was assembled for them, and conducted independent telephonic inquiries oftheir own political scientists and political journalists across the country (Neustadt,_). Based on this informationthey concluded that Perot , at this point of the campaign has no realistic chance of being elected (Neustadt,_). Theywent on to say that they took into consideration his previous run for the presidency but that his chance in the Houseof Representatives was incalculable (Neustadt,_). This letter was dated September 17, 1996. Perot took his exclusion to court to demand he be included in the debates. His lawyers contend that if he cannot participate in the debates and get exposure that he can not be competitive and therefor would not have arealistic chance to win a majority of votes (Stall,13A). The results of his hearing were to uphold the Commissionsdecision. U.S. District Judge Thomas F. Hogan heard two hours of legal argument after which he said that helacked legal authority to tell the Federal Election Committee and the Presidential Debate Commission to includePerot or any other third party candidate. (Jackson,16A) Judge Thomas also went on to say that the candidates could pursue their complaints with the Federal ElectionCommittee but the commission is not required to resolve the complaint before the election (Jackson,16A). Hoganalso endorsed the committee’s point that it is not a constitutional right for anyone to be included in the debates,that Congress established the rules governing presidential elections and that is something the courts do notinterfere with (Jackson,16A). On October 4,1996 a federal appeals court rejected Perot’s attempt to sue his way into the debates upholdingthe district court's decision thus dismissing the lawsuit and ending Perot’s attempt to participate in the debates(Xinhua,_). Perot’s campaign coordinator Russ Verney said, “We will take this to the American people and ...
