Third-Party Candidates

Re “Third-Party Candidates Dealt Court Blow,” May 19:

Justice Anthony Kennedy of the Supreme Court has written in the Forbes decision that requiring taxpayer-funded radio and television stations to include third-party candidates in debates will “result in less speech, not more.” In fact, his ruling will result in boring speech, not more speech.

In 1974, then-Chief Justice Warren Burger held in Lubin vs. Panish that there should never be less than three candidates in any election. What’s the point of having more than Democrats and Republicans in an election if the third-party candidates can be excluded on the simple basis that they aren’t going to win?

Over the years, I have run for Assembly once, Congress twice, state Senate twice, lieutenant governor, governor, president and now, for the second time, state treasurer. In all those years, on only two occasions have I ever been included in an invitation to debate on an equal basis with all other candidates.

The Supreme Court has now created a situation where you have to have support to get into a debate, but you can’t win that support without either being in the debate or else spending a lot of money. The de facto effect is to discriminate against working-class and indigent candidates.

JAN B. TUCKER

Peace and Freedom Party

Candidate for State Treasurer

Toluca Lake