There is one US presidential candidate that few people have heard of. Yet he wants to overturn the dreadful Citizens United case that allowed unlimited corporate spending in US elections. He wants to roll back political interference with Congressional boundaries so that districts can't be gerrymandered. He wants to ensure that all Americans are not restricted in their ability to cast a vote. He could have as much appeal to progressive Democrats as Bernie Sanders, the openly socialist Senator from Vermont.
However, thus far, Democrats have refused Larry Lessig, a Harvard law professor, attorney and political activist, entry to the forthcoming debate on November 6th. The decision smacks of a set up even if it is not, of a party establishment closing ranks around Hillary Clinton, fearful that choosing another would lead to electoral Armageddon. They have let Bernie Sanders in as a bone to the left, and this risk could well backfire, so why chance another radical voice?
Such thinking, if it does exist, is folly, since Sanders has made Clinton a better candidate by forcing her to demonstrate greater clarity, and to espouse her progressive credentials. Moderates such a Clinton could benefit if there is a late surge for another progressive as it could split the vote amongst the left. Furthermore, the Republicans are doing a fine job of ensuring their own electoral meltdown, thus now is a good time for Democrats to champion a bold agenda and to consider "mavericks" of their own.
More importantly, everything Lessig is suggesting will benefit progressive causes in all US elections, and will vitalise US democracy. For example, no gerrymandering means no built in Republican hegemony in the House of Representatives. Ending this anomaly will mean things can get done again in America.
The Democrats need to think again and give Lessig some time at the podium.