|
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.
|