On Saturday October 3, 1992, Bob Virgil, Professor of Accounting at Washington University, answered a call from Chancellor Danforth. Danforth was calling to ask Virgil to lead the planning in the next presidential debate between Bill Clinton, George Bush and Ross Perot, which Washington University had been asked to host. The only catch was the debate was scheduled for October 11, only eight days away.

When Washington University had originally reached out to the Commission on Presidential Debates, the independent, nonprofit and nonsectarian organization in charge of planning such debates, they were told they would be a backup and would only be needed if another site backed out. Just eight days before the first scheduled debate, another school did just that, leaving Virgil and his team barely over a week to prepare to host a presidential debate.

However, Virgil had little hesitation in accepting that responsibility.

“My immediate reaction was, ‘This is terrific for Washington University and for St. Louis,’” Virgil said. “I thought people would get on board and rise to the occasion and they did.”

Virgil worked frantically to form a committee with representatives from each department of the university. Despite the time constraints, Virgil had little difficulty in convincing his colleagues of the value of hosting a debate.

“Everyone got on board and committed and was enthusiastic, and we made it happen,” he said. “There wasn’t enough time to consider pros or cons or argue about this or that, we just had to do it. “

Virgil and his team were incredibly successful. Steve Givens, current Chair of the Washington University Presidential Debate Steering Committee, explained that “We did a really great job of it evidently, and that helped solidify our relationship [with the commission] and our reputation for a place that could do a really good job,” Givens said.

Since 1992, due in large part to their strong relationship with the Commission on Presidential Debates Washington University has been selected to host two additional presidential debates as well as one vice presidential debate, and was recently chosen to host the second presidential debate of the 2016 election.

Givens attributed the number of debates awarded to Washington University with their reputation and past successes.

“You have to have the kind of facility that lends itself to this,” he said. “And then I think you have to have the right kind of people who are willing to do lots of work to make this successful, and I think we’ve really proven ourselves.”

Givens explained that the complexity of planning a presidential debate begins with the room itself. Special flooring and drapery has to be installed, as well as extra air conditioning and redundant electrical power. “They literally build a television studio in the middle of the athletic complex,” he said.

Despite the enormity of such a task, Givens described how there was no room for error. “It’s 90 minutes of live television and so there cannot be any chance of power going out,” Givens said.

Virgil remembers feeling a similar sense of pressure back in 1992. “We knew there was a lot at stake, if the ball was dropped on this or that, it would be a black eye and it would probably linger for a while,” Virgil said. “We wanted to avoid that, and I think that’s what drove us, and frankly, I think we were successful — it went off without a hitch.”

In addition to setting up the debate room, preparation for a presidential debate includes accommodations for the thousands of media members and activities for the students. “We also try to empower our students to plan their own events, whether that’s their own debates or conversations they want to have with other guest speakers,” Givens said. “Sometimes faculty create special courses students can take about the American presidency or different aspects of political science.”

For Givens, these opportunities for students are some of the most valuable aspects of hosting a presidential debates, as only a portion of students will actually be able to attend the debate itself. “Our job is really to be the host and have everything in place to make sure nothing can go wrong,” he said. “But at the same time we want to create an environment around campus where our students and faculty can benefit from having an event like this.”

Although some students might be frustrated that they are not able to attend the actual debate, Givens argued that most still have a positive experience. “There’s just a great deal of excitement on campus to know that you’re sitting right in the middle of this,” he said.

Only some students are able to attend the debate because the commission first gives tickets to the campaigns and the media, and the host school only gets whatever tickets remain. At Washington University, the tickets are distributed via lottery system for students, a tradition started back in 1992 under Virgil.

Virgil remembered “The students were really excited about it and I daresay they all wanted to attend. As best we could, we accommodated that, and used a lottery to make it as fair as possible.”

However, the lottery was strictly for students, and no tickets were given to faculty or administrators. “Chancellor Danforth decided that none of the administration would go. All of the available seats would go to the students,” Virgil explained. “Chancellor Danforth, for example, was not in the room where the debate took place.”

Although the time constraints of the 1992 debate prevented Washington University from having the same activities as they do today, Virgil and his team proved extremely effective given the pressure. Givens, who was the editor of the alumni magazine at the time remembered the chaos of the week leading up to the debate. “It was just crazy,” he said. “But we didn’t know any better. It was an around the clock operation for sure and we hope we never we have to do that ever again.”

Virgil attributed his team’s success to the level of cooperation they established. “They all had other responsibilities at the university, but they put this [the debate] first,” Virgil said. “We set up ways for communicating and staying in touch and everyone made it their top priority and everyone was available. We really worked well together.”

In working with such a devoted and cooperative group, Virgil feels he learned a valuable lesson. “In many organizations, there definitely is a balkanization that occurs and silos do develop between different areas of the organization and it becomes very difficult to put the interests of the institution foremost,” he said. “We broke down the silos. We didn’t care one little bit about this department or that department. It was get the job done for Washington University and St. Louis.”