GINGREY

Students create 'innovative' policy platforms for election

By: HAYLEY PETERSON

Posted: 4/14/08

"Gee, I wish Congress could hear this," Georgia U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey whispered during the Roosevelt Institution's policy presentations for the perfect 2008 presidential platform.

Gingrey said Congress members should take a lesson from Roosevelt Institution participants, who demonstrated in a two-day conference that the perfect 2008 presidential platform transcends political partisanship.

"So many members of Congress are unwilling to even consider policies presented by members of another affiliation, knowing already they will disagree with them," Gingrey said.

But incidentally, cross-partisan harmony resonated throughout the Roosevelt Institution's deliberations during the weekend.

Approximately 75 students traveled from schools across the nation to debate conservative, moderate and liberal policies on five major issues that are influencing the 2008 presidential election - energy, taxes, the war in Iraq, immigration and health care.

Friday afternoon, the students broke into groups monitored by professors to form their policy arguments in accordance with an assigned partisanship.

At 9 a.m Saturday, the student groups presented their respective policies, which were voted on by all participants.

The groups with the prevailing platforms for each topic presented their policies to policy experts Gingrey, associate of the Charles F. Kettering Foundation, former University professor Margaret Holt and Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Jere Morehead.

During the forum, even seasoned experts found common ground and agreed on what are usually partisan policies.

The elected energy policy platform was liberal and argued for energy independence with a transition to renewable, sustainable and carbon-free resources. The group proposed a carbon and oil tax to provide revenue for research on alternative resources and government programs to facilitate the transition economically.

On taxes, a conservative platform won the vote. This group emphasized the complexity of the 65,000-page current tax code, which disadvantages lower income families who don't understand how to benefit from the program. They called for tax code simplification with special regard to equity.

The moderate platform that won the vote for the war in Iraq promoted accountability and transparency through engaging rhetoric, regional negotiations to share financial responsibility and gradual redeployment of U.S. forces with the succession of Iraqi forces.

A conservative immigration platform called for increased border security, with a plan to finish the proposed 700 miles of fencing at the border. This group advocated peaceable enforcement of the laws through an employer identification program with sanctions for those who do not abide by the rules, and incentives for those who do.

A conservative platform also won the vote for health care. This group said the U.S. ranks 39th in the world for adequate health care. To improve this ranking, they proposed an individual-based health care system, so individuals could benefit from the pre-tax incentive currently enjoyed by employers.

In making insurance companies more directly accountable to customers, they said the increased competition would yield improved service.

Alex Johnson, a junior from Royston, was in the liberal Iraq War group.

"The whole process of jogging ideas was so exciting," he said. "I often feel deprived of intellectual conversation. It's so enlightening to know there are other students out there who also enjoy this dialogue."

Many students were so engaged they resisted conference administrators trying to force them out of the Student Learning Center around midnight.

"Many people were upset that there was little downtime in the schedule," Tyler Pratt, executive board member of the Roosevelt Institution and senior from Martinez, said. "But we were trying to close down, and they would not leave because they wanted to keep working. We practically had to force them out."

Following each presentation, the three panelists reiterated how impressed they were with the students' high-quality work and in-depth policy considerations. Although it appears the conservative platforms prevailed, many groups did not limit their policies to embody just one ideology, Pratt said.

"Surprisingly, they did not regurgitate the information we gave them for their political platforms," Pratt said. "They are coming up with some very innovative things."

Kristen Tullos, a junior and co-chair on the Roosevelt Institution's board, said the students' quality dialogue was a strong indication of the Institution's legitimacy.

"Essentially you guys had eight hours to hammer out this quality of work. All of us felt we could really identify with each topic. This is a real testament to what this organization is about," she said.

Johnson said, "Up until now, everything I have done for the Roosevelt Institution has been on an individual basis.

This is what I thought the Institution was supposed to be like, when I joined last year.

It was a phenomenal symposium, in the Greek sense of the word - where you talk through things until you come up with a working solution. It is stuff like this that sets UGA apart from other giant state organizations."