Another live debate with the candidates of the 18th Congressional District took place last night, this time on WEEK-TV with questions asked by WEEK’s Mike Dimmick and the Journal Star’s Christine Smith.
I thought Schock really shined at this debate. He answered all the questions directly and substantively and came across as the competent, ready-for-Congress candidate his campaign literature describes. It’s worth mentioning that there were no questions about foreign policy at this debate. McConoughey did well substantively, but was a little weak in his answer to the earmarks question, and as always struggled a bit with style. Morris was exactly the same as previous debates, alternately repeating his well-worn talking points and taking potshots at Schock, rarely answering a question directly. On that last point, Dimmick was manifestly exasperated by Morris’s doublespeak more than once during the debate.
Morris had another faux pas. He likes to talk about Article I of the Constitution and seems to bring it up in every debate. But we learned last night he’s not quite as well versed on Article V. While the candidates discussed what Constitutional amendments they would support, Schock mentioned that he would support a pro-life amendment. Morris immediately criticized Schock, questioning how he could support Giuliani — a pro-choice candidate — for President. Said Morris, with a pro-choice President, a pro-life amendment “would never pass.” Yet the President has nothing to do with the process for passing a Constitutional amendment. Here’s the complete text of Article V of the Constitution:
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Note that the President’s approval or even assent is not necessary, nor does it necessarily help an amendment get enacted. Bush has proposed several amendments that have not gone anywhere — e.g., flag-burning amendment, marriage amendment. All he can do is support it or advocate for it, but it’s up to the Congress and the state legislatures to make it happen.
The more debates there are, the more I feel the race becomes more of a two-man contest between Schock and McConoughey. I’m still supporting McConoughey, but I’m willing to acknowledge that Schock performed a little better in this debate.
Agreed, Morris is losing votes each debate.
John Morris is a good guy but I don’t see him as our next congressman.
Great family man though…….bla,bla,bla
[...] C.J. Thinks Schock won the debate. But he also called out Morris on a contitutional gaffe. *** [...]
McConaughey did more double-speak in giving a long winded no answer to the question on Medicare than Morris did in the entire debate. Even when Christine Smith asked a follow up question, not about bland platitudes on health care, but about the Medicare program, McConaughey stammered.
debate watcher — McConoughey said the same thing Schock did, only Schock said it better. They both said that the issue isn’t Medicare, but rather the rapidly increasing costs of health care. If health care costs don’t get under control, no tweaking to the Medicare system is going to solve anything.