SEARCH
Monitor archives:
Copyrighted material


One Thing You Can Do To Make A Difference

by Randolph T. Holhut


MORE
on CPD and the debates

TAKE ACTION

  1. Write letters/emails and make phone calls challenging mainstream media (and pollsters) to stop ignoring or marginalizing third-party candidates in campaign coverage

  2. Encourage TV networks to reject the exclusionary debates of the CPD and set up their own debates, with more inclusive criteria for participation -- leaving empty seats for any major-party candidate who fails to appear. See FAIR's Media Contact List for more information.

  3. Demand that the Commission on Presidential Debates broaden its criteria to end the lockout of third-party candidates. info@debates.org

  4. If all of the above fails to open up the debates, take to the streets. Gather in Boston on October 3 and -- while the whole world is watching -- protest the farce of an undemocratic, corporate-sponsored non-debate: 9 pm, University of Massachusetts-Boston

SOURCE: Will Nader Be Banned in Boston?

With the political conventions done, and the general campaign set to begin, the next big event is the presidential debates. The first one will be held Oct. 3 at the University of Massachusetts' Boston campus.

Al Gore and George Bush will be there. Green Party nominee Ralph Nader, Reform Party nominee Pat Buchanan and Libertarian Party nominee Harry Browne will be likely be watching from the sidelines.

This will happen because of the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). This is a group that is allegedly nonprofit and nonpartisan, but is funded by corporate donations and created and run by the Democratic and Republican parties. It was formed in 1987 to both take away control of the debates from the League of Women Voters, and to make sure that no third party candidates get heard.

The CPD has decreed that it will exclude third party candidates from televised debates if they do not have at least 15 percent support in the opinion polls by September. Nader is polling between 5-8 percent and Buchanan is at 2-4 percent. Thus, under the CPD rules, neither would be allowed to participate.

Can debates make a difference? Ask Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura. In the 1998 governor's race, he was at 10 percent in the polls and was considered merely a curiosity entering into the first of a series of televised debates that gave him credibility and gave the voters a glimpse of an alternative to the major party's candidates. It was the decisive moment in his ultimately successful campaign.

Or ask Ross Perot. His performance in the 1992 debates helped him get nearly 20 percent of the popular vote in the November election -- the best showing for a third party candidate since 1912. His presence also did something else; it helped attract more viewers. The 1992 TV debates were watched by an average of 90 million viewers. By contrast, the Bill Clinton/Robert Dole snoozefests of 1996 averaged 41 million viewers.

The increased viewership can be traced to what third party candidates bring to debates, namely fresh ideas and perspectives. Perot helped put the effects of free trade on the American economy and the need for deficit reduction on the political agenda in 1992. Neither topic would have been seriously discussed without him.

Including Nader, Buchanan and Browne would insure that many issues would be discussed -- issues that Gore and Bush are either in total agreement over or would rather not talk about. Without the third party candidates, we will not hear about corporate welfare, the harmful effects of globalizaton, the failures of the drug war or the growing inequalities between rich and poor.

The Appleseed Citizens' Task Force on Fair Debates, an offshoot of the Appleseed Electoral Reform Project at American University's Washington College of law, is challenging CPD's arbitrary and unfair criteria. They suggest the threshold should be lowered to 5 percent in national opinion polls (which is the level of support in the general elections that make major parties eligible for federal matching funds) or 50 percent in polls asking voters whom they would like to see participate in the debates.

These criteria would allow Nader and Buchanan to participate, with Browne as a long shot. While the supporters of the two-party monopoly do not anyone to know there's an alternative, the voters are very much interested. According to the polls, nearly 4 in 10 Americans consider themselves independents. In some states, independents are in the majority. They hold no allegiance to the Democrats or Republicans. They instead base their allegiances on issues and candidates.

Candidate debates are the best opportunity for candidates that normally get little or no press coverage an opportunity to have a venue to spread their ideas. Ventura's 1998 campaign is a great example of this. His participation in the 10 televised debates that October raised his poll numbers from 10 percent to 27 percent in the space of a month. He went on to win with 37 percent of the vote in a three-way race. Ventura is quick to admit that he didn't get included in the debates, he probably wouldn't have won.

What can we the voters do about this? Call, write or e-mail the corporate media outlets to tell them to start covering all the candidates for president, not just Bush and Gore. Encourage the TV networks to set up their own debates and tell the CPD to take a hike. Challenge the CPD to be inclusive and give third party candidates a break.



Comments? Send a letter to the editor.

Albion Monitor September 4, 2000 (http://www.monitor.net/monitor)

All Rights Reserved.

Contact rights@monitor.net for permission to use in any format.