There is an old saying that America doesn't need a third party, America needs a second party.

Granted, the Democrats and Republicans differ on gay rights and abortion. However, on issues like campaign finance reform, renewable energy, college tuition, the war in Iraq, health care, crime, drugs, economic development, corporate taxation, government outsourcing, ethics reform, and more, the positions of Jim Doyle and Mark Green are closer to each other than either is to Nelson Eisman of the Green Party.

Is that because Eisman's ideas are outlandish? Ed Thompson doesn't think so. Handing him a campaign contribution, Thompson told Eisman, "You're the only one in this race talking common sense."

Here's some common sense: honest government. Doyle and Green bicker about which is more ethically challenged, but only Eisman wants to end the legal corruption of corporate campaign contributions through publicly-financed elections. He would also eliminate government waste and fraud by rewarding whistleblowers, not punishing them.

Eisman calls for universal health care. Nearly every other
industrialized nation has it, making their health statistics much better than ours. There are advantages for Wisconsin besides the obvious. For example, the biggest obstacle to job creation is expensive health premiums, which universal health eliminates. This expands the tax base and makes Wisconsin better for business.

Doyle and Green worked renewable energy into the last "debate," after polls showed Eisman's numbers climbing. Their vision, however, is underwhelming. Eisman, in contrast, calls for conservation, expanded mass transit, and development and manufacturing of solar and other renewables here in Wisconsin.

Eisman proposes to eliminate the sales tax completely, as well as the property tax on primary residences. That revenue would be made up in the income tax, but not by the poor. In fact, people making under $25,000 would pay no income tax at all. Up to $250,000, the tax rate would be around 5-6%, and above that, whatever it takes to balance the budget. That would probably be about 10%, a rate the rich already pay in some states.

There are other issues on which Eisman is conspicuously different from the corporate parties. One is his strong opposition to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Another is calling for an immediate tuition freeze for in-state UW students, and tuition reduction in coming years. Still another is his support for instant-runoff voting.

Eisman wants to expand the discourse in this campaign. He accepted five debate invitations from civic-minded organizations, such as the League of Women Voters. Doyle and Green, in contrast, only appeared in the "We the People" and Wisconsin Broadcasters Association "debates," which allowed them to avoid facing Eisman.

As they learn of Eisman's exclusion, Wisconsinites tell our campaign they are outraged -- regardless of who they plan to vote for -- because debates are for the benefit of the voters, not the candidates. Until the voters see all the candidates and hear all their ideas, the democratic process in Wisconsin remains fundamentally flawed.