Wally Herger, the Republican 24 year incumbent in CA-02, is not doing himself any favors by repeatedly refusing debates with his Democratic opponent Jim Reed, and may only be encouraging the idea that Herger has something to hide.
According to the Reed campaign’s internal polling released by email, the race has tightened from a 14 point lead by Herger to just under a 2 point lead.
In the past month the race has revolved around Herger’s uncharacteristic refusal to debate his opponent and Reed’s open speculation over rumors that Herger is suffering from the early onset of Alzheimer’s disease.
While it has become common in the current election cycle for a Republican to avoid risk, refuse debates and only speak to supporters, this race has taken an unusual turn, as the challenger has refused to acquiesce in frustrated silence.
Herger, who has willingly debated opponents in past elections, initially refused to debate his primary Tea Party challenger, Col. Pete Stiglich. Though he did promise future debates against his Democratic opponent, he then refused Reed’s offer of a series of 3 contests during the Congressional recess in August and September.
The Shasta County Tea Party, after meeting with Reed, also offered to sponsor their own debate to draw Herger out, but Herger again refused.
Pete Stiglich even offered his own editorial chiding Herger for not debating the Democrat.
During a September 28th Progressive News Radio interview, candidate Jim Reed was asked about a recent C-Span video of a Ways and Means Committee discussion of the Chinese Yuan where Herger went off topic for six minutes to read an unrelated diatribe about taxes. Citing other odd behaviors as well as rumors brought up to him by two Republicans early in the campaign that Herger was in the early stage of Alzheimer’s, Reed expressed sympathy for anyone so afflicted and suggested the only way to dispel such rumors was to agree to a debate. The interview was posted on Reed’s website.
When Herger canceled two days before an October 6th debate scheduled two months prior by the League of Women Voters and the Chico Enterprise Record, the Chico ER decried Herger’s tactic of “Campaigning From the Couch,” saying:
Our view: When politicians don’t have to debate before an election, it’s not good for democracy. Jim Reed will drive three hours from his home in Fall River Mills to speak at a candidates forum tonight in Chico. Wally Herger, the other candidate, won’t drive across town to do so.
And, with that public pressure, Herger relented and scheduled a debate for October 25th.
After a representative from Herger’s office read a brief statement at the candidate’s forum, Jim Reed expressed skepticism that the October 25th debate would actually occur, saying:
Wally Herger and I have a debate scheduled for October 25th, to be televised on KIXE. I am absolutely convinced that wouldn’t have happened but for a newspaper article that came out from a Chico paper last week that identified some unusual behavior and suggested that maybe he’s not willing to debate Reed because he has an illness, perhaps Alzheimer’s. The next day, we had a debate [scheduled]. Now that was the right thing for Wally to do because the easiest way to just get rid of a rumor like that, a terrible rumor, and that’s a terrible disease, is to debate. But the problem with choosing October 25th for that debate is, it should have been today. If on October 25th he finds an excuse why he can’t be there, he gets called back to Washington, there’s just not enough time to reschedule it. So, and it even suggests that maybe this is a ploy that he never intended to debate at all if he doesn’t show up on October 25th. So anyway, let’s stay tuned, I truly hope he will.
Without commenting on Herger’s mental state, Herger’s campaign manager, Dave Gilliard, demanded an apology, calling Reed’s statements “the lowest, most vile attack I’ve ever seen.” He threatened to cancel the debate unless Reed removed the links from his website.
Reed said he had nothing to apologize for, again suggesting that Herger was using any excuse to duck a debate and concluding,
I wasn’t the one that brought it up. The rumors are out there and everyone is hearing about it. We were discussing it.
And so yet another debate was canceled until an apology was forthcoming, provoking a follow-up editorial in the Redding Searchlight Record, decrying both Reed’s tactics and Herger’s umbrage, saying the voters deserved both an end to cheap shots and a debate.
Reed, who still refuses to remove the radio interview from his website and apparently prizes a shot at a public debate above all else, apologized to Herger on October 13th at a joint appearance in Red Bluff.
Herger refused the apology, saying:
I’ve always been taught that you don’t reward outlandish behavior and I don’t think it would be proper to reward him.
Reed, unsurprised, said that despite the apology he had no expectation that Herger would back down, concluding that Herger would come up with “any little excuse” not to debate.
In the light of his falling poll numbers Herger might want to reconsider his recalcitrance. He may be coming off as more petulant than principled, and a debate is hardly a reward for good behavior, but rather a forum to freely air differences and directly confront allegations on both sides.
After all, politics is rough and occasionally nasty business. Did Meg Whitman refuse to debate over a sexist slur?
