One could make many observations about this Saturday night ABC debate between the Republican presidential candidates three days before the New Hampshire primary. Here’s one I would make. The mid-debate questions from the left-wing ABC questioners David Muir, Martha Raddatz and John McElveen provided multiple Republican candidates with an opportunity to contrast their views with those of Democratic candidates, as evidenced in the two-candidate MSNBC debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders two nights ago.
Thus the Republicans were challenged to defend themselves against the charge, raised by Clinton and Sanders, that they would “privatize” the Veterans Affairs Department. Jeb Bush responded that veterans should get more choices and pointed out that only 3 VA employees were fired following disclosure of abuses. John Kasich said that veterans should be able to go anywhere for treatment. Marco Rubio said that portability of benefits was important. The Democrats’ assumption is that only a government monopoly can provide veterans with the assurance of care. The Republicans’ assumption is that giving beneficiaries the ability to make choices will result in better care. Given the record of the VA, that sounds pretty persuasive to me — and, I suspect, to most voters.
Then we had Muir urging the Republicans to endorse the policy urged by the mother of beheaded hostage James Foley that families of victims should be allowed to negotiate ransoms. Ted Cruz fired back, persuasively, that that would put a bounty on the back of any American abroad. Donald Trump said that he knew the Foley family but nonetheless negotiating with terrorism would have terrible consequences for Americans abroad.
Then there was a question from Raddatz about whether women should be required, as some military commanders have suggested, to register for the draft. Marco Rubio noted that women in the military are already in combat-like situations and that there’s nothing problematic about requiring them to register for the draft — and swatting down suggestions from Raddatz that he wanted to institute the draft (which no one except a few left-wing Democrats like Charles Rangel has advocated any time recently). Bush, Chris Christie and Ben Carson chimed in with similar views. One sensed that Raddatz was ready to indict the Republicans whether they advocated draft registration for women (oppressing them!) or opposed it (not treating women as equals!). The Republicans didn’t take the bait.
Then we had Raddatz suggesting, in questions about quaranting people exposed to Ebola, that this was an intiolerable violation of civil liberties and an example of (racist?) bigotry. Christie batted this back by defending one such quarantine decision in New Jersey and noting that the nurse quarantined was released when she tested negative for symptoms. Carson, drawing on his medical expertise, argued that a rapid response, including quarantine in the right circumstances, was warranted. The fact is that the United States, and civilized governments going back to the Republic of Venice in the 17th century, have employed quarantine to check the spread of deadly communicable disease. This is standard public health policy. Civil liberties which government ordinarily protects, and rightly so, can be abridged if there is a serious threat of dissemination of deadly disease. We can compensate people who are discommoded by being put in quarantine, but it’s a lot harder — impossible, actually — to recompense those who die because of the spread of communicable disease which could have been stopped.
And then there was the smart question by conservative commentator Mary Katherine Ham on abortion, in which she noted that although young voters tend to support same-sex marriage they also tend to support restrictions on the supposed right to abortion. Rubio hit this out of the park by noting that no debate questioners have asked Clinton about her support of partial birth abortion and by stating his own position of preferring life. Bush and Christie also made powerful statements backing their own support of restrictions on abortion.
My sense is that Muir and Raddatz thought they were pinning the Republicans down on issues which would hurt them — but on which actually the candidates that are at risk of political damage are the Democrats.
