The third and final gubernatorial debate Friday night in La Crosse focused mostly on healthcare and education issues, and the candidates took their last opportunity to defend themselves and attack each other.
""The bottom line is [the debate] was certainly more direct confrontation between the two,"" said Charles Franklin, a UW political science professor. ""This one lent itself better to differences between the candidates.""
Citizens asked Gov. Jim Doyle and U.S. Rep. Mark Green, R-Green Bay questions and each candidate had 90 seconds to speak before the debate was opened to both for two minutes.
The first question asked how each candidate plans to lower healthcare. ""Preventative care is the answer for the long term,"" Green said.
Doyle said a federal movement is needed and discussed importing Canadian drugs.
Green accused Doyle of blaming others. Doyle replied, ""Congress has had healthcare on its agenda for years ... Congressman, you'd better talk about what Congress has failed to do.""
The debate moved on to education, and as in the second gubernatorial debate, Doyle listed education as his number one priority. ""I've stood up against powerful forces for education,"" Doyle said. Green said Doyle was pointing fingers and defended his past record on education. ""Slowing down cost increases is not a cut,"" Green said.
Green repeated throughout the debate that UW tuition has risen more than 50 percent for in-state students since Doyle has taken office.
Doyle discussed his ""Wisconsin Covenant"" plan, which would promise all Wisconsin high school students a place in the UW system with a financial aid package if they met requirements and behaved.
One question asked the candidates how they would restore the public's faith in Wisconsin politics. Doyle said he holds himself and those who work with him to a high standard despite ""wild allegations.""
Green brought up Doyle's relationship with casino interests. He said Doyle was against casinos four years ago during his first campaign for governor, but the state is now witnessing the largest expansion of gaming in its history after ""millions of dollars of contributions.""
Franklin said overall the debate did not introduce any new topics, though it would have been the best opportunity to give the media something new to discuss. The main difference from the other debates is that this time, ""the competitiveness was more visible,"" Franklin said.
Franklin also said the debate had no clear winner and probably will not affect voters' opinions. ""The people that could have been influenced paradoxically are more likely to go to the fish fry than stick around and watch the debate,"" he said.
