Editorial
Hillary Clinton's apparent determination to duck a debate with the Democratic challenger to her re-election, Jonathan Tasini, is so unbecoming of a woman who would be President that it has prompted both the New York Post and New York Times - which rarely agree editorially - to demand that one be held. Add us to that list.
Ms. Clinton is in absolutely no danger of losing the primary. Her aversion to debating Mr. Tasini has to do with the prime focus of his campaign: her vote four years ago to authorize President Bush to go to war with Iraq.
Our junior Senator would just as soon not remind voters, in a state where diverting our focus from smashing Al Qaeda and hunting down Osama bin Laden to invade another nation was questioned long before the national mood shifted against the war, that she was one of the President's enablers. For much of the primary campaign she has succeeded in dodging the issue, in no small measure due to Mr. Tasini's campaign being so woefully underfunded that he hasn't run TV commercials.
His lack of fund-raising prowess, in fact, is what has prevented him from getting the opportunity to debate her. New York 1, which has sponsored televised debates for several other contests this summer, has set a $500,000 fund-raising minimum for candidates to qualify, and Mr. Tasini is well short of the mark.
The station may feel that in today's political world, that threshold is just high enough to weed out those who don't have enough public support to be considered serious candidates.
There are two obvious rebuttals on that point. One is that Mr. Tasini has polled in double-digits in recent voter surveys, despite being largely unknown among the public. The other is that money should not be the basis for determining who is a serious candidate. The two Republicans vying to oppose Senator Clinton in November, John Spencer and Kathleen McFarland, squandered their own chances to make a favorable impression by turning their debate into a mosh pit of backbiting.
Even if New York 1 holds to its standard, that should be no barrier to Ms. Clinton debating her opponent and defending the positions she has taken. She recently told an interviewer that she was enough of a "grown-up" to take responsibility for those positions. Let her prove it by sparring with someone who would challenge her about them.
From the time when she launched her campaign for Senator six years ago and prevailed on Democratic leaders to elbow U.S. Rep. Nita Lowey out of the race and give her a clear field, Ms. Clinton has been a kind of 800-pound gorilla in the state party. Getting a second free ride this time is no way to get ready for the run for higher office everyone expects her to make, and it's disrespectful to voters in this contest.
Mr. Tasini has been described as a "protest" candidate. But if Ms. Clinton uses her clout to continuing ducking him, voters would be well-advised to cast a protest vote against her Sept. 12.