The first-ever Texas Republican
Primary Debate was held on Feb. 17
and was hosted by the UTSA College
Republicans.

The Texas Republicans vye for
the party’s nomination and tried to
outdo one another to prove their
conservative credentials.

Candidates from all levels of
government were represented including
the United States Representative
candidates for the 23rd
District, the district encompassing
UTSA.

Among the students attending
the event were freshman computer
science major Joe Engel and freshman
communication major Sederrick
Salone.

Neither identifies himself as a
Republican, but they came to hear
an alternative viewpoint and get to
know the candidates better.

Gay rights, the ongoing war and
the economy were the most pressing
issues to the students, but they
finance limits that allow corporations
to spend freely in campaigns for president
and Congress.

“I think it severely undermines me as
a voter. I don’t have millions of dollars
to fork over to somebody’s campaign,
so how can I be sure that my vote is
really going to make an impact when
a company like McDonald’s can spend
millions of dollars to get the issues that
they want passed. If they’re going to
do that, they [politicians] should have
to be like NASCAR and wear all of
their corporate sponsors when in public,”
Salone said.

Speakers included five Congressional
candidates: Clayton Trotter,
Francisco Canseco, Dr. Robery Lowry,
Mike Kueber and Will Hurd.

Trotter said that he disagrees with
President Obama’s remarks on the
ruling of the Supreme Court. During
the 2010 State of the Union Address,
President Barack Obama said, “Last
week the Supreme Court reversed a
century of law that I believe will open
the floodgates for special interests –-
including foreign corporations –- to
spend without limit in our elections.”
Trotter said that the ruling was a victory
for the freedom of expression and
the First Amendment.

“Corporations don’t vote. They can’t
give money directly to the candidates,
but what they can do is express their
own opinions. Corporations will now
be allowed to create issue-specific advertisements,
and to specifically name
names regarding politicians. That’s
freedom of speech,” Trotter said.
When asked whether corporations
would run advertisements for the candidate
who would most likely benefit
the corporation rather than the country,
Trotter admitted they probably
would.

“I think that they will run advertisements
that will benefit them as organizations
just like the unions run advertisements
that benefit the unions,”
he said.

At 7 p.m., the UTSA Air Force
ROTC performed a color guard ceremony.
The debate began directly following
the color guard ceremony.

One of those candidates was UTSA
alum Jason Wolff, who graduated
Summa Cum Laude in 2001 with a
Bachelor of Arts degree in communication.
He currently serves as a prosecutor
for the Bexar County District Attorney’s
Office, but decided that it was
time to run for County Court 2 Judge
when he found out his opponent Paul
Canales (D), was spending much of his
time performing marriage ceremonies
instead of hearing cases.

“County Court 2, in my opinion, has
lost its focus. County Court 2 has the
oldest docket, the oldest cases, and it
has a cost to the taxpayers that’s higher
than all of the other county courts.
In my opinion, it’s time for change in
that court. It’s something I’m going to
work hard to do, and can ensure you
I will give focus and dedication to the
job,” Wolff said.

Throughout the night, candidates
made their way onto the stage where
they were each allowed two minutes to
speak and one minute to answer questions
from the audience. Among the
major issues discussed were political
corruption, education reform, energy
independence and overuse of our military.

The last question of the night was
directed to the candidates of the 23rd
Congressional District. The question
asked that the candidates’ state their
stance on the nation’s current drug
policy in regards to the prohibition of
marijuana, a topic typically considered
taboo within the Republican Party.
Although the question drew a few
chuckles from the crowd, the mood
quickly turned serious as the audience
awaited the candidates’ responses.
Canseco said that he is opposed to
legalizing drugs.

“Let me give you an example: If the
policy of XYZ country is to reduce
population, you don’t do it by legalizing
murder. It is immoral, it is wrong,
it is corrupt,” Canesco said.
“I think that we need to make sure
that our drug policy works, that our
drug enforcement agencies work, that
our educational projects work, and I
will make sure I will seal that border
and make sure that these drug criminals
and drug cartels that are coming
across our border cease and stop
because they bring more than just
drugs. They bring violence, they bring
horror, and they bring terror to the
area, but I am not in favor of legalizing
any drugs.”

Lowry said that the violence on the
U.S. borders is caused mostly by the
smuggling of marijuana.

“The violence upon our borders is
mostly drugs, and most of that, if you
talk to the sheriffs down there, is marijuana.
I have seen numerous patients
of mine, who, if they could get to marijuana,
would be a whole lot better off,”
Lowry said.

“When we had prohibition [alcohol],
it created a huge giant crime wave
that got us the mobs, and that’s why we
see what we’re seeing on our border
right now. I would be completely open
to seeing marijuana above board because
we would actually see much less
crime on the borders, we would see
much less money being wasted there;
and, just like our alcoholics that I treat,
if brought above board, I would be able
to treat that small fraction that would
over use it,”

“So marijuana I’d be okay with; meth,
now that’s another deal.”
Kueber said he agrees with Lowry.
“I think that the states are supposed
to be a laboratory of government, and
we’re starting to see that now in California.
“They have medicinal marijuana,
and I think there are maybe 10 or 15
other states that are playing with medicinal
marijuana. I think we should
go ahead down that road and see how
that works out. Eventually, it seems
to me it’s the direction the country’s
going, and we will eventually get to
where Lowry was talking about,” Kueber
said.

Hurd said he is against the legalization
of drugs.
“I think we need to do more to stop
the drug cartels, and make the drug
cartels a national intelligence priority,
and treat them the same way we treat
the Taliban and Al Qaeda,” Hurd said.

Each candidate’s response drew applause
from the audience, but Lowry’s
response was clearly the crowd favorite,
even drawing some hoots and
whistles during and after his speech.
The debate ended shortly thereafter as
each of the officers of the College Republicans
was presented to the crowd
with thunderous applause.

“It was beyond my expectations.
This was our baby in that it was the
first event like this that we’ve ever
hosted and invited the entire student
body to. For us to have over 150 people
here with the majority of them being
students, I’m shocked,”
Republican Chairman Bryan Sandssaid
that’s all I’m hearing from the
candidates. They were shocked too.
Even the candidates were saying they
had never been to such a big forum
before. It makes me proud and I’m
proud for the university too. UTSA
will be known for this, so we’re really
excited.”