 "Photo: dth/andrew johnson")
Due to a reporting error, this story incorrectly attributed a quote. The accusation that Price voted to renew the USA Patriot Act, which Price refuted, was made by Di-Phi moderator Daniel Friedman, not Republican congressional candidate B.J. Lawson. The Daily Tar Heel apologizes for the error.
U.S. Rep. David Price, D-N.C., battled Republican opponent B.J. Lawson in a student-run debate on campus Tuesday night.
Four moderators and three fact-checkers from UNC’s Dialectic and Philanthropic Societies orchestrated the N.C. 4th Congressional District Debate, steered by student questions.
“This debate is unique,” said Jeevan Vittal, a Di-Phi member who helped coordinate the event in Carroll Hall, which about 250 people attended.
“In contrast to presidential debates which are notorious for not answering questions, we’re UNC — we don’t stand for that stuff. We want actual questions answered.”
Answer them the candidates did — during almost an hour and a half of debate that covered domestic and foreign policy issues raised in a Facebook group created for the event.
Di-Phi chose from the group the questions they thought best represented students.
“I like the format,” said UNC senior Paige Michael-Shetley, a member of Tar Heels for B.J. Lawson, which co-sponsored the event with UNC Young Democrats. “The Di-Phi moderators are very bright individuals who will ask some good, challenging questions.”
Through the debate, three Di-Phi members sat with their laptops to check facts cited by the candidates.
“They’re Googling anything verifiable that’s not common knowledge,” said sophomore Di-Phi member Abhinav Komandur.
However, the candidates fact-checked each other too.
Lawson accused 20-year congressional veteran Price, a UNC and Di-Phi alumnus, of renewing the USA Patriot Act and voting for the war in Iraq, which Price refuted.
While Lawson railed against government funding for corporate interest projects, Price said repeatedly that Lawson believes that the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation are unconstitutional.
Although Lawson has been referred to as Libertarian, Price made sure to tie him to Republicans after Lawson criticized corporate giveaways, the war and the USA Patriot Act.
“I’m not running away from my national ticket. He would vote for the very Republican leadership he has been criticizing tonight,” Price said in his closing statement.
But Lawson, a strict constitutionalist, tried to blur party lines with a return to the Constitution as originally written.
“At some point we need to stop pretending that the rule book doesn’t exist,” he said in his closing statement. “The Constitution specifies a system of government that serves the American individual.”
However, Price made it clear that he felt that approach to the Constitution is backwards.
“He’s trying to mark his personal, idiosyncratic view of the Constitution with anti-government rhetoric,” Price said in an interview with the Daily Tar Heel.
Contact the State & National Editor at stntdesk@unc.edu.
“They’re Googling anything verifiable that’s not common knowledge,” said sophomore Di-Phi member Abhinav Komandur.Hmm, seems like they missed a pretty big one, like Price voting FOR the Big Bail Out on the first draft. You're fired!
His opposition to needless military aggression, billionaire bailouts, and bad legislative policies make him a great candidate.
So what really makes me sick about reading this is the fact that the small YD group in attendance last night was trumped by all the Lawson supporters...... and of course the DTH had nothing to say about that.
In fact, reading this article, it's obvious that the writer is in support of Congressman Price.
The article appears to make it clear that Price would've "won" the debate, if we were to have picked a winner.
However, anyone who attended last nights debate will gladly tell you that Dr. Lawson was on top of things all night, often receiving applause during the debate. Price's only tactic was to attack Dr. Lawson's party and the party's decisions over the past 15=20 years. This could simply not be a more ridiculous tactic. It's like fighting Obama by saying his party is for gay marriage or John McCain's party is anti-amnesty for immigrants when neither one of them are personally for that and would fight against it.. If you really want to see "Change," Unc, look for something a lot closer to home and get rid of a Congressman who votes straight down the line with his party and what he's told to vote for. Now is the time to bring in an intelligent man who want just shoot "zing" phrases at the other party, but work to get things done for Americans in general and not just ppl in certain political groups.Vote Dr. BJ Lawson for Congress!
I know I will.
Log in to be able to post comments.