Current analysis of the upcoming presidential election indicates that Reform Party nominee Ross Perot isn’t a serious contender for the White House.

Maybe that’s true. But shouldn’t that be a decision left up to American voters?

It was decided by the Commission of Presidential Debates to exclude Perot from participating in the upcoming presidential debates on Oct. 6 and Oct 16.

The Commission is composed of five members of the Republican party and five members of the Democratic party.

This is akin to the University of Nebraska and Penn State University getting together and deciding that they’re the only real contenders for the mythical NCAA football national title, so they’ve ensured the champion will be decided in a game between the Big Ten and Big Twelve champions. It doesn’t guarantee a victory by either team, but it certainly limits the field of contenders.

Realistically, Democratic incumbent Bill Clinton and GOP nominee Bob Dole are the only candidates with a reasonable chance of winning the election.

But why aren’t the voters allowed the opportunity to watch other third-party candidates such as Perot or consumer advocate Ralph Nader, or a number of other candidates, and then decide for themselves wether or not Clinton or Dole are indeed the only “real” choices for the White House.

Shouldn’t this Commission on Presidential Debates be a non-partisan organization, rather than bi-partisan?

As it is, this system only encourages the continued rigidness of the two-party system, which certainly gives an even larger advantage to Democrats and Republicans.

That doesn’t sound so democratic to us.