University faculty members play an important role during historic campus events. During the weeks and days leading up to the debate, many were interviewed by national and international press. The night of the debate, some were in “spin alley” providing commentary and context before, during and after the debate. Later, nine of them provided the Record with their opinions regarding what they heard, or didn’t hear, during the second presidential debate.
“Senator Kerry’s answer to the question about abortion articulated the pro-choice position. He made clear how one can personally oppose abortion, for moral or religious reasons, while recognizing that our guarantees of liberty and equality require leaving such intimate and personal matters to the conscience of each individual.
“Kerry’s insistence that bans on ‘partial-birth abortions’ must have exceptions for the woman’s health acknowledges government’s inability to make medical decisions, which require a patient-by-patient evaluation by health-care providers, not a legislature’s vote.
“By contrast, President Bush would let legislatures restrict women’s reproductive health care. Bush’s approach to reproductive health care and his simultaneous condemnation of the government involvement in Kerry’s health-care plan reveal Bush’s devaluation of women, their health and their choices.”
— Susan Frelich Appleton, J.D., the Lemma Barkeloo and Phoebe Couzins Professor of Law
“Senator Kerry suggested that human embryonic stem-cell research offers patients more hope than research using cells from less controversial sources. In turn, President Bush said that his policy permitting limited federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research defensibly balances ethics and science.
“Kerry argues that anyone understanding the scientific promise should favor more funding, but Bush contends that respect for early human life justifies funding limits, despite the potential knowledge gains.
“If re-elected, Bush will face ongoing complaints that funding limits are impeding scientific progress. If Kerry prevails, he will encounter a longstanding congressional refusal to appropriate funds for ‘destructive embryo research,’ as well as objections to federal support for research cloning. Thus, stem cells will remain a presidential preoccupation.”
— Rebecca S. Dresser, J.D., the Daniel Noyes Kirby Professor of Law and Professor of Ethics in Medicine
“A pointed question posed early on in the debate opened the door for the candidates to present their views on the vexing matter of public education. Yet debate around this important issue never really materialized.”This is unfortunate for, despite the passage of the broadly supported 2001 No Child Left Behind Act, subsequent Bush Administration domestic budget cuts have made it virtually impossible for public schools to reduce achievement gaps among students of different class and racial backgrounds. In Missouri alone, Kansas City and St. Louis city schools will lose $35 million, about 41 percent of their respective budgets, in federal funds for the fiscal year 2005. This will result in the reduction of teachers, resources and educational programs that are necessary to ensure that ‘no child is left behind.'”— Garrett A. Duncan, Ph.D., associate professor of education in Arts & Sciences
“The town-hall format plays a special role in the presidential debates, not so much because it introduces new subjects or previously unasked questions, but because it personalizes issues.
“Challenges from an opponent or inquiries from a journalist can be diverted or dismissed, but a matter raised by someone from the audience, someone with whom typical Americans are more likely to identify, has to be taken seriously and the questioner treated with respect.
‘Because so much of what we hear from our candidates is carefully prepared in order to limit the risks of spontaneity, and because even in the usual debate performance we mostly get carefully choreographed performances, the town-hall format represents more of a challenge (which is why ours was the debate that came nearest to being removed from this year’s campaign schedule).”
— Wayne D. Fields, Ph.D., the Lynne Cooper Harvey Distinguished Professor in English and director of the American Culture Studies Program, both in Arts & Sciences
“Abortion is a women’s issue that matters greatly in this election, and the candidates’ positions on this issue were mentioned briefly during the second debate. George Bush’s pro-life views are already well-known, yet John Kerry’s position regarding the morality of abortion is less well-known and deserves mention.
“Kerry regards the debate over abortion as a clash of divergent religious viewpoints. The First Amendment guarantees to Americans the freedom of religious worship. This includes the freedom not to be bound by religious restrictions that one does not, in good conscience, accept.
“Legalized abortion helps each woman to live her reproductive life according to the dictates of her own religious conscience. No woman is forced to comply with any other woman’s (or man’s) religious restrictions. Bush’s pro-life stance would deny this religious freedom to many women.”
— Marilyn A. Friedman, Ph.D., professor of philosophy in Arts & Sciences
‘President Bush completed the transformation of his rationale for going to war with Iraq from claiming an immediate threat from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), to the assertion that Saddam Hussein was a ‘unique threat’ to us, and that he could have given those weapons to al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.
“He said the biggest threat to us is still WMDs ‘in the hands of terrorists.’ He did not explain how Saddam could have given his nonexistent WMDs to terrorists, or in what way Saddam’s intentions added up to an immediate threat requiring us to go to war.
“Overall, the president did better than in the first debate, but he apparently felt that vehemence in replying could substitute for persuasive argument.”
— Victor T. Le Vine, Ph.D., professor emeritus of political science in Arts & Sciences
“The candidates have been asked only one question about environmental issues in the debates. This is not surprising as other issues are more salient right now.
“But environmental issues are important, and they provide a clear contrast be-tween the candidates. The answers to that one question just hinted at the differences.
‘President Bush supports more use of fossil fuels (including oil drilling at the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge), opposes international programs to reduce global warming, favors voluntary programs rather than pollution control regulations and encourages increased use of public lands (e.g., snowmobiles at Yellowstone).
“Senator Kerry favors increased development of renewable energy sources, opposes drilling in ANWR, advocates international actions to combat global warming, opposes reduction of pollution regulations and opposes snowmobile use at Yellowstone.”
— William R. Lowry, Ph.D., professor of political science in Arts & Sciences
“What struck me about the debate was the fact that virtually nothing was mentioned regarding the millions of Americans in poverty or on the edge of poverty. Of course, this was not simply the candidates’ fault, since they were responding to questions asked by the audience and selected by the moderator.
“But there were many opportunities where the issue could have been brought up had the candidates wanted to. The only real mention of poverty was Senator Kerry saying that he had supported welfare reform, in order to point out that he wasn’t a typical liberal.
“That’s a very sad indictment of the neglect the issue received.”
— Mark R. Rank, Ph.D., the Herbert S. Hadley Professor of Social Welfare in the George Warren Brown School of Social Work
“The current rate of growth of health-care expenditures is not sustainable. Despite massive spending, we still have 45 million people without health-care insurance, and we have major disparities in access and quality. Health statistics show that we are little better off than many other countries that spend a lot less.
‘The two candidates have very different proposals as to how to deal with this issue. Bush favors an incremental plan that uses private insurance and provides tax credits and other incentives, while Kerry favors a solution built on the public insurance. The Bush plan would only take 8 million citizens off the uninsured roll, as opposed to Kerry’s 25 million, but Kerry’s plan has a massive price tag.
“I personally don’t think either candidate has the answer.”
— Larry J. Shapiro, M.D., executive vice chancellor for medical affairs; dean of the School of Medicine; and the Spencer T. and Ann W. Olin Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics
— Compiled by Terri Nappier