California leaders want to boycott the debate if other candidates are not included

Democratic legislative leaders on Monday urged voters to boycott USC’s upcoming debate if the university invites disqualified candidates to participate.

The unreserved letter adds another complication to Tuesday’s forum, which due to the university’s selection process will not include any color leaders.

“We are writing to demand that you open the March 24 gubernatorial debate to all candidates,” said a letter sent Monday evening to USC President Beong-Soo Kim by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister), Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón (D-Goleta) and Latino, Black, Asian and Pacific Islander, Native American and Pacific Islander, Native American and Pacific legislative leaders. “The outcry over this debate is deafening and includes legislative demands from elected representatives, public calls from elected leaders across the country, concerns from registered voter campaigns, and growing concerns from California voters.

USC officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday. Tuesday’s debate is scheduled less than two months before voters’ mailboxes begin.

The university has faced controversy over the process it used to select candidates for Tuesday’s election, sponsored by KABC-TV Los Angeles and Univision.

In particular, critics pointed out that the process allowed San José Mayor Matt Mahan – a white newcomer to the race and a poor pollster – to rise above former US Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former state Superintendent Betty Yee.

“The university’s selection process – built on a formula that has never been used in a debate of this scale, brought a biased result,” the letter said. “When a process produces this result — one that nominates a candidate with significant ties to the USC donor community and the director of the Dornsife Center for the Political Future — the burden falls on USC to explain itself, not on everyone else to accept it. If USC doesn’t do the right thing, we’re asking California voters to boycott this debate.”

Mike Murphy, director of USC’s debate center, has been volunteering to advise an independent spending committee that supports Mahan. The veteran GOP strategist previously said he had nothing to do with organizing the debate and said he has requested an unpaid leave of absence from the university until the end of June 2 if he takes a paid part in the campaign.

USC also received tens of millions of dollars in donations from billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso and his wife. Caruso, a USC alumnus who has served as a trustee for years, is also a supporter of Mahan.

“I have had no discussions with the debate organizers or the editors,” Caruso said in a statement sent to The Times on Monday. “This is the most important election for California in a generation, and I encourage everyone to get involved, learn as much as possible about each candidate, and then form an opinion that can move California forward in the best ways. Watching the debates is part of that process. That’s why I believe the debates should include all honest people.”

Sponsors of the debate issued a joint statement on Friday defending their decision.

“We want to be clear that we absolutely, unequivocally deny any allegations that the terms of the debate were biased by either candidate and we want to get the facts straight,” said a statement from the USC Dornsife Center for the Political Future and its broadcast partners. “This methodology was based on well-founded metrics that corresponded to formulas widely used to determine national debate participation – a combination of polling and fundraising – and were developed without regard to any particular candidate.”

Hours later, four prominent Democrats who were not included in the debate called on their opponents to boycott the event, reiterating their concern that the method used to decide who is invited to participate has resulted in everyone of color being excluded from the forum.

Four Democrats participated in the discussion – Rep. Eric Swalwell of Dublin, former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter, billionaire climate activist Tom Steyer and Mahan – all issued statements criticizing USC’s selection process, but did not opt ​​out of the debate.

“It’s a shame that USC decided to promote one person over others,” Swalwell wrote in X on Sunday. “USC, and every gubernatorial debate host, must use a fair, objective, and honest approach to all candidates. I hope they do that Tuesday night.”

Porter expressed similar thoughts.

“The criteria used to determine which candidates are eligible to participate in the debate must be transparent, fair, and objective,” he wrote in X. “I am disappointed in the way USC handled Tuesday’s debate process. The candidates and the people of California deserve answers.”