The Boston Globe has this story, which says that in the upcoming special election for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, the Democratic nominee, Martha Coakley, wants all the debates to include all three ballot-listed candidates. By contrast, the Republican nominee, Scott P. Brown, is willing to participate in debates at which the sponsors exclude the independent candidate, Joseph L. Kennedy.

The reporter who wrote the article seems to hint that he is not in sympathy with the demand for three-candidate debates. He suggests that the independent candidate is “little-known” and also that the voters may be confused by his name. The best way to educate the voters about Joseph L. Kennedy, obviously, is to see to it that he is included in the debates.

The Hartford Courant has this editorial, dated December 15, calling on the Connecticut legislature to pass a bill this month, making the state’s public funding law non-discriminatory.

On December 11, the Connecticut Green Party filed this brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd circuit. The case is Green Party of Connecticut v Garfield, 09-3941. The hearing is January 13, 2010. The case concerns the state’s system of public funding for candidates for state office, which are highly discriminatory in favor of Democrats and Republicans.

The Green Party’s brief is 118 pages. Highlights include footnote 34, which says, “Defendants’ own witness, State Senator Peter Mills of Maine, confirmed that third party candidacies on the state legislative level have never posed a threat to the public fisc under Maine’s public financing system.” Maine’s public funding program does not discriminate for or against any candidate on the basis of that candidate’s partisan membership or independent status.

Also worth reading is footnote 22, which explains that if Connecticut’s existing system had been in place in 1990, Lowell Weicker could never have succeeded in winning the governorship as the nominee of a new political party. Weicker has been a witness for the Green Party in this lawsuit.