‘The public is cheated’ as Idaho candidates reject debates, voter guides before primary
A growing number of Idaho political candidates are declining to take part in traditional election activities, such as debates and questionnaires, in what political experts are saying is a concerning trend.
Several candidates declined to take part in debates on Idaho Public Television in recent weeks, resulting in the cancellation of debates for the state’s two highest offices. In addition, the Idaho Statesman has had an unusually high rate of non-response to our traditional Voter Guide survey.
Dave Adler, a political analyst based in Idaho Falls, said that while it’s not uncommon to have some candidates decline debates and other election activities, the frequency is increasing — and it’s the public suffering as a result.
“That’s the thing about running for office: It’s a democratic tradition,” Adler told the Statesman. “It’s an expectation of voters that candidates will stand before the public and answer questions.”
Lack of political engagement becoming a trend
Several prominent candidates have ducked out of debates, including The Idaho Debates, which are broadcast statewide on Idaho Public Television.
Most notably, Gov. Brad Little announced two weeks ago that he would not take part. A gubernatorial debate was set to go on with Little’s challengers, Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin and Ed Humphreys, but that was canceled after McGeachin’s campaign did not respond to the Idaho Press Club, which hosts the debates alongside IPTV, the League of Women Voters of Idaho and Idaho’s public universities.
Prior to Little’s announcement, Rep. Priscilla Giddings, R-White Bird, who is a candidate for lieutenant governor, declined to debate her opponent, House Speaker Scott Bedke, R-Oakley. Longtime 2nd Congressional District Rep. Mike Simpson also declined to debate his competitor, Bryan Smith.
The Idaho Statesman sent 113 candidates for state and local office a questionnaire to be published in their own words as part of its Voter Guide. More than one-third of those candidates did not respond. That’s a sharp increase from the last comparable election cycle in 2018, when just 15% of 100 candidates did not respond to a similar Voter Guide survey.
One legislative candidate, Republican Dorothy Greenzang, told a Statesman reporter that some of the questions in the survey — which covered age, occupation, prior political experience and political priorities — were “personal” and “not relevant to my campaign.” Several candidates, including Smith, Giddings, and attorney general candidates Raúl Labrador and Art Macomber, have declined interviews with the Idaho Statesman editorial board, which traditionally issues recommendations.
While it’s not uncommon for candidates to skirt public engagement opportunities, Adler and Boise State University political science associate professor Jeff Lyons said they feel it’s becoming a trend.
“My sense is that it’s certainly something that has happened before, but probably not as common as we’re seeing right now,” Lyons said. “It almost seems like debates have become the outlier, not the norm this cycle. I do not think that is normal.”
Why candidates refuse debates, engagement
Campaign representatives for Little, Giddings and McGeachin did not respond to requests from the Idaho Statesman to elaborate on why they declined to debate.
The candidates initially gave differing reasons for refusing to participate. Little’s campaign said his record is “non-debatable.”
“Gov. Little has a proven track record of cutting red tape, responsibly managing the budget and the economy, and providing Idaho families and businesses with historic tax relief and record investments in schools, roads, water, and other areas,” his campaign said in a statement. “Those historic accomplishments and facts are non-debatable.”
According to the Idaho Press Club, Giddings was upset that Idaho Public Television would not break its policy and allow her to approve panelists beforehand.
Adler called Little’s statement “arrogant,” and said it’s up to voters, not the candidate, to decide whether his record stands on its own.
“In terms of Giddings’ demands or McGeachin, their refusal to submit themselves to questions smacks of insecurity and their own sense of vulnerability in their records,” Adler told the Statesman.
McGeachin met with the Statesman editorial board and also answered Voter Guide questions.
Both experts acknowledged there’s a risk in debating — of potentially opening up to harsh criticism, pointed questions or even misinformation shared by opponents. Adler said he could see some traditional candidates feeling hesitant to share the stage with more fringe candidates like McGeachin and Giddings, but argued it would be a chance to reaffirm their own legitimacy.
“There’s no doubt in my mind that (Little) would’ve looked very, very good compared to his opponents,” Adler said. “By standing on stage with fringe figures, he’s not only able to defend his competence and his record, by comparison he’s able to demonstrate to voters precisely why his opponents are unqualified and unworthy of assuming the seat he occupies.”
Some candidates have leaned on their records or campaign promises in lieu of answering questions. Lyons said those promises don’t often illustrate key differences among candidates. Lyons and Adler said the debates that have taken place — both pointed to the race for Idaho attorney general — have highlighted such distinctions.
In last week’s attorney general debate, incumbent Lawrence Wasden explained his view of the role as a purely legal one, while challenger Labrador said he would take a more “aggressive” political angle. Art Macomber, a third candidate for the office, tried to set himself apart by calling his competitors “insiders.”
Adler said concerns about how they’ll appear aren’t reason enough for candidates to avoid debates entirely. He pointed out that many famed U.S. politicians, including Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan and John F. Kennedy, participated in debates despite reservations about the strength of their debate skills.
Voters lose out on lack of info
Regardless of motivations, Lyons and Adler said it’s voters who lose out when candidates decline to debate or respond to questions. Instead, voters must rely on general statements from campaigns, as well as one-sided promotions or attacks.
Lyons said he’s not sure the lack of traditional engagement will keep voters from the polls, but said it will change how people decide to cast their votes.
“Maybe yard signs are a larger part of the calculus, or what one of their friends posted on social media instead of voters themselves observing information,” Lyons said. “I’m not sure that’s a good thing.”
In a state like Idaho, which heavily favors one party, that can be especially problematic, Lyons added. He said voters are trying to understand the distinctions between candidates from the same party during primary races, where differences are much more nuanced.
In Idaho, Republican primaries often determine the candidate who goes on to win the November general election. Adler said “the public is cheated” by a dearth of information in May.
The lack of engagement counters a key democratic principle, makes candidates less accessible and erodes the ability to hold them accountable, Adler said. He worries what will happen if the trend of avoiding participation continues.
“I wish (candidates) would take into account that there are larger issues, larger dimensions at work in a democracy than their own single election,” Adler said. “If everybody ceases to participate in these debates, then how will the public have the opportunity to compare and contrast?”
This story was originally published April 29, 2022 at 4:00 AM.
