David Curtis vs CPD
1
29 February 2012 IRS EO Classification Mail Code 4910DAL 1100 Commerce St. Dallas, TX 75242-1198 I wish to file a complaint against the Commission on Presidential Debates, I believe them to be in violation of their nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) corporation status. Text samples from CPD website*: “3. INDICATORS OF ELECTORAL SUPPORT The CPD's third criterion requires that the candidate have a level of support of at least 15% (fifteen percent) of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.” CPD claims to provide “the best possible information to viewers and listeners” and yet they exclude the majority of candidates from presenting the information within the sole debate context. CPD claims “the organization is nonpartisan” and yet includes criteria which excludes candidates of all parties but two. The candidates who participate in the debates are always the candidates of the republican and democratic parties, all other party candidates are excluded. The organization is literally partisan and in violation of its mission. CPD claims a “goal of educating voters” yet only allows voters to be shown via sponsored debate and therefore educated about the republican and democratic candidates. All other party candidates are excluded from participating in the CPD debates by criteria 3. CPD claims “to provide assistance to emerging democracies” while it does not successfully provide such assistance to democracy in the US. CPD perpetuates a two party monopoly. I maintain that the Indicators of Electoral Support requirement violates the non-profit status of the CPD. The only way for a candidate to achieve this criteria is through commercial advertising via for profit media. The polls are conducted by entities that pre-load the poll results so that only the names of the republicans and democrats are presented to poll subjects. This effectively prevents any other candidate from emerging to challenge the named democrat or republican, both of which accept donations from for profit businesses and recycle that money into advertisements in corporate for profit media. I ask the IRS to prohibit CPD from imposing the “indicators of electoral support” criteria. David Curtis PO Box 6624 San Rafael, California 94903 *http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=about-cpd
-
Upload
david-curtis -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
1
description
David Curtis issues formal complaint to the IRS against the Commission on Presidential Debates
Transcript of David Curtis vs CPD
29 February 2012
IRS EO Classification
Mail Code 4910DAL
1100 Commerce St.
Dallas, TX 75242-1198
I wish to file a complaint against the Commission on Presidential Debates, I believe them to be in
violation of their nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501(c)(3) corporation status.
Text samples from CPD website*:
“3. INDICATORS OF ELECTORAL SUPPORT
The CPD's third criterion requires that the candidate have a level of support of at least 15%
(fifteen percent) of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion
polling organizations, using the average of those organizations' most recent publicly-reported
results at the time of the determination.”
CPD claims to provide “the best possible information to viewers and listeners” and yet they
exclude the majority of candidates from presenting the information within the sole debate
context.
CPD claims “the organization is nonpartisan” and yet includes criteria which excludes
candidates of all parties but two. The candidates who participate in the debates are always
the candidates of the republican and democratic parties, all other party candidates are excluded.
The organization is literally partisan and in violation of its mission.
CPD claims a “goal of educating voters” yet only allows voters to be shown via sponsored
debate and therefore educated about the republican and democratic candidates. All other party
candidates are excluded from participating in the CPD debates by criteria 3.
CPD claims “to provide assistance to emerging democracies” while it does not successfully
provide such assistance to democracy in the US. CPD perpetuates a two party monopoly.
I maintain that the Indicators of Electoral Support requirement violates the non-profit status of
the CPD. The only way for a candidate to achieve this criteria is through commercial advertising
via for profit media. The polls are conducted by entities that pre-load the poll results so that only
the names of the republicans and democrats are presented to poll subjects. This effectively
prevents any other candidate from emerging to challenge the named democrat or republican, both
of which accept donations from for profit businesses and recycle that money into advertisements
in corporate for profit media.
I ask the IRS to prohibit CPD from imposing the “indicators of electoral support” criteria.
David Curtis
PO Box 6624
San Rafael, California 94903
*http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=about-cpd
