The Christian Science Monitor has this story, on whether it is good public policy to let minor party and independent candidates participate in debates with their major party opponents.  The story was triggered by a publicity campaign recently launched by Free and Equal, to expand the California gubernatorial and U.S. Senate debates from just two candidates, to all six candidates on the ballot.

The story does not mention that in the last few weeks, several U.S. House debates have been held in California, and everyone on the ballot participated.  Also there will be a U.S. House debate in which all four candidates on the ballot in California’s 6th district are invited, on September 20 in Santa Rosa.  The four candidates in that race are the nominees of the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, and Peace & Freedom Parties.

The Miami Herald has this op-ed by Political Science Professor Daniel A. Smith, recommending that states and the federal government implement programs for public funding of campaigns.  Thanks to Political Activity Law for the link.

Voters in one Board of Education district in Beaufort County, South Carolina, will find a November ballot with no candidates listed for that office.  The only person who submitted a petition thought she had at least 50 valid signatures, but she didn’t.  See this story.  As a result, the winner will be determined by write-in votes.  South Carolina is one of ten states that permits write-in votes in the general election, yet doesn’t have a write-in declaration of write-in candidacy.  So, no one needs to file anything to potentially be elected.  Thanks to ElectionLawBlog for the link.

Indiana and Pennsylvania are two other states in which it is routine for very small jurisdictions (such as townships) to elect people by write-in vote, because candidates often don’t bother to do the work needed to get themselves on the ballot.