RALEIGH – The Democratic and Republican races for governor differ in many ways. The blue field consists of two well-funded major candidates, Richard Moore and Beverly Perdue, who have each been elected twice to statewide executive posts and before that worked for years within the Raleigh establishment. The red field consists of four lesser-funded major candidates – Bill Graham, Pat McCrory, Bob Orr, and Fred Smith – whose governmental experience lies in local government or the courts, and are to varying degrees running against the Raleigh establishment.
One manifestation of the difference between the two nomination contests has to do with debates. The Democrats have had a handful, including last night’s forum televised on Capitol Broadcasting outlets in the Triangle, Wilmington, and Charlotte. The Republicans have had a bucketful – some 23 by my count, ranging from formal debates on statewide television to forums in front of trade associations, clubs, and university audiences.
The comparison isn’t favorable to the Democrats. A glaring example was their absence from a recent Cape Fear Community College forum in Wilmington cosponsored by local broadcast stations and civic organizations. As WWAY-TV anchor Steve Rondinaro put it in a bracing editorial last week, the two candidates’ “refusal to participate spoke volumes in a silent voice that was heard loud and clear.”
I had the privilege of moderating the Republican candidates’ first true debate, at High Point University back in October. And I will be moderating one of their last debates next Monday night in Asheboro, an evening sponsored by the Republican Women of Randolph County and entitled “A North Carolina Hometown Forum: The Republican Candidates for Governor.” Having moderated or served on panels for a number of debates in previous cycles, I have a couple of personal observations to make.
First, I strongly believe that the willingness to engage one’s electoral competitors in public debate is a key test of political leadership. Governing is largely a communication enterprise. Yes, governors make personnel decisions, fashion state budgets, and sign or veto bills, but their lasting influence is determined to a large degree by how effectively they communicate their vision and ideas to political elites, political activists, and the general public (roughly in that order). For all his flaws, Mike Easley has usually been an effective communicator, particularly on television, which helped sell his legislative agenda, primarily the state lottery.
Gubernatorial candidates who aren’t willing to engage in public debate either lack confidence in the merit of their proposals, doubt their ability to communicate, or are too willing to listen to risk-averse political consultants. These are all warning flags.
Second, debate formats vary and each has its pros and cons. Because debates must necessarily be time-limited, there are inescapable tradeoffs. If you opt to cover the many different topics important to voters, you sacrifice depth. But if you zero in on only a few topics, your lack of breadth will leave some of the audience unsatisfied. If you choose a format of meticulously timed responses and rebuttals, you ensure that all candidates are treated fairly and the audience is treated respectfully by delivering what you promise on time. But you sacrifice spontaneity, passion, and sometimes newsworthiness.
As for interlocutors, debates with a single, Wolf Blitzer-ish moderators have their place. You can push beneath the rhetorical boilerplate and get down to details and disagreements. But moderators who push and probe can turn into moderators who prance and preen. It’s supposed to be about the candidates. A panel of journalists is another means of subjecting debaters to questioning, but if they are not coordinated carefully the result can be duplication or irrelevancy.
I happen to like the no-holds-barred, direct-questioning format in which candidates ask each other questions. But I don’t think it’s the only valuable format, and if you let candidates set the agenda entirely you yield up the power to force them to opine on challenging, meaty topics rather than simply dispute small-bore issues or resume items.
For the North Carolina Hometown Forum in Asheboro next week, we chose a mix of moderator and panel questioning. Because the location is smack dab in the center of the state, and in one of the traditional communities that still encompass a large swath of the state population, we invited journalists from two other “hometowns” – Hickory in the west and Jacksonville in the east – to participate on the panel. We wanted to get a view of important issues such as economic change, transportation, education, and resource management through the unique lens of North Carolina’s smaller cities and towns. Some are prospering. Others are struggling. All are changing, in ways that will create both challenges and opportunities for North Carolina’s next governor.
I’m delighted that Perdue ultimately agreed to debate Moore Tuesday night. I’m disappointed that Barack Obama ultimately decided not to debate Hillary Clinton in North Carolina, a pivotal contest in his path to the nomination. And I’m looking forward to next Monday’s debate in Asheboro.
Hood is president of the John Locke Foundation.