By
Anthony Michael Erickson
October 30, 2008
The Young Democrats and College Republicans held the first of what will be a series of policy debates on campus last night. The topics for the debate were education and the budget in the state of Washington.
“Let’s just come out and say it: our education [in Washington] sucks,” said John Fay, finance chair for the UW College Republicans. “We’ve got a lot of problems with education in this state, and right now Dino Rossi says they need to be solved.”
The big issues the College Republicans took with current state education policies were the need to ditch the WASL and the need to reform teacher and school funding. They argued that Rossi’s plans to replace the WASL and institute a merit-pay system for teachers and schools would greatly benefit Washington state students.
The Young Democrats disagreed.
“For a governor that’s so big on sex offenders, it’s a little bit weird that we’re just letting just anyone teach our students,” said Young Democrats member Chelsea Harris. “It doesn’t seem like math and science scores are going to improve under those conditions.”
The Young Democrats said Washington state would be better off revamping the current WASL test, and supported Gov. Chris Gregoire’s current policy of delaying certain portions of the WASL test while the test itself is further refined.
The other major themes of the debate were the state budget and fiscal policy.
“It’s true that we do face a projected $3.2 billion deficit for 2011,” said Chris Jordan, political and legislative affairs director for the Young Democrats. “It’s also true that Governor Gregoire supported raising the gas tax in 2005, and it’s true that she has increased spending during her tenure as governor by 33 percent. But, looking at these things by themselves without considering anything else distorts the reality of the governor’s otherwise strong performance.”
The Young Democrats emphasized Gregoire’s recent record on freezing state hiring and cutting spending across the board by one percent. The College Republicans were skeptical.
“Now think rationally, even the Democrats,” said Justin Bryant, vice president for the College Republicans. “Are you going to tell me that Christine Gregoire spent the last four years as governor spending money with the support of the House and the Senate, and is now going to go in and just cut these programs she created?”
By the end of the debate, students in the crowd had mixed feelings of which group came out ahead.
“I personally went with the College Republicans, since they seemed pretty together,” said Chelsea Eck, a student watching the debate. “I just enjoyed how [the College Republicans] tried not to get too fired up.”
Clay Alney, a senior in the Biology department, disagreed.
“I think that throughout the debate the Young Democrats held a commanding lead in terms of the positions from which they are able to argue from,” Alney said. “Overall, I think the Young Democrats won the debate.”
Reach reporter Anthony Michael Erickson at news@dailyuw.com.
12 Comments
#1 Doug M.
on October 29, 2008 at 11:21 p.m.(Seattle, WA)
I don't understand why the WASL is now a campaign issue. Everyone, Democrats and Republicans and nonpartisan people, think it sucks. It is applied to students unfairly, the policies around it are poorly written, and the way it has been instituted in high schools and middle schools has hurt education and student progress overall.
I would please ask both sides not to make it a partisan issue, seeing as it is something that desperately needs reworking. Whoever wins the gubernatorial race is obligated to do so - it's not like Gregoire won't and Rossi will, or vice versa. My concern is the "how" and what the end result is, which didn't seem to be addressed. There are many other ways to measure student progress.
#2 Alex L.
on October 29, 2008 at 11:55 p.m.(Spanaway, WA | Unverified Name)
well said Doug,
#3 Doug M.
on October 30, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.(Seattle, WA)
thank you, alex.
#4 timothy
on October 30, 2008 at 12:10 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
it's an issue because rossi wants to pick an easy target to make himself look like a reformer. he doesn't have any real plans about the WASL, he just knows it suffers from near-universal hatred in this state so he can try to score points with electorate by publicly announcing that he hates it too.
the governor, meanwhile, is a realist and has elected not to scrap the WASL (an expenditure that the RGA and BIAW would not doubt hammer her for in ads) and has instead chosen to work with the program we already have and refine it into a meaningful, balanced test for students in this state.
#5 Rohan S.
on October 30, 2008 at 12:43 a.m.(Seattle, WA)
Doug and Alex: If you guys share the same feelings about the WASL that I do, I encourage you to vote for Randy Dorn for Superintendent of Public Schools. He agrees that the WASL is in need of major reform, and that we shouldn't teaching our students nothing except what they need to pass an arbitrary examination.
#6 anonymous
on October 30, 2008 at 1:02 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
“I personally went with the College Republicans, since they seemed pretty together,” said Chelsea Eck, a student watching the debate. “I just enjoyed how [the College Republicans] tried not to get too fired up.”
Chelsea Eck? Any relation to Auggie aka the College Republican president?
#7 Mara H.
on October 30, 2008 at 2:49 a.m.(UW Campus)
This "standardized test" that Dino wants to implement sounds a lot like a certain test that we have in place now...
If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck...
#8 Chris J.
on October 30, 2008 at 2:52 a.m.(UW Campus)
I'm glad to see The Daily covered the debate! The Governor's race is going to be close this year and it's extremely important.
I'm the Chris Jordan mentioned in the article and for anyone out there in cyberspace reading I want to clarify my quote so that it is not misinterpreted --
At the beginning of the debate I acknowledged that those three statements about a projected deficit, a raise in the gas tax, and an increase in spending were true -- but that just stating those things outright ignores the fact that Gregoire has acutally performed strongly in those areas (if you look a little closer).
1. Voters backed Gregoire's gas tax increase 55%-45% on an initiative in 2005.
2. Her spending increases have brought results to Washington, and she did it in the 2007 budget with a billion dollar surplus left over.
3. She has taken strong action to make spending cuts now that the economy has gone bad and ensure that the projected future deficit does not become a reality.
So my point was not to say that she has failed in those areas and succeeded overall, it was to suggest that those statements ignore the reality of her strong performance IN THOSE VERY AREAS of spending, taxes, and the budget.
#9 Sabrina
on October 30, 2008 at 10:35 a.m.(Bremerton, WA | Unverified Name)
Agreed Doug. I think the reason why there was no clear winner is because the issues debated could not result in a win for either side. Next quarter we need to choose a topic to debate that is not so broad.
#10 Benjamin L.
on October 30, 2008 at 1:57 p.m.(Redmond, WA)
Where were the UW Libertarians? Were they invited?
#11 Chris
on October 31, 2008 at 1:01 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
Chris J, what results has gregoire brought us by turning a 2 billion dollar surplus into a 3.2 billion dollar deficit!? Traffic is worse than ever, and we have yet to see ANYTHING of value with the 5 billion that she has BLOWN!
#12 John
on November 3, 2008 at 11:58 a.m.(Olympia, WA | Unverified Name)
Chris, that 3.2 billion is a projection. And it's largely due to what's happening to the national economy. And personally, I've noticed an improvement in traffic flows especially on I-5.
Post a comment