Disclaimer: Estelle Anderson, a moderator of the debate, is the Executive News Editor of the Daily. Anderson was not involved in the writing of this article.
On Monday, Tufts Cooperation and Innovation in Citizenship hosted its annual debate between Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans, focusing on the issues of immigration, the economy and gun violence, with the upcoming general election coming in just a few weeks.
The debate featured three questions on each issue, with each side given the opportunity to rebut their opponents’ arguments and deliver closing comments at the end of each issue.
The first question under immigration asked debaters if, in response to the present increase in illegal border crossings, the U.S. should make pathways to citizenship easier or prioritize implementing stricter policies. First-year Kieran Doody answered for the Democrats.
“[Democrats] take a more balanced approach, where we like to have a strong border, we like to have the resources that our border agents need, and also strong protection against drug cartels coming in and illegal human trafficking. At the same time, we prioritize implementing a pathway to citizenship for immigrants, including illegal immigrants who are living in the United States and are contributing to the economy,” Doody said.
Senior Justin Lokere responded for Tufts Republicans.
“What we’ve seen in the Biden-Harris administration has been an unmitigated disaster,” Lokere said. “The Republican Party supports border security and making sure that we’re vetting everyone who's coming across our border.”
Throughout the follow-up questions, Doody continued to emphasize the potential that immigrants have to contribute to the country and build lives in America, while Lokere maintained that immigrants can divert resources and security from citizens and residents.
“If we’re able to allow for more people to come … I think we’re able to strengthen our country as a whole,” Doody stated, citing the contributions of Jewish immigrants fleeing to America from persecution in Europe.
Kieran Doody speaks about immigration for the Tufts Democrats.
The second topic of the debate was the economy, subject to many discussions about inflation leading up to the election.
The first question asked participants to consider the increase in college tuition costs.
“What is the role of the federal government, if any, when it comes to making college more affordable and forgiving student debt?” moderator Remy Bernatavicius asked.
“If the government were to forgive this debt, it wouldn’t be forgiving it, it would just be shifting the money onto the taxpayers,” senior Ethan Putlack, a member of Tufts Republicans, answered.
Putlack also argued that relieving student debt could have negative consequences if students preemptively believe their debt will be forgiven.
“It will encourage students to pursue degrees that may not necessarily be most favorable to them in their futures … no offense to any Women’s Studies [majors] in the audience,” Putlack said. The comment provoked a significant audience reaction.
The audience is pictured during the Cooperation and Innovation in Citizenship debate.
Sophomore Reece Christian countered for the Democrats that, while student loan forgiveness isn’t a total solution, a free public education program should be advocated for.
Christian conceded that this is a taxpayer burden, but argued that it is easily doable by just enforcing current taxpaying laws, stating: “The question we need to ask here is, [which] taxpayers specifically? … The top 1% in America is making more than $150 billion in taxes every year.”
On these economic questions, disagreement between the two parties was less pronounced. Putlack and Christian both advocated for nuclear energy and hailed green energy’s environmental benefits, though Putlack disagreed with the Green New Deal specifically.
Both also found common ground against Trump’s endorsement of aggressive tariffs, noting that they raise prices for local importers, not for other countries.
During closing statements, Christian argued that Democrats hold the rich accountable and support social mobility, while Putlack argued that Biden’s administration has seen four of the worst years of inflation and deficit spending.
The final debate topic was gun violence. Debaters were first asked what they believed was the cause of America’s abnormally high rates of gun violence.
First-year David Seaton responded for the Democrats first.
“If we are going to actually solve this problem, we're going to have to implement legislation like red flag laws, extreme risk protection orders, universal background checks and safe storage laws that have been proven to keep people safe in their communities,” Seaton said.
Lokere, speaking again for the Republicans, characterized the gun violence issue as one of poor law enforcement.
“Prosecutors are all too willing to let violent criminals get back out onto the streets,” Lokere stated. He added that the majority of guns used in crimes were not obtained legally, and argued that “The kinds of people who are going through legal channels to purchase firearms are not the kinds of people who are committing gun crimes.”
Lokere later detailed the extensive safety process he went through to legally purchase a firearm in Massachusetts as evidence that legal gun owners are responsible, with Seaton countering that every state should have laws like Massachusetts’.
On the final question about Second Amendment rights, Lokere maintained its importance to this day.
“Republicans believe the Second Amendment is a fundamental part of the Constitution. It’s the only amendment that concludes the words ‘shall not be infringed’,” stated Lokere.
Seaton responded that unregulated gun ownership makes Americans less safe and less secure in their rights to life and freedom.
After thanks and closing statements were made, Cooperation and Innovation in Citizenship Co-President Tessa Moore spoke to the Daily about the debate.
“I thought that both sides were very respectful, and that was one of the things that I was more worried about, and that is important to any productive discussion,” Moore said.
Moore added that Cooperation and Innovation in Citizenship hosts this event annually, aiming to capitalize on its turnout compared to regular club meetings.
“It broadly fits into our goal of trying to create bipartisan political discussion on Tufts’ campus and helping people be open-minded towards viewpoints that are different from their own,” Moore said.
