|
The
televised
presidential debates are the mega-events of the fall campaign. Stakes
are
high as the candidates face each other, across a single stage, within a
month of the election, before a television audience of tens of millions
of people. A debate can reveal the candidates' differences and
ability
to think on their feet or it can devolve into a scripted exercise
bordering
on a joint press conference or into an exchange of soundbites.
When
it comes to the number, timing and formats of the debates, as well as
who
will participate, there is a lot of discussion, but invariably the
major
party candidates and their campaigns have the final word.
Each
campaign acts in its own best interest; it wants to create the most
favorable
possible set of circumstances for its candidate.
DEMOCRACY
IN ACTION photo. |
October 8,
2004--President
Bush makes a point during the second of three presidential debates,
held
at the Washington University in St. Louis. |
The Commission on
Presidential Debates
The Commission on
Presidential
Debates (CPD), a non-profit organization established in 1987, organized
the 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004 debates. Previous debates
were
sponsored by the League of Women Voters (1976, 1980, and 1984) and the
networks (1960). The CPD develops candidate selection criteria
which
are used to evaluate which candidates it will invite to
participate.
It proposes dates and locations of debates. It lines up corporate
sponsors and oversees preparations for these important events.
The 2004
Debates--Sponsored by
the Commission on Presidential Debates
First
Presidential Debate
|
University
of Miami
Coral
Gables, FL
Thursday,
Sept. 30, 2004
9:00-10:30
p.m. EDT
more
>
|
Format:
Candidates at podiums. Focus primarily on foreign policy,
Moderator:
Jim Lehrer
-Anchor
and Executive Editor, The NewsHour, PBS. |
Vice
Presidential Debate
|
Case
Western Reserve University
Cleveland,
OH
Tuesday, Oct.
5, 2004
9:00-10:30
p.m. EDT
more
>
|
Format:
Candidates seated at a table with the moderator.
Moderator:
Gwen Ifill
-Senior Correspondent, The NewsHour, and Moderator, Washington Week,
PBS. |
Second
Presidential
Debate
|
Washington
University
St.
Louis, MO
Friday,
Oct. 8, 2004
9:00-10:30
p.m. EDT
more
>
|
Format:
Town meeting format in which "soft" supporters, selected by the Gallup
Organization, will question the candidates.
Moderator:
Charles
Gibson - Co-Anchor, ABC News Good Morning America. |
Third
Presidential Debate
|
Arizona
State University
Tempe,
AZ
Wednesday,
Oct. 13, 2004
9:00-10:30
p.m. EDT
|
Format:
Candidates at podiums. Focus primarily on domestic policy.
Moderator:
Bob Schieffer
-CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, and Moderator, Face the
Nation. |
On Jan. 6, 2003
the CPD posted
2004
site selection criteria. There was a March 31, 2003 deadline
for prospective hosts; on April 24, 2003 CPD announced that it had
received
proposals from fourteen potential 2004 debate sites.
On Sept.
24, 2003 the CPD announced 2004
candidate selection criteria; it is using the same three criteria
as
in 2000.
On Nov.
6, 2003 the CPD announced proposed 2004 sites
and dates.
On June
17, 2004 the CPD announced formats
for its proposed 2004 debates.
On July
15, 2004 the Kerry-Edwards campaign announced its acceptance of the
CPD's
2004 debate schedule.
On Aug.
13, 2004 the CPD announced moderators
for its proposed 2004 debates.
On Sept.
20, 2004 James A Baker, III and Vernon Jordan, Jr, the campaigns'
debate
negotiation team leaders, announced they have reached an agreement
for the candidates to hold three presidential debates and one vice
presidential
debate.
Negotiations
There is no
requirement
that presidential candidates participate in debates, but it would be
quite
damaging to be seen as avoiding or blocking the debates, particularly
since
the candidates are taking federal funds. Typically every four
years
there is a ritual debate over debates. For several weeks the two
major campaigns jockey back and forth haggling over details big and
small--everything
from the number and format of the debates to the podium height and
shape
and who is or is not acceptable as a moderator. Closed-doors
meetings
alternate with pointed public pronouncements, but eventually the two
sides
reach an accord.
Debate
Negotiation
Teams
Bush-Cheney
'04, Inc.
James A. Baker
III (Senior
partner, Baker Botts LLP (Houston))
Robert B.
Zoellick (U.S.
Trade Representative)
Mississippi
Governor Haley
Barbour
Allan B.
Hubbard (President
of E&A Industries, Inc.)
Karen Hughes
(BC04 senior
advisor)
Mary Matalin
(BC04 senior
advisor)
Mark Wallace
(BC04 deputy
campaign
manager) |
Kerry-Edwards
2004, Inc.
Vernon Jordan
(Senior managing
director of Lazard LLC)
Arizona
Governor Janet Napolitano
Michigan
Governor Jennifer
Granholm
Jim Johnson
(Washington
businessman and civic leader )
Robert Barnett
(Washington
lawyer)
Mike McCurry
(former White
House press secretary) |
In 2004, aside
from an early
report that the Bush campaign might skip the proposed St. Louis debate
and agree to only two presidential debates, as President Clinton had
done
in 1996, negotiations were conducted in quiet and without
posturing.
Although the CPD did get a bit nervous (Sept.
15 letter) the negotiating teams announced on September 20
agreement
for three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate, almost
exactly as the CPD had proposed. (One minor adjustment made,
reportedly
at the behest of the Bush campaign, was to have the first debate focus
on foreign policy rather than domestic policy as the CPD had
proposed.
In other changes from the CPD proposal, the September 30 and October 13
debates were held with the candidates at podiums rather than seated at
a table with the moderator, and the October 8 town hall featured
questions
from "soft" supporters rather than undecided voters). In a
commendable
and unprecedented sign of openness, the campaigns released the full Memorandum
of Understanding [PDF] outlining the terms of the debates.
Format
The format of a
debate has
a critical impact on nature of the exchanges that occur and on the
amount
of information viewers are able to learn. The most obvious parameter to
consider is who is on the stage and who is not, but there are many
other
factors. Is there a live audience and are they controlled or
disruptive?
Is the subject matter confined to one area, such as the economy, or is
it more wide-ranging? What is the time limit on candidate responses and
on rebuttals? Finally, who asks the questions? The 1960 and
1976-1988 presidential debates exclusively used the panel of
reporters.
More recently the single moderator and town hall formats have come into
favor. The town hall format was first used in the Richmond, VA
debate
in 1992. Having an audience of undecided voters pose the
questions
likely results in a broader range of questions, but on the downside
this
format does not foster follow-up. One format which has not been
attempted
is to have the candidates question each other directly.
Prep
In the lead up to
the debates,
the candidates undergo intensive preparations. Briefing books are
put together, and the candidates engage in mock debates. The
media
provide glimpses of these rehearsals. The candidates will also be sure
to be seen engaging in public displays of confidence such as throwing a
baseball, jogging, or giving a thumbs up.
Spin
Following each
debate occurs
one of the most unique and fascinating scenes in American
politics.
Top campaign staff, campaign surrogates and party leaders gather in the
media filing center and spin reporters, telling them what they have
just
seen. On opposite sides of the filing center chairs are set up
for
Democratic and for Republican partisans to do satellite interviews with
local stations around the country. Meanwhile, a rapid response
unit
has been working feverishly to produce rebuttals to various claims made
during the debate; these documents are distributed and faxed out.
Media
In 1988 media were
criticized
for giving too much attention to the spinners. Spin soundbites
still
form an integral part of coverage, but another common element is to
assemble
a group of undecided voters and interview them for their
reactions.
As in 1996 and 2000, the Commission on Presidential Debates ran a Debate
Watch program to encourage debate-watching groups around the
country.
According to the Commission over the four debates more than 30,000
people
participated in an estimated 2,003 groups around the country.
These
groups provided convenient opportunities for local media to do
debate
coverage.
Controversy Over the CPD
Critics charge that
the
CPD, headed by the former chairs of the Democratic National Committee
and
the Republican National Committee, is a bipartisan rather than a
nonpartisan
organization, and can scarcely be expected to be fair to third party
and
independent candidates. They also maintain the CPD lacks
transparency.
Clearly some
limits must
be set as to who will appear on the debate stage, for with too many
candidates
these events will become unmanageable. In past cycles, the CPD
used
a complicated set of "objective criteria" that drew much
criticism.
The commission's 2004 criteria, announced on Sept. 24, 2003, are the
same
as those used in 2000. To participate in the debates, candidates have
to:
(a) be
constitutionally
eligible;
(b) have ballot
access in
enough states to win a majority of electoral votes (at least 270);
and
(c) have a level
of national
support of at least 15 % as measured in polls done by five selected
national
polling organizations.
Third party
candidates have
raised strong objections to the 15 % threshhold, arguing that it is
arbitrary
and too high. In the 2000 cycle, Pat Buchanan/Reform Party, Dr.
Lenora
Fulani's Committee for a Unified Independent Party, John
Hagelin/Natural
Law Party, and Ralph Nader all filed lawsuits seeking to gain entry
into
the debates, all to no avail (see the 2000
debates page).
Third party
candidates and
parties filed an administrative complaint
with the FEC on June 17, 2003 charging that the CPD is a partisan group
and that therefore cannot finance the debates with corporate
funds.
This complaint would not be resolved until long after the debates and
the
election. After the FEC failed to act in a timely manner,
attorneys
filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on
Feb.
11, 2004. (press
release). On Aug. 12, 2004 U.S. District Judge Henry H.
Kennedy,
Jr. ruled (Hagelin
et al. v FEC) that the Federal Election Commission had to
investigate
the charge that the CPD is a partisan group. The FEC filed a
motion
to stay the decision pending appeal. The District Court granted
this
motion on Oct. 6. The matter then went to the U.S. Court of
Appeals
for the District of Columbia, which on June 10, 2005 issued a ruling
siding with the FEC and reversing the District Court ruling.
Attorneys
for Hagelin et al. did not give up; they asked the Appeals Court to
reconsider
its decision, but on Aug. 9, 2005 the Court reissued its opinion,
effectively
ending the matter.
Meanwhile on Oct.
1, 2004
the Arizona Libertarian Party filed suit against Arizona State
University
and the CPD in the Superior Court of Arizona for Maricopa County
charging
that ASU, a state entity, was "making a donation to two individual
campaigns
[Bush and Kerry] through the Commission on Presidential Debates as a
conduit,
in violation of the Arizona Constitution's prohibition on making gifts
or donations to individuals or corporations." Judge Pendleton
Gaines
issued an Order to Show Cause for the president of ASU and the director
of the CPD to appear in court for a hearing on October 12, one day
before
the scheduled debate. The Arizona debate nonetheless
proceeded.
At the debate in St. Louis on Oct. 8, Libertarian nominee Michael
Badnarik
and Green nominee David Cobb were arrested as they crossed a police
line.
Citizens Debate Commission
Open
Debates is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit "committed to reforming the
presidential
debate process." Open Debates traces back to Ralph Nader's call
for
a People's Presidential
Debate
Commission (2/18/02). Founder George Farah has worked at
Nader's
Center for the Study of Responsive Law and authored a book, No
Debate
(Seven Stories Press, April 2004). Open Debates established a
Citizens
Debate Commission in an effort to replace the CPD. The Citizens
Debate
Commission proposed five presidential debates and one vice presidential
debate, what it terms "real and transparent"
presidential debates as opposed to "stilted and deceptive events
proposed
by the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD)."
(August
16, 2004 letter)
Debates
Proposed
by the Citizens Debate Commission
-Sept.
22, 2004 - Capital University, in Columbus, OH |
-Sept.
28, 2004 - Swarthmore College, in Swarthmore, PA |
-Oct.
3, 2004 - Canisius College, in Buffalo, NY |
-Oct.
7, 2004 - Willamette University, in Salem, OR (vice-presidential) |
-Oct.
11, 2004 - Carleton College, in Northfield, MN |
-Oct.
15, 2004 - Nova Southeastern University, in Fort Lauderdale, FL |
|
Additionally, on
Feb. 14,
2004 Open Debates filed a complaint with the FEC alleging "that
presidential
debates sponsored by the CPD are controlled by the major parties in
violation
of FEC debate regulations." The Open Debates complaint sought to
have "the FEC prohibit the CPD from staging future corporate-sponsored
presidential debates." And on April 2004 Open Debates filed a
complaint
with the IRS in an attempt to revoke the tax status of the Commission
on
Presidential Debates (CPD).
Other Ideas
-
In a March 13,
2004 speech
in Quincy, Illinois, presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Kerry proposed
"a series of monthly debates, starting this spring." (During his
1996 re-election campaign Kerry had held a series of eight debates with
his Republican challenger Bill Weld from April to October).
-
In the past
there have been
unsuccessful attempts by a few members of Congress to legislate the
question
of participation. For example in Nov. 2001, Rep. Jesse Jackson
Jr.
(D-IL) introduced a resolution that sought to lower the threshhold for
participation to 5 % (H.C.R.
263).
Third Party Debates
Voters who want to
see third
party presidential candidates in debates have thus far had to rely on
C-SPAN.
In 2004 there were half a dozen debates involving third party
presidential
or vice presidential candidates:
Aug.
31 |
Sts. Cyril
and Methodius
Church, New York, NY (during Rep. Nat'l Conv.) |
Badnarik, Cobb |
Sept.
30 |
Holiday
Inn, Coral Gables,
FL |
Badnarik,
Cobb |
Oct.
5-VP |
Democracy
Now |
Camejo,
Campagna, LaMarche |
Oct. 6 |
Cornell
University, Ithaca,
NY |
Badnarik,
Brown, Cobb, Peroutka |
Oct. 7 |
University
of Texas-Austin |
Badnarik,
Cobb |
Oct. 15 |
East Tenn. State
Univ., Johnson City, TN |
Brown,
Cobb, Jay reps. of
LP, SEP, and WWP (see note) |
Note: Brown is Walt
Brown the
Socialist Party candidate; Jay is Charles Jay, candidate of the
Personal
Choice Party; stand-ins were Gary Nolan (LP), Jerry White (SEP) and
Dierdre
Griswold (WWP).
Green Party nominee
David
Cobb assidiously participated in these forums, Libertarian Party
nominee
Michael Badnarik missed one, Constitution Party Michael Peroutka did
only
one forum, and Ralph Nader eschewed them altogether. C-SPAN
covered
a couple of these events.
Dates and Locations of
Past Presidential
and Vice Presidential Debates
2000
Gore-Bush |
Oct. 3, 2000
Boston, MA |
Oct. 11,
2000
Winston-Salem,
NC |
Oct. 17,
2000
St. Louis, MO |
Lieberman-Cheney
Oct. 5, 2000
Danville, KY |
1996
Clinton-Dole |
Oct. 6,
1996
Hartford, CT |
Oct. 16,
1996
San Diego, CA |
. |
Gore-Kemp
Oct. 9, 1996
St.
Petersburg, FL |
1992
Bush-Clinton-Perot |
Oct. 11, 1992
St. Louis, MO |
Oct. 15,
1992
Richmond, VA |
Oct. 19,
1992
East Lansing,
MI |
Quayle-Gore-Stockdale
Oct. 13, 1992
Atlanta, GA |
1988
Bush-Dukakis |
Sept. 25,
1988
Winston-Salem,
NC |
Oct. 13,
1988
Los Angeles, CA |
. |
Quayle-Bentsen
Oct. 5, 1988
Omaha, NE |
1984
Reagan-Mondale |
Oct. 7, 1984
Louisville, KY |
Oct. 21,
1984
Kansas City, MO |
. |
Bush-Ferraro
Oct. 11, 1984
Philadelphia,
PA |
1980
Carter-Reagan-Anderson |
Reagan-Anderson
Sept. 21, 1980
Baltimore, MD |
Carter-Reagan
Oct. 28, 1980
Cleveland, OH |
. |
none |
1976
Ford-Carter |
Sept. 23, 1976
Philadelphia,
PA |
Oct. 6,
1976
San Francisco,
CA |
Oct. 22,
1976
Williamsburg,
VA |
Dole-Mondale
Oct. 15, 1976
Houston, TX |
1960
Nixon-Kennedy |
Sept. 26,
1960 |
Oct. 7,
1960 |
Oct. 13,
1960 |
Oct. 21,
1960 |
Note: 2000, 1996,
1992 and
1988 debates sponsored by Commission on Presidential Debates; 1984,
1980
and 1976 sponsored by the League of Women Voters; 1960 sponsored by the
networks.
Copyright ©
2001,
2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Eric M. Appleman/Democracy in Action.
|