By Phil Huber, ADVANCE COLUMNIST
The University of Mary Washington just announced that they’re moving the Tuesday, Sept. 15, congressional election debate to Tuesday, Sept. 22. The devate will feature three of the four candidates seeking Virginia’s 7th Congressional District seat: Republican Doug Ollivant, Independent Alaha Ahrar and Libertarian Taner Lopez. The Democratic incumbent, Eugene Vindman, had other commitments and won’t be there. The event begins at 7 p.m. in Dodd Auditorium at George Washington Hall. It is free, requires no ticket, and is also expected to be available by Zoom. UMW’s Student Government Association is hosting the event with local civic and media partners.
***
A debate is not merely a political show. It is an opportunity for citizens to ask whether people seeking power have done the hard work of thinking through the consequences of their promises.
Campaign slogans are easy. “Cut spending.” “Protect Social Security.” “Secure the border.” “Support our troops.” “Put Americans first.” “Stand up for human rights.” Most voters can agree with the sentiment behind at least some of those phrases. The important question is what a candidate would do when the slogans collide with one another—and with budget realities, constitutional limits and the real needs of working people, retirees, veterans, farmers, employers and families.
The following are questions I would like the candidates to answer. If you think they are fair and useful, copy one or more, bring them with you and submit them at the door before the program begins. If you have better questions, write those down and submit them instead.
The point is not to stage a “gotcha” moment. It is to encourage specific, accountable answers.
First: Social Security, Health Care and Debt
For Doug Ollivant:
You have said you would preserve current Social Security benefits while also reducing federal spending and taxes. With an aging population and a federal debt exceeding $40 trillion, what specific changes would you support—or oppose—to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act? What specific spending would you cut to put the federal budget on a sustainable path?
For Alaha Ahrar:
What specific steps would you take to protect Social Security and Medicare and make health care more affordable while also addressing the federal deficit? Would you raise taxes, reduce benefits, cut other federal programs, or accept continued large deficits—and where would you draw the line?
For Taner Lopez:
As a Libertarian, you advocate substantially smaller government and reducing the national debt. Social Security, Medicare and other health programs account for a large share of federal spending. What specifically would you change in those programs, and would today’s retirees or people nearing retirement see any reduction in benefits?
These questions matter because Congress cannot responsibly promise to protect every major program, cut taxes, increase defense readiness, lower health-care costs and reduce debt without explaining the tradeoffs. Every serious federal budget has winners, losers and consequences. Voters deserve to know which choices each candidate would make.
Second: Immigration, Tariffs and Our Economy
For Doug Ollivant:
Our region depends on federal workers and contractors, small businesses, construction, agriculture and consumers already dealing with high costs. Do you support the administration’s tariffs and current immigration-enforcement policies? Where would you draw the line if tariffs raise prices or immigration enforcement reduces the workforce that farms, construction companies and other local businesses depend upon?
For Alaha Ahrar:
As an immigrant and human-rights advocate, what changes would you make to America’s immigration system to secure the border while treating undocumented immigrants already living and working here fairly? Specifically, who should be deported, who should be allowed to remain, and should there be a path to legal status or citizenship?
For Taner Lopez:
Libertarians traditionally favor both individual liberty and limited government, while you have said America’s immigration system is broken. What should happen to undocumented immigrants already living and working in the United States, and what role should the federal government play in border enforcement, detention and deportation?
Immigration policy cannot be reduced to a choice between “open borders” and “mass deportation.” It involves border security, criminal enforcement, due process, labor needs, family unity, employers’ responsibilities and the basic question of what to do with millions of people who have lived and worked here for years.
Likewise, tariffs are not an abstract Washington argument. They can affect prices paid by consumers, costs faced by local businesses and the competitiveness of American producers. Candidates should explain not only the principle they favor, but also how they would respond if their preferred policy produces harm at home.
Third: War, Peace and Military Power
For Doug Ollivant:
You have considerably more national-security experience than most candidates for Congress and advocate “peace through strength.” What specifically should America’s objectives now be in Iran and Ukraine? How much more American money and military support are you prepared to commit to each, and under what circumstances would you vote to end that support or authorize U.S. forces to enter a conflict?
For Alaha Ahrar:
Given your background in Afghanistan and human rights, what should America’s objectives be in Iran and Ukraine? When should the United States provide military or financial assistance to another country, and what limits would you place on American involvement?
For Taner Lopez:
You argue that American tax dollars should primarily serve Americans and that our troops should not continually be sent into other countries’ wars. Would you therefore oppose further U.S. military assistance to Ukraine or involvement in Iran? Would you also oppose tariffs because they interfere with free trade and can raise prices for American consumers?
Congress has enormous responsibilities in matters of war and peace. It appropriates money, oversees the executive branch and holds the constitutional power to declare war. A candidate should be able to state clearly what American interests are at stake, what resources the nation should commit, what limits should apply and when Congress—not simply a president—must make the decision.
Democracy Requires Participation
UMW has assembled a valuable local civic event: candidates with different political affiliations and sharply different assumptions about government, the economy and America’s role in the world. The announced participants are Ollivant, Ahrar and Lopez.
Go. Listen carefully. Take notes. Pay attention not only to which candidate gives an answer you like, but also to which one answers the question actually asked. Notice who identifies tradeoffs, who relies on slogans and who is willing to acknowledge uncertainty or change course when facts warrant it.
Bring your own question—or borrow one of these. Submit it at the door before the debate begins.
Then practice democracy in action.
***
Phil Huber is a retired Army Reserve colonel, federal civil servant and consultant who writes on civic education. He lives in Fredericksburg.
