By Todd Stevens
The Daily Cardinal
Everybody loves a good debate. It's one of the best examples we have of democracy in action. This should have been the case this past Sunday evening, when four aspiring candidates gathered at the Roosevelt Institution-sponsored debate for the District 8 alderman race. The debate was the only time all four candidates: Bryon Eagon, Katrina Flores, Jacob Schmidt and Mark Woulf, would be able to present their platforms at the same time and differentiate themselves - at least, in theory.
Sadly, the old cliché about leading a horse to water applies here. You can lead candidates to a debate, but you can't necessarily make them say anything. The only candidate who stood out was Bryon Eagon, not because he took wildly different stances from his competitors, but because he alone seemed to have an actual plan.
For the vast majority of the questions posed by moderator Rob Huston, the candidates refused to serve up any specifics and instead relied on dull and tired generalities. Schmidt in particular was more guilty of this than anyone, often retreating to bland, universal concepts such as prioritizing safety or increasing student involvement, but never explaining how he planned to accomplish these goals.
The Progressive Dane-backed Flores didn't fare much better. Like Schmidt, she emphasized the vague goal of getting students involved on the ground,"" a phrase she seemingly repeated every other sentence. It seems Flores is trying to paint herself as the activist candidate for District 8, however when she only deviates from a more mainstream competitor like Eagon on an issue as trivial as the Common Council calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush, it's hard for Flores to legitimately claim that title. In fact, her symbolic-but-toothless gestures mostly indicate that Flores is likely to fall into the common Progressive Dane trap of rallying for a cause but not following through.
Eagon, on the other hand, seems to be the only candidate who has put some thought into what it will take to accomplish his goals as alderman. When asked how he would tackle Madison's current alcohol policies, Eagon explained he would repeal the Alcohol Licensing Density Plan using its sunset clause, then transfer the plan's regulatory power to the Alcohol License Committee, which would review new downtown bars on a case-by-case basis.
This is a firm, concrete plan. Schmidt and Flores both agreed on the need to repeal the Alcohol Licensing Density Plan, though neither appeared to have solutions nearly as detailed as Eagon.
Eagon also outlined the most comprehensive plan on community safety, including removing funding for mobile ID scanners from the Downtown Safety Initiative. This would force police to dedicate fewer resources to bar raids and fund more cabstands and maintain officer patrols on Langdon Street. Other than Flores' suggestion of creating a Lakeshore-esque Langdon blue light phone system, neither she nor Schmidt could present any specific public safety plans.
This pattern continued down the line. Particularly emblematic of the debate was Flores' response when asked about the environmental quality of Madison's lakes.
""Lakes make Madison what it is,"" said Flores. ""So yeah... important.""
If only we could all be so insightful.
And where exactly was Mark Woulf in all of this? On the occasions when Woulf would raise his voice above an inaudible mumble, he spent most of the debate pushing the sole issue of increasing entertainment licenses for bars. Woulf's reasoning was that entertainment licenses allow underage students into bars legally, meaning fewer cops will be raiding bars and more will be patrolling the streets. This is a nice idea in theory, but as Eagon pointed out, entertainment licenses cost only a few hundred dollars so availability is hardly the problem. With Woulf's key issue rendered moot, it was hard to take him seriously as a candidate for the debate.
In the end, the issues didn't take center stage. Instead, the debate was an audition to see who can perform on the Madison Common Council. Of the four prospective civil servants, three looked like mere candidates while Bryon Eagon appeared as the only true alderman.
Todd Stevens is a sophomore majoring in history and psychology. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
