The three leading candidates for the Republican nomination in this year’s U.S. Senate race are engaged in the usual, tiresome sniping about who should debate where, if at all.
The only right answer is: Yes, there should be at least a few debates, broadly televised, with neutral moderators, involving all candidates who exceed a minimum polling average. Candidates should be expected to debate under these terms, not to make debates a subject to political tactics. Their duty is to serve the public, not themselves.
Alas, the candidates in the new May 16 GOP primary are playing games.
Incumbent Sen. Bill Cassidy has challenged U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow to debate, without mentioning the other major candidate, state Treasurer John Fleming, at all. Cassidy indicated he would not debate unless Letlow is there, too.
Good for him for raising the prospect of debates, but Cassidy sang a different tune in previous campaigns. When challenging embattled incumbent Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu in 2014, he declined all but one major debate invitation in the runoff against her. When running for reelection against Democratic Shreveport Mayor Adrian Perkins and others in an open primary in 2020, Cassidy refused to debate unless all 14 candidates, including ones not even actively campaigning, were invited. No respectable outlet would sponsor what surely would have been a circus instead of a constructive public forum, so Cassidy’s stance amounted to a refusal to have a real debate.
Letlow’s response has been to decline participation in an already scheduled April 16 debate on Louisiana Public Broadcasting — generally seen as a neutral forum — but instead to suggest a debate on the radio show of outspoken conservative Moon Griffon. As Griffon has a longstanding feud with Cassidy, his show could hardly be considered unbiased.
Fleming, with a significant base of support but generally seen as running third in the race so far, naturally wants any airtime he can get. He said he’s eager to debate the others.
Let’s be clear: To dodge major debates is to say public accountability doesn’t matter. A candidate who relies entirely on the self-controlled environment of campaign advertising and endorsements is failing the test of transparency and ducking the responsibility to answer tough questions. Voters deserve to know, in an open setting, what candidates stand for and whether they can take some heat.
It goes without saying that any candidate that has conditions about when or where to debate isn’t serious about presenting his or her ideas to the public.
The default response to an invitation to debate should be yes. Anything else is a smoke screen, ill-befitting a public servant.
