Opinion: Amid an often confusing debate, a few instructive answers

This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.

Was or was not New York a ‘sanctuary city’ for illegal immigrants when Rudy Giuliani was its mayor? We’re still not sure.

Does Mitt Romney bear responsibility for work done at his home by a company whose crew included illegal immigrants, thereby sanctioning what Giuliani sneered was a ‘sanctuary mansion’? We’re stumped over that one, too.

The charges and counter-charges were flying fast and furious at Wednesday night’s CNN/YouTube debate, often generating far more heat than light -- especially on the immigration issue, which dominated the proceeding’s first 30 minutes or so. You can read more about the evening’s give-and-take here.

But on at least two occasions -- on the key topics of tax hikes and abortion -- the forum produced some worthwhile moments.

In one instance, a YouTube question came from a major player in U.S. politics -- Grover Norquist, a conservative activist who heads Americans for Tax Reform. He posed the query for which he is most famous: would the candidates pledge that, as president, they would oppose and veto any tax increase Congress might send them?

Tom Tancredo, Mike Huckabee ...

Romney and Giuliani quickly affirmed their embrace of the Norquist pledge.

Fred Thompson, however, offered a more nuanced and pugnacious response. ‘Cut tax cuts for eight years when I was in the United States Senate. Never met a tax I like. ... But I don’t do pledges to anybody but the American people.’

John McCain echoed his onetime Senate colleague; after touting a ‘24-year record of opposing tax increases and supporting of tax reductions,’ he added that ‘like Fred, my pledge and my record is up to the American people, not up to any other organization.’

Ron Paul, somewhat to our surprise, didn’t give a simple ‘yes’ to the question. But we think we know the answer, given that, as he said, he has ‘never voted for a tax increase, never will,’ and given that his platform calls for dismantling vast swaths of the federal government.

That left Duncan Hunter, for whom these debates serve mainly as a needed reminder to others that he remains in the race. But on this night, in responding to this question, he shined. He did so by broaching a useful caveat.

Noting that he was first elected to Congress in 1980, the House member from the San Diego area said, ‘I probably voted for more tax cuts than anybody here.’

He continued: ‘But you could have an emergency, a time of war, and I think it would be wrong to say absolutely I would pledge to Grover Norquist that I would never raise taxes. Could have a national emergency.’

The abortion issue was raised by a woman identifying herself in her video as A.J., from Millstone, N.J. She asked that if the Roe vs. Wade decision establishing a right to abortion was overturned and ‘Congress passed a federal ban on all abortion ... would you sign it?

Moderator Anderson Cooper directed the query to Giuliani, who has sought to downplay the oft-stated support he expressed for abortion rights when, as New York’s mayor, he represented a more liberal constituency than he is now trying to woo.

Giuliani did not dodge a direct answer. ‘I probably would not sign it,’ he said. ‘I would leave it to the states to make’ decisions about abortion rights.’

Romney, as was the case throughout much of the night, was harder to decipher.

Once pro-choice, he reiterated the change of position he adopted a few years back and said he supported overturning Roe vs. Wade. He then called for returning ‘these issues to the states.’

He continued: ‘I would welcome a circumstance where there was such a consensus in this country that we said we don’t want to have abortion in this country at all, period. That would be wonderful.... I’d be delighted to sign that bill. But that’s not where we are. That’s not where America is today. Where America is, is ready to overturn Roe vs. Wade and return to the states that authority. But if the Congress got there, we had that kind of consensus in the country, terrific.’

We would have liked Cooper to interject that passage of a bill on Capitol Hill does not imply ‘consensus’ (a measure can get filibustered in the Senate, but clearing the House requires only a one-vote margin among its 435 members).

Even more, we would have liked Cooper to give several other candidates a chance to respond to the well-framed question.

-- Don Frederick