DANVILLE -- The question of who could be more effective as the congressional representative for Virginia's 5th District was debated Wednesday night.

Incumbent Virgil Goode and Democratic challenger Tom Perriello took the stage at the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research for the debate hosted by the Sorenson Institute for Political Leadership.

Perriello accused Goode of lacking effectiveness in the areas of earmarks and immigration.

Southside Virginia is "not getting its fair slice under Goode," Perriello said.

The challenger cited a report from Roll Call, a newspaper on Capitol Hill that ranked Goode 60th out of the 66 members of the House Appropriations Committee in terms of effectiveness.

"I have brought home the bacon and delivered the goods," Goode said of his accomplishments for Southside Virginia. "And 60th out of 430 [members of Congress] is not too bad." Goode listed money he obtained for Southside including funds for the Institute for Advanced Learning and Research, numerous community colleges and infrastructure projects.

Both candidates said they favor earmarks but only those that benefit the area. Goode said he supports legislation to put a moratorium on earmarks.

Goode accused Perriello of falling in line with his fellow Democrats and not getting anything done on issues such as immigration and the nation's energy crisis.

Both candidates agree the country needs to become dependent from foreign oil, but Goode pushed drilling and the American Energy Act as solutions.

About immigration, Goode said Perriello is like other Democrats who believe the problem of "anchor babies" -- children born to parents in the country illegally who automatically become American citizens -- can't be solved.

Goode maintains that immigration is a drain on the country's economy and needs to be stopped.

Perriello agreed that illegal immigrants put a strain on the nation's health care system and economy but that a better solution needed to be sought than "dehumanizing our fellow children of God." Goode supported legislation to end services to "anchor babies," which Perriello pointed out didn't muster too much support from Democrats or Republicans.

About 350 people attended the debate, the second for the two candidates. The audience wasn't permitted to ask questions, but moderators focused on four issues: economic development, energy, national security and immigration.