Democrats Shockingly Excluded from USC Governor Debate: Will Their Rivals Actually Boycott? Find Out Why!

As the race for governor heats up in California, four Democratic candidates are demanding their fellow contenders boycott an upcoming debate at the University of Southern California (USC). They argue that the criteria used to determine who was invited to participate unfairly excluded every prominent candidate of color from the forum.

During a Friday news conference, former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra stated, “We ask each and every candidate who is in this race to recognize that if we can’t have a fair process for a debate, then we should all not participate. We call on them to withdraw from this biased forum.” Becerra’s sentiments were echoed by former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, and former state Controller Betty Yee.

The call for a boycott follows concerns raised a week earlier about the debate's criteria. Some candidates believe it was designed to allow the inclusion of San José Mayor Matt Mahan, who entered the race in late January and quickly amassed significant funding from Silicon Valley executives. Villaraigosa noted, “The rules initially were polling and money. Matt Mahan is [polling] lower than some of us, period,” pointing out that additional criteria were later added to favor Mahan's participation.

Mahan’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment, but the mayor previously asserted that he should be included in the debate alongside Becerra. The controversy is further complicated by connections between Mahan’s supporters and the university. Mike Murphy, a co-director of the USC center hosting the debate, has been advising an independent expenditure committee supporting Mahan. Murphy claimed he had no involvement in organizing the debate, having requested unpaid leave if he takes on a paid role in the campaign.

The scrutiny of USC extends to its donors, including billionaire real estate developer Rick Caruso, a longtime supporter of Mahan. Caruso, who served as a trustee for years, has contributed tens of millions to USC. He stated, “This is the most important election for California in a generation. I encourage everyone to be engaged, learn as much as possible about each candidate, then form an opinion.” He believes all credible candidates should be included in debates.

The USC Dornsife Center for the Political Future, along with KABC-TV Los Angeles and Univision, is set to host the debate at 5 p.m. Tuesday, just under two months before California ballots are mailed. The forum will be streamed and broadcast across the state. In a joint statement released before the candidates’ news conference, the debate organizers defended their criteria as unbiased. They stated, “We categorically, unequivocally deny any allegations that the debate criteria was in any way biased in favor or against any candidate.”

According to Christian Grose, a USC political science professor responsible for developing the debate criteria, it was based on established metrics that combine polling and fundraising, designed without consideration for any specific candidate. Grose remarked, “The idea that it was biased or designed to create some sort of outcome to disfavor the candidates who spoke at the press conference is just not correct.”

However, the debate has prompted backlash from USC faculty, past and present. Concerns linger about the implications of excluding candidates, especially in a state where a majority of residents are people of color. Yee emphasized the importance of representation, stating, “We are a minority-majority state, and the idea that the four candidates of color are not going to be on the stage to bring those perspectives... is really not doing right by the voters.”

Becerra mentioned that discussions with university leadership about potentially expanding participation or even canceling the debate were rebuffed. He expressed disbelief at the criteria, suggesting it penalizes candidates who have been campaigning longer, arguing, “Your fundraising numbers are divided by the number of days you’ve been out there campaigning in front of voters.”

The invited candidates, including Democratic representatives Eric Swalwell and Katie Porter, climate activist Tom Steyer, and Mahan, did not respond to requests for comment regarding the boycott. Meanwhile, former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton criticized the excluded Democrats for complaining about the debate criteria, calling their concerns “completely ridiculous.”

As the political landscape shifts, the demand for a more equitable debate raises essential questions about representation and fairness in the electoral process. With mounting tensions and disagreements over how to engage voters, California's governor race is poised to reflect deeper social dynamics at play, making every candidate's voice crucial in shaping the future of the state.