Five candidates running for at-large seat meet at UMC
Five candidates running for the at-large seat on CU’s Board of Regents participated in a debate at the UMC Thursday night.
The debate was sponsored by UCSU and the United Government Graduate Students (UGGS), and covered several topics, including retirement of faculty, tuition rates, campus diversity and academic rigor.
“There was not much of a debate because there was not much controversy,” said Maura O’Neal, a mass communication research graduate student.
Most of the debate was in question and answer form; UCSU and UGGS came up with several questions for the candidates to answer, and each candidate had two minutes to respond. After the two organizations responded to the questions, the debate was opened to the audience for any questions left unanswered.
The event closed with a two-minute speech from each candidate, except for independent candidate, Douglas Campbell, who took four minutes for his opening speech.
“I thought the debate went very well. It provided them an opportunity to look at all of the spectrums of the university,” said Ryan Biehle, a sophomore English and political science major. “I thought the candidates did a very good job in covering their bases as well.”
The candidates present were Democrat Steve Ludwig, Republican Brian Davidson, Jeffersonian Libertarian Daniel Ong, American Constitution candidate Douglas “Dayhorse” Campbell and Independent Marcus McCarty.
Issues addressed by the candidates throughout the night included: grade inflation, under-funded university programs, affordable student health care and other personal messages.
“One of the best things for a panel to do is to compare perspectives and see what they would potentially bring to the regents’ board,” said religious studies graduate student Katie Vahey.
The audience asked candidates to explain their plans to reach out to students, their positions on the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) versus the 401K retirement plan, and the relationship between tuition and the faculty’s salary.
“I think that most of them did (a good job), and a lot of the debate focused on fiscal matters,” said museum studies graduate student Kris Anderson. “A lot of it just came down to money.”
