The debate debate

Boston Globe editorial, 9/6/2000

lans for the presidential debates have sadly turned into a petty debate over coverage among the television networks.

At the center of the fight is George W. Bush's proposal for the events. In the come-one-come-all tone of prize fights, the Bush campaign calls for a ''modern-day record of five debates.'' Bush would participate in three debates, and Richard Cheney would become ''the first vice presidential candidate in modern history'' to participate in two.

But Bush has dismissed the sensible proposal by the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates for three prime-time meetings and wants the line-up to include appearances on NBC's ''Meet the Press'' moderated by Tim Russert and on CNN's ''Larry King Live'' instead. This leaves ABC and CBS out in the cold.

No problem, Bush campaign officials say, the Russert and King debates would be available to be aired by the other networks.

No way, officials from ABC and CBS retort. They're not giving free air and promotional time to competitors' talk shows.

Bush officials are betting that if the two men appear on one network, the other networks will cave in and air the broadcast. This sets up a suspense-filled game of who-will-blink-first that would be great on a so-called reality television show about two candidates and four networks in a mock-struggle for survival. But real-life democracy should be above this.

The better plan is to stick to the schedule proposed by the debate commission, set up in 1987 to ensure that voters receive maximum information and to eliminate just this sort of candidate sniping. This schedule starts in Boston on Oct. 3 and includes three presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate, all in prime time and all to be aired on the major television networks.

Gore has objected to the Bush proposal. The Bush camp has responded with the silly contention that Gore is now ''backing away from debates'' he has already committed to and that this ''raises questions about Al Gore's credibility.'' One of the things that can be credibly said about Gore is that he is hungry for debates. Gore is simply and wisely insisting that other joint appearances be held in addition to - not instead of - the commission's schedule.

The Bush campaign argues that the public should not have to wait; debates should start this month. That's a fine idea, as long as it does not interfere with the commission debates.

The Gore team has already agreed to the commission's Sept. 3 call for a meeting. As of 5 o'clock yesterday, the Bush campaign had not. It is up to Bush to close the credibility gap. Rather than proposing a clumsy and last-minute reinvention of the wheel, the Bush campaign should agree to the broadcasting basics of bringing the candidates to the widest audience possible without stirring up distracting television turf wars.