Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Debate's a study in contrasts

In the District 9 faceoff , the candidates express radically different views on immigration and Iraq.

By ROBIN STEIN
Published October 31, 2006

Phyllis Busansky and Gus Bilirakis were together at last.

The two District 9 candidates sat face to face at WEDU's studio in Tampa on Saturday morning for the taping of their much-anticipated debate.

It was not only the first and only debate of this congressional race. For Bilirakis, a soft-spoken four-term Republican state legislator, Saturday's scenario also marked a career first.

All the buzz in the Busansky camp about "Gus-sightings" and last-minute cancellations heightened suspense surrounding the face-off, but also endowed Bilirakis with all the advantages that accompany low expectations. He scored points just for showing up.

During the 24-minute exchange, Bilirakis took some hard hits from Busansky, a wonkish former Hillsborough County commissioner.

Minutes after moderator Rob Lorei thanked the candidates for their time, Bilirakis bolted from the studio before the makeup woman could get him cleaned up. But he escaped without any acute campaign-threatening damage.

And actually, the vibe was decidedly cordial. Lorei said Busansky and Bilirakis exchanged some light chit-chat before the debate.

But it became clear as soon as the cameras started to roll that the candidates' polite tones veiled their radically different policy positions and rhetorical styles.

On Iraq

Lorei kicked things off by querying the candidates about Iraq: Given the intensifying violence and recent reports of anti-American sentiment among Iraqi people, what policy approach would they recommend?

Busansky responded by taking a direct hit at the Bush administration.

"First of all, I think we need a policy in Iraq. I think we haven't had a policy in Iraq or a plan for Iraq," she said. The most pressing tasks, she said, should be replacing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and properly equipping troops. Busansky said the three-state framework laid out by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Delaware, offers the best way to stem the sectarian conflict in Iraq and get U.S. troops out from the center firestorm in Baghad.

"The Iraqis can in fact separate themselves into three different ethnic groups," she said. "We can patrol the borders and make sure the oil is apportioned appropriately."

Bilirakis took the opposite tack, embracing the administration's evolving stance.

"I feel that they voted three times for democracy and we need to put pressure on the Iraqi government," Bilirakis said. "That's what I would do, put pressure, set timetables for the Iraqi government to secure its country."

It was a shift from September, when Bilirakis told the St. Petersburg Times that he thought things in Iraq were improving, especially with the recent increase in troop levels in Baghdad.

Bilirakis also suggested that the Baker commission's report, when it is completed, could present an opportunity to adjust policy.

"It will come out after the election," he said. "We can't politicize Iraq. We have our children over there, our kids. And I want to make sure that we hear from James Baker and Lee Hamilton, who are very highly respected people."

On immigration

Busansky said the first priority should be securing the border - by bolstering the ranks of border security or a fence, if necessary.

As for the estimated 12-million illegal immigrants already here, Busansky laid out a two-pronged approach similar to President Bush's middle-of-the-road plan: A crackdown on employers that hire illegally would be coupled with a path to citizenship for people who have lived here for more than two years, paid back taxes, passed criminal background checks, and most importantly, learned English. The only other option - rounding up and expelling some 12-million illegal immigrants - would be logistically impossible, she said.

Bilirakis, on the other hand, said he is unequivocally opposed to any proposal rewarding illegal activity:

"I do not support the president's plan," he said. "I do not support any path to citizenship. I do not support permanent residency or temporary residency."

Bilirakis' conviction caught Busansky and even Lorei off guard. The even-keeled moderator actually departed from pre-set debate format to ask a follow-up question.

Yet Bilirakis remained firm.

"I think that we need to deport these people and bring them back in if we need their employment," he said.

He would consider a temporary worker program that set up "Ellis Island stations" in Mexico that businesses could use to sponsor workers for jobs Americans do not fill.

But to Bilirakis, deportation is essential for safety.

"It's a safety concern," he said. "There are some good people here but there are also some bad people."

Property insurance

Both candidates maintained their civility even as the allegations flew during a contentious back and forth over property insurance.

"I am amazed that the Legislature, a Legislature that my opponent sat in for eight years, really could not do anything," Busansky said. "And I'm amazed that my opponent did not do anything, either."

Bilirakis said he sponsored a bill that would have reduced rates by making sinkhole coverage optional.

"Unfortunately, the Senate didn't pick it up," he said. "Right now the Legislature is looking at this. We should have done it last session, but I'm only one person."

Busansky pounced.

"You're not only one person," she said. "You're in a Republican Legislature - a Republican House, a Republican Senate with a Republican governor. ... You're a force if you want to be."

Busansky said she plans to fight to reverse the antitrust exemption Congress gave to home insurers in the late 1940s.

Bilirakis shot back by confronting Busansky with a quote she gave to the Tampa Tribune in 1996.

"You stated, 'The federal government should not be involved in assisting homeowners with insurance,' " he read.

Busansky said she did not recall making the statement. It's possible she did, she said, but insurance rates have spiraled since then, and it was only in the course of this campaign that she had learned the extent of the problem.

Dog leash fees

Busansky sprang her own surprise when she turned the conversation to dog leashes.

Dangling a royal blue strip of nylon, she challenged Bilirakis to justify running a TV spot attacking her for supporting a fee increase on dog leashes.

It's true, Busansky said, that she had voted to approve such a measure on the Hillsborough County Commission in 1990.

But with nearly 100 U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq this month, 46-million Americans without health insurance, and insurance rates soaring, why did he focus on a $1 dog leash fees program enacted 16 years ago?

Bilirakis said the vote was emblematic of Busansky's record as a "high taxer" and a signal that she would support increased taxes and fees in the future.

[Last modified October 30, 2006, 23:44:58]