College Democrats, Republicans, Socialists and Libertarians Debate
The Interclub Debate topics included tax reform and gun control.
The Politics Society hosted the Fall Interclub Debate between College Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians and the Democratic Socialists of America Wednesday night.
Moderated by the Politics Society’s event directors Jami Tanner and Adrian Pietrzak, the groups debated about tax reform — specifically, the GOP’s new tax bill — and gun control, with approximately 90 students in attendance.
Senior Milad Mohammadi, representing the Libertarians, kicked off the debate. He argued in favor of removing exemptions and deductions from the tax code.
“The goal of taxation is to collect revenue for the funding of government functions, namely national defense and government programs,” Mohammadi said. “However, today, taxes have become a way to socially engineer society. It has gone beyond its intended purposes. These policies create market distortions that have a long-term, negative ripple effect on the economy.”
Arguing for the Republicans, sophomore Thomas Lesniak proposed that revenue is not the problem, spending is. If the government does not handle its debt deficit, he said, the nation will “face a merciless day of reckoning.”
“Reckless, unfunded promises have crippled our nation, whose only answer seem to be shrinking the tax base while increasing the recipient base,” Lesniak said. “As such, we need a simplified tax code with a flat tax, at almost all income levels, and proportional to one’s income. Corporate tax rates must be slashed or eliminated.”
The College Democrats representative, junior Arjun Reddy, said the current GOP tax bill was created to be “a win for the Republicans in a system where it seems they cannot get anything done, despite the fact they control everything.” He concurred with Mohammadi about the nature of taxes to raise money and to advise certain actions, but qualified how it is wasteful to not use tax dollars to alleviate financial struggles.
“This bill improves on neither of those goals,” Reddy said. “It is going to hurt everyday people and expand the deficit for no good reason. We, as a country, have to decide whether we want to be morally complicit in reducing accessibility to the American Dream or if we would rather make the rich richer.”
Junior Nina Svirsky, the only woman who debated, represented the Democratic Socialists of America. She argued the bill was “designed under the false pretense of a failed economic system, which has been disproven” and that tax breaks for the rich neither the right thing to do and isn’t a popular policy, either.
“We are moving rapidly towards oligarchy,” Svirsky said. “When we talk about taxes, when we talk about economic growth or GDP growth, we must ask a basic question: growth for whom?”
A large chunk of the discussion revolved around the role of corporations. Mohammadi and Lesniak agreed that the bill’s corporate tax cut is “a step in the right direction.” Those on left disagreed, citing that the majority of Americans think corporations should be taxed.
However, Mohammadi noted that NYU is technically a corporation, but doesn’t pay taxes, and perhaps it should. Reddy agreed, saying that “the function of this place is to educate people, not to make money… at least in theory.”
During the the gun control portion, all debaters conceded that the second amendment should not be repealed. The socialists, led by senior Zach Lewis, said that “guns laws should reflect the will of the people,” and that in light of mass shootings, perhaps re-evaluating the gun lobby’s role in making legislation — such as universal background checks — is necessary.
Freshman David Gordon, who debated on behalf of the Democrats, listed statistics of gun-related violence. “In 2017, there have been 55,000 gun-related incidents, 323 mass shootings and 14,000 Americans lost to guns,’ Gordon said. “Something has to change.”
Gordon attributed lack in preventative measures as the reason for why such violence occurs. Senior Weston Richey —the vice president of the College Libertarians — and junior Ethan Harper, who represented the Republicans, had qualms about background checks, though.
Richey said background checks, such as the no fly zone list, are rooted in racism and prejudice. “It would unfairly target certain populations,” Richey said.
Harper’s argument focused more on self-protection against government and “bad people.” He opened polling the room. “How many of you own a gun? How many of your parents own a gun? See, for those of you who don’t have guns, the thing is, some people value guns like the freedom of speech. You wouldn’t take away that, would you?”
The final question of the night was whether guns make society safer. Harper answered yes, especially in rural communities where there are not as many cops. In addition, he said that “having more good people with guns” could help during mass shooting.
The other debate participants, on the other hand, dissented. “If we want to make society safer,” Richey said, “we need to focus on the issues causing the violence.”
