The Debate Question

To the Editor:

I couldn't agree more with your Nov. 10 editorial, "Talking Point: More Debates."

All incumbent elected officials - be they Democrat or Republican on the city, state or Federal level - start out with many advantages not available to challengers. During any term of public office, incumbents have daily television, radio and newspaper exposure, press conferences, newsletters, guest columns in newspapers, letters to the editor and speaking engagements on a regular basis. Don't forget the perks of public office, including announcements of member items (many of which taxpayers consider local pork-barrel projects) which are used to raise name recognition and assist in greasing the wheels of re-election.

In the 1960s, '70s and '80s, both Democratic and Republican primary candidates participated in numerous television and newspaper editorial board debates. Voters could look beyond the 30- or 60-second TV commercial sound bites to learn about real views and issues among the candidates.

Those candidates who refused to participate in these debates would be subject to critical newspaper and television editorials. They ended up losing any chance of newspaper endorsements and usually went down to defeat in either the primary or general election.

In the 1980s, a new Rose Garden Strategy emerged. Incumbents of both parties refused to debate lesser-known, under-funded opponents. They had no interest in providing a free forum for challengers to get their message directly out to voters. Too many newspaper, television and good government groups failed to speak up and shame these incumbents into participating in open forums and debates.

Clearly, all this year's winners, including Senator Clinton, Governor Spitzer, Attorney General Cuomo and State Comptroller Hevesi, had no interest in providing their Republican opponents any significant number of debates which would have provided them with free forums to explain their positions on issues of the day.

Perhaps in the future, The Chief will set the benchmark for the so-called major daily newspapers to follow in insuring that candidates will provide voters with more debates, as opposed to canned TV commercials.

LARRY PENNER