A republic with democratic principles like the United States depends on public discussions — even if they grow heated — on consequential issues shaping our day and age.

What then to make of U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts' absence during what was supposed to be a comprehensive debate on WGAL last week?

Three of the four candidates arrived at the Gap Diner — Democrat Bruce Slater, independent John Murphy and Constitution nominee Dan Frank — but Joe was a no-show.

At the time of the debate, Pitts was in Washington, D.C., huddled with other members of Congress trying to deliver legislation that would turn around Wall Street's financial fiasco and boost the slumping economy.

Yet according to Slater, his campaign was told by WGAL that Pitts would agree only to a one-on-one interview without the other candidates present.

Gabe Neville, Pitts' chief of staff, said Thursday: "That's probably his preference."

And the Slater campaign has said organizations like the League of Women Voters have struggled to convince Pitts to debate.

An incumbent in Lancaster County refusing to debate a challenger is not unusual. Remember former state Rep. Gibson C. Armstrong and challenger Bryan Cutler in the 2006 spring primary?

It's a play-it-safe strategy that ends with hundreds of thousands of losers — the voters, who deserve to see candidates square off in person. Debates bring out the leadership qualities of each office seeker, how they handle pressure and the opportunity to hold each other accountable in a public arena. Debates allow clear contrasts to be drawn between the candidates.

Pitts has debated before. He faced off with Democrat Lois Herr and Murphy last time around.

Why is this year so different?

While the campaign has offered no definitive explanation for why avoiding debates is Pitts' "preference," voters can deduce a few insights by looking at the current political climate in Lancaster County.

Pitts' seat remains relatively safe due to a continued Republican dominance in the number of registered voters versus Democrats. But the advantage has shrunk by 6 percentage points since 2004. Republicans make up more than 50 percent of the electorate, but Democrats now have about 30 percent of voters in Lancaster County, the largest area covered by Pitts' district, which also includes parts of Chester and Berks counties.

Mix that fact with Pitts' support for most of President Bush's policies and enthusiasm locally for Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, who drew 15,000 to a rally in Lancaster city, and suddenly you have a dynamic Pitts may have never faced before 2007.

This concoction of shrinking voter margins and presidential politics has put a crunch on Pitts' margin for error. Any error could potentially lead to an upset at the ballot box. Why then would he want to give his challengers an opening?

A little more than a month remains before the election, so here's hoping Pitts changes his mind and allows the voters to see firsthand the candidate who's represented this district for 14 years and is asking for two more.

Quotes of the Week
"I'll go on record to say that five years from now, and I don't know who, but we'll send three, maybe four members of the Lancaster delegation" (to the state Legislature).
— Bruce Beardsley, chairman of the Lancaster County Democratic Committee, after the party for the first time registered its 100,000th voter in the County

•••

"We shouldn't socialize or nationalize our economy. We have a free market. It's been capitalistic on the way up, and now it's going socialistic on the way down. I don't think that's the answer."
— U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts on saying tax cuts would be better than a proposed $700 billion bailout of Wall Street

•••

"Our opponent (Barack Obama), he likes to point the finger of blame, but tell me, has he ever lifted a finger to help?"
— GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin in Media. Local Democrats responded by pointing out Obama's work as a community organizer in Chicago prior to entering politics

E-mail: dpidgeon@lnpnews.com