As a few students gathered in Harrelson to show their support, all three candidates for student body president braved a one-hour debate Monday night to demonstrate their knowledge of the University and defend their personal platforms.

While the student showing was less than desirable and filled mainly by members of Student Government, Student Media made a noticeable appearance, most especially with moderator and Technician editor-in-chief, Laura Wilkinson.

To start the debate, each candidate was given three minutes to introduce themselves and their platform, a task each of them completed in a different way.

“I’m really passionate about N.C . State…I’m the only candidate with experience in both branches of Student Government, currently holding an executive position on cabinet- I’m traditions chair,” Andy Walsh, junior in political science, said.

He spent the remainder of his time discussing changes he would like to make on campus and focusing on giving students “tangible changes,” like making ePack more efficient. Walsh has worked on such projects as Campout and The Brick, and is currently coordinating N.C . State’s largest fundraiser, Coach’s Corner. In addition, Walsh hopes to begin a yearlong concert series and an end of semester rave.

Jonathon Smith, junior in agricultural education, spent his three-minute slot talking up the University, making special note of our reputation for land grants and touching on his work with the Talley renovation project.

“I’ve been up to my arms and elbows in the Talley project, and I hope you’re excited about how it’s going to change and transform this University for the better,” Swift said.

He continued to say that he wants to revive student traditions, go green, and make sure the Talley project benefits students.

Finally, Caroline Yopp , junior in agricultural science, spoke, taking a decidedly different approach to her self-introduction.

“I’m qualified, I can give you a list of all the positions I’ve held inside of N.C . State and outside of it as well, but more importantly, I’m going to ask you a question: why do you love N.C . State?” Yopp said.

She continued to describe her experience in asking students this question around campus, and surprised the audience when she explained that many students could not answer it.

“That’s a problem. It is time to change the culture of N.C . State. I love this university, and if I could do one thing as Student Body President, it would be to show you why you should love it too. No matter why you’re here, I don’t care if it was your first choice or your last choice, you’re here, and this university is one to be proud of,” Yopp said.

She continued to highlight five reasons she believes students should take pride in the Pack: innovation, opportunity, social change, the city of Raleigh, and athletics.

“I don’t have a political agenda, I don’t. And I can’t promise that tuition is always going to be lower, but I can promise that I fight for what I believe in,” Yopp said.

As introductions ended, Wilkinson began the Q&A session by asking how each of the candidates felt about the Student Government bill that was passed in opposition to Amendment One for the GLBT cause.

While each candidate took their time defending their stance, all three agreed that it was inappropriate to speak on behalf of the student body, and would hope to increase communication in their respective offices.

Next, Wilkinson posed a question about the Association of Student Governments, an organization that is meant to advocate for students and charges most N.C . State students a $1 fee.

While Smith said he sees the benefits of the program, he felt strongly that there needs to be an inquiry into where that $1 fee goes. Yopp agreed that ASG is not using the student fee well, but stressed the importance of the potential of such an organization. Walsh, however, suggested that ASG might not be the most effective way to represent our University at the legislature.

Candidates were also given an opportunity to discuss their plans to incorporate social media in their office, should they win.

“We need to increase transparency,” Yopp said. “I’d like to start a weekly blog about what’s going on in Student Government so that students know what’s actually being done.”

Smith followed up by saying he wanted to “revamp” some existing programs.

“We can do a lot more with Wolfpack students on Facebook, and we’ve also been working on an app,” Smith said.

Things got a little heated when, in rebuttals; Smith took a dig at Student Senate.

“I’m going to let the cat out of the bag, last year, Student Senate did nothing to benefit students,” Smith said.

Walsh passionately countered by mentioning all the funds that were allotted to student clubs.

In the last general question posed, Wilkinson asked each of the candidates to share an idea for cutting budgets in the University, were they ever given the power to do so.

“I would join the Scholars and Honors programs to decrease administrative structure,” Smith said,  stating this was an example from the overall University administrative realignment Smith supports.

Yopp followed up by offering the stipends for Student Body officers.

“Stipends for Student Body officers were increased, that’s ridiculous and unnecessary,” Yopp said.

Walsh, who pointed out that these stipends have not been increased in the past three years, immediately countered this. He also noted that student body officers are making approximately $.08 per hour as it is.

“I would cut the athletics fees that have increased, ” Walsh said. “I know that may be surprising, but I don’t feel that we’ve actually gotten anything out of those increases as students.”

In defense of her previous statement, Yopp chose to counter.

“Well I’ll offer my $4000 stipend, because I don’t need all that,” Yopp said.

As the debates concluded, the candidates were asked to name at least three college deans, a task all accomplished save Yopp , who named only one, compared to Walsh and Smith’s five or six.

The candidates closed with statements regarding their goals for managing the University’s academic and social costs, agreeing that there has to be better management of readily available funding.

Editor’s Note: The headline has been corrected to read Student Media, not Student Government, as the debate organizer.