States rights against the 2 party monopoly?

[Michael Landon]

Here is what I'm thinking, let me know if you think it would work -

Let's use Minnesota as an example. If Minnesota's state reps where to pass a law that stated "For a Presidential debate to be aired in Minnesota, the top 4 candidates based on national polls must be included."

Could this work?

- ML

[nate895]

Here is what I'm thinking, let me know if you think it would work -

Let's use Minnesota as an example. If Minnesota's state reps where to pass a law that stated "For a Presidential debate to be aired in Minnesota, the top 4 candidates based on national polls must be included."

Could this work?

- ML

Debate not aired in Minnesota at all. Get a couple of huge swing states to sign on, and you have a chance.

[kirkblitz]

they just pick 1 person from each party from the primary season that didnt win probobaly.

[pebcak]

I could be off, but it seems like such a law would be a breach of the 1st Amendment. Who's the state of Minnesota to dictate what I can and cannot broadcast, outside the regular FCC regulations?

Edit:

I think a better course of action would be to have the states fix their electoral college system. Forty-eight out of fifty states are winner takes all. The exceptions are Maine and Nebraska, where the 2 Senator electors are winner takes all, but the congressional district electors each go to whomever won that district. This never comes up because Nebraska's 3 districts always vote the same way (R), but if other states did this too, it would begin to remove some of the logistical bias against 3rd parties. I would hope that any Ron Paul/C4L people who make it into their state legislatures would begin to push for these changes in their home state.