Higher education was the focal point in a debate between the four candidates for Secretary of State Monday at Lane Community College.
Democrat Bill Bradbury, Republican Lynn Snodgrass, Pacific Green Party member Lloyd Marbet and Libertarian Ed Pole attended the debate.
The debate was organized by the Oregon Student Association, Youth Vote 2000 and the Associated Students of LCC. The event brought the statewide student government’s voter registration drive to a close.
The debate — moderated by ASLCC president Susan Whitmore — was organized into a five-part agenda. Candidates were given the opportunity to briefly describe their platform, with a panel discussion following. Then candidates targeted each other in a question-and-rebuttal format. Finally questioning was opened to the audience, before the candidates gave their closing arguments.
Current Secretary of State Bradbury kicked off the event by congratulating youth for taking the initiative to get involved.
“I have two real passions as Secretary of State. One, to be a person who safeguards democracy. And two, is to be a watchdog for our tax dollars.”
During his introduction, Marbet questioned the absence for third-party representation in campaigns, and especially in the presidential debates.
“There’s a saying ‘If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten,’” Marbet said. “Democracy is in trouble.”
Pole emphasized his background — as a member of the Apollo 11 launch team and an engineer with IBM and Intel — to foreshadow the creativity he promised to bring to the office of Secretary of State.
Republican candidate Snodgrass, a small business owner and former teacher, stressed her ability to “squeeze the waste out of government.”
Introductions gave way to the second round panel questions, and each candidate had the opportunity to address issues such as environment, educational funding and minority involvement in politics.
The candidates seemed to agree that there were problems in secondary education.
“The most pressing problem is [students] get inadequate preparation in high school and elementary school,” Pole said.
Marbet concurred with his fellow third-party representative, but specified that Oregonians need to vote against Measures 7, 8 and 91. Bradbury went a step further, outlining the specific issues voters needed to address when voting for the three measures that will have the greatest affect on secondary education.
“First, can all of you afford the education you’re seeking,” Bradbury said. “Second, are we making sure we have enough money at the state level to fund higher education?”
Another issue addressed specifically affecting students was raised by ASUO State Affairs Coordinator Brian Tanner, who questioned the candidates’ feelings on the control of student fees. Again, the candidates were in agreement, supporting student control of the incidental fees.
“You pay those fees,” Marbet said. “You should control them.”
Audience members questioned the candidates on issues related to the state’s vote-by-mail system, including voting fraud. Bradbury, who oversaw the first vote-by-mail preliminary election during his term as Secretary of State, continued to support the vote-by-mail method.
“We had more Oregonians vote in this primary than ever before,” he said.
Candidate Ed Pole said he also supported the vote-by-mail process, and even suggested extending it to include voting over the Internet using digital signatures.
The candidates used their closing remarks to offer promises to voters, and in some cases to attack their competitors.
“I leave you with three promises if I am elected. First, every penny of tax dollars will be spent wisely,” Snodgrass said. “Second, I will make our elections fair. And third, quality and accountability, as well as funding for education, will be priority.”
Pole used the opportunity to push his Independent Party platform.
“Three promises? Promises, promises, promises,” Pole said in response to Snodgrass’ statement. “Libertarians do not want to rule you. They want you to rule yourself.”
After the debate, students surrounded the candidates to ask them further questions.
“There is a phrase ‘Make them listen to us.’ I’m one of ‘them,’” Bradbury said. “I think it’s so great to have student forums. Most candidate forums, there are as many candidates as audience.”
Students at the debate said they thought a wide range of viewpoints were represented.
“I think it will enhance student debate on campus, since there is a clear difference between candidates,” Tanner said.