Excitement and tension filled the air last night at the final presidential debate for the Undergraduate Student Government (USG) elections held tomorrow.

Dressed casually in their campaign shirts, candidates fielded questions prepared by their opponents, who were given the opportunity to pose rebuttals.

Head Elections Commissioner Diana Maxham said because of the set-up of this debate and the proximity to election day, she had expected candidates to become hostile and defensive. "I was happy it didn't get dirty and mean," Maxham said. "Everyone kept their cool and there was good discussion."

Candidates posed questions to other candidates on the feasibility of their platforms and the steps they would take to accomplish them.

Candidate Michael Peters asked current USG leaders Galen Foulke and Luke Adams if their plan to "ostracize" racist students would cause discord in an already divided student body.

Foulke said the student-led response would include steps for individuals to redeem themselves in the eyes of the Penn State community.

Candidate Robert Dinkelspiel was asked how he would solve the problems of labor and excess expense created by opening Alumni and Heritage halls in the HUB-Robeson Center during student lunches.

Dinkelspiel maintained that their administration could find a cost-effective way to fix the problem.

"This is a very simple problem," Dinkelspiel said. "Students shouldn't be sitting on the floor."

Candidates Scott Sherbine and Alex Ibrahim said many platforms of candidates Mark Taticchi and Rodney Hughes were not in the jurisdiction of USG executives and have been tried before without success.

Taticchi replied that the jurisdiction of the USG president is to work toward the betterment of student life, and his platforms on incorporating diversity into first year seminars and improving junk filters in Webmail could be accomplished with communication.

Candidates Mahmoud Ablan and Kyle Aucker were asked how they planned to provide funding for low-income students at Penn State.

Ablan said expanding Lion Line and working with more alumni could guarantee more financial aid and more scholarships.

Candidates continued to stress communication in USG between the branches, student groups and the students.

Sherbine and Ibrahim were asked if they had any experience with the Off-Campus Student Union to further their platform on better lighting.

"I don't need experience," Ibrahim said. "I just need to know where their office is."

Much like the first debate, the crowd was mostly affiliated with a particular campaign. However, the energy and noise of the observers was markedly different as they cheered for their candidates after answers and rebuttal questions were given.

Elections Special Counsel Shawn Gordon said the candidates have realized that winning the election is not just about publicity.

"They are realizing they have to solve issues," Gordon said.