Weather
Do the Debates Unfairly Shut Out Third Parties?The League's decision to drop its sponsorship gave rise to the CPD, which was initially chaired by the former heads of the Democratic and Republican parties. Today, the co-chairmen are Frank Fahrenkopf, Jr., the former chairman of the Republican National Committee and the president and CEO of the American Gaming Association, and Democratic strategist Michael McCurry, who was White House press secretary under President Bill Clinton. Despite its leadership, backers of the CPD say, the organization has shown that it is not in thrall to the major parties. Minow, who authored a New York Times op-ed defending the CPD, points to the group's 2004 rejection of a "memorandum of understanding" concerning the debate details and its refusal in 2008 to delay the debates at the request of Sen. John McCain, who cited the financial crisis as the reason for his request. (The CPD hasn't always stood its ground: In 1988, it agreed to demands from the campaigns that two debates be held instead of three, and in 1992 it had to scramble to meet the conditions set forth by the major parties, who worked out a deal with no one from the CPD present.) "I'm very proud of the commission," he told CBS News. In his op-ed, Minow described the debates as "the one time when the major candidates appear together side by side under conditions they do not control." A representative for the CPD did not respond to multiple requests for an interview with CPD executive director Janet Brown. Schroeder, the debate expert from Northwestern University, said that it's "inevitable" that the commission would have a relationship with the major parties. "But is it collusion? I don't think so," he said. Schroeder says the CPD allows private agreement between the two parties, though he said the negotiations this year were informal and the agreements do not cover what questions will be asked. Farah wants to see the CPD replaced by a citizens' debate commission made up of civic leaders that would be "genuinely nonpartisan" and not be funded by corporations. Under the CPD, the debates are sponsored by Anheuser-Busch Companies and other corporations and foundations. He also dismisses concerns that if third party candidates are allowed to participate, the major party candidates may choose drop out - as Carter did in 1980 - potentially depriving the American people of one of their few chances to see the major candidates in a relatively unfiltered setting. "At this point in history, a candidate cannot avoid an actual presidential debates without appearing to be totally cowardly," he said. "So the public has leverage." Buchanan said that the requirements of the CPD mean that "it's enormously difficult for a third party candidate to make it unless he has an enormous amount of money or is an extraordinarily popular figure." "They say if you don't have 15 percent you don't get in the debates, but if you don't get in the debates you don't get 15 percent," he said. |
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled.
Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
|
You have indicated this comment should be removed.
The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .
Mark o said on Monday, Oct 15 at 7:07 PM
Should'nt the questions come from random audience members? These jokers have to give up some control, and besides, what it would be laughable to watch them stumble. These are not leaders but oligarach's who desire power.
104039746Arcticmoon said on Monday, Oct 15 at 12:54 PM
Yes they do unfairly shut out the third party candidates. I also watched the third party candidates in real time on Democracy Now on FSTV. The major parties don't want the vote split. It was reported on Thom Hartman that when you count the people who are voting for Gary Johnson the Libertarian candidate, that Mitt Romney may actually be a half point behind Obama. Unfortunately, the Republicans have been very successful at stealing our elections. An article on In These Times said that the Koch brothers sent a letter to 45,000 Georgia Pacific employees warning of consequences if they voted for Obama, Murray Energy, SG software and Westgate resorts have done the same thing. When you add this to all of the voter suppression around the country. I am afraid that the Republicans will steal the election even with the Libertarian Candidate to split the vote. There is also the Justice Candidate and the Green party candidate which will divide the vote for Obama.
104016231WhiteTrashInWasilla said on Monday, Oct 15 at 11:50 AM
I watched the "Expand The Debate" on Democracy now. It was very illuminating to hear Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson answer the same questions, Obama and Romney answered. For all their posturing, I do not see much difference between the two major parties. Let's face it neither Obama or Romney are going to shake the bush much, when they have to "dance with them what brought em". If we are ever to have a functioning democracy we must break the strangle hold of the two party system. If people like Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson's voice's are never heard, then how can people consider alternatives? The CPD, was created to maintain the status quo, and the sooner we demolish it the better. I like the idea of more debates with more candidates early on, then whittling the number down, as the election draws nearer. In closing, this year's election is a total farce. Never was never even a mention of a challenge to Obama, even though he is not exactly popular, not to mention Romney.
104010545Guest said on Monday, Oct 15 at 11:31 AM
I think the debates problem is trying to cover everything in one debate. They should have separated the topics for each debate. ie. one debate for foreign policy, domestic issues and so on. That way each candidate has more time and can go into more detail without having to worry about switching topics. That's my two cents for the day.
104008876Add a comment
Most Popular