Catherine Djang ’13 and Ben Smith ’13 are the first Bates debaters to “break” at the World Universities Debating Championship since 1999. Photograph by Phyllis Graber Jensen/Bates College.

They were in Berlin, in a big meeting room at Technische Universität along with 384 of the world’s best debate teams.

After nine grueling preliminary debates over the prior three days, the debaters were listening to the slow roll call of teams that had earned enough points to “break” into the 48-team elimination rounds of the World Universities Debating Championship, held Dec. 27 through Jan. 4.

Forty-four teams had already been announced.

Just four spots remained.

No Bates team had advanced since 1999.

Then came the sweet words from the front of the room: “Breaking 45th, on 18 points: Bates A.”

A few minutes later, Djang was shaking, mostly because a fellow Bates debater had just grabbed her shoulders. “Do you know what this means!?” exclaimed Taylor Blackburn ’15.

“Do you know what this means for Bates!?” continued Blackburn. “Do you know what this means for you!?”

What “this” means is this: Djang and Smith are now “among the elite of elite of global debaters,” says Director of Debate and Lecturer in Rhetoric Jan Hovden, who served as a judge in Berlin, as did Blackburn. (Adding to the Bates presence at this year’s WUDC was Colin Etnire ’12, who was selected as one of nine judges of the Grand Final, won by Monash University.)

Breaking at the WUDC is one of those feats that’s more impressive the more you learn about it. For one thing, they are the first Bates team to break since Tamara Pogue Drangstveit ’99 and Amy Keith ’99 did the trick their senior year.

“Not many people realize how big an achievement this really is,” says Drangstveit, who now directs the Family & Intercultural Resource Center in Summit County, Colo. ”The tournament is really the Olympics of international spoken and analytic competition.”

The numbers support what she says.

Djang advances her team’s argument during a World Universities Debating Championship match as teammate Ben Smith ’13 watches.

This year, those 384 teams came from 264 colleges, universities and debating societies in 64 countries, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe. Once featuring mostly teams from England and Australia, WUDC is now more worldwide and competitive than ever, and this year’s field was about double that of a decade ago.

“You can be in a room with people representing every continent except Antarctica,” says Hovden.

Djang and Smith’s feat gains even more luster when you learn that Americans have no edge in international debating (Bates’ long history of international debate notwithstanding). A handful of English and Australian colleges dominate: “Oxford and Cambridge, Sydney and Monash,” recites Hovden.

International debaters tend to be vastly more experienced, nearly professional. As Smith says wryly, “We’re not as good.” International debaters are often law students or Ph.D. candidates. “It can be intimidating.”

Even at home, Bates debate walks a distinctive path, as most other colleges have tryouts and cuts; Bates never has.

Of the 33 U.S. colleges and universities that sent 53 teams to Berlin, only nine teams made the break: Bates, Stanford, Harvard, Yale and Princeton. Not making the cut were U.S. teams from Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Duke, Swarthmore, Amherst, and Williams, among others.

Djang and Smith confer as a McGill University debater presents the Opposition argument during a preliminary round of the 2013 World Universities Debates Championship. Bates argued the Government position with Australia’s Griffith University, while McGill was paired with Durham Union Society of England.

Americans are also at a disadvantage at the WUDC because U.S. parliamentary style differs from the British style employed at most world tournaments.

American style features one team (the Government) supporting the motion, and the other team (the Opposition) against. British parliamentary style doubles the fun. Two teams are on each side of the motion, each team getting a chance to support or oppose the motion.

For example, in one of their debates, Smith and Djang, along with a team from Australia’s Griffith University, were the Government, supporting the motion that “universities should never prohibit research or teaching on the grounds of sexist, racist or otherwise discriminatory implications.” The Opposition teams were from Canada’s McGill University and Durham Union Society of England.

“The British style is a lot more competitive,” Smith says. “It’s more exciting, and there’s a lot more strategy.”

Breaking at worlds puts Djang and Smith “among the elite of elite of global students,” says Director of Debate and Lecturer in Rhetoric Jan Hovden. Photograph by Phyllis Graber Jensen.

Hovden explains that the two styles reflect “different argumentative communities.” That is, “the way you might argue in a court of criminal law is different from civil law. How you are argue with the person on the street differs from how you argue” in the academic realm.

Given the complexity of the format, it’s imperative for a team to keep track of all arguments, then wisely choose which ones to argue. You simply can’t argue them all.

“You have to identify the really critical arguments of the debate and use them to your advantage,” Smith says.

This ability, taught to Smith and Djang by their coach, Jan Hovden, is also what debate alumnus Erich Fuchs ’92 learned from the late Bob Branham, the coach who completed the Bates program’s  shift from policy debate to the more freewheeling parliamentary style by 1990.

Fuchs, now on the faculty in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at Penn State, recalls how Branham would “caution against simply refuting each argument separately” during a parliamentary debate, even as he taught his debaters to track the many different arguments carefully.

Branham “recommended developing perspective on the entire debate, then developing a few carefully selected responses or incisive points of information,” Fuchs says.

“Points of information” are occasions when a side can question the other. “Because there can be several people asking you questions, you can get bombarded,” Smith said. “But it’s more fun that way.”

All told, being an underdog at a world-level event suited the Bates team just fine. Like any competitor who relishes the arena, Djang and Smith savored the chance to “play up.”

“There’s greater pressure to perform, but we like that,” Djang said. “The different knowledge backgrounds, different educational backgrounds — it’s exciting on so many levels.”

In at least one instance, the Bates team used its academic coursework for effect.

Catherine Djang ’13 and Ben Smith ’13 ponder a question as they pose for photographs near the debate trophy case in Pettigrew Hall. Photo by Phyllis Graber Jensen/Bates College.

In the fifth preliminary round, Djang and Smith argued the Government side on the motion that progressive males “of dominant ethnicities” should refrain from taking jobs when there is a qualified candidate from a “historically disadvantaged group.”

A politics major (with minors in philosophy and Spanish) whose senior thesis looks at the underrepresentation of women in politics, Djang, who goes by “Cat,” pounced.

“I was able to easily articulate a justification for why it is important to consider historical marginalization and access to positions of power,” she said.

Of course, a debate motion can just as easily clash with a debater’s set of beliefs. (Case in point: Smith, being a self-described progressive male, had less zeal for the motion.)

Specific motions aside, the overall experience at an event like the WUDC, where debaters might argue more than a dozen motions over a few days — on sensitive topics ranging from nuclear weapons and aid to Egypt to feminism, monogamy, religious intolerance and population control — is enough to jostle anyone’s beliefs.

“You go into a debate and you realize that your strongly held opinions are matched by strong opinions on the other side, with very valid arguments to support them,” Smith acknowledges. “You can lose track of what you yourself believe.”

But, says Hovden, offering her students a path out of this rhetorical rabbit hole, by arguing a position that you don’t believe, “students to gain a better understanding of the issue as a whole.”

In turn, understanding an issue is the first step toward testing one’s own beliefs, a basic tenet of a liberal arts education. From that test comes greater respect for the positions of others.

“Ultimately,” Hovden says, completing her own neat argument, “that makes the student a stronger and more empathetic individual.”

Ian Mahmud ’12 supports the government position during the quarterfinals at Cambrige in November. The motion: “This House believes that the use of conscripted soldiers should be a war crime.”

What was true 90 years ago, when The New York Timesproclaimed Bates to be a “power centre of college debating,” is in evidence again now as the college’s Brooks Quimby Debate Council ranks among the best debate programs in the world.

Ranked 14th globally as of Feb. 29 by the International Debate Education Association, the Bates team recently has ranked as high as ninth.

Bates’ strong world ranking, says Director of Debate Jan Hovden, “is a true honor for members of the Brooks Quimby Debate Council. Bates is an undergraduate-only institution whose students regularly compete against graduate and law students from around the globe, so the ranking speaks volumes about the quality of students we have at Bates.”

According to the IDEA website, the world rankings draw “from the results of 33 high-profile tournaments across the world to show an accurate representation of the comparative strength of debating societies against each other.”

In rankings published by the American Parliamentary Debate Association, Bates is ranked sixth the U.S., behind Yale, Brandeis, Harvard, American and Columbia universities.

Bates debates at home March 8-10, hosting a public debate vs. Yale at 7:30 p.m., March 8, in the Chapel, and an intercollegiate debate the following two days.

Ian Mahmud ’12 and Colin Etnire ’12, ranked among the top U.S. debate teams, chat during their November debate trip to Cambridge.

Pacing the Brooks Quimby Debate Council are seniors Colin Etnire of San Francisco and Ian Mahmud of Duxbury, Mass., ranked seventh in the U.S.in the Team of the Year standings by the American Parliamentary Debate Association.

Etnire is ranked eighth in U.S. Speaker of the Year standings, while Taylor Blackburn ’15 of Atherton, Calif., is eighth in the Novice of the Year standings.

The Brooks Quimby Debate Council is distinctive in that the club trains and develops debaters who have had no prior experience. It does not hold competitive tryouts but is open to all interested students.

Here, Walter Garcia ’11 of Deer Isle, Maine, recalls his debating experiences.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Garcia, who took a year off and will graduate in 2012, joined his 2011 classmates  at a recent Trustee luncheon, where each year the Bates seniors in attendance respond to President Elaine Tuttle Hansen’s invitation to offer impromptu comments.

The debate will be webcast and broadcast live by MPBN on radio and television 8-9 p.m. from the Olin Concert Hall at Bates, 75 Russell St., Lewiston. Because seating is limited, admission will be by ticket only, reserved in advance — but tickets are free and a limited number of them are still available on a first-come, first-served basis, via e-mail at yourvote2010[at]bates[dot]edu. There is a limit of one ticket per e-mail address. While all tickets must be reserved prior to the debate, any tickets not claimed by 7:30 p.m. at the reservation table in Olin will be offered to the general public.

A RELATED EVENT:
Beside the gubernatorial debate, Bates’ Brooks Quimby Debate Council and students in the Presidential Campaign Rhetoric class will offer a two-part program from 4:15 to 5:15 p.m. in the Mays Center, near Central Ave. and Russell St. The debaters will outline the candidates’ stances on key issues and talk about areas of divergence and overlap. The Rhetoric students will then discuss strategies of political debates. Both these associated events are open to all at no charge.

DEBATE BACKGROUND:
While no questions will be taken from the audience during the live debate, MPBN welcomes questions received prior to the debate for consideration by its moderator and two questioners. Those questions should be submitted by e-mail to talk(at)mpbn(dot)net before noon Oct. 28.

All five candidates on the state ballot committed to participating in the Oct. 28 debate at Bates: independent candidate Eliot Cutler, Republican nominee and Waterville Mayor Paul LePage, Democratic nominee and Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell and independent candidates Shawn Moody and Kevin Scott.

However, late Wednesday afternoon Oct. 27 LePage notified MPBN he will not be participating in the Bates debate.

This and prior debates will all be available on demand at www.mpbn.net as part of MPBN’s “Your Vote 2010″ election coverage, and will be rebroadcast over the weekend.

MPBN gubernatorial debate broadcast times:
10/28 Thursday 8 p.m. LIVE – Also live radio simulcast, and webcast at www.mpbn.net
10/29 Friday 1 p.m. – Radio
10/29 Friday 8:30 p.m. – TV
10/31 Sunday 11 a.m. -TV
10/31 Sunday 4:30 p.m. – TV
11/1 Monday 3 p.m. – Radio
The debate will also be available on demand at www.mpbn.net following the live event.

The Brooks Quimby Debate Council is getting more and more comfortable outside its comfort zone.

An established force in the American Parliamentary debate format, Quimby deepened its inroads into the contrasting world of British Parliamentary style during the weekend of April 10. The team of Colin Etnire ’12 of San Francisco and Ariela Silberstein ’10 of New York City made the semifinals at the United States Universities Debate Championship, the nation’s ultimate British-style contest.

In its USU Championship debut, in Colorado, the Quimby twosome was among teams from the University of Vermont and the University of Alaska that got as far as the semifinals. A Claremont Colleges team beat out finalists from Stanford, Yale and Portland State to win the tournament.

Co-hosted by Regis University and the University of Denver, the tourney took place at the latter campus and drew 124 teams.

For Silberstein, a high point in the action was winning a quarterfinal round in opposing the resolution “This House would replace citizen juries with professional juries.”

“We were able to defeat a team from the University of Alaska that was one of the top-ranked teams at the tournament,” she said, “in front of a judging panel that included a former World Champion.

“And it was quite significant for us that in the last preliminary round of competition, we were in the top-ranked room of the entire tournament.”

The British style emphasizes rhetorical style and an extended line of argument, while the American is more legalistic, emphasizing line-by-line breakdowns of an argument.

The American Parliamentary Debate Association circuit is Bates’ usual stomping ground. While Brooks Quimby has a long track record with British Parliamentary events — including longstanding participation in tournaments at Cambridge and Oxford, U.K., and at the World Universities Debating Championship, which took place in Turkey over New Year’s — the squad’s British-style competition on this side of the Atlantic has been less common.

But that’s changing. A British Parliamentary circuit independent of the APDA is growing in the United States, and this is the first year Bates has competed on that circuit.

“It’s a sign of the strength of our program that we were able to go so far at a tournament held in a style that hasn’t traditionally been our focus,” Silberstein said of the Colorado event. “However, we’re fast learning how both educational and dynamic British style is, and I think we’ll continue to expand our emphasis on it — and our competitive success.”

The weekend meet extended Etnire’s personal string of successes in the British realm, as he and classmate Ian Mahmud topped 73 other teams at the University of Vermont tournament last fall.

Hosted by the Brooks Quimby Debate Council, retired Col. Richard Klass of the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation and Dr. Ira Helfand of Physicians for Social Responsibility will present the talk to provide medical and military perspectives on questions of nuclear security issues.

A recent TV documentary featured Portland as the site of a nuclear “dirty bomb” detonation. Top intelligence officials assert that terrorists will attempt an attack on the U.S. in the next six months. In an age when terrorists seek to use weapons of mass destruction, what role, if any, should nuclear weapons play in our national security strategy? This and other questions will be addressed by Klass and Helfand.

Klass retired from the U.S. Air Force in 1980 after serving for over 22 years. His decorations include the Silver Star, Distinguished Flying Cross, Legion of Merit, and Purple Heart. Klass currently serves as executive director for the Veterans’ Alliance for Security and Democracy. He lives in Arlington, Va.

Helfand is a specialist in emergency medicine in Springfield, Mass., and a co-founder of Physicians for Social Responsibility. He has published widely on the medical implications of nuclear explosions and has provided congressional testimony on developing systems to better respond to medical disasters.

Klass and Helfand’s presentation will discuss topics such as the potential impact of a nuclear weapons attack, what Cold War nuclear weapons policies mean in an age of terrorism and the Obama administration’s diplomatic efforts to curb nuclear weapons proliferation.

By Elizabeth McKean ’12

The atmosphere in the College Chapel was one of excitement on Jan. 21 as the Brooks Quimby Debate Council held its annual public debate against rival Yale.

Anticipation ran high, given Quimby’s long tradition of excellence and Yale’s current position as the world’s top-ranked American team. Accordingly, a large and enthusiastic contingent of Bates students, both debaters and non-debaters, attended. The audience included Bates President Elaine Tuttle Hansen and a group of Yale supporters.

The two teams did not disappoint. The resolution of the evening was “This house believes that California should create schools that teach primarily in Spanish.” Bates argued the side of government and Yale, the opposition. Debating for Bates were seniors Ariela Silberstein, Rachel Kurzius and Matt Marienthal. Yale’s team consisted of seniors Steven Kryger and Grant May, and first-year student Josh Kalla.

Silberstein opened by proposing that a bilingual education system would better address the educational needs of California ‘s large Spanish-speaking population. Overall, the government argued that bilingual schools that teach English as a secondary language would be more beneficial because students would both be able to learn English and advance in other subject areas without being hindered by a language barrier.

Kryger responded that immersion was a better system for learning a language. He also cited several “perverse results” of the creation of such schools including pressure from peers and school administrators to attend bilingual schools, increased difficulty learning English and de facto segregation for Spanish-speaking students .

Kurzius emphasized the costs of failing to learn other skill sets because of the language barrier, arguing that this would be the greatest disservice to students. Kalla disagreed, reiterating that becoming very proficient in English through total immersion should be the priority, and that other negative impacts of bilingual schools reinforced this point.

The debate was undoubtedly close, with both sides proposing solid arguments and responding quickly and effectively to critique. Yet despite the heated discussion, the atmosphere in the Chapel was that of friendly rivalry and intense academic interest, with loud cheers for both sides’ displays of aptitude. Both teams were courteous and humorous when fitting.

At one point, questioning the effectiveness of bilingual schools, Yale’s May asked Kurzius if she felt that by learning Spanish in a class, she would be able to debate in Spanish. She quipped, “Actually, Bates is considering putting on a debate in Spanish, so unfortunately for you, yes.”

This being a public debate, audience members took the opportunity to offer insights prior to the final

rebuttals. Perhaps the most interesting comments came from two Bates students who learned English as a second language — one who supported the government’s position and one the opposition’s. Their commentaries on their respective firsthand experiences and what they would suggest emphasized the closeness of the debate.

Marienthal of Bates and May of Yale gave final rebuttals. A “sound vote” was used to determine a winner, with the audience cheering for the side they believed won. Appropriately for such an evenly matched debate, no clear winner was audible, and the event adjourned with the moderator laughing, “Well, we’ll leave it at that.”

The Yale debate marked the beginning of a busy weekend for Brooks Quimby as Bates hosted a tournament on Friday and Saturday.

Thirty-two teams from nine different schools including Yale, Stanford, MIT and the University of Windsor (Canada) participated. According to league rules, Bates teams could not participate because most of the judges were affiliated with the college. Yale teams won both the overall tournament and the novice division, beating teams from MIT and Stanford, respectively.

Senior Quimby member Silberstein described the event as an especially great learning experience for younger debaters. The novices watched rounds being judged by varsity debaters, who in turn explained how they voted and why. Overall, Silberstein called the tournament “incredibly successful.”

Representing Bates’ Brooks Quimby Debate Council, sophomores Colin Etnire of San Francisco and Ian Mahmud of Duxbury, Mass., finished first out of 76 teams in the Robert Huber Memorial Debating Championship at the University of Vermont on Sept. 27. (Debate teams comprise two people.) 

Advancing to the quarterfinals in the Sept. 26-27 competition were Yoon Loong Wong, a sophomore from Ipoh, Malaysia, and Mircea Lupu, a junior from Northville, Mich.

The tournament was held in the British Parliamentary style, as opposed to the American Parliamentary format, which is the Brooks Quimby Debate Council’s specialty.

Beginning debaters — those who have attended three or fewer formal competitions — acquitted themselves well that same weekend. Two Bates teams won three out of four rounds in the American Parliamentary Debate Association Novice Tournament at Boston University Sept. 25-26.

“The team is tremendously excited about the great start to this year,” said Ariela Silberstein, Quimby’s public relations and alumni affairs officer. “While there may be other schools on the circuit that debate as well as we do, few have the same kind of team dynamic and support system for members.”

“For some, it was the first time debating, but everyone rose to the challenge,” added Rachel Kurzius, a senior from Ridgewood, N.J., who works with the team’s novices. “I had one conversation with a novice who lost a round, but still felt really fulfilled — and that’s what is most important, enjoying the act of debating more than win or loss records.”

In the British style, two teams of debaters work each side of the argument and the emphasis is on rhetorical style and an extended line of argument. The topics are decided by the tournament directors of the host school, are announced 20 minutes before debating is to begin and differ for each round.

In the American style, one team argues each side of the resolution, and the style is more legalistic, emphasizing line-by-line breakdowns of an argument. Topics are brought by the individual teams, but only one side knows the topic before a given round.

At UVM, the resolutions were revealed to competitors only 20 minutes prior to performance, restricting time allowed for preparation. Topics included whether it is legal to support surrogate mothers, whether Iran should be allowed to have nuclear weapons and whether Gordon Brown should be ousted as Britain’s prime minister.

Last March, Etnire and Mahmud defeated a team from Yale University to win the novice division of the 2009 Stanford University Parliamentary Debate Tournament. Also last year, Brooks Quimby dominated novice divisions at tournaments at Providence College and MIT.

“This year we aim to further Bates’ standing on circuits both domestic and international, and to showcase the effectiveness of our debating program to the Bates community through on-campus events,” commented Silberstein.

Three teams will travel to Antalya, Turkey, to compete at the World Universities Debating Championship. Colloquially known as Worlds, this is the largest annual debating tournament for international students. Quimby debaters will also visit England to attend tournaments at Oxford and Cambridge universities in November.

The Brooks Quimby Debate Council was founded in the 1800s when completing a public debate was a graduation requirement at Bates. The team was one of the first in the nation to go co-ed and to include African American students. Bates, too, was the first American institution to debate with foreign universities.

— Kelly Cox ’11, Editorial Assistant, and Doug Hubley, Staff Writer

First-year Bates students Colin Etnire of San Francisco and his partner Ian Mahmud of Milton, Mass., defeated a team from Yale University to win the novice division of the 2009 Stanford University Parliamentary Debate Tournament, held March 6 and 7 in Palo Alto, Calif. In addition, Etnire brought home the trophy for first novice speaker at Stanford, ranking above average in every single round.

Seventeen colleges and universities sent 74 debaters, including 31 novices, to the tournament. The tournament’s novice division is organized specifically for debaters competing for the first time at the collegiate level. During the tournament’s five preliminary rounds, novice participants debate against both varsity and novice teams. In the finals, however, organizers separate the varsity and novice teams into two divisions. A novice speaker can debate on the same team with a varsity member, but that team competes as a varsity squad and cannot break into the final novice round.

Etnire and Mahmud broke into semi-finals, where they beat a team from Dartmouth on a 3-0 decision. The Bates team opposed the resolution that “This house believes that voting should be obligatory in a democracy.” The pair then advanced to debate the Yale team in the final round, arguing against the resolution, “This house believes that all political campaigns should be publically financed.” Discussing the important roles played by 527s (tax-exempt groups organized under section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code to raise money for political activities) and PACS (political action committees that raise money to elect or defeat candidates), as well political donations as a form of free speech and expression, the team won the final round on a 4-1 decision. Furthermore, all four speakers met by Etnire and Mahmud during the final rounds were ranked in the top 50 nationally for novices.

In addition, debaters Mircea Lupu ’12 of Northville, Minn., and Yoon Loong ’12 of Ipoh, Malaysia, broke into the novice division’s semi-finals before losing to a Yale team on a 2-1 decision. The Bates team debated in opposition to the resolution that “This house believes that in a situation where there is a shortage of blood, volunteers who donate blood should be paid.”

This is the third year in a row that the Brooks Quimby Debate Council has won either the novice or varsity division of the Stanford tournament, says Bates debater Alison Vingiano ’11 of Hastings-on-the-Hudson, N.Y. “This tournament provided insight to how talented our novice class is. We expect to see great success from them for the rest of the season, and look forward to next year when the talented speakers will advance to the varsity team, and continue to make Bates proud,” Vingiano says.

Due to unforeseen circumstances, the following tournament has been canceled, and the Bates-Yale debate has been postponed with a new date and time to be announced.

The Brooks Quimby Debate Council hosts an American Parliamentary Debate Association Tournament at Bates College on Friday, Feb. 27, and Saturday, Feb. 28.

As tournament host, the Bates team won’t debate in this competition.To keep the squad limber, however, Bates team members will debate the Yale University team at 8 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 26, in Chase Hall Lounge, 56 Campus Ave.

They will debate the issue, “This House believes that the United States should end the ban on media coverage of U.S. soldiers’ bodies returning home.”

The match is open to the public free of charge. Audience members are encouraged to participate with cheers, jeers, questions, comments and floor speeches.

The Yale squad is currently the top debating team in the United States, while Bates is the sixth-ranked U.S. team, says Bates debater Alison Vingiano, a sophomore from Hastings-on-Hudson, N.Y. Coached by director of debate Jan Hovden, Bates debaters are sophomore Nate Sweet of Sharon, Mass.; senior Jared Levy of Ardmore, Pa.; and senior Geoff Shaughnessy of Hanover, N.H.

The Yale debaters will include junior Grant May, who is ranked as the seventh-best speaker by the American Parliamentary Debate Association. The two other Yale debaters will be announced.
Vingiano predicts “an exciting, competitive exchange between two of the country’s top debating teams.”

The Bates vs. Yale match precedes the debate tournament. Competing university and college teams take part in five preliminary rounds beginning 5 p.m. Friday, Feb. 27, and continuing through Saturday, Feb. 28. The final round, open to the public at no charge, will begin at about 4:30 p.m. Saturday in a location to be announced, followed by an awards ceremony.

For more information about the debate, please contact Alison Vingiano at avingian@bates.edu.