Drama over debates in the 1st Congressional District race extends well beyond the confines of the stage.
Who gets invited – or snubbed – and who is a no-show in the eight-plus debates and forums has become a central point of contention among candidates and with event organizers. All the fuss over invites suggests a larger concern: With less than a month until the Sept. 5 primary, there is no clear front-runner, forcing candidates to jockey for as much air and screen time as possible.
Building a Stronger Heart: Inside South County Health’s Cardiopulmonary Rehab Program
A Heart-Healthy Start to the Year February is American Heart Month—a time to raise awareness…
Learn More
“If there was a runaway frontrunner, we probably wouldn’t have so many debates,” said John Marion, executive director for Common Cause Rhode Island.
Not that a slew of debates and forums is a bad thing, at least to Marion.
“Candidates like to control their message through commercials and press releases, but debates and even forums are a chance for voters and the press to see candidates in a less scripted way,” he said.
The events, including some hosted by interest and advocacy groups, also offer voters a chance to hear what candidates have to say about specific issues – race relations and police funding, foreign policy, business incentives – that might otherwise get glossed over in broader, media-organized debates.
That’s exactly why Lisa Peterson, president of the Rhode Island Association of Addiction Professionals and chief operating officer for the Providence outpatient treatment clinic VICTA, organized an addiction-focused forum earlier this month.
“People talk about health care in general, but we really wanted to make sure the candidates were clear to us about what they would or wouldn’t do to support our work,” Peterson said. “We wanted to send a message that this is important, it’s widespread. And we are a voting bloc that is watching you.”
The only problem: only six of the 14 candidates (Democrats and Republicans) came. A few never responded to the invite, while several others told Peterson in advance they couldn’t attend due to scheduling conflicts. Others canceled minutes before, or just didn’t show.
Providence City Councilman John Goncalves, one of six Democrats who attended the forum, blasted those no-shows during the forum.
“I think it’s unfortunate,” he said in a later interview. “It’s an important topic and some people decided to go to a fancy fundraiser instead of talking directly to voters.”
Goncalves could not name any fancy fundraisers allegedly attended by debate no-shows.
Peterson said she was disappointed, not only by the poor turnout among candidates, but the relatively few media outlets that covered the forum.
Ironically, Peterson’s forum was one of few in which all 14 candidates were invited. Many other forum organizers whittled the field using criteria including campaign finance activity and policy stances.
Which has upset some candidates, including Rep. Stephen Casey, a Woonsocket Democrat, who pushed back against the Rhode Island Association of Democratic City & Town Chairs for initially leaving him out of a debate at Roger Williams University on Aug. 17.
Tom Kane, president of the association, said Casey didn’t originally make the cut based on criteria including funds raised and “commitment to the Democratic Party platform.”
However, after Casey made his case to Kane, highlighting his grassroots fundraising approach and explaining his votes on prior State House bills, along with key endorsements from local town committees and the firefighters’ union, the association reconsidered, Kane said.
Yet when fellow Democrat Walter Berbrick appealed to the Black Lives Matter Rhode Island PAC for a seat on the stage for its Aug. 4 forum after initially being left out, the committee did not change its mind.
Harrison Tuttle, president of the PAC, chalked up the decision, in part, to time constraints.
“We knew it was going to be tricky to host what we thought would be an effective debate with all of the candidates given the time we have,” he said. “We really wanted the strongest candidates there.”
Tuttle offered Berbrick and the other 3 Democrats left out of the event the option to submit a video explaining their stances on the questions asked, which could be shared publicly. None have taken him on the offer, he said.
Kate Cantwell, Berbrick’s campaign manager, said in an emailed response that Berbrick was “saddened and disappointed” not to be invited to the BLM debate.
“We look forward to continuing to share his background and how he will fight for civil rights and equity in Congress with the voters of Rhode Island,” Cantwell said.
Like Peterson, Tuttle wanted issue-specific debate to force the conversation about racial identity and inequity, which he felt was left out of debates and forums during the 2022 election cycle.
“I really wanted to be able to separate the candidates on policies, but I felt like our debate really separated them personally,” he said. “I know based on the voters I have talked to that it has changed people’s votes. Which in my mind, makes it worth it.”
The downside to the dizzying schedule of debates and forums: scheduling conflicts.
A separate, Aug. 7 forum on military and foreign policy topics occurred the same night as the Woonsocket Democratic Town Committee meeting in which committee members made their endorsement in the race. That’s why Casey missed the forum hosted by East Bay Citizens for Peace, among other organizers. Rep. Sandra Cano of Pawtucket also missed it, according to Erich Haslehurst, her campaign manager.
“It’s hard because people are scheduling things and sending out invitations without actually working with the campaigns,” Haslehurst said. “The normal protocol is to try to make sure things work for the candidates first.”
Scheduling conflicts are not why Republican-turned-Democrat Allen Waters has yet to appear on any debate stage. While Waters was not invited to several of the forums and debates held thus far, he has also declined or simply not shown up to others – most notable, a July 24 forum organized by the Rhode Island Democratic Women’s Caucus, which he declined because the moderator is a trans woman.
Waters in an interview said his decision was not a personal affront to Rev. Donnie Anderson, who moderated the forum, but stemmed from his belief it was “not proper” for Anderson, the caucus chairwoman, to “lead a biological women’s organization.”
In other cases, Waters skipped out because he felt the events were “too small to be good for my campaign,” or “not a topic where my ideology would shine.”
One example: the peace forum at East Providence Weaver Library. Organizers asked all 14 candidates to come, but only six showed up, said Jonathan Daly-LaBelle, a community activist and founder of No Endless War or Excessive Militarism. He suspected the poor participation was, in part, because certain candidates didn’t feel well-versed enough in foreign policy to field the questions.
“They’re challenging issues, so I think that was part of the equation,” Daly-LaBelle said.
Which is all the more reason why issue-centric forums are important, especially in a congressional race where the winner will have to be up-to-speed on a range of topics including foreign policy, Marion said.
While Marion acknowledged that any debate or forum organizer could limit participation based on their agenda or other set criteria, it ultimately means less information for voters.
That’s why Casey was peeved about being left out of several debates and forums.
“I get a little offended personally, but I’m more disturbed by the process itself,” he said. “It’s limiting the voter because they don’t get to hear from each candidate.”
Spencer Dickinson, a former South Kingstown state representative, expressed similar concerns. He was particularly offended at being passed over for an Aug. 15 forum hosted by the Jewish Alliance of Rhode Island. The organization invited 11 of 14 candidates, based on criteria set by its board of directors including quarterly campaign finance reports, said Stephanie Hague, chief policy officer.
But Dickinson said his decision not to raise or spend more than $5,000, allowing him to bypass filing a quarterly financial statement with the Federal Election Commission, shouldn’t be a reason to exclude him.
At least FEC reports are concrete. Other forum and debate organizers have used more subjective measurements when deciding who gets a spot on the stage, or in podcaster Bill Bartholomew’s case, huddled around a makeshift table at his Providence artist’s loft.
Bartholomew acknowledged that who he invited to his Aug. 10 live-taped podcast debate was based, at least in part, off of “gut instinct” about who was a serious candidate.
“As much as I can’t stand gatekeeping, you have a unique situation when you have this many candidates,” he said. “You have to use common sense. Does the presence of [a candidate like] Spencer Dickinson in a 60-minute debate add value? Or does it subtract from the other candidates in the race?”
Bartholomew’s event was the only one available through audio-only. It was logistically more challenging to make sure the candidate speaking was properly identified each time, he said.
But the lack of video also made the event seem more equalizing.
“There’s a rawness of standing around a door that is made into a table in an artist’s loft, with no sponsors, no money, no ratings,” he said. “You can’t see who has a stylist, or who has been hitting the gym more than the campaign trail.”
Alternative formats like podcasts and live streams also let voters who can’t attend in-person still hear (and see) what happens. The BLM RI PAC is planning to release short clips from the video of its forum on Instagram and TikTok to help reach even more voters, Tuttle said.
“I would absolutely love for people to watch every single debate, but I think there is a lot of voter fatigue,” Tuttle said. “Being able to access a 30-second clip versus a full two-hour debate is still something.”
The primary is Sept. 5. The general election is Nov. 7.
Nancy Lavin is a staff writer for the Rhode Island Current.
