Binghamton University’s political organizations held an informal debate Thursday, during which they discussed current national and world issues.
Representatives from the College Democrats, College Republicans and College Libertarians participated in the forum, which lasted approximately two hours.
“I just want to get people talking and lay a groundwork for next semester, because if you want to be involved with politics, you have to be able to work with different groups,” said Alex Paolano, chairman of the College Republicans.
Throughout the debate, which was moderated by Paolano, participants answered seven questions, ranging from health care to cap-and-trade policy to firearms to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, and more.
There were three speakers for each topic and each speaker was allotted three minutes to present their positions on the topic.
The three debaters for the College Republicans were undeclared freshman Adnan Charania, junior political science major Nick Valiando and senior political science major Paul Liggieri.
Two members of the College Libertarians, Mark DelloStritto, a junior physics major, and Arkadiy “David” Aloyts, a junior political science major, participated in the debate, while Sam Sussman, a freshman political science major, was the sole debater for the College Democrats.
During the debate on the first question, which centered on the best way to address health care reforms, Valiando argued that while students need health care reform, the government should not be involved. He said the country cannot afford any costly plans.
“If the American people choose to take the risk and participate in a private system, that is their right as an American citizen,” Sussman said. “However, if people do not want to play Russian roulette, we need a public health care option.”
Aloyts agreed with parts of the Republican stance and said that Libertarians “do not want the government involved in health care.”
Debaters were also asked about their opinions regarding President Barack Obama’s recent decision to have a troop surge in Afghanistan.
Sussman is against the troop surge and believes that America’s presence in Afghanistan is only fueling anti-U.S. sentiment. He found similarities between the War in Afghanistan and the Vietnam War, in that there is no direct objective.
The Libertarians sided with Sussman because they found the war to be similar to Vietnam and advocated for a withdrawal plan, and DelloStritto argued that Afghanistan should be its own state.
However, Liggieri believes that a withdrawal of troops mid-state would be detrimental.
“The war in Iraq was a war of choice, whereas Afghanistan was a war of necessity,” he said.
Debaters were also asked to argue the effectiveness of the recent stimulus package, during which the Libertarians argued that it awards companies’ failures and encourages other industries to ask for money for the government, while the Republicans felt that the figures related to the effects of the stimulus package have been inflated.
Sussman argued for a New Deal-like program that will create jobs and turn the economy around.
“What I advocate for is a public-private partnership that puts people back to work to improve conditions in America,” he said.
Other topics discussed were gay rights and firearms.
Sussman and DelloStritto both agreed that the denial of marriage rights for gays is both morally and legally unjustified.
In terms of firearms, Sussman argued that while he supports hunting rights, hunting and firearms are two completely different topics.
Other questions regarded nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran and cap-and-trade policy on emissions.