This year has seen a remarkable regression in presidential debates in the U.S., with the Republican candidate initially rejecting an ABC News debate, though he later relented. Meanwhile, the Democratic candidate is contemplating whether to accept a debate invitation from Fox News. Both networks are viewed as biased by one side or the other, adding to the confusion. A vice presidential debate is scheduled for October 1.
Such confusion could have been avoided had the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) been in place. Established in 1987, the CPD was created to ensure debates were consistently held without the uncertainty that now plagues the process.
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) was established to ensure consistent debate scheduling and fairness
Before 1988, presidential debates were non-existent for over a century and a half. It wasn’t until 1960 that debates between presidential candidates began. For the next 25 years, the organization and scheduling of debates were sporadic and unreliable, with some sponsored by the League of Women Voters or television networks, lacking structure.
The CPD changed this dynamic by institutionalizing the process. It set debate venues and dates a year in advance, using geographically diverse college campuses to ensure neutrality. Moderators were respected journalists chosen by the CPD, not the candidates themselves, and the debate rules were established independently of the campaigns.
The CPD’s model inspired state and city-level debate commissions, contributing to a more formalized debate process at various government levels. However, the CPD’s high participation threshold meant that only one third-party candidate, Ross Perot, participated in its debates. Despite this, for over 30 years, no presidential candidate refused to participate until 2020, when the commission canceled a debate due to a candidate’s refusal to engage virtually during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The CPD’s decline this year began when the Republican National Committee withdrew from its debates, followed by President Biden’s campaign confirming it would not participate in CPD debates. This undermines the voters’ trust in having a fair and impartial debate process. Candidates now exploit network preferences and territorial advantages, as demonstrated by Trump’s Fox News debate proposal.
The CPD has offered to organize debates this fall, emphasizing its role as a neutral, independent body that focuses on candidates and issues. Vice President Kamala Harris, with the opportunity to chart a new course, could reinstate the CPD’s esteemed role. By rejecting biased network invitations and accepting the CPD’s offer, she could restore the integrity of presidential debates and reaffirm the CPD’s critical role in future elections.
