On Media Blog Archives Select Date… December, 2015 November, 2015 October, 2015 September, 2015 August, 2015 July, 2015 June, 2015 May, 2015 April, 2015 March, 2015 February, 2015 January, 2015

Philips pulls presidential debate sponsorship

Philips Electronics has dropped its sponsorship of the 2012 presidential debates, citing a desire not to associate itself with "partisan politics," POLITICO has learned.

Philips is the third and by far the largest of the original ten sponsors to pull its support, following similar decisions by British advertising firm BBH New York and the YWCA over the last week. Their decision to do so is seen as the result of intense lobbying efforts by advocacy organizations -- primarily Libertarian supporters of former Gov. Gary Johnson -- who oppose the exclusion of third-party candidates and who therefore believe the Commission on Presidential Debates is an anti-Democratic institution.

Mark A. Stephenson, the head of corporate communications at Philips North America, told POLITICO that the company doesn't want to provide "even the slightest appearance of supporting partisan politics."

Philips "has a long and proud heritage of being non-partisan in the many countries it serves around the world. While the Commission on Presidential Debates is a non-partisan organization, their work may appear to support bi-partisan politics," Stephenson said in a written statement. "We respect all points of view and, as a result, want to ensure that Philips doesn’t provide even the slightest appearance of supporting partisan politics. As such, no company funds have been or will be used to support the Commission on Presidential Debates."

George Farah, the executive director of Open Debates, one of the groups leading the charge for debate reform, celebrated the news.

"This is a triumph for the debate reform movement," Farah told POLITICO. "These former sponsors no longer want to be affiliated with an anti-democratic commission that defies the wishes of the American people."

The Philips decision will be seen as a victory for those organizations -- including Open Debates, Help The Commission, and various Libertarian groups -- that want to end the hold the Commission on Presidential Debates has over the debate process.

Last week, Open Debates and seventeen other organizations called on the Commission to release the contract negotiated between the Barack Obama and Mitt Romney campaigns for the debates, citing the possible existence of "anti-democratic provisions that sanitize debate formats, exclude viable third-party candidates and prohibit additional debates from being held." (Though, as my colleague Maggie Haberman reported today, this "memorandum of understanding" is still being negotiated just three days out from the first debate.)

But the Philips decision, like that of BBH New York and YWCA, also comes at great cost to the Commission, which is a 501(c) (3) and relies on corporate funding. (Debate sponsors get tickets to the debates but do not have any input on the questions, format, venue, etc., nor do they receive face-time with the candidates.)

"The work we've done for 25 years is in very large part due to our extremely generous sponsors, who believe the debates are an invaluable, civic education forum," Janet Brown, the executive director of the Commission told POLITICO. "The sponsors get virtually nothing in return, and we are deeply sorry to see them attacked by people who have issues with the CPD."

The seven sponsors still supporting this year's presidential debates are Anheuser-Busch Companies; The Howard G. Buffet Foundation; Sheldon S. Cohen, Esq.; Crowell & Moring LLP; International Bottled Water Association (IBWA); The Kovler Fund; and Southwest Airlines.

This post has been updated.