University pulls event hours before scheduled start following criticism that format excluded candidates of color from California’s diverse field
The University of Southern California abruptly canceled a California gubernatorial debate scheduled for Thursday evening, less than 24 hours before it was set to begin, after widespread criticism that the event would feature only white candidates despite the state’s diverse electorate and field of contenders.
USC’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism announced the cancellation in a statement released at 2:47 p.m. Pacific time, citing concerns about the debate format and “the need to ensure all Californians see themselves reflected in this critical democratic process.” The debate had been scheduled to air at 7 p.m. on multiple television and radio stations across the state.
The event was to include Lieutenant Governor Eleni Kounalakis, former Controller Betty Yee, and State Senator Toni Atkins—all Democrats and all white women—in what organizers had billed as a discussion of issues facing California’s next governor. The format excluded several prominent candidates of color, including State Senator Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and Assemblymember Evan Low, who are all running in the crowded Democratic primary.
“We made a determination that our threshold criteria, while well-intentioned, did not adequately reflect the diversity of the field or the state,” said Willow Bay, dean of USC Annenberg. “Upon reflection and after hearing from our community, we concluded that moving forward with this format would not serve the public interest.”
The controversy began Tuesday when news outlets reported the debate lineup. By Wednesday afternoon, more than 15,000 people had signed an online petition demanding USC either expand the participant list or cancel the event. Several faculty members at USC publicly criticized the university, and the Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council, which represents more than 40 community organizations, sent a formal letter of complaint.
USC had used polling and fundraising thresholds to determine debate participation, requiring candidates to register at least 8% support in recent statewide polls and to have raised at least $4 million. The three invited candidates met those criteria based on surveys conducted in February and March. But critics argued the thresholds were arbitrary and excluded viable candidates who have significant support in California’s communities of color.
“California is the most diverse state in the nation, and we’re about to have a debate where everyone on stage looks the same,” said Kim Yamasaki, executive director of the Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council. “That’s not representative democracy. That’s selective democracy.”
California’s population is 39% Latino, 15% Asian American, 6% Black, and 35% white, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The state has not had a white governor since Arnold Schwarzenegger left office in 2011. Current Governor Gavin Newsom, who is not seeking reelection after announcing plans to run for president in 2028, is white but has prioritized diversity in state appointments.
Villaraigosa, who served as Los Angeles mayor from 2005 to 2013 and finished second in the 2018 gubernatorial primary, called the original debate lineup “a step backward for inclusion in California politics.” His campaign had registered 6.4% support in the most recent Public Policy Institute of California poll, just below USC’s threshold.
Low, an openly gay Asian American assemblymember from Silicon Valley, said the criteria reflected “a bias toward candidates with access to wealthy donor networks rather than deep community support.” His campaign pointed to strong fundraising numbers in small-dollar donations and endorsements from labor unions representing workers of color.
The cancellation came just hours before Kounalakis, Yee, and Atkins were scheduled to arrive at USC’s campus for final preparations. None of the three candidates immediately commented on the decision, though Kounalakis’s campaign released a statement saying she “respects USC’s decision and remains committed to participating in forums that include all serious candidates.”
This is not the first time debate criteria have sparked controversy in California politics. During the 2003 recall election that brought Schwarzenegger to power, organizers faced similar criticism for formats that excluded some of the 135 candidates on the ballot. More recently, the 2021 recall debate involving Newsom drew complaints about which replacement candidates were invited.
Political analysts noted that California’s top-two primary system, which advances the two highest vote-getters regardless of party, makes early debates particularly important for voter recognition. With 11 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 3 independent candidates currently in the race, exposure in televised debates can significantly affect a candidate’s trajectory.
“Debates shape the race, especially this early when most voters are still forming opinions,” said Mindy Romero, director of the Center for Inclusive Democracy at USC. “When you exclude candidates from communities that make up two-thirds of California’s population, you’re fundamentally shaping who gets heard and who doesn’t.”
The controversy also raised questions about whether traditional debate criteria—polling and fundraising—adequately measure viability in diverse states where some communities are underrepresented in likely voter samples and have less access to wealthy donor networks.
A February analysis by the Public Policy Institute of California found that likely voters in state polls skew whiter, older, and more affluent than the general population. Asian American and Latino voters are consistently underrepresented in likely voter models, even though they comprise growing shares of the actual electorate.
USC said it would work with news partners and community organizations to develop new criteria for future forums “that better reflect California’s diversity while maintaining meaningful standards for participation.” The university did not announce a timeline for rescheduling the debate or specify what new criteria might look like.
Other organizations that had planned to host or broadcast the debate, including KQED public radio, the Los Angeles Times, and Univision, issued statements supporting USC’s decision. Several said they would independently convene gubernatorial forums with more inclusive participation standards.
The California primary is scheduled for June 3, giving candidates just over two months to reach voters before ballots are cast. With no clear frontrunner and a wide-open field, the canceled debate represents a lost opportunity for the invited candidates but potentially a gain for those who were excluded.
“Democracy works best when all voices are heard,” said Yamasaki. “Today’s decision, while last-minute and imperfect, gets us closer to that ideal than what we were about to see on stage.”