The agreement between President Biden and President Donald J. Trump to proceed with two presidential debates and sideline the Commission on Presidential Debates is a debilitating and potentially fatal deal for an institution that was once the chief arbiter of presidential politics. This is a serious blow.
But the roots of the committee's decline go back at least a decade and culminated in 2020, when the committee struggled to hold a debate between Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden during the pandemic.
The first meeting between the two candidates that year was acrimonious and raucous, with Mr. Trump yelling at Mr. Biden and the host. “I'm a professional. I've never experienced anything like this,” host Chris Wallace said.
As it later emerged, Trump had been diagnosed with COVID-19 days before the event, leading to strong opposition to the committee from the Biden campaign. The committee requested that the second debate be held virtually because Trump is recovering from an illness, but Trump canceled it. By the third debate, the committee gave moderators a mute button to cut off candidates who broke the rules.
But even before that, the commission was on thin political ice. Anita Dunn, a longtime senior adviser to Mr. Biden, helped write a 2015 report that called for updating the debate for the modern media environment. Trump accused the bipartisan commission, created by Democratic and Republican leaders in 1987, of being biased against Democrats. The Republican National Committee announced it would no longer work with the committee in 2022.
“Campaigns have always wanted to own the debates,” said Alan Schroeder, a professor emeritus at Northeastern University's Graduate School of Journalism in Boston and author of several books on presidential debates. “They've been trying to get rid of the commission for years. So now we're going back to the future, and we're going back to a future that didn't work.”
Frank Fahrenkopf Jr., who helped found the committee as Republican chairman and now co-chairs it, said in an interview that he was stunned by the campaign's decision to bypass the committee, and that He said he was skeptical about how it would work.
“I would be a fly on the wall once the campaign starts coming together to consider this detail,” he said. “Who sits where, who is the host, who is there, where are they? We were created to do all these things.”
In fact, the commission was created to incorporate bipartisan, empowered negotiators into the plan, including the selection of hosts, the number of guests each side can bring into the studio, and the number of podiums candidates can stand behind. It covers issues such as height.
The organization took over from the League of Women Voters, which had overseen the debate for a decade, but had been criticized for not being successful in managing demands to serve the interests of campaign workers. In 1984, the campaigns of Republican President Ronald Reagan and Democratic opponent Walter F. Mondale vetoed the names of 100 journalists proposed for panel questioning.
“The problem was that the league didn't have a lot of influence over the campaign, so it tended to be shabby when it came to details like format, schedule and whether there would be live spectators.” said. Schroeder said.
The commission set aside practices that had developed since the first televised presidential debate between Richard M. Nixon and John F. Kennedy in 1960. The panel of questioners, which made it more difficult to stay focused on the topic and enable follow-ups, has been replaced with a single moderator. The committee decided who could participate, where the debates would be held, and ensured they were broadcast on all major networks.
The location, date and focus of the debate (foreign policy or domestic issues) had been announced long in advance, with the idea being that it would make it harder for sides to influence the rules of the game.
“I’m a fan of the commission,” said Gibbs Knotts, a political science professor at the College of Charleston. “They have a track record of consistently doing a good job. It would be a shame if that was put back into the campaign. I think more strategic calculations should be made and what is in the best interest of the American people as a whole.” It will be less likely that it will happen.”
Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden quickly agreed on a date and sponsorship network for the debate, but tough negotiations lie ahead. Mr. Biden wants the debate to be held without an audience and with microphones that automatically turn off if a speaker exceeds their allotted time. It is unclear whether Mr. Trump has agreed to these terms.
Also unresolved is whether this discussion will be held exclusively on the host network or shared with other broadcasters and streamers. ABC, one of the sponsors, said it would allow other networks to air the debate. CNN said otherwise, at least initially.
For viewers, there may not be an obvious difference between debates sponsored by committees and debates negotiated by candidates and networks.
“A debate is a live show. It's not unscripted, because as history has shown time and time again, debates have a mind of their own and take on a life of their own,” Schroeder said. Told.
Fahrenkopf said the committee was caught off guard by Biden's proposal Wednesday, despite long-standing complaints. “We weren’t alarmed by anything,” he said. But he said he is hopeful that the commission will eventually be able to step in and run the show, given how difficult these negotiations will be.
“I'm leaving now,” he said.
Michael M. Greenbaum Contributed to the report.