Bruce Guthrie, the Libertarian Party candidate for US Senate from Washington State will appear with Democratic Governor Maria Canwell and Republican Mike McGavick in a televised debate October 17.
Guthrie met one of the criteria by raising at least 10 percent of the funds raised by the winner of the previous Senate election. The sponsors used the 2004 third quarter report filed by Senator Patty Murray, who raised just under $12.1 million. The Guthrie campaign’s third quarter report showed total receipts of over $1.21 million, qualifying him for the debate. Guthrie reached this threshold by personally loaning his campaign $1.2 million.
Two other candidates, Green Party candidate Aaron Dixon and Independent Robin Adair, are not expected to meet the criteria. Nevertheless, Guthrie believes they should also be included in the debates. “Our Democracy can only be strengthened by having a diversity of ideas in the political arena,†he states. “The voters would be better served by open and inclusive debates, not publicity events limited to those with access to money.â€
Here’s the press release put out by the Dixon campaign. Congrats to Bruce for his inclusion and here’s hoping we can convince KING-5 to change their mind:
Tuesday, October 11, 2006
CONTACT:
Mike Gillis, Press Secretary, 206-755-4262, media@dixon4senate.com
Aaron Dixon Campaign Decries Exclusionary Debates.
On October 11, it was announced that the Libertarian nominee for U.S. Senate, Bruce Guthrie, would be invited to participate in a televised debate on KING-5 television on October 17 and Green Party nominee Aaron Dixon would not.
“While a three person debate is clearly better than one between simply the Democrat and the Republican”, says Jesse Hagopian, Dixon’s campaign manager, “we’re still missing the candidate who has clearly been the most prominent anti-war candidate since he announced. Without Aaron Dixon in the debates, progressive voters who want an end to war, living wage jobs and universal healthcare will have their voices silenced.”
The criteria chosen by KING-5 set a bar that almost no one but a major party nominee can meet, requiring either 10% in the polls — which not even Ross Perot acheived in 1992 prior to his debate inclusion — or $1.2 million.
The Dixon campaign has been in contact with the Guthrie campaign on the issue of debate exclusion. While there are some differences of opinion between Libertarians and Greens, both agree that only a debate with all ballot qualified candidates will give voters a real opportunity to see their options.
“Bruce is a principled and articulate candidate”, said Mike Gillis, Dixon’s press secretary. “But despite his million dollar loan to his own campaign, the Aaron Dixon campaign has clearly outperformed his. We’ve raised nearly twice as much money, $60,000 to Bruce’s $30,000, we’ve gotten more media attention and our last poll numbers are triple that of his. If you’re going to invite Bruce, you have to be fair and invite Aaron Dixon.”
According to a September 26 SurveyUSA poll commissioned by KING-5, Aaron Dixon is currently polling 3% of Washington voters to Guthrie’s 1%.
“I hope that KING-5 reconsiders and chooses open and fair debates”, says Dixon. “Voters deserve to hear from every voice in the Senate race, not just those that can afford to be heard.”
Polls should be banned as a basis for debate inclusion. The only criteria should be ballot standing, if a candidate has a spot on the ballot then he should be REQUIRED to debate. There should also be public funding to each campaign for every debate they attend. there should also be civil penalties to every airwave media that refuses to cover the debates.
Larry,
You’re absolutely right. This Senate debate should be five ways. The purpose behind a debate is education.
It’s a way for a voter to look at their options contend with one another for support and have their ideas challenged under questioning so that the voter can cast an informed vote.
When you exclude voices from the debate, you’re failing to do your job in educating voters about their options and rigging it in the favor of the included candidates — normally only the Ds and Rs.
When you cut out different voices and choices, the real loser is the voter.
No one should be required to broadcast anything. TV networks should include third party and independent candidates in debates because they get higher ratings when they do.
Appealing to the civic virtue of broadcasters might work sometimes, but appealing to their self interest will work a lot more often.