Yesterday, organizers of The People’s Debate – AARP Virginia and League of Women Voters of Virginia – announced the panelists for the October 12 event: CBS 6 anchor Stephanie Rochon, WCVE’s “Virginia Currents” host May-Lily Lee, AARP Virginia State President Warren Stewart, EdD, and League of Women Voters of Virginia President Olga Hernandez. As previously announced, the debate will be moderated by Judy Woodruff, senior correspondent for The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. The debate will be carried live across the state.
As noted in the press release (below the fold), both candidates have been formally invited. Their response is requested by this Friday, June 26.
AARP Virginia and League of Women Voters of Virginia
Announce Panelists for 2009 Race for Virginia’s GovernorThe People’s Debate
Richmond, June 23, 2009 – AARP Virginia and the League of Women Voters of Virginia announced today that CBS 6 anchor Stephanie Rochon, WCVE’s “Virginia Currents” host May-Lily Lee, AARP Virginia State President Warren Stewart, EdD, and League of Women Voters of Virginia President Olga Hernandez will serve as panelists for their statewide broadcast gubernatorial debate, slated for 8:00 p.m. October 12.
This unique debate, organized by the largest membership organization in the state, AARP Virginia with over 1 million members, and the League of Women Voters of Virginia whose primary purpose is to encourages the informed and active participation of citizens in government, will ask the candidates to go on record about issues important to the average Virginian. The debate will be moderated by Judy Woodruff, veteran political reporter and senior correspondent for The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and will be broadcast live across the state by all PBS television and radio stations and most commercial networks. Richmond television stations CBS 6 WTVR and WCVE are co-producing and distributing the debate to all Virginia broadcasters and a total of seven CBS and Public Television affiliates have agreed to broadcast the debate.
AARP Virginia State President Kallio said, “We believe it is time that Virginia tradition included a debate focused on the interests and concerns of voters and seen by more than a small select group of people. Often candidates drag their feet in accepting invitations for public debates, waiting to see what strategic advantage they can gain. We hope none of the candidates will do that this year and will accept the invitation to the people’s candidate forum as soon as their nomination is official.”
League of Women Voters of Virginia President Olga Hernandez said, “This debate will have an online component which will allow the people of Virginia to fully participate by submitting questions and blogging about issues online at the Battleground Virginia website which will launch later this summer. We will cover an array of subjects to inform the public on the candidates’ positions.
Letters of invitation for the debate were issued earlier this month to Democrat Creigh Deeds and Republican Bob McDonnell with a reply requested by Friday, June 26.
AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organization that helps people 50+ have independence, choice and control in ways that are beneficial and affordable to them and society as a whole. AARP does not endorse candidates for public office or make contributions to either political campaigns or candidates. We produce AARP The Magazine, the definitive voice for 50+ Americans and the world’s largest-circulation magazine with over 34.5 million readers; AARP Bulletin, the go-to news source for AARP’s 40 million members and Americans 50+; AARP Segunda Juventud, the only bilingual U.S. publication dedicated exclusively to the 50+ Hispanic community; and our website, AARP.org. AARP Foundation is an affiliated charity that provides security, protection, and empowerment to older persons in need with support from thousands of volunteers, donors, and sponsors. We have staffed offices in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
The League of Women Voters of Virginia, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and advocacy. We never endorse parties or candidates for office. Voter Service is one of the League’s most important functions. The LWV-VA has a strong history of hosting community public issue forums and candidate debates. The LWV-VA also publishes a non-partisan Voters Guide for statewide candidates and many of our local affiliates issue Guides for local elections. So that voters may compare the candidates’ views, our Voters Guides allow all certified candidates to answer the same questions, unedited. We publish a legislative directory, Your Virginia Government and various other educational materials for public use. Visit out website at www.LWV-VA.org.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Warren Stewart is a devoted Democrat who has given money to several Democratic candidates and run for office himself as a Democrat.
Shouldn’t the panelists be people who have at least a chance of appearing impartial?
http://www.vpap.org/donors/profile/index/37233?end_year=2003&filter_cmte=all&filter_cmte_radio=all&lookup_type=year&order=amount&page=1&start_year=2001
Additionally, Olga Hernandez’s only contribution on record is for Leslie Byrne– not one of Virginia’s more moderate candidates in years past.
http://www.vpap.org/donors/profile/index/84990
They really don’t care whether they look impartial or not.
Warren Stewart hasn’t donated any money since 2003 and his run for office was in 2001, eight years ago.
Olga Hernandez’s $100 in 2005 hardly warrants a mention, especially since Leslie isn’t on the ballot.
Besides, that’s only two of the 4 panel members. Don’t you think it is a stretch to call the panel “partisan”?
I just think it’s interesting that they make sure to include the label “nonpartisan” twice in their press release when referring to their organizations, yet the people they place on the panel are not nonpartisan.
And I do think that contributions in 2003 are relevant. I take note that Stewart had two in-kinds for “Fundraising Event Expenses,” indicating that he likely hosted a fundraiser for Kaine. This was more than an “Oh, I think I’ll send this guy a check.” He hosted an event for Kaine–a higher level of support for a candidate.
His involvement on the panel brings an air of skepticism to the debate and is harmful to the reputation of the AARP. He should be replaced on the panel.
NO ONE IS “NONPARTISAN” and if you believe such a thing exists, then you’re gullibility should prevent you from posting on political websites.
His involvement is only harmful to the AARP’s reputation, according to you! You have a right to your opinion, but its not fact.
Nathan, Nathan, Nathan. Let’s have a civil discussion and not resort to shouting or advocating for the censorship of people that believe that individuals can exist between of the world of committed Republicans and Democrats.
I do not agree with you that people are necessarily either a Republican or a Democrat. And hundreds of thousands of Virginians– those who vote for the candidate they like best, not based on party label, and determine the outcomes of our elections– would probably agree with me.
I believe that in debates like this, we should strive to find unbiased moderators and panelists rather than former political candidates and/or partisans to control the debate. I think that journalists, who may have a bias but have a professional duty to put their duty above their bias, do a pretty good job in debates.
Maybe AARP and LWV should host the debate but not let their egos get in the way by forcing themselves onto the panel.
Clearly you have a COMPREHENSION problem. I’m neither shouting nor advocating censorship, as anyone who has an IQ into double digits can attest, after reading my post.
Nor do I believe everyone is either Democrat or Republican. You seem myopic in your single minded opinion that there is bias, where there is none. Even the independents have a bias of some kind.
To further position that there is someone who is “unbiased” only beats an already dead horse. Maybe you should let the AARP and LWV do what they’ve been doing for years without controversy or problems and not let your ego keep butting in! But please enjoy your life in fantasy land and keep us informed as to when the trolls voices in your head, keep making you post this nonsense!
These disclosures should be made during the broadcast. If a questioner has run for office or given money or in-kind contributions to candidates, that should be announced up front.
Having experienced the media’s love for Democrat-stacked panels by sometimes being the lone Republican at a roundtable, I’m not surprised.
I am surprised when they take offense to their involvement being announced during the debate.
I don’t recall seeing you making “full disclosure” of your involvement in campaigns or financial interests in campaigns when you appear on WHRO. Possibly this is one of those times where you should lead by example and not dictate to others?
As an editorial panelist on WHRO, I’m not non-partisan asking questions of candidates.
In fact, my partisanship is exactly the reason WHRO invited me to their program, and Vivian too. I’m not supposed to be non-partisan on that show. I’m SUPPOSED to voice my opinions and balance Vivian’s as well. That’s the whole point of that show.
I happen to know both people in question. Further, I know how committed they are to the non-partisan missions of their organizations. That’s why you see no contributions since 2003 from Warren and only the small (non-reportable, I might add) contributions from Olga. (I say “non-reportable” because only contributions that exceed $100 are reportable.)
The LWV is serious about their nonpartisan status and any appearance of partisanship. So much so, in fact, that I was asked to step down from my position in the local chapter because of the partisan nature of this blog.
The idea that the media and/or journalists are non-partisan simply because they don’t contribute money to candidates is a mistaken one. Do we not all know where the reporters on Fox News or CNN stand?
What matters is the ability to set aside partisanship. And personal experience tells me that these two are capable of that.
Of course, if Bob McDonnell is looking for a reason not to participate, then calling the panel partisan is a way out. But the Bob McDonnell that I know wouldn’t do that. After all, he certainly didn’t shy away from participating in a live blog here on this site, despite my obvious leanings.
Why isn’t the panel a bunch of Republican donors and candidates who promise to “set aside partisanship”?
Do we know whether the other two panelists as well as the moderator are not Republicans?
We know they haven’t run for Delegate.
So what? Around here, people flip flop from one party to the other all the time.
So are you saying Warren Stewart is a likely Republican now?
No but are you saying that the only people who are fit for the panel are people who have NEVER indicated any kind of bias in favor of one party or the other? Doesn’t that eliminate, like, EVERYBODY?
I think running for office as a Democrat kind of ranks up a bit higher than “any kind of bias”
Thank God you republicans aren’t debating issues, and have, in fact, obssessed about minutia! I was starting to think that you girls would be on the blogs discussing why you’d been in favor of more and bigger government and higher taxes (HB3202) but thankfully, you have focused on and devoted all your time to this big, huge, all encompassing issue of “non-partisanship” on a panel, that fewer than 1/10th of 1% of the people care or know about.
If it weren’t for you people, we’d be lost in a debate over something important, that actually matters, wasting time and words over the issues that directly affect our lives.
Thank you for keeping us distracted with this, and only this!