Representatives from the Harvard College Democrats and Harvard Republican Club held a debate last night at the Institute of Politics intended to provide clarity which they say is lacking on the national stage.

Eva Z. Lam ’10 and Jonathan P. Hawley ’10—legislative director and events director of the Democrats—and Colin J. Motley ’10 and Jeffrey Kwong ’08-’09—president and president emertius the Republicans—sparred on a range of issues during the hour and a half debate, including the state of the economy, health care, the war in Iraq, and public education.

“We’re looking for more pointed responses from the debaters because in the [national] debate later on, that may not happen,” said IOP Forum Committee member Christopher J. Hollyday ’11.

Questions were posed by former Chairperson of the Massachusetts State Republican Party Jean Inman, former governor of Iowa Thomas J. Vilsack, and Emma M. Lind ’09, editorial chair of The Harvard Crimson. David C. King, a lecturer in public policy at the Kennedy School, moderated the event.

Although the debaters focused on the strengths of their respective candidates’ plans and highlighted the weaknesses of the opposing campaigns, both groups found areas of agreement.

“I’m glad that we can both agree that the Second Amendment affords an individual right to bear arms,” Motley said after Lam said that the right to own guns—while constrained by the public safety—is confirmed by the Constitution.

Both sides describes public education as an absolute right.

Throughout the event, King and the panelists remained focused on the debate’s goal of providing clear answers.

“I want to know, at the end of four years, will there still be American troops in Iraq?” Vilsack said after debaters had answered a question about American presence in Iraq. “I don’t think I got a response from the Republicans on that question.”

Students in attendance said that they appreciated clarity that the debate provided.

“I think it almost went better than the last Presidential debate,” said Elizabeth C. Elrod ’11, who identified herself as a Republican. “There seemed to be a little bit more of answering the pertinent questions.”

Students also said they enjoyed the discussion of unity.

“It was nice to see civilized debate, Democrats and Republicans coming together on both sides,” said Phillip J. Morris ’12. “A lot of the themes were great, talking about some of the things that unite us rather than just focusing on strictly the issues that divide us.”

After the debate, Hawley said the he thought the event was a success because it rose above individual disagreements.

“We love doing this debate,” Hawley said. “Because despite all the bitterness and pettiness in politics, these debates remind me: it’s about ideas. We may disagree, but we still love the fact that we can sit here and debate these ideas.”