Open Debates Files FEC Complaint VS the Commission on Pres. Debates

[maddezmom]

2/19/04 12:18:00 PM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To: National Desk

Contact: Chris Shaw of Open Debates, 202-628-9195

WASHINGTON, Feb. 19 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Today, Open Debates filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD). The complaint contains previously unreleased, secret documents that reveal how the major party candidates collude with the CPD to dictate the terms of the presidential debates and exclude third- party and independent challengers.

"FEC regulations require presidential debate sponsors that accept corporate contributions to be `nonpartisan' and to employ `pre-established objective' candidate selection criteria. The CPD, which accepts millions of dollars in corporate contributions, fails to stage the debates in accordance with these FEC regulations," said Open Debates' Executive Director George Farah.

The complaint alleges that presidential debates sponsored by the CPD are controlled by the major parties in violation of FEC debate regulations.

The complaint further alleges that the CPD was created by the Republican and Democratic parties, for the Republican and Democratic parties. The CPD exists to secretly award control of the presidential debates to the Republican and Democratic nominees. Questions concerning third-party participation and debate formats are resolved behind closed doors, between negotiators for the Republican and Democratic candidates. These negotiators draft secret debate contracts called Memoranda of Understanding that dictate precisely how the debates will be run - - from decreeing who can participate, to prohibiting candidate-to- candidate questioning, to stipulating the height of the podiums. Posing as an independent sponsor, the CPD implements the directives of the Memoranda of Understanding, shielding the major party candidates from public criticism. Many of these issues are documented in the forthcoming book /No Debate/ (Seven Stories Press) authored by Open Debates' Executive Director George Farah.
~snip~
more: http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=119-02192004

Discussing now on CSPAN1. :)

[quispquake]

1. I know a lot of folks here on the board hate Nader...

...but he was gonna give Gore a pass on the close states until Gore agreed that he shouldn't be in the debates, which I thought wasn't cool either. I think Ralph shouldn't have fought so hard on the close states afterwards, but he should have been allowed to debate.

When 3rd parties & independents are excluded from debates, many ideas that should be on the table are never mentioned. I'm glad that Kucinich & Sharpton can still debate in the primaries, so that ideas like Universal Health Care can still be brought up (not to mention it's a lot easier for Sharpton to call Bush a liar than it is for Kerry at this point).

pp23

[Walt Starr]

2. EXCELLENT!!!!

Include third party candidates and a third party could win.