Mayoral Campaign Debate

It’s been a long time since April, when Ward 4 Councilmember Muriel Bowser, with full momentum, brushed aside incumbent Mayor Vincent Gray, and three other council members to win the Democratic Party mayoral primary handily.

In the interim, Bowser traveled heavily throughout the city at town hall events, meet-and-greets and events from Fourth of July parades to gay pride events, as well as to business association meetings, here there and everywhere, to let folks get used to her citywide presence, if not her proposals.

The powerful at-large Councilmember David Catania had, as expected, jumped into the race as an Independent just before the primary. Later in the year, former Republican Councilmember Carol Schwartz, who has run for mayor several times in the past—with big numbers for a GOP candidate in a Democratic city—also joined in the fray, dropping the GOP for Independent status.

So, what happened? You’d think with three high-profile candidates, there’d be a buzz around town, a lot of talk and debate, especially now, after Labor Day, but also before. But nothing much actually happened. It is partly because there were no debates, no candidate forums, no face-to-face meetings among the three people vying to be the next Mayor of the District of Columbia.

Bowser continues to be the dead-on favorite, and as time went by she started taking on aspects of a presumptive mayor. When a debate finally materialized last week, it came with the proviso from Bowser that she would participate in only four debates before the November election. The first debate came in the immediate aftermath of a Washington Post-NBC 4-Marist poll, which showed Bowser with a 43-percent to 26-percent lead over Catania, with Schwartz at 16 percent.

The debates remaining are a WAMU 88.5 affair at NPR headquarters, Oct. 2, 7 to 9 p.m.; an NBC4-Washington Post debate, streamed online, Oct. 15, 12:30 to 1:30 p.m.; and a Ward 8 Collaborative Forum at Anacostia High School, Oct. 16, 7 to 9 p.m.

The Post—which endorsed Bowser in the primary and will likely endorse her in the general election—also applauded the four-debate scheme in an editorial, rationalizing that live streaming on the Internet and televisions would allow more people to see the debates and participate. In short, the city could dispense with all those repetitive forums in various wards—including one in Georgetown. Those forums—and there were a lot in the primary, and there should be more for the general election—while hectic, frequent and often focused on neighborhood issues, allowed the whole city to participate in the flesh, instead of being allowed to punch in an anonymous response on the Internet.

Given that every one agrees that many people just don’t know enough about Bowser—her personality, her accomplishments and record—why not let her loose on the general public where she can not only face her opponents but also the people who will decide whether to support her or oppose her? The last debate, while often contentious, was not particularly illuminating or revealing, with the Post offering up softball questions like one on the types of transportation each candidate prefers.

It seems to us the Post should be encouraging more, rather than fewer debates. But then we know the Post has already made up its mind. Some of the rest of us have not and would like to see more of the candidates—not less.