Debates are the best ways for voters to get to know candidates for office — especially when those candidates have never served in a specific office before. Especially when they are not well-known to the electorate.
So it is a major disappointment to see Attorney General Martha Coakley, the leading Democrat in all the polls heading into the Dec. 8 primary election for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the passing of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, dodging all but two debates with her fellow Democratic candidates, Congressman Michael Capuano, Boston Celtics co-owner Steven Pagiluca and City Year co-founder Alan Khazei.
The only televised debate was more than three weeks ago, on Oct. 26. There was one radio debate and two or three forums, but nothing head to head. A second televised debate has now been set for Dec. 1, but for just one hour.
In a contest for a seat that is vacant for the first time in more than 45 years, that is, as Capuano puts it, "just ridiculous." Statewide, voters don't know any of them well. While both Capuano and Coakley have served in elective positions, Coakley has never been a legislator. Capuano is not well-known outside of his district.
And in a special election, there is little time for voters to get to know them. That may serve the interests of the Coakley campaign — the less unscripted exposure she has, the less chance there is for a major blunder. Coakley wants to protect her lead, not give face time to her challengers.
But it is not good for voters and it is not healthy for the electoral process. Debates are among the very few public events that cannot be entirely scripted or tightly controlled by the candidates. That is precisely what voters need to see. Just about anybody can look and sound good when reciting from a prepared text, having staff members issue press releases, issuing focus-group-tested position papers or glad-handing supporters at a fundraiser. It is only when they are being challenged by questions they haven't seen in advance, or are challenging one another, that voters can see how they think on their feet, how they respond to pressure and how well they can defend their views.
Those qualities are important in a senator.
The candidates, as all candidates do, have made extravagant promises of how they will "fight" for any number of causes, groups or principles — the economy, the poor, women's rights, gay marriage, universal health care, energy independence, winning or ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and protecting us from terrorism. So, if they're promising to be effective fighters, why not show us how they do in a rhetorical battle with one another?
There are less than three weeks until the primary, and with the Thanksgiving holiday weekend in the middle of it, really only two weeks to help voters make an informed choice. Debates are the best way to do it. That ought to be a priority for all the candidates, including the front-runner.
