Bring on the debates.

Byline: The Register-Guard

Anyone doubting that the current presidential campaign has gone seriously adrift should consider that the nearly exclusive focus in recent weeks has been over a war that ended three decades ago. Meanwhile, no one seems to be talking about a current war that has claimed the lives of nearly a thousand U.S. soldiers and that has no end in sight.

The election is now less than 10 weeks away, and the voters have yet to hear a comprehensive, meaningful discussion of critical issues ranging from the war in Iraq to the economy to national security to health care to education.

On Thursday, Sen. John Kerry offered a proposal that could go a long way toward getting the campaign back on track and the candidates focused on the issues that really matter. Speaking at a town hall meeting in Anoka, Minn., the Democratic candidate proposed a series of weekly debates, each focusing on a single theme or issue.

"America deserves a serious discussion about its future. It does not deserve a campaign of smear and fear," Kerry said.

Well, to be fair, Democrats have been known to engage in a bit of "fear and smear" themselves. But Kerry is on target about the need for serious discussion of the candidates' positions and priorities. A series of weekly presidential debates between the two major candidates would provide just that.

The Bush campaign's response to Kerry's proposal was predictably dismissive, with a GOP spokesman suggesting snidely that Kerry take the next few weeks to "debate himself" to figure out where he stands on the issues.

An earlier Kerry proposal for monthly debates also failed to produce anything resembling a positive response from Bush. The Commission on Presidential Debates has proposed three Bush-Kerry debates beginning with a late September face-off in Miami and ending with a mid-October encounter in Tempe, Ariz. Kerry has said yes, but so far there's no word from Bush.

Incumbent presidents, particularly those who enjoy substantial leads in the polls, are traditionally reluctant to debate their adversaries. Often, they perceive that there is little to gain politically - and much to lose. But Bush is no traditional incumbent, and he should rethink his position on debating Kerry. The latest polls show that the election is basically a dead heat, with neither candidate enjoying leads that exceed the margin of error.

Bush has no lead to protect. A series of weekly debates beginning after the convention and ending in late October would give Bush, who proved four years ago that he's a capable debater, an opportunity to defend his record and outline his agenda for the next four years. It would also allow him to disprove Kerry's claim that the GOP campaign is all about negative politics and that it is lacking in substance.

As for nailing down details on format and location, the Commission on Presidential Debates has proven itself more than capable of working out such matters in the past. The commission also should schedule at least two or three debates (they've currently proposed just one) between vice presidential candidates Dick Cheney and John Edwards.

Kerry's right - Americans do deserve a serious discussion between the candidates about this nation's future.

Bush should agree to the proposed debates and help lift the campaign out the muck where it has been mired for far too long.