Libertarians, Greens ready lawsuit against Commission on Presidential Debates

[brooklynite]

Source: Washington Post

The Libertarian Party and Green Party and their 2012 candidates for president are readying a legal complaint against the Commission on Presidential Debates, hoping that a new legal argument -- an anti-trust argument -- will break the "duopoly" that's dominated the stage.

The legal complaint, which was sent early to The Washington Post, argues that a "cognizable political campaign market" is being corrupted by the commission's rules. The commission, a private entity set up after the League of Women Voters' 1992 debates allowed third party candidate Ross Perot to participate, has withstood yearly assaults from the likes of Ralph Nader, Pat Buchanan, and former Congressman Bob Barr. None of them have gotten past a 1999 commission rule: No candidate gets onstage unless he or she is polling at 15 percent or better.

Bruce Fein, the attorney for the new plaintiffs, argues over 43 pages that keeping them out of a "multi-billion dollar" market violates "antitrust laws, the First Amendment, and District of Columbia tort law."

"The unlawful agreement among Defendants has several illicit purposes," writes Fein. "The first is to acquire, maintain, and exercise duopoly control of the multi-million dollar market in organizing, promoting, sponsoring, and fundraising for holding national general election presidential and vice-presidential debates to artificially advantage the Democratic and Republican Party candidates... the second illicit purpose is to acquire, maintain, and exercise duopoly control over, and to exclude and severely undermine competition in, the multi-billion dollar market of organizing, promoting, fundraising for, and engaging in general presidential and vice-presidential election campaigns."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/09/24/libertarians-and-greens-ready-lawsuit-against-commission-on-presidential-debates/

---

What then is a fairer measure? There will probably be up to 20 registered Presidential candidates on the ballot in one or more States. Do they all get to participate? If so, what will be the value of the debate to anyone?

[Wilms]

1. Well, now that you ask.

What has been "the value of the debate to anyone" on the Democratic side, thus far?

[brooklynite]

5. The General Election debates all happen in the last two months...

...so, no big hurry?

[Wilms]

8. You're an intelligent person.

I figure you understood my reference.

[Thinkingabout]

3. OMG, what next?

[Warren Stupidity]

4. A fairer measure? The debate commission's charter is to prevent another Perot.

They ain't trying to be fair.

[brooklynite]

6. But if the Greens and Libertarians prevail, what will be the alternative formulation?

[Warren Stupidity]

7. Open debates with participants determined by an actual non-partisan

commission, as it was with the LWV, instead of by the duopoly.

[geek tragedy]

9. attention-seeking lawsuit, not a serious one.

this is like a minor league team suing for the right to play in the World Series.

[OilemFirchen]

10. It writes itself...

Greens team with Looneytarians and pick Bruce Fein - who orchestrated the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine - to fight for equal representation.

There really should be a law addressing abject depravity.

[Lychee2]

12. See it as an irony.

Look at Bruce Fein as one of God's little jokes.

[OilemFirchen]

13. Wicked dry!

It took me years to get the punchline.

[PosterChild]

11. Libertarians + antitrust ? WTF? eom

[antigop]

14. everybody reading this thread, WATCH THESE VIDEOS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251607252

and see who is on the Board of Directors for the Commission on Presidential Debates.

[NobodyHere]

15. As far as a "fair" measure

Ralph Nader proposed allowing any candidate appearing on enough state ballots to theoretically win the presidency to be allowed on stage. That would prevent 20 candidates from appearing on the debate stage and be more fair than what we currently have.