A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Candidate Forums
By ADAM NAGOURNEY - NEW YORK TIMES
These forums are interfering with the most important function a candidate has right now. Raising money!
WASHINGTON, May 19 - When is too much too much?
Democratic presidential prospects are suddenly drowning in a cascade of invitations to candidate forums across the nation over the next six months. And they are responding by conspiring to figure out a way to say no, or at least to say no to most of them.
At first glance, it might seem strange that any of the nine Democrats, struggling to break out of the shadow of President Bush, would shun a camera or a microphone.
But if the campaigns agree on anything, it is that this crush of invitations has turned into a time-consuming, candidate-draining, personnel-depleting, expensive mess. And the presidential campaign managers are looking for anyone to impose order on what seems to be verging on political chaos.
Tonight, in what amounted to a group shout for help, the managers met with the party's national chairman, Terry McAuliffe.
"I have before me now a spreadsheet with, O.K., 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10," a beleaguered Jim Jordan, campaign manager for Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, said today, his voice trailing off as he continued counting the debate requests on his desk. "O.K., I've got 37 on the spreadsheet in front of me. It will be impossible to accept every invitation."
Bill Carrick, a senior adviser to Representative Richard A. Gephardt, said: "We are getting into a situation where we just have so many of these as to become meaningless. They are a distraction from the campaign."
Some progress was apparently made at tonight's meeting, called by Mr. McAuliffe. Three campaign managers said in a joint telephone call from a bar near the White House, where they had retired for drinks, that Mr. McAuliffe would draft a proposal for a limited schedule of officially sanctioned events, which would presumably be televised nationally.
The proposal is expected to come out in a week, and will probably call for one debate a month, along the lines of a proposal made last week by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who took the lead in trying to resolve this after his own well-received performance at the candidates' first debate two weeks ago.
All the candidates tentatively agreed to abide by the McAuliffe calendar. But the managers disagreed over whether by agreeing to Mr. McAuliffe's schedule, they would still get out of doing other ones. But aides to some of the candidates suggested that agreeing to a once-a-month schedule of debates would give them the cover to say no as often as they want.
Why say no?
Well, these forums are a lot more complicated than they might appear. It is not just a matter of a candidate hopping on a plane with an aide or two and stepping out in front of the klieg lights. In South Carolina, for example, it was not unusual to see candidates show up with a dozen aides to help them prepare for, and then get through, the big night. For campaigns keeping an eye on spending, that is a lot of hotel rooms, plane tickets, meals and, of course, bar tabs.
For a nationally televised debate, a candidate spends two days out of public sight, running through practice sessions, and resting up for the big night. These days, there is already enough for a candidate to do, from raising money to hiring staff members to figuring out what they stand for. "There's a lot of stuff that you've got to do in a campaign ? and you can't spend all your time debating," said Steve Elmendorf, another adviser to Mr. Gephardt.
The more debates there are, the fewer new things there are for the candidate to say ? which means that the only things that tend to draw attention are mistakes and miscues, as one campaign adviser said today.
And beyond that, the groups that are sponsoring these debates tend to be organizations whose support the candidates want, like labor unions, gay rights groups, environmental advocates or the Congressional Black Caucus. These kind of forums inevitably push the candidates to pander to the interests of their audience, as many of the Democrats did at a government employee forum in Des Moines on Saturday.
"This is Karl Rove's dream," Democratic adviser said of President Bush's senior political adviser.
Not all candidates want to stop the interminable cattle calls. The exposure may be unwanted exposure for candidates who have the money and the resources on their own. But it is a tonic for the underfinanced candidates, who welcome the attention.
And it is not so easy to say no to a group whose support all the candidates are seeking. "If you don't go, the other guys are going to go," said David Ginsberg, communications director for Senator John Edwards of North Carolina. "Everybody has to go because the other guy is going."
From that perspective, it seems, Mr. McAuliffe's work has just begun.
nytimes.com |
