When Larry Krasner announced his campaign for his third term as Philadelphia District Attorney in February, he made a punny proclamation about how he plans to approach the job: “D.A.” he said, stands not just for “District Attorney.” It stands for “Democracy Advocate.”

Which is why it’s a head-scratcher that Krasner has spent the last several weeks stalling, and ultimately refusing, the opportunity to practice democracy by debating his opponent, former Municipal Court President Judge Pat Dugan, on live TV.

Most recently, Krasner last week declined to participate in a debate hosted on CBS3 and organized by the Philadelphia Association of Black Journalists (PABJ), with WURD radio planning to air it. His campaign told a reporter he did so because of scheduling conflicts — even though they sent the invitations many weeks ago — and noted that the two candidates have appeared together and separately at community events and town halls around the city. That includes a fiery West Philadelphia forum that featured Krasner erroneously accusing Dugan of being a closet conservative (and, perhaps, Trumper), and Dugan lobbing threats at the incumbent: “Don’t put my wife’s name in your mouth, young man.”

“Krasner’s campaign was categorically difficult to work with — misleading, condescending, and misinforming various partners we collaborated with.” — PABJ President Ernest Owens

That is not the same as a formal televised debate, easily watchable by thousands of Philadelphians. And neither Dugan, nor PABJ President Ernest Owens, are buying it.

“During this primary election cycle, there was a stark contrast between candidates District Attorney Larry Krasner and Judge Pat Dugan when it came to their willingness to participate in our long-standing televised debate,” Owens says. “Krasner’s campaign was categorically difficult to work with — misleading, condescending, and misinforming various partners we collaborated with. They cowardly moved the goalpost of debate inquiries / requests several times for over a month, wasting precious resources and time in preparing for a televised debate that they clearly never wanted to participate in.”

Dugan’s campaign, Owens went on to say, was immediately cooperative without any “special requests, demands, or complaints. Let me make this crystal clear: Krasner is the sole reason why there is no televised debate this election cycle hosted by PABJ and our media partners.” (Krasner did the same thing — stalling and then declining — when invited by The Citizen, WURD and 6abc to participate in an Ultimate Job Interview this month. Only Dugan participated.)

Dugan said in a statement this week that, out of “solidarity” with WURD and PABJ, and to force Krasner into a televised debate, he planned to skip the only formal debate scheduled so far — this past Wednesday night at WHYY. That event, co-hosted by Committee of Seventy, the Philadelphia Bar Association and League of Women Voters, still went on before a live audience — with just Krasner answering questions from ’HYY’s Cherri Gregg and Carmen Russell-Sluchansky.

WURD General Manager Ashanti Martin, meanwhile, bristled at Dugan’s statement. “I’m not okay with him assuming, particularly without consultation, that he’s standing in ‘solidarity’ with WURD,” Martin says. “WURD radio does not stand in solidarity with any candidate for office. He overstepped a boundary that we care about very much and we ferociously protect.”

“We very much believe that both of these candidates should be speaking directly to Black Philadelphians.” — WURD General Manager Ashanti Martin

Why does any of this matter? So-called “off-year” elections get little attention from citizens; voter turnout is expected to hover below 20 percent for the May 20 primary, despite the fact that the city’s highest law enforcement officer and most of our judges are on the ballot. A televised debate is the best way to reach thousands of potential voters to make a case about the candidates’ records, their plans for keeping Philadelphians safe, how they will navigate our new Trumpian reality — and how they respond to critics and opponents.

If democracy is on the ballot — as Krasner has stated — then shouldn’t as much democracy as possible be the theme of his campaign? What is he afraid of?

Dugan needs this more than Krasner

Krasner has made clear that he doesn’t think he needs to debate Dugan on TV. A couple weeks ago, his team released an internal poll showing he leads his opponent by 37 points — a sign, to them, that he is headed for another landslide in this year’s primary. Put aside for a minute that “internal polls” generally say whatever the pollster wants them to, Krasner held a similar lead over Vega in 2021 when he participated in a debate on NBC10.

But it is true that Krasner no longer needs to introduce himself to Philadelphians. He’s been in office for seven years; good, bad or indifferent, he has a record that anyone interested can follow. And it may be politically smart of him to let people forget the years of his term when gun violence was at a generational high, shoplifting was (even more) rampant, and lawlessness felt pervasive. Avoiding a debate lets him tell the story he wants to tell, one that focuses on the drop in violence and other crimes over the last couple years.

Dugan, though, is not well-known. He has no public prosecutorial record; as a judge, most of his work was hidden from all but those before him in court. Even if Krasner’s internal poll numbers are inaccurate, it seems like Dugan should grab every opportunity to introduce himself to voters. So it’s also a head-scratcher that he would decline to show up at WHYY, which had about 100 people in attendance and 2,300 streaming the event live on Facebook and YouTube. He may see his refusal to participate as a moral stance, but it doesn’t particularly help voters know how he would do the job.

An Army veteran who served as president of Municipal Court before stepping down and throwing his hat in the ring, Dugan has said he plans to revive diversion programs that offer defendants a chance at social services rather than jail time; defend the city’s status as a sanctuary city (ditto Krasner); strike a balance between public safety and criminal justice reform; and be a leader who both gathers a well-trained staff around him and works well with others (things that have often eluded Krasner in his tenure). “Larry,” Dugan said at The Citizen’s Ultimate Job Interview, “doesn’t play well in the sandbox.”

Is there a debate on the horizon?

Krasner’s team says 6abc has not yet invited him to participate in a debate. If the station does, it would be the best opportunity for a moderated debate, as it still has the largest viewership in the region. But his spokesperson has also indicated that they are not particularly bothered about it: “We’ve appeared at events across Philadelphia, from community meetings to ward gatherings. We decide on events based on logistics and the event format. It’s not possible to reach everyone,” Krasner campaign spokesperson Anthony Campisi told Delaware Valley Journal.

Martin says WURD’s role in the scuttled CBS3 debate would have been to air it live, the way it did for the debate between now-Mayor Cherelle Parker and her opponents in 2023. (The groups were collaborating as part of Lenfest’s Every Voice Every Vote program, of which The Citizen is a member.) She says the station has a standing invitation to both candidates to appear live on the radio for a joint forum or debate — and that it feels especially important for her audience of Black Philadelphians.

“We very much believe that both of these candidates should be speaking directly to Black Philadelphians,” she says. “We believe that Black media organizations should be asking questions, especially because Philadelphia is a 40 percent Black city and especially because Black Philadelphians are disproportionately justice-impacted, from community policing to arrest and sentencing. We hope that both accept our invitation.”

Krasner is a frequent guest on WURD, which has also had Dugan on to talk with some hosts. The DA, though, appears to want to control how TV stations and other media outlets organize the debates — something that is both antithetical to the history of debates in America and to journalistic precepts of free press, a fundamental aspect of our democracy. How can Krasner do that and still claim to be a defender of democracy?

But also: What is the point of refusing a televised debate? If Krasner is so sure he’s ahead in the polls and will win this thing, then why not take the opportunity to make his case to as many Philadelphia voters as he can, if for no other reason than maybe it would get more people to the polls to practice their electoral democracy? He was ahead in 2021 when he debated Vega; he is not shy about cameras, as evidenced by his participation in a documentary about his first term; he is seemingly not worried about mixing it up with Dugan, as was clear in some of the forums they have already done.

Could it be, as Owens claims, that he is too “condescending” to bother explaining his record to voters? Could he be too scared to face an opponent who will call out that record and pose hard questions?

I’m sure Krasner would bristle at both questions. Here’s a way to prove it: Agree to a debate. We’ll even, happily, host it, if 6abc or another station will air it. (Also still on the table: An invitation to participate in an Ultimate Job Interview event.)

How about it?

Correction: An earlier version of this story: misstated when WURD aired a televised debate involving Mayor Cherelle Parker: It was the 2023 primary; mis-attributed the photo of Judge Pat Dugan: Albert Yee is the photographer.

MORE BACKGROUND ON LARRY KRASNER AND PAT DUGAN