Senior aides to the Gore and Bush campaigns will sit down with the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates tomorrow to finalize the schedule and formats for a series of televised forums likely to be held early next month. It is clear, however, that the only party interested in haggling is that of the Texas governor. Vice President Al Gore '69 has rightly embraced the Commission's original proposal, which called for three debates at college campuses in Boston, North Carolina and St. Louis in early October. These debates, independently sponsored by the Commission, would be broadcast by all three major television networks and would maximize prime-time exposure.

This recommendation differs sharply from the Bush campaign's counter-proposal, which would have included at least two network-sponsored debates, one on NBC and the other on CNN. As a political calculation, such a proposal is understandable: It could be politically disadvantageous for an inexperienced debater to meet a four-campaign veteran head-on, and Bush may prefer to first meet Gore in front of a smaller audience.

But Bush's ill-fated attempts last week to twist the words of his rival are inexcusable. Gore might have been willing to debate "anytime, anyplace, anywhere," but such debates only have meaning if they are seen by a large segment of the American populace (not possible through the cable-only CNN) and if they are initially broadcast live and unedited (not possible under the format of NBC's "Meet the Press").

The Bush campaign has now shown welcome signs of compromising with the Commission. Nevertheless, a few hurdles still remain. Most notably, the Texas governor has expressed unwillingness to debate on the UMass-Boston campus. That location, Bush's aides have commented, is too close to the John F. Kennedy Memorial Library, hostile territory because it honors a Democratic president. We are puzzled why such an association would necessarily hurt Bush's debating performance any more than a debate in front of the Lincoln Memorial would hurt that of Gore.

It is our hope that both sides reach an agreement in tomorrow's meeting that incorporates, at the least, three debates that are sponsored by an independent organization and broadcast to the widest possible national audience. At least one vice-presidential debate should be similarly structured.

After these televised forums, both candidates should make every effort to appear jointly on national television. Conversations with Tim Russert and Larry King--along with appearances on late-night talk shows, Oprah and MTV--certainly have their place in presidential politics, but only if they are offered as additions to, rather than as substitutes for, fair and legitimate debates.