I'd like to jump in quickly and state that one thing Tim and I discussed that would be a first step with this position is reforming the above mentioned bill that sets requirements for this act as parts of it are impractical.
One aspect of that is it is nearly impossible to find a non-partisan person as I had initially sought out, I think a Deputy DM would be good for conflicts of interest. The bill also doesn't really outline what happens if candidates don't agree on a debate moderator - it states that there is only one DM, but then requires that all candidates agree on one. More changes would be likely, for example I don't think the DM should be "required" to host any debates except Presidential and probably Congressional, anything beyond that should be on a request basis. That includes Party Chairs.
Hopefully I'm not intruding here, but just a note - all of the debate types listed in the bill were suggestions, not requirements. The ones I included were put in there specifically as types of debates that were likely to be covered, but not required per se.
I had the same feeling, but considering Yankee's question I felt a clarification could be needed. Section 1 Clause 2 also gets in the weeds a bit too much, IMO.
