Starving for Issues

The presidential campaigns should not waste much more time quibbling over debate details like how many, when and sponsored by whom. They should get on with the debating. The nation deserves a serious discussion of real issues in detail--something that has not yet occurred in a manner that reaches the average American voter.

The two debates proposed by representatives of Vice President George Bush, along with a third between the vice presidential nominees, is not adequate. This is particularly true if the second debate occurred more than two weeks before the election, as the Bush staff seems to be insisting. Millions of voters do not normally focus much attention on the November election until the final two weeks of the campaign, and new issues often arise in the waning days of the contest that should be discussed head-to-head by the candidates.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the Bush campaign will agree to the four sessions proposed by representatives of Massachusetts Gov. Michael S. Dukakis. Thus three presidential meetings seem to be a logical compromise, although we would like to see more. There also should be at least one debate between Sens. Lloyd Bentsen of Texas and Dan Quayle of Indiana, the Democratic and Republican vice presidential nominees.

The question of sponsorship should be an easy one to settle. The debates should be sponsored jointly by the League of Women Voters, which has handled that role since 1976, and the Commission on Presidential Debates, formed last year by the leadership of the two political parties in an effort to take over control of the debates. By virtue of tradition, the league really deserves the “honor,” but at this late date such a fine point should not be allowed to stand in the way of a speedy agreement on the debates and their format.

Bush says that he does not want to bore people with too many debates, and his aides seem to believe that Bush needs more time to prepare than Dukakis, who has experience on a debate-format television program. But the people would be better served if neither candidate had much time to prepare. The debates should be spontaneous and test the candidates’ knowledge of government and issues and not their abilities to memorize nice-sounding statements written by assistants.

Past presidential debates have been too rigid to be very enlightening. But any format wouldbe better than the long-distance sniping that has marked the 1988 political campaign so far. The candidates must be forced to sit down face-to-face and get specific about the matters that are of the utmost importance to the well-being of the American republic during the coming four years.