congress speech and debate example

Student Congress Debate/Speech Structure

• Attention Ladies and gentlemen, the motion that's for discussion today is '.......'
• Purpose ("I stand in affirmation/negation on the bill/resolution...")
• Preview ("for the following reasons")
• State issues on the floor
• State points in conflict
• Prove your point with evidence including the source and date of publication, add the credentials of the source
• Logic - explain why this evidence reinforces your point and your side
• Tell the assembly the impact of your point and how it should affect their vote
• Present a Challenge to the Opposition.
• Summarize key points of clash.
• Summarize key points.
• Come full circle.
• Open yourself to questions. ("I now yield my time to the chair.")

Sample Speech [ edit | edit source ]

[Attention grabber]

Fellow senators, I [rise to the affirmative/stand in negation] of this [bill/resolution] [because of/for] the following [two/three] contentions:

First shall be that, [contention #1]

Second shall be that, [contention #2]

[First, let me talk about/I will start off by saying that] [contention #1]. [reason, citations] Also, I [rise to the affirmative/stand in negation] of this legislature because [reason, citations]. Finally, this [can/cannot] work because [reason, citations].

[Second, let me talk about/I will continue by saying that] [contention #2]. [reason, citations] Also, I [rise to the affirmative/stand in negation] of this legislature because [reason, citations]. Finally, this [can/cannot] work because [reason, citations]

So, in conclusion I urge your [affirmation/negation] of this [bill/resolution] because [summarize contention #1], [summarize contention #2], and because [summarize contention #3] because, as stated, [restate contentions #1, #2, and #3].

I now yield my time to the chair.

• Book:Student Congress Debate

Navigation menu

• EXPLORE Random Article

How to Do Well in Congressional Debate (NSDA)

Last Updated: September 10, 2016

wikiHow is a “wiki,” similar to Wikipedia, which means that many of our articles are co-written by multiple authors. To create this article, volunteer authors worked to edit and improve it over time. This article has been viewed 18,675 times.

Congressional Debate is one of the several events that make up the NSDA, or National Speech and Debate Association. Congressional Debate is a mock congress with legislation to be debated in a very professional and organized manner. It can be difficult to understand if you've never done the event before, but is easy to get the hang of and can be very enjoyable.

Understanding the Lingo

• P.O, or Presiding Officer , will be the student that runs the chamber. The P.O will be the student that recognizes others for speeches, questions, and motions.
• Representatives and Senators are the students in the chamber, or room, with you. If you are in a house or senate, you will compete with and against representatives or senators, respectively.
• Parliamentarians and Scorers will be the people judging the chamber. The Parliamentarian is in the chamber for the whole competition (typically 4 hours) and will rank, or score, all representatives and senators in the chamber. Scorers are typically in the chamber for one to two hours and typically rank the top eight competitors.

• Previous Question   - to bring the debate to an end, moves to vote on legislation.
• Recess - to take a brief break
• Point of Personal Privilege - to allow you to leave the room, move, etc.
• Suspend the Rules - to do anything not traditionally allowed
• Set an Agenda - this is what will be debated

• Docket and Legislation are the packet of topics you will debate. The packet is called a 'docket' and each individual topic is called 'legislation'.
• The Agenda is the order which you will debate legislation. You won't debate the legislation in the order it is in the docket; rather, you will set an agenda with other students to be debated in that order.
• An Amendment is any change to the agenda or legislation.
• Authorship or Sponsorship is the first speech on legislation. This speech opens debate and discusses the criteria, purpose, and importance of the legislation.
• Precedence and Recency determine who speaks next. Precedence is how many speeches a person has given, recency refers to simply how recent the speech was. This is kept by the P.O and is called speaker order. It is recommended that other members of the chamber keep track of this as well.
• Cross Examination is the short period after a speech during which the chamber, or floor, can question the speaker.

In the Chamber

Writing Speeches

Qualifying for Nationals

Community Q&A

• Don't be afraid to speak in front of the chamber. Everybody had to give their first speech and everybody can recall at least one speech that didn't go nearly as well as they expected. Thanks Helpful 2 Not Helpful 0
• Write speeches on all of the legislation. You might not get to speak over the legislation you actually want to speak over, but you should be prepared to speak over the next legislation so that you don't miss out speaking for a full hour. Thanks Helpful 2 Not Helpful 0
• Be friendly to everybody. If you're unfriendly, then others will remember this and be less likely to help you later. Thanks Helpful 3 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

About this article

Did this article help you.

• About wikiHow
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

University Interscholastic League

This is the main content.

Speech & Debate

• Extemporaneous Speaking
• Oral Interpretation
• Tournaments
• New Coach Information

Speech & Debate Contact Info

Speech & Debate Director: Jana Riggins

Department Phone: 512-471-5883

State Champions

View State Champions

UIL Congress Contest

Congress is an individual contest in a large group setting. It models the legislative process of democracy, specifically, the United States Congress. Within this mock legislative assembly competition, contestants draft legislation (proposed laws and position statements) submitted to the tournament, and they research the docket of bills and resolutions dealing with real-world  social and political policies prior to the contest to prepare their speeches. At the tournament, students caucus in committees, deliver formal discourse on the merits and disadvantages of each piece of legislation, and vote to pass or defeat the measures they have examined. Parliamentary procedure forms structure for the discourse, and students extemporaneously respond to others’ arguments over the course of a session.

Resources & Guidelines

• 2023-24 Congress Handbook
• Overview of the Congress Contest
• Synopsis & Time Structure of Congress
• Skills Gained from Participating in the Congress Contest
• The Case for UIL Congressional Debate
• Writing Effective Congress Legislation
• Showcase Video of Congress
• Request for Accommodation Process

Congress Competition

2024-25 important dates, 2024-25 region clerks, region legislation  , state competition.

2024 State Congress Program

2025 Tentative Program

2025 State Meet Procedures

2025 - State Tournament Information 

Champions History

Contest Rules

• Congress Contest Rules & Procedures

Congress Contests and Clinics

• PHOTO RELEASE - Certification (coach)
• PHOTO RELEASE - Student

Congress Contest Materials

• Legislation Template- Bill
• Legislation Template- Resolution
• Legislation Template- Resolution Amend Constitution
• Judging Instructions
• Oath of Office
• Debate Rubric: Speaking
• Presiding Officer Rubric
• Speech Evaluation
• Master Ballot
• Presiding Officer Evaluation
• Parliamentarian Ballot
• Amendment Form
• Table of Frequently Used Parliamentary Motions
• Chamber Voting/Election Record
• Precedence/Recency Table & Fractions of Parliamentary Voting
• Agenda Report
• Final Session Evaluation

Suggestions

• Send suggestions for Prose & Poetry Categories

Drafting Legislation

Following are some resources to consider when drafting legislation. Please also see the NSDA's Congressional Debate Guide (see Learning page on this site), as well as the Legislation Templates (also on this site). 

U.S. Congress Legislative Subject Areas :  Use this list to help brainstorm topic areas.

Writing Legislation Advice : an article from NSDA's Rostrum magazine (February 2011). 

Inclusive Language Guide : from the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies.

Searchable U.S. Code : helps students find reference to cite in bills, for when they're modifying existing laws.

Congress.gov : models of legislation before the actual U.S. Congress

Ballotpedia : analysis of current bills and resolutions, both nationally and at the state level

Standards for Effective Legislation

The standards below include considerations from the NSDA's Equity Topic Rubric .

Debatability

How two-sided it is; is there sufficient ground for debate on both sides of the issue but without requiring students to uphold a morally indefensible position inextricably tied to degrading peoples' identities, such as sexism/ sexist policies, ableism/ ableist policies, racism/ racist policies, etc. (adapted from California High School Speech Association materials) .

Equity questions : 

(Accessibility) In order to attract and sustain participation, does the topic facilitate an exploration of ideas related to established intellectual, social, or cultural interests? Considering the present moment, will theorizing and researching the topic encourage supportive social, emotional, and intellectual interactions amongst the intended participants?

Focus of debate : how will the debate focus on policies, values and/or facts?

Bill : specific details for realistic, timely, and feasible implementation and action; details who, what, when, where, and how a plan of policy would be implemented. 

Resolution : Whereas clauses (if used) effectively argue rationale of why a problem needs fixing. Resolved clause(s) state a compelling position; or if beyond the jurisdiction of Congress, further action needed; or if a Constitutional amendment, enumerates specific details.

(Literature base) In order to be competitive, does the topic compel students to research and present arguments that would stigmatize, discriminate against, or exclude a traditionally marginalized and disenfranchised community?

(Language) Does the wording of the topic discriminate or unequally value others? Is the topic clear, as well as free of any cultural idioms that may disadvantage some participants?

(Openness) Does the topic promote research and theorizing that challenges students to critically think about their world and consider different perspectives and experiences?

Specificity : consider such facets as who a policy impacts, and exactly how it impacts them.

Jurisdiction

Bill : national scope with domestic enforcement mechanisms (i.e., funding and/or oversight by specific agencies), and is Constitutional.

Resolution : Addresses issue outside of jurisdiction for further action, but indicating who has agency/jurisdiction and what general direction should be taken or a specific position to be taken.

Equity questions :

(Advocacy) Does the legislation enable students to actively theorize and address ethical, social, political, and economic barriers that perpetuate inequalities by advocating for changes to policies and practices?

(Intentional inclusion) The topic compels students to explore ethical, social, political, and economic issues in a way that features the experiences and perspectives of traditionally marginalized and disenfranchised communities.

(Power) The topic promotes a deeper understanding of power imbalances.

Significance

Exhibits seriousness of purpose , meets needs and desires of a significant population, and uses clear and specific language (adapted from Shannon LaBove of Rice University, Texas). 

Use person first language that centers on people

Avoid informal idioms, formal jargon (unless a legal term of art already define in U.S. Code), and acronyms not already defined.

Avoid language that suggests victimhood (e.g., "afflicted by," "victim of," "suffers from").

See Inclusive Language Guide link above.

(Awareness) Analyzing the topic from the perspective of many diverse student groups, does researching and theorizing about this topic promote awareness of specific experiences related to oppression and/or larger systemic issues?

(Justice) The topic provides opportunities to explore how we should define and live out social justice.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

TikTok challenges U.S. ban in court, calling it unconstitutional

Bobby Allyn

TikTok's suit is in response to a law passed by Congress giving ByteDance up to a year to divest from TikTok and find a new buyer, or face a nationwide ban. Kiichiro Sato/AP hide caption

TikTok's suit is in response to a law passed by Congress giving ByteDance up to a year to divest from TikTok and find a new buyer, or face a nationwide ban.

TikTok and its parent company on Tuesday filed a legal challenge against the United States over a law that President Biden signed last month outlawing the app nationwide unless it finds a buyer within a year.

In the petition filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the company said the legislation exceeds the bounds of the constitution and suppresses the speech of millions of Americans.

"Banning TikTok is so obviously unconstitutional, in fact, that even the Act's sponsors recognized that reality, and therefore have tried mightily to depict the law not as a ban at all, but merely a regulation of TikTok's ownership," according to the filing.

The law, passed through Congress at lightning speed, which caught many inside TikTok off guard, is intended to force TikTok to be sold to a non-Chinese company in nine months, with the possibility of a three month extension if a possible sale is in play.

Yet lawyers for TikTok say the law offers the company a false choice, since fully divesting from its parent company, ByteDance, is "simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally," the challenge states. "And certainly not on the 270-day timeline required by the Act."

Anupam Chander, a law professor at Georgetown University who specializes in technology regulations, said if TikTok loses this legal fight, it will likely shut down in the U.S.

"The problem for TikTok is that they have a parent company that has these obligation in China, but they're trying to live by free speech rules by the United States," Chander said in an interview. "The question is whether American courts will believe that that's even possible."

TikTok says law based on "speculative and analytically flawed concerns"

Lawmakers in Washington have long been suspicious of TikTok, fearing its Chinese owner could use the popular app to spy on Americans or spread dangerous disinformation.

But in the company's legal petition, lawyers for TikTok say invoking "national security" does not give the government a free pass to violate the First Amendment, especially, TikTok, argues, when no public evidence has been presented of the Chinese government using the app as a weapon against Americans.

Possible TikTok ban could be 'an extinction-level event' for the creator economy

According to the filing, the law is based on "speculative and analytically flawed concerns about data security and content manipulation — concerns that, even if grounded in fact, could be addressed through far less restrictive and more narrowly tailored means."

New DOJ Filing: TikTok's Owner Is 'A Mouthpiece' Of Chinese Communist Party

Constitutional scholars say there are few ways for the government to restrict speech in a way that would survive a legal challenge. One of those ways is if the government can demonstrate a national security risk. Also key, legal experts say, is the government showing the speech suppression was the least restrictive option on the table.

TikTok said Congress ignored less restrictive ways of addressing the government's national security concerns.

"If Congress can do this, it can circumvent the First Amendment by invoking national security and ordering the publisher of any individual newspaper or website to sell to avoid being shut down," the filing states. "And for TikTok, any such divestiture would disconnect Americans from the rest of the global community."

Since more than 90% of TikTok's users are outside of America, Georgetown's Chander said selling the U.S.-based app to a different owner would cannibalize its own business.

"You can't really create a TikTok U.S., while having a different company manage TikTok Canada," Chander said in an interview. "What you're doing essentially is creating a rival between two TikToks," he said. " It may be better to take your marbles out of the United States and hope to make money outside of the U.S., rather than sell it at a fire-sale price."

TikTok critics call app a 'spy balloon on your phone'

The filing sets off what could be the most important battle for TikTok. It has been fending off legal challenges to its existence since former President Trump first sought to ban the app through an executive order in the summer of 2020. That effort was blocked by federal courts.

Since then, Democrats and Republicans have shown a rare moment of unity around calls to pressure TikTok to sever its ties with ByteDance, the Beijing-based tech giant that owns the video-streaming app.

Trump's Ban On TikTok Suffers Another Legal Setback

Congress has never before passed legislation that could outright ban a wildly popular social media app, a gesture the U.S. government has criticized authoritarian nations for doing.

In the case of TikTok, however, lawmakers have called the app a "spy balloon on your phone," emphasizing how the Chinese government could gain access to the personal data of U.S. citizens.

Worries also persist in Washington that Beijing could influence the views of Americans by dictating what videos are boosted on the platform. That concern has only become heightened seven months before a presidential election.

Yet the fears so far indeed remain hypothetical.

There is no publicly available example of the Chinese government attempting to use TikTok as an espionage or data collection tool. And no proof that the Chinese government has ever had a hand over what TikTok's 170 million American users see every day on the app.

TikTok says it offers U.S. a plan that would shut app down if it violated agreement

TikTok, for its part, says it has invested $2 billion on a plan, dubbed Project Texas, to separate its U.S. operation from its Chinese parent company. It deleted all of Americans' data from foreign servers and relocated all of the data to servers on U.S. soil overseen by the Austin-based tech company Oracle.

While the plan was intended to build trust with U.S. lawmakers and users, reports surfaced showing that data was still moving between staff in California and Beijing.

In the filing on Tuesday, TikTok said it submitted an agreement to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which has been probing the app for five years, that would allow the U.S. to suspend TikTok if it violated terms set forth in a national security plan.

But, lawyers for TikTok say, the deal was swept aside, "in favor of the politically expedient and punitive approach," the petition states.

Mnuchin claims he will place a bid to buy TikTok, even though app is not for sale

Despite the new law giving TikTok the ultimatum of selling or being shut down, there are many questions around how the app could even be bought by another company or group of investors.

Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told NPR on Monday, he is planning to assemble a group of investors to try to purchase TikTok without the app's algorithm.

Mnuchin, who declined to answer additional questions, said in between sessions at the Milken Institute Global Conference in Los Angeles that the proposal to buy the app is still in the works, but he would not say when it would be formally submitted.

One major obstacle in any possible sale of TikTok is a glaring problem: The app is not for sale.

TikTok Ban Averted: Trump Gives Oracle-Walmart Deal His 'Blessing'

Despite the new law in the U.S., ByteDance says it does not intend to let go of the service. Furthermore, winning the support of China would be necessary, and officials in Beijing are adamantly against any forced sale.

In 2020, amid the Trump administration's clamp down on the app, China added "content-recommendation algorithms" to its export-control list, effectively adding new regulations over how TikTok's all-powerful algorithm could ever be sold.

ByteDance, not TikTok, developed and controls the algorithm that determines what millions see on the app every day. The technology has become the envy of Silicon Valley, and no U.S. tech company has been able dislodge TikTok's firm hold on the short-form video market. Experts say key to its success is its highly engaging and hyper-personalized video-ranking algorithm.

The algorithm, which involves millions of lines of software code developed by thousands of engineers over many years, cannot be easily transferred to the U.S., even if China did allow it, TikTok's challenge states.

Lawyers for TikTok argue that "any severance [of the algorithm] would leave TikTok without access to the recommendation engine that has created a unique style and community that cannot be replicated on any other platform today."

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

What we know, and don’t know, about the presidential debates

In this combination photo, President Joe Biden speaks May 2, 2024, in Wilmington, N.C., left, and Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump speaks at a campaign rally, May 1, 2024, in Waukesha, Wis. (AP Photo)

• Copy Link copied

WASHINGTON (AP) — After months of questions about whether general election debates would happen, President Joe Biden and Republican nominee Donald Trump have agreed to participate in two of them: one in June and one in September.

But there are still some nitty-gritty details to be worked out, including the formats of the events and who will moderate. Here’s what we know so far:

THE DETAILS:

Trump and Biden have agreed to two debates. The first will held at 9 pm. Eastern time on June 27 at CNN’s studios in Atlanta, in a critical battleground state. “To ensure candidates may maximize the time allotted in the debate, no audience will be present,” CNN said in a statement. To qualify, candidates must receive at least 15% in four national polls of registered or likely voters that meet CNN’s standards.

Anchors Jake Tapper and Dana Bash would moderate the debate, CNN said.

The second debate will take place on Sept. 10 and will be hosted by ABC. While ABC has yet to detail where that debate will take place or the format, it set the same 15% polling threshold as CNN. Anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis will moderate that debate, the network said.

“It is my great honor to accept the CNN Debate against Crooked Joe Biden,” Trump posted on his Truth Social site. “Likewise, I accept the ABC News Debate against Crooked Joe on September 10th.”

What to know about the 2024 Election

• Democracy: American democracy has overcome big stress tests since 2020. More challenges lie ahead in 2024.
• AP’s Role: The Associated Press is the most trusted source of information on election night, with a history of accuracy dating to 1848. Learn more.
• Read the latest: Follow AP’s complete coverage of this year’s election.

Biden said he’d done the same.

“Trump says he’ll arrange his own transportation,” Biden wrote on X. “I’ll bring my plane, too. I plan on keeping it for another four years.”

The first debate will play out in a jam-packed and unsettled political calendar, before either candidate becomes his party’s official nominee at the summer conventions — scheduled to begin July 15 for Republicans and Aug. 19 for Democrats.

The June 27 match-up will come after the expected conclusion of Trump’s criminal hush money trial in New York, foreign trips by Biden in mid-June to France and Italy, and the end of the Supreme Court’s term. That term will include a ruling on whether Trump is immune from federal prosecution for his role in the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection. The debate will also come before the expected start of two criminal trials on opposite coasts for the president’s son, Hunter.

The second debate would take place before most states begin early voting — though some overseas and military ballots may already be in the mail.

STICKING POINTS

Trump’s campaign is also pushing for more debates. In a memorandum Wednesday, senior campaign advisers Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles sent a memo to Biden campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon saying, “we believe there should be more than just two opportunities for the American people to hear more from the candidates themselves.” They proposed holding one debate per month, with events in June, July, August and September, in addition to a vice presidential debate.

“Additional dates will allow voters to have maximum exposure to the records and future visions of each candidate,” they wrote. Biden’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment on the Trump team’s push for additional match-ups.

Trump has also expressed other preferences. In an interview Wednesday morning with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, he agreed the debates “should go two hours” and also said he’d prefer if the men stand instead of sit.

“A stand-up podium is important,” he said, adding he thinks Biden wants to sit. He also said he would prefer the events take place in larger venues, before a live audience.

“It’s just more exciting,” he said.

The Biden campaign outlined its own preferences in a letter Wednesday. It wants candidates’ microphones muted when they aren’t recognized to speak to promote “orderly proceeding,” and it is opposed to live studio audiences.

“The debates should be conducted for the benefit of the American voters, watching on television and at home — not as entertainment for an in-person audience with raucous or disruptive partisans and donors, who consume valuable debate time with noisy spectacles of approval or jeering,” O’Malley Dillon wrote.

Biden’s camp also argued third-party candidates should be excluded. “The debates should be one-on-one, allowing voters to compare the only two candidates with any statistical chance of prevailing in the Electoral College,” O’Malley Dillon wrote, “not squandering debate time on candidates with no prospect of becoming President.”

There should also, she wrote, “be firm time limits for answers, and alternate turns to speak — so that the time is evenly divided and we have an exchange of views, not a spectacle of mutual interruption.”

DEBATE COMMISSION

The deal between the campaigns now sidelines the Commission on Presidential Debates, the nonpartisan group that has organized them for more than three decades. Both campaigns had expressed longstanding concerns about the commission’s operations, with Trump blaming it for microphone issues during a debate in 2016 and Biden’s campaign calling its plans “out of step with changes in the structure of our elections and the interests of voters.”

Both sides had taken particular issue with the dates the commission had announced , arguing the debates should happen earlier, before voting begins.

In a statement, the debates commission noted it had been “established in 1987 specifically to ensure that such debates reliably take place and reach the widest television, radio and streaming audience. Our 2024 sites, all locations of higher learning, are prepared to host debates on dates chosen to accommodate early voters. We will continue to be ready to execute this plan.”

WHAT ABOUT OTHER NETWORKS?

The debates will be the first televised general election match-ups to be hosted by an individual news organization. The 1960 debates, which helped show the power of the medium to influence public opinion, were hosted jointly by the leading networks of the day, ABC, CBS and NBC. The presidential debates of 1976, 1980 and 1984 were organized by the League of Women Voters, and every debate since has been hosted by the Commission on Presidential Debates.

Traditionally the debates are simulcast across all networks and other streaming outlets to reach the widest possible viewing audience. It was not yet clear whether the 2024 matchups would be shared similarly.

The Biden and Trump teams accepted the invitations from ABC and CNN after the Biden campaign proposed that the debates this year be hosted by any broadcast organization that hosted a Republican primary debate in 2016 and a Democratic primary debate in 2020. In that event, “neither campaign can assert that the sponsoring organization is obviously unacceptable: if both candidates have previously debated on their airwaves, then neither could object to such venue.”

Those criteria would eliminate Fox News, which did not host a Democratic primary debate in 2020, and NBC News, which did not host a GOP one in 2016 — though its corporate affiliates CNBC and Telemundo were co-hosts of one debate each that year.

Trump has said he accepted a debate invitation in October from Fox News, though Biden’s team dismissed it as “playing games.”

HOW WILL THEY PREPARE

Both Biden and Trump are expected to engage in intensive preparation sessions before the debates. Former Biden chief of staff Ron Klain, who now works at Airbnb, told the AP he will use vacation time to help Biden get ready to face off with Trump. Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who helped Trump prepare for previous debates, seems unlikely to reprise the role, having suffered a falling out with the presumptive GOP nominee.

WHAT ABOUT THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES?

It is unclear whether any third party candidates will qualify for the debates, but both CNN and ABC’s criteria appear to pose an challenge for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He railed against the plan on X on Wednesday, accusing Trump and Biden of “colluding to lock America into a head-to-head match-up that 70% say they do not want.

“They are trying to exclude me from their debate because they are afraid I would win,” he wrote. “Keeping viable candidates off the debate stage undermines democracy.”

In addition to their polling requirements, both CNN and ABC said that in order to qualify, a candidate’s name must appear on a sufficient number of state ballots to qualify that person to reach 270 electoral college votes.

So far, Kennedy has qualified for the general election ballot in three states -- California, Michigan and Utah, according to AP Elections Research. He is listed as an independent or minor party candidate in eight more states, but hasn’t yet qualified for the ballot in them. They are Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire and North Carolina. Those 11 states have a combined 123 electoral college votes, meaning he would need to get on the ballot in additional states in order to qualify.

___ Colvin reported from New York.

Congressional Debate – Legislation Templates

Templates for writing legislation.

• Bill Template ( Word | Google | Pages )
• Resolution Template ( Word | Google | Pages )
• Constitutional Amendment Template ( Word | Google | Pages )

Advertisement

With Debate Deal, Trump and Biden Sideline a Storied Campaign Institution

For nearly 40 years, the Commission on Presidential Debates has made the rules for the most-watched events in politics. This year, both campaigns said no thanks.

• Share full article

By Adam Nagourney

• May 16, 2024

The agreement by President Biden and Donald J. Trump to move ahead with two presidential debates — and sideline the Commission on Presidential Debates — is a debilitating and potentially fatal blow to an institution that had once been a major arbiter in presidential politics.

But the roots of the commission’s decline go back at least a decade and came to a head in 2020, when the commission struggled to stage a debate with Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden during the pandemic.

The candidates’ first encounter that year was caustic and raucous, as Mr. Trump shouted over Mr. Biden and the moderator. “I’m a pro: I’ve never been through anything like this,” the moderator, Chris Wallace , said.

As it later turned out, Mr. Trump had a Covid diagnosis days before the event, leading to strong objections from the Biden campaign to the commission. The second debate was canceled by Mr. Trump after the commission sought to make it virtual because Mr. Trump was recovering from the illness. By the third debate, the commission gave the moderator a mute button to cut off a candidate who broke the rules.

But even before then, the commission has been on political thin ice. Anita Dunn, a longtime senior adviser to Mr. Biden, helped write a 2015 report that called for the debates to be updated for a modern media environment. Mr. Trump accused the nonpartisan commission, created by the leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties in 1987, of bias toward the Democrats. The Republican National Committee announced in 2022 that it would not work with the commission.

“The campaigns have always wanted to take the debates back for themselves,” said Alan Schroeder, a professor emeritus at the Northeastern University School of Journalism in Boston, who has written several books about presidential debates. “They have been trying for years to get rid of the commission. So we are back to the future with this and back to a future that didn’t work that well.”

Frank Fahrenkopf Jr., who as Republican Party chairman helped create the commission and is now its co-chair, said in an interview that he was stunned by the campaigns’ decision to bypass the organization — and skeptical about how it might work.

“I would love to be a fly on the wall when the campaigns start to get together to go over the details of this,” he said. “Who sits where, who is the moderator, who is there, where these are. We were created to do all of this.”

Indeed, the commission was created to insert a bipartisan and empowered negotiator into the planning, covering matters such as moderator choices, how many guests each campaign could bring into the studio and the height of the lecterns the candidates stood behind.

It took over from the League of Women Voters, which had overseen the debates for a decade and was criticized for its lack of success in managing the demands of campaign operatives maneuvering for advantage. In 1984, the campaigns of Ronald Reagan, the Republican president, and Walter F. Mondale, his Democratic challenger, vetoed the names of 100 journalists suggested as panel questioners.

“The problem was that the league didn’t have a lot of clout against the campaign so the campaigns tended to run roughshod over them when it came to details of the format, the schedule, whether there would be a live audience,” Mr. Schroeder said.

The commission pushed aside practices that had evolved since the first televised presidential debates, in 1960, between Richard M. Nixon and John F. Kennedy. Panels of questioners, which made it more difficult to stay focused on a topic, or allow for follow-up, were replaced by a single moderator. The commission decided who could participate and where the debates would be held, and made sure that they would be televised on all the major networks.

Locations, dates and the focus of the debate — would they be about foreign policy or domestic issues — were announced well in advance, with the idea of making it harder for the campaign to try to influence the rules of the game.

“I am a fan of the commission,” said Gibbs Knotts, a professor of political science at the College of Charleston. “They have a consistent record of good work. It’s unfortunate if it’s going to be returned back to the campaigns; there will be more strategic calculations going on and less overall what’s in the best interest in the American public.”

Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden were quick to agree on the dates and networks sponsoring the debates, but tough negotiations lie ahead. Mr. Biden wants debates without an audience and with microphones that automatically cut off when a speaker exceeds his allotted time. It’s unclear whether Mr. Trump has agreed to those terms.

It is also unresolved whether the debate would be carried exclusively on the host network, or shared with other broadcasters and streamers. One of the sponsors, ABC, said it would allow other networks to show the debates as well; CNN, at least initially, said it would not.

For viewers, there might be no obvious difference between a commission-organized debate and one negotiated by the candidates and a network.

“A debate is a live program. It doesn’t have a script. Because as history has shown us over and over again, the debates have a mind of their own and take on a life of their own,” Mr. Schroeder said.

Despite the years of discontent, Mr. Fahrenkopf said the commission was caught off guard by Mr. Biden’s proposal on Wednesday. “We had no head’s up,” he said. But he said he was hopeful the campaigns, after taking into account how difficult these negotiations can be, will ultimately allow the commission to step in and run the show.

“We are set to go,” he said.

Michael M. Grynbaum contributed reporting.

Adam Nagourney is a national political reporter for The Times, covering the 2024 campaign. More about Adam Nagourney

Our Coverage of the 2024 Election

Presidential Race: News and Analysis

Donald Trump and the Republican Party out-raised President Biden and the Democrats in April  for the first time in this election cycle, according to campaign officials. But Biden still has far more cash on hand.

Trump posted a video online that features images of hypothetical newspaper articles celebrating a 2024 victory for him and referring to “the creation of a unified Reich”  under the headline “What’s next for America?”

Early in his term, Biden seemed to have struck an uneasy truce with the oil and gas industry. But the president’s decision to pause permits for gas export terminals has whipped up industry support for Trump .

Georgia’s Changed Landscape:  Biden’s narrow win in Georgia in 2020 was seen as a sign of the state’s emergence as a battleground. This year could be different .

A Candidate Like Few Others:  Maggie Tamposi Goodlander, the wife of the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, is navigating a personal landscape with little precedent  in her run for Congress in New Hampshire.

Political Violence:  Public officials from Congress to City Hall are now regularly subjected to threats of violence. It’s changing how they do their jobs .

Trump’s Running Mate:  Trump’s V.P. search is still in its early stages, but he is said to be leaning toward more experienced options  who can help the ticket without seizing his precious spotlight.