Panel asks how to fix America

Should Americans be able to choose their public schools? Is Congress a bunch of pathetic power gluttons? Would taxing bullets be an answer to America's crime problem? Over 300 opinions crowded into the Annenberg Center's Harold Prince Studio Theatre last night, each one trying to have their say at the University's first-annual town hall meeting. The forum, sponsored by Connaissance, the Penn Political Union and The Daily Pennsylvanian and coordinated by Adjunct American Civilization Professor Frank Luntz, was an attempt to answer – or at least respond to – the question of "What's Wrong with America?" And many, many people had answers. Among the panelists who participated in the forum were George Bush's campaign adviser Alex Castellanos, U.S. News and World Report editor Michael Barrone, Newsweek senior editor Joe Klein, Wall Street Journal editorial board member John Fund, former Congressional whip Tony Coehlo, national Crime Strike director and National Rifle Association supporter Steve Twist and future Pennsylvania senatorial candidate Joe Watkins. The New Republic columnist Fred Barnes, Newsweek's Eleanor Clift and famed "It's the Economy, Stupid" Clinton campaign engineer James Carville were noticeably absent from the forum, all having canceled their intended appearances hours before the forum. Luntz, who moderated the panel's discussion, invited all members of the audience to stand up and voice their opinions for the nation to hear – the event will be broadcast on C-SPAN within the next few days. The panel began their discussion with cutting remarks on convenient prey: the University. Klein, who characterized himself as "a somewhat embarrassed alumnus" of the University, told the audience that the University has apparently chosen to base itself on "bizarre theoretical constructs of a world as it should be – or might be, God forbid." And Barrone said the University is not truly seeking diversity, but rather, an environment "where everyone believes the same thing." These remarks were greeted with cheers by many members of the audience and an awkward silence from others. But the rapid give-and-take of ideas among the panelists rendered silence powerless, as the topic shifted from University-bashing to the questioning of America's educational system. Watkins, in his most impassioned statement of the evening, said the development of school choice in East Harlem led to "54 of the most creative public schools in the country." "They were forced to take responsibility for choosing it," Watkins said to applause. "Take more responsibility for yourselves." The audience became progressively more involved in the discussion, as Luntz asked the audience to "clap their minds" – first if they felt Bill Clinton was doing a good job as president, and second if they did not. "There were more people clapping the first time, but the second group was louder," Luntz observed to the laughter of the audience. Coehlo indicted Clinton's performance by giving it the meager grade of C, but was more generous and gave him an A "for bringing ideas to the table." And Castellanos didn't let the opportunity slide without getting in his two cents. "I'd be happy to support Bill Clinton if I knew which one," he said, commenting on what he characterized as Clinton's waffling stance on numerous issues. As the conversation shifted to party politics, audience members questioned the workability of Congress with the constant liability of what some characterized as bipartisan warfare. "There's a sense that both parties are deficient," Klein said, garnering nods from the audience. "But then you have the radical middle, represented by a charlatan demagogue billionaire." Klein and Swift soon found themselves enmeshed in a quick-paced debate on gun control and mandatory sentencing for criminals when Klein suggested that bullets be taxed as a solution to America's violence. Luntz quickly turned the discussion over to the audience by going down a row and asking students, "What's wrong with America?" Among the answers were concerns about "small interest groups like the NRA," "lack of compassion," "violations of constitutional rights like freedom of speech," "differences in opportunities people have" and "gridlock in politics." Swift responded to the NRA remark with fervor, saying his group has "a firm commitment to marshalling resources against crime." The panelists also addressed what the Wall Street Journal's Fund characterized as an overly-cynical media, calling journalists "frustrated politicians." The evening's discussion ended with closing remarks from each of the panelists, with Klein's remarks on race relations drawing the loudest and longest applause of the evening. "We thought we could remedy the evils of racism, of making distinctions according to race, by making distinctions according to race," Klein said. "There's a hyphenization of the country, an atomization into pools. The important things aren't the things that distance us, but the things we have in common." Students reactions to the discussion were as varied as the two-hour session itself. "I thought it was very, very interesting, although politically imbalanced," first-year Annenberg graduate student Chris Ferris said, adding that he found some panelists' "comments about education really naive." "It was a great opportunity for students to get involved with some people who make a direct impact on government," College junior Christina Reyes said. "Students were really able to express their concerns." But, as could be expected from the evening, not everyone agreed. "The people who got the biggest applause were the ones who pointed out problems, not people who proposed solutions," College junior Mike Levy said. "It was a little disheartening."