gun rights without having mass shootings,” Lamb said in defense of the Berneater’s position.

College Republicans’ said that having a semi automatic doesn’t mean the intention to kill. Novshadyan also attempted to discredit the Berneaters by stating that semi automatics have been banned and a better measure would be having stricter background checks.

“The answer is not gun control, it’s good guys with guns and bad guys with guns,” said Novshadyan.

Berneater responded by stating that the country should look at successful models that eliminated gun violence such as Australia and stated that studies have been done that state having guns in the household increases violence and the danger to them.

On the subject of foreign policy, the Young American for liberty argued against America intervention saying that it doesn’t work giving the example of Saddam Hussein. College Democrats took a more neutral stance, stating there is no one answer and America should be more balanced when it comes to regime change. College Republicans said the US is a powerful nation with the strongest leadership and had a duty to help other countries.

The Berneaters disagreed “We have policy of regime change when it’s not favorable to our economics. There is no guise of morality which is justification for our economic and political gains, “Lamb said.

One issue above all that gained consensus was the legalization of marijuana use but how to reform the sentencing laws was an area of disagreement.

A heated argument ensued with the College of Democrats and College of Republicans. Both parties agreed that minor non-violent drug offenses receiving high capital punishments and incarceration rate increasing is a problem. The disagreement began with the issue of how each party attempts to solve the issue. The College Republican, Novshadyan accused the College Democrat, Alemen of the inconsistency in blaming drug policies on the system while not fully taking responsibility for system failures.

“[Although] I agree that we should decriminalize [non-violent drug offenses] and that their should be less government involvement but your policies counter each other because you want all these things that are stifle wages but then you blame the system which is controlled by you...so frankly you’re inconsistent,” said Novyshadyan. The audience definitely reacted and the College of Democrats argued about Republican were the ones pressuring minorities and drug users and criminalizing them. This argument went with interruptions from both parties during each of their rebuttals.

The importance of reproductive health care was addressed and was of mutual agreement among all the organizations and the audience as they cheered for every response each party made.

Stern from Young Americans state pro- life and pro-choice shouldn’t be a federal government issue and the other parties agreed.

“I take great pride in this issue, being the only woman on stage to be able to talk about it,” said Duran from College of Democrats. “As a woman, I take great offense when the federal government [tries] to block Planned Parenthood from expanding especially because no one should tem me hot to control me body. The government should not tell any woman how to control their own body.”

The debate sparked conversation among the audience and they were allowed to submit their own questions at the end of the debate. However not many were submitted and there was a time crunch towards the end and some audience members believed that discussion the topics already discussed could have been extended.

“I thought all the organizations did really well and there wasn’t a clear winner,” stated audience member and member of the College Republicans at UCI, Peter Voorhis. “I’m biased but I thought everyone had great points and even though some of the policies of the Berneaters were unrealistic they made good points.”

Photo courtesy of ASUCI 60 by 16 Commisssion

ASUCI conducted a poll for students to vote for the organization they believed won the debate College Republicans received 44 percent of the vote marking their third win in all three debates.

“I think [the debate] went really well I’m really proud of our organizations and the political organizations that get together just to express all these different opinions,” said “60 by 16” Co-Commissioner Grecia Orozco. “It dispels a lot of ideas that UCI is a certain political

affiliation. These debate encourage people to register to vote and not be ashamed of what their ideas are.”

#debate #ASUCI