USC cancels gubernatorial debate after backlash from dems

USC canceled a gubernatorial debate it was scheduled to host Tuesday after facing heavy criticism from state Democrats who fumed that no candidates of color qualified for the event.

The last-minute decision was a remarkable development in a saga that exploded last week when Xavier Becerra, a gubernatorial candidate and former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, claimed without evidence that USC “rigged the formula” to exclude candidates of color.

Becerra and a chorus of prominent California Democrats took particular issue with the inclusion of San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, who entered the race relatively late and has loose ties to USC.

“When a methodology produces this outcome — one that elevates a candidate with notable ties to USC’s donor community and the co-director of the Dornsife Center for the Political Future — the burden falls on USC to explain itself, not on everyone else to accept it,” a group of state legislators wrote in a letter to USC President Beong-Soo Kim Monday.

A co-director of Dornsife’s political center is advising an independent expenditure committee backing Mahan, and USC trustee Rick Caruso has supported his campaign. Both told the LA Times that they had nothing to do with the debate.

USC previously emphatically defended its selection criteria for the event, hosted by the school’s Center for the Political Future and KABC-TV, writing that “we would be doing the very thing these candidates are accusing us of doing by unfairly influencing the criteria to reach a pre-determined outcome.”

But it appears that by late Monday night, USC and KABC had reached irreconcilable differences.

“Concerns about the selection criteria for tomorrow’s gubernatorial debate have created a significant distraction from the issues that matter to voters,” the university wrote in a statement. “Unfortunately, USC and KABC have not been able to reach an agreement on expanding the number of candidates at tomorrow’s debate.”

A USC spokesperson did not immediately respond when asked if one party had advocated for an expanded candidate pool.

Earlier Monday, several dozen political scholars at USC and other leading U.S. universities penned an open letter to the school, defending Christian Grose, the professor who developed the debate’s selection criteria.

“The controversy does not arise from a flawed method,” the scholars wrote. “It arises because a defensible, objective method produced results that certain candidates and campaigns do not prefer.”

Tomo Chien can be reached at [email protected].