In a close general election by less than 1 of the popular vote. Good evening, i am bill of abc news. It is my privilege to provide this series of the two major president ial candidates. Like the last meeting, the subjects to be discussed worriedly suggested by questions from a panel correspondence. Programs, first two the two candidates will not be sharing the same platform. In new york the democratic president ial nominee, john f. Kennedy, separated by 3000 miles in a los angeles studio, and Vice President richard im now joined for tonights discussion by which permits each candidate to see and hear the other. Good evening. Good evening. Now meet the panel of correspondence. Correspondent frank mcgee n. B. C. News. Child. C. B. S. News. Douglas. Cater reporter baggage the rosco drama new york herald. As you probably noted before reporters include a newspaperman out a magazine report. These two selected by a lot by the press secretaries of the candidates from among the reporters problem with the candidates. Broadcasting representatives were chosen by their company. The rules for this evening ive been agreed upon by the representatives of both candidates in the radio and Television Networks and i should like to read. There will be no Opening Statements by the candidates nor any closing some the entire hour will be devoted to answering questions from the report. Each candidate to be show less text questioned in turn with opportunity for comment. By the other. Each answer will be limited to two and one after bennetts eight comment to one and a half months. Re starters are free to ask any question they choose. On any subject. Neither candidate knows what questions be will asked time alone will be determined who will be the final question. The first question is from mr mcguinty and as for senator kennedy senator kennedy. Yesterday. You used the words. Trigger happy. And referring to Vice President. Richard nixons stand on defending the islands of kimmel and motss. Last week on a program like this one. You said the next president would come face to face with a serious crisis in berlin. So the question is would you take military action to defend berlin. Isnt a game we have a contractual right to be and barely in coming out of the conversation to potsdam and World War Two that. Its been reinforced by a number of other nations under nato. I have stated on many occasions. The United States must meet its commitment on berlin. And it is a commitment that we have to meet. If were going to protect the security of western europe. And they have or on this question. I dont think that there is any doubt in the mind of any american. I hope there is not any doubt in the mind of any member of the community of west berlin. Im sure there isnt any doubt in the mind of the russians. We will meet meant much to maintain the freedom and independence of west berlin. Mr Vice President do you wish to comment. Yes. As a matter of fact the statement that senator kennedy made was that. To the effect that there were trigger happy republicans. My standard was an indication of trigger happy republicans. I resent that comment. I resent it. Because theres an implication that republicans have been trigger happy and therefore would lead this nation into war. I would remind senator kennedy of the past fifty years. I would ask him the name. One republican president who lead this nation into war. There were three democratic president s who led us into war. I do not mean by that that one part of the war party and the other party is the peace party. But i do say that any statement for the effect that the Republican Party is happy. Is belied by the record. We had a war when we came into power in one thousand nine hundred fifty three. We got rid of that weve kept out of other wars. And certainly that doesnt indicate that were trigger happy. Weve been strong. But we havent been trigger happy. As far as berlin is concerned. There isnt any question about the necessity. The funding. Berlin the rights of people there to be free. And there isnt any question about what the united American People republicans and democrats alike would do in the event. There were an attempt by the communist to take over in berlin. Next question is by mr bond for Vice President next. Mr Vice President a two part question concerning the offshore islands in the formalises straits. If you were president and the Chinese Communist tomorrow began an invasion of camorra and matt sue. Would you launch the United States into a war by sending the seventh fleet and other military forces to resist this aggression and secondly if the regular conventional forces failed to halt such such an invasion. Would you authorize the use of nuclear weapons. Mr brown brown it would be completely irresponsible for a candidate for the presidency or for a president himself to indicate the course of action and the weapons he would use in the event of such an attack. I will say that in the event that such an attack occurred. And in the event the attack was a prelude to an attack on pearl most of which would be the indication today. Because the Chinese Communists say over and over again that their objective is not the offshore islands that they consider them only stepping stones the taking formosa in the event that theyre attacked then. Were a prelude to an attack on for most of there isnt any question but that the United States would then again as in the case of berlin honor our treaty obligations and stand by our ally for most. But to indicate in advance how we would respond to indicate the nature of his response would be incorrect. It would certainly be an appropriate it would not be in the best interest of the United States. I would only say it is however in addition to doing what senator kennedy has to. To suggest that we will surrender these islands or force our Chinese Nationalist allies to surrender them in advance. Is not something that would lead to peace. It is something that would lead in my opinion. To a war. This is the history of dealing with dictators. This is something that senator kennedy and all americans must know. We tried this with hitler. It didnt work. He wanted burst. We know austria and then he went on to the sudeten land and then danzig. And each time it was thought this is all that he wanted and what the Chinese Communist want. They dont want just a few more and match who they dont want just from also they want the world. And the question is if you surrender or indicate in advance that youre not going to defend any part of the free world. And you think or thats going to satisfy them. It doesnt satisfy them. It only wants their appetite. And then the question comes when do you stop. I have often heard president eisenhower and discussing this question. Make the statement that. If we want to start the process of indicating that this point or that point is not the place to stop those who threaten peace the and freedom of the world. Where do we stop. And i say that those of us who stand against surrender of territory. This or any others in the face of blackmail in the face of force by the communists are standing for the course that will lead to peace. Senator kennedy do you wish to comment. Yes the whole United States now has a treaty which i voted for in the United States senate in one hundred fifty five. To defend for moshe. And the pesca doris the islands which mr next is discussing are five miles off the coast of china. Now one senator green the chairman of the Senate Foreign relations committee. Wrote to the president received back on the second of october nine hundred fifty eight neither you nor any other american. The u. S. Will be involved in military hostilities. Really in the defense of chemo in math. That is the issue. I believe we must meet our commitment to the most. I support it in the islands that is the present american position. The treaty does not include these two while mr nixon suggest the United States should go to war. If these two islands are attacked. I suggest that if a motion was attacked on the pesca doris or if theres any military action. In any area which indicates an attack on for most and the pesca doris. Then of course the United States. Is that want to defend its trees. I must say what mr nixon wants to do is committed as i understand him so that we can be clear that the disagreement. He wants us to be committed to the defense of these nearly as a defense of these islands as free territory. Not as part of the defense of promotion. Admiral yarnell the commander the leader said that these islands are not worth the bones of a single american president of the United States has indicated they are not within the treaty area. They were not within the treaty area. When the treaty was passed in fifty five. We have attempted to persuade shack as late as january of one nine hundred fifty nine to reduce the number of troops he has on. This is a serious issue and i think we ought to understand completely. If we disagree and if so where. Mr cater as the next question for senator kennedy senator kennedy last week you said that before we should hold another summit conference. But it was important that the United States build its modern weapons. Quite a long time to build. Sort of for a long period do you envisage before there can be a summit conference and do you think the can be any new an issues on the grounds of nuclear or weapons controlled. During this period. I think we should strengthen our conventional forces. And we should attempt in january february and march of next year to increase the airlift capacity about conventional forces. Then i believe that we should move full time on our missile production. Particularly on minuteman. And on palermo. It may be a long period but we must we must get started immediately. Along the question of disarmament particularly nuclear disarmament. I must say that i feel that another effort should be made by a new administration in january of 1961 to renew the goshi agents with the soviet union and see whether its possible to come to some conclusion which will lessen the chances of contamination of the atmosphere. And also lessen the chances that other powers will begin to possess a nuclear capacity. There are indications because of new inventions. Ten fifteen or twenty nations will have a nuclear capacity. Including red china. By the end of the president ial office in one nine hundred sixty four. This is extremely serious. They have been many wars in the history of mankind. And to take a chance now and not make every effort that we could make to provide for some control over these weapons i think would be a great mistake. One of my disagreements with the President Administration has been that i dont feel a real effort has been made on this very sensitive subject not only of nuclear control. But also of general disarmament less than a hundred people have been working throughout the entire federal government on this subject. And i believe its been reflected in our success and failures at geneva. That we may not succeed. Soviet union may not agree to an inspection system. We may not be a big get satisfactory assurance and it may be necessary for us to begin testing again. But i hope the next administration. And if i have anything to do with it. The next administration will make won last great effort to provide full control of nuclear testing. Control of nuclear weapons. If possible control of our space. Free from weapons. And also to begin again the subject of general level. These must be done. If we cannot succeed then we must strengthen ourselves. But i would make the effort. Because i think the only of our own civilization. But i think the fate of world. In the future of the human race is involved in preventing a nuclear war mr Vice President your comment. Yes. I am going to make a major speech on this whole subject next week before the next debate. And i will have an opportunity then to answer any other questions that may arise with regard to my position on it. There isnt any question but that we must move forward in every possible way to reduce the danger of war. To move toward control disarmament. To control tests but also lets have in mind this when senator kennedy suggests that we havent been making an effort. He simply doesnt know what hes talking about. It isnt a question of the number of people who are working in an administration. Its a question of who they are. This is ben one of the highest level operations in the whole state department. Right under the president himself. We have gone. Certainly the extra mile and then some and making offers to the soviet union on control of tests on disarmament. And in every other way. And i just want to make one thing very clear. Yes we should make a great effort. But under no circumstances must the United States. Ever make an agreement based on trust. There must be an absolute guarantee. Now just to comment on senator kennedys last answer. He forgets that in this same debate on the promote a resolution which he said he voted for which you did that he voted against an amendment or was regarded against an amendment. And on this particular or for the men but i should say. Which passed the Senate Overwhelmingly seventy the twelve. And that amendment. Put the senate of the United States. On record with a majority of the. Senators own party voting for it as well as a majority of republicans put them on record against the very prison that the senator takes now. Of surrendering of indicating in advance that the United States will not defend the offshore ive been expos tunas by mr drummond or vice pres that next to next and i would like to ash. One more aspect or raise another aspect of the same question. It is my understanding that president eisenhower. Never advocated more and matthew should be defended under all circumstances. As a matter of principle. I heard secretary dollars at a press conference in fifty eight. Say that he thought that it was a mistake for Chiang Kaishek to deploy troops to these islands. I would like to ask what has led you to take what appears to be a different position on this subject was the german first of all. Referring to secretary dollars this press conference i think if you read it all. And i know that you have. You will find that secretary bellows. Also indicated in that press conference that. When the troops were withdrawn from few more that the implication was certainly of everything that he said that came or it could better be depending. There were too many and countrymen there not enough for your tory. And certainly i dont think there was any implication in secretary dollars the statement that came or and maps who should not be defended. In the bent that they were attacked in that attack was a preliminary to an attack on for most. Now as far as president eisenhower is concerned. I have often heard him discuss this question. As i related a moment ago. The president has always been to kate id that. We must not make the mistake in dealing with the dictators. Indicating that we are going to make a concession. At the point of a gun. Whenever you do that. Inevitably the dictator is then courage to try it again. So first it will be chemo and mad so next it may be promoted what do we do then. My point is that that once you do is follow this course of action. Of indicating that you are not going to defend a particular area. The inevitable result is that it encourages a man who is determined to conquer the world. To pressure you to the point of no return. And that means war. We went through this tragic experience leading to World War Two we learned our lesson again in korea. We must not learn it again. That is why i think the senate was right including the majority of the democrats a majority of the republicans. When they rejected senator kennedys position. In 1955 and is that anneli senator johnson was among those who rejected that position. Voted with the seventy. Against the trial. The senate was right. Because they knew the lesson of history. And may i say to that i would trust that senator kennedy would change his position on changes. Because as long as he is a major president ial candidate. Continues to suggest that we are going to turn over these islands he has only encourages the aggressors. The Chinese Communist. And the soviet aggressors. To press the United States. The process to the point where war would be inevitable. The road to war is always paved with good intentions. And then this instance the good intentions of course her desire for peace. But certainly were not going to have peace. By giving in and indicating in advance that we are not going to defend what has become a symbol of freedom i dont think its possible for mr nixon the state the record distortion of the facts with more precision that he just did. Nine hundred fifty five mr dulles at a press conference. The treaty that we have with the republic of china. Excludes from the treaty area. That was done with much thought and deliberation. Therefore that treaty does not commit the United States. To defend anything except for most around the basket doors and to deal with acts against that treaty area. I completely sustain the treaty. I voted for it. I would take any action necessary to defend the treaty. And the pesca dora dialogue. Were now talking about is the Vice President s determination to guarantee which are four and five miles off the coast of china which are not within the treaty area. I do not suggest the jank. And this administration has been attempting to persuade the lesson is to commitment. Then a mission the president in 1955. Mr robinson and admiral radford general twining said they were still doing it in 1959 general ridgway sandwich chief of staff to go to war for more youre mad to me would seem an unwarranted and tragic course to take to me that concept is completely repugnant. So i stand with them i stand with the secretary of state mr hurd said these islands were indefensible. I believe that we should meet our commitment. And if the Chinese Communists attacked. Doris and they know that it will mean a walk. I would not hand over these islands. Any point a gun. But i merely say that the treaty is quite precise. And i sustain the treaty to nixon had a guarantee. Islands five miles off the coast of the republic of china. When hes never really protested. Communist seizing cuba. Ninety miles off the coach the United States. From the as a question for senator kennedy senator kennedy id like to conversation if i may do a domestic. Call argument. The chairman of the Republican National committee senator through stand martin declared earlier this week. Vice president nixon and the Republican Party a public apology for some strong charges made by a former president harry truman. Bluntly suggested where the Vice President on the Republican Party could go. Do you feel that you owe the Vice President an apology. Well i must say that. Is to truman has a is methods of expressing things hes been in politics for fifty years hes been president of the United States. Amy and not my style. But i really dont think theres anything that i can say to president trumans going to cause him at the age of seventy six to change his particular speaking. Manner. This is true and can but i dont think i can i just have to tell mr martin that message on to him. And a comment that survive president. Yes i think so of course both senator kennedy and i have felt mr truman vire and consequently i think he can speak with some feeling on this subject. I just do want to say one thing however. We all have tempers i have one im sure senator kennedy has one. But when a mans president of the United States or a former president. He has an obligation not to lose his temper in public. One thing i noted as ive traveled around the country are the tremendous number of children who come out to see the president ial candidates. I see Mothers Holding their babies up so that they can see a man who might be president the United States. I know senator kennedy sees them to it makes you realize that. Whoever is president is going to be a man that all the children of america will either look up to or will look down to. And i can only say that im very proud that president is and how are we store a dignity and decency. And frankly good language. To the conduct of the presidency of the United States. And i only hope that. Should i when this election. That i could approach. President eisenhower. In maintaining the dignity of the office in seeing taught that whenever any mother or father. Talks to his child. He could look at the man in the white house and whatever he may think of his policies he will say. Well there is a man who maintains the kind of standards personally. That i would want my child to follow. Mr caters question is for Vice President next. Its Vice President id like to return just once more for made to this area of dealing with the communist predictive claim that on at least three occasions in recent years. On the sending of american troops to endo china in one thousand fifty four. On the matter of continuing the you to flight in may and then on this definition of the of our commitment to the offshore island. That you have overstated. The end ministration position that you have taken a more bellicose position than president eisenhower. Just two days ago you said that you called on the candidate to serve notice to communist aggressive around the world that we are not going to retreat. One inch more anyplace. We did retreat from the touch in holland or at least Chiang Kai Shek did. What do you think this was a valid criticism of your statement of Foreign Policy. Well educated of course its a criticism that is being made. I obviously dont think its valid. I have supported the administrations position. And i think that that position has been correct i think my position has been correct. As far as then go china was concerned. I stated over and over again that it was essential. During that period. That the United States make it clear. Or we would not tolerate indochina falling under communist domination. Now as a result of our taking the strong stand that we did. The civil war there was ended. And the day at least in the sounds of in the china. The communist a moved out. And we do have a strong. Free bastion there now looking to the euro two flights. I would like to point out that. I have been supporting the president s position throughout. I think the president was correct in ordering these flights. I think the president was correct certainly in his decision to continue with the flights. While the conference was going on i noted for example in reading a particular discussion the senator kennedy had with theyve go away. Shortly after the his statement about regrets. He made the statement that he felt that these particular flights were ones that shouldnt have occurred. Right at that time. And the indication was how would mr khruschev itself. If we had had a flight over the how would we have dealt with mr crewe should have had a fight over the United States. Well or he was visiting here. And the answer of course is the communist as benard goes on all the time. The answer is that the United States cant afford to have and essays. Espionage lack or shell be. Leg or should i say. And intelligence lag. Any more than we can afford to have a missile at now. Referring to your question with regard to chemo and met so what i object to here is the constant reference to surrendering me as i am. Senator kennedy courts the record which he read from a moment ago. But what do you forgets to point out is that the key vote. Both were dr referred to several times where he was in the minority. Was one which rejected his position. Now why did they rejected for the very reason that those senators know as the president of the United States knew that you should not indicate to the. Vance that youre going to surrender an area thats free. Why . Because they know. Senator kennedy will have to know if you do that you encourage them to more aggression well number one in indochina mr nixon talked in the newspaper editors in the spring of one nine hundred fifty four. About putting and i quote american boys into indochina reason indochina would preserve was a result of the geneva conference which petitioned indochine. Number two on the question of the you two flights. I thought the you to flight in may just before the conference was a mistake in timing because of the hazards involved. If the summit conference. At any hope of success. I never criticize the. In general however i never suggested. Should stop. It still goes on i would assume on both sides. Number three the Vice President on may fifteenth. After the you to fly. Indicated that the fights were going on even though the administration and the president had cancelled the flight on may twelfth. Number three. Vice president suggested we should keep the communist. In doubt about whether we would fight on to more a matter thats not the position hes taking. Hes indicating that we should fight for these islands. Come what may because they are in his words in the area of freedom. He didnt take that position on to bet you didnt take that position and buddha past. Doesnt take that position that ive seen so far in laos guinea and guyana have both moved within the soviet there of influence in Foreign Policy so if cuba. I merely say that the United States should meet its commitments and the best doors. What is admiral yarnell is dead and hes been supported by most military authority. These islands that were now talking about are not worth the bones of a single american soldier. And i know how difficult it is to sustain troops. Close to the show under artillery bombardment and therefore i think we should make it very clear the disagreement between mr nixon myself hes extending your ministrations commitment. Mr drummond. As for senator kennedy. Mr kennedy. Representative adam clayton powell. In the course of his speaking tour in your behalf. Is saying and i quote kkk is riding again in this campaign. Is it doesnt stop. All they get will vote for nixon. And all right thinking christians and jews will vote for kennedy rather than be found in the ranks of the play in mind and quotation. Governor michael just south is saying much the same thing. What i would like to ask senator kennedy is what is the purpose of this sort of thing and. How do you feel about. Well the mr. Griffin i believe who is the head of the clan lives in Tampa Florida indicated a statement i think two or three weeks ago that he was not going to vote for me and that he was going to vote for mr next. I do not suggest in any way. Or have i ever. That indicate that mr nixon had the slightest sympathy. Involvement or in any way imply any inferences in regard to the budget plan thats absurd. I dont suggest that thats what i would disagree with it as to nixon or very well then this is this whole matter. Been involved in the socalled religious discussion in this campaign i have never suggested. Even by the vaguest implication. That he did anything but disapprove. And thats my view now. I disapprove of the issue. I do not suggest next and does. In any way i welcome this opportunity to join senator kennedy completely on that straight and to say before this Largest Television audience in history something that i have been saying in the past and want to always say in the future. On our last television debate. I pointed out that it was my position that americans must choose the best man. Either party. Could produce. We cant settle for anything but the best. And that means of course the best man. That this nation can produce. And that means that we cant have any test of religion. We cant have any test of race. It must be a test of the math. Also as far as religion is concerned. I have seen. Communism abroad. I see what it does. Communism is the enemy of all religion. And we do believe in god must join together. We must not be divided on this issue. The worst thing that i can think and happened in this campaign. Would be bored to be decided a religious issue. I obviously repudiate the klan i repudiate. Anybody who uses the religious issue i will not tolerate it i avoided all of my people who have nothing to do with it. And i pay say to this great audience where we may be listening remember. If you believe in america. If you want to america to set the right example for the work that we cannot have religious or racial prejudice. We cannot have it in our hearts. But we certainly cannot have it in a president ial campaign for a Vice President next and. Mr Vice President some of your Early Campaign literature said you were making a study to see if new laws were needed to check the public against excessive use of power by labor unions. Have you decided whether such new laws are needed and did so what would they do. Mr mcgee. I am planning a speech on that subject. Next we all saw it so that we can get the opportunity for the questioners to question me. It will be before the next television debate. I will say simply in advance of it that i believe that in this area. The laws which should be passed. As far as the big National Emergency stripes are concerned. Are ones that will give the president. More weapons with which to deal with those drugs. Now. I have a basic disagreement with senator kennedy though on this point. He has taken the position. He first indicated in october of last year that he would even favor compulsory arbitration. As one of the weapons the president might have but stop a National Emergency stress i understand in his last speech before the steelworkers union. But he changed that position and indicated that he felt that government seizure. Might be the best way to stop a strike which could not be settled by collective bargaining. I do not believe we should have either compulsory arbitration or stage. I think the moment that you give to the union on the one side and the management on the other side. The escape hatch. Of eventually going to government to get it said that most of these Great Strides will end up being settled by government. And that will be im the end in my opinion wage control it will mean price controls all of the things that we do not want. I do believe however we can get to the president of the United States. Towers. In addition to what he presently has in the fact finding areas which would enable him to be marked active. Then we have been in handling these drugs. One last point i should make the record in handling this has been very good during this administration. We have had less man hours lost by strikes in these last seven years than we had in the previous seven years. By a great deal. And i only want to say that. However good the record is. Its got to be better. Because in this critical period of the sixtys. Weve got to move forward. All americans must move forward together. We have a management. On the economy i always have difficulty recognizing my positions when they stated by the Vice President. I never suggested that opposed to an october nineteenth. I have suggested that the president should be given the National Interest in case of National Emergency i dont know what other is talking about. Im talking about giving him only the Fact Finding Committee that he now has under thection. Only the injunction. But also the Fact Finding Commission to make recommendations which would not be binding. One of the additional powers that i would suggest. The president having. And he only has very limited company. And therefore there would be a greater incentive to reach an agreement with the government. The president set up a Fact Finding Committee limited. He can provide an injunction if theres a National Emergency. And there are no other actions. This is a difficult and sensitive matter. President should have things he could do. Therefore there would be incentives. Steel companies. Ready to take because they felt the injunction of eighty days would break the union which didnt happen. Would run at least your figures. Would you do that. I have stated in both debates and i state again that i believe in a balanced budget and have supported that concept during my fourteen years in the congress only two times when and on balanced budget during a serious recession. And we had a National Emergency where there should be a large extended National Defense which we during part of the on the question of the cost of our budget. Stated that is. Dollars less than the present Agriculture Program. Judgment is that the program the Vice President put forward which is an extension of mr benson cost a billion dollars more than the present program which cost about six billion dollars the most expensive in history. More money on agriculture in the last one hundred years of the second. I believe that this administration has added about three billion dollars a year. Interest on the debt funding today which is a burden on the tax. I would hope under a different monetary policy. That would be possible to reduce that third i think its possible to gain a seven hundred billion dollars tax changes which i believe would dividend withholding on expensive medical care for the aged. And the bill which the congress. The president that it would cost a billion dollars on the. Million dollars by the state that i have put forward. And which many of the members of the Party Support is the medical care finance. And the Social Security which would be finance under the Social Security tax which is less than three cents a day per person for medical bills nurses hospitals when they read it is actually in my judgment. We would spend more money in this administration on aid to education. More money on housing more money and i hope more wisely. On defense in this administration is done. Believe that the next administration should work for a balanced budget. And that would be my intention to next in the states which is the fact of the matter is here is where i stand and i just want to have it on the Public Record mr Vice President. Senator kennedy as indicated on several occasions in this program the night that ive been misstating his record as figures. I will issue a white paper. What he said on compulsory arbitration. And the record will show that i have been correct. As figures are concerned here tonight. Again as im gauging in theres what i would call mirror game. Here it is and here it is on the one hand for example he suggests that as far as his medical care program is concerned that really isnt a problem because its from Social Security. But Social Security is attack people pay if it comes right out of your paycheck. This doesnt mean that the people arent going to be paying the bill as far as Agriculture Program is concerned that he feels it will cost less than an hour. Although i can suggest is that all the experts in the program. And the gate that is the most fantastic program. The Worst Program in so far as its effect on the farmers. America has ever had on it in the Election Year or any other time. And i would also point out that senator kennedy left out a part of the cost of that program. Twenty five percent rise in prices that the people would have. The pig now. Are we going to have that one it isnt going to help the farmers. I dont think we should have that kind of a program. And he goes on to say that hes going to change the Interest Rate situation and were going to get some more money that way but what hes saying there in effect were going to have inflation. Were going to go right back to what we had under mr truman. When he had political control of the Federal Reserve board. I dont believe we ought to pay our bills through inflation. A phony. Interest rate. Grummans question for Vice President nixon. In line for the convention mule and governor rockefeller said jointly. That the nations Economic Growth. Ought to be accelerated. And the republican platform. States set to the nation needs to quicken the pace of Economic Growth. Is it fair therefore. Mr Vice President to conclude that you feel that there has been insufficient economic roles. During the past eight years. And its still what would you do. The present administration policy. To step it up as a german. I am never satisfied with the Economic Growth of this country. Im not satisfied with that even if there were no communism in the world but particularly when were in the kind of a race wherein we have got to see that america grows just as fast as we can go by do we grow some with. Because even though we have maintained as i pointed out in our first debate. The absolute gap over the soviet union. Even though the growth in this administration has been twice as much as it was in the truman administration. That isnt good enough. Because america must be able to grow enough. Not only to take care of our needs a home for better education and housing and help all these things we want. Weve got to grow enough to maintain the forces that we have abroad and to wage the nonmilitary battle for the war for the were in asia and africa latin america. Its going to cost more money and growth will help us to win that battle. Now. What do we do about it and here. I believe. Basically that what we have to do is to stimulate that sector. Of america. The private enterprise sector of the economy in which there is the greatest possibility for expansion. So that is why i advocate a program of tax reform which will stimulate more investment in our economy and addition to that we have to move on to other areas that are holding back row for example the distressed areas. We have to move into those areas with programs. So that we make adequate use of the resources of those areas. We also have to see that all of the people of the United States the tremendous talents that our people have are you. Adequate. Thats why in this whole area of civil rights. You quality of opportunity for employment education is not just for the benefit of the minority groups. Its for the benefit of the nation. So that we can get the scientists in the engineers and all the rest that we need. And in addition to that we need programs particularly young Higher Education which will stimulate scientific breakthroughs. Which will bring more growth. And what all this of course as up to is that america has not been standing still. Lets get that straight. Anybody who says americas been standing still for the last seven a half years hasnt been traveling around america has been traveling in some other countries. We have been moving. We have been moving much faster than we did in the truman years. But we can and must move faster. And thats why i stand so strongly. Or programs that will move America Forward in the sixtys. Moving forward so that we can stay ahead of the soviet union and win the battle for freedom and peace. Senator kennedys statement which was made before that under my Agricultural Program food prices would go up twenty five percent. A son true. The farmer who grossly gets about two and a half cents out of a twenty five cent lopa bread. If you put his income up ten percent of the two and three quarters percent or three cents out of that twenty five cents. Its a man who grows tomatoes. Course last of those tomatoes than it does the label on the can. And i believe when the average many farmers wage about fifty cents now if you do better than anybody who suggested that program would come to any figure. Indicated by the Vice President is an error Vice President suggested a number of things suggested that we a distressed areas. Administration is veto that bill passed by the congress twice. He suggested we need to education bill. The administration and the republican majority in the congress as any realistic. The Vice President cast the deciding vote against federal aid the teachers salaries in the senate. This administration and this country. At the lower rate of Economic Growth. Which means jobs. Any major industrialized society in the world. One hundred fifty nine. When we have to find twenty five thousand new jobs for the next ten years. Were going to have to grow. Says five percent. The average growth has been about two and thats why we dont have full employment today. Senator kennedy. Senator kennedy a moment ago you mentioned tax loopholes. Your running mate senator Lyndon Johnson is from texas Oil Producing state and one that Many Political leaders in this Election Year and reports from there say that all men in texas are seeking assurance from senator johnson that the oil. The democratic platform in the tax laws and refers to an equitable depletion allowance as being a conspicuous question is do you consider the twenty seven and i have both. Mr mcgee one hundred days that have some kind of different kind of Minerals Including all. All of those should be gone over in detail. Make sure that no one is getting a tax break to make sure that no one is getting away from that includes boil it all. That includes everything within the range of it include oil a broad broad should be treated differently than the oil. Some of the smaller produce their ruling about eight or nine days in texas. But i can assure you that if im elected president. Taxes will be gone through. And if there is any in equity or any other commodity. Then i would vote. I have voted in the past. To reduce the depletion allowance for the largest producer. To maintain it. I believe we should study their dividend expenses and all the rest. And make a determination. Stimulate. We can provide the revenues needed to move our country forward. Senator kennedys position and mine are completely different on this present depletion allowance. I favor it not because i want to make a lot of oil man rich but because i want to make america rich. Why do we have a depletion allow because theres is the stimulation the incentives for companies to go out and explore for oil. To develop. If we didnt have a depletion allowance. Certainly i believe the president out. We would have our Oil Exploration. Cut substantially in this country. Now. As far as my position then is concerned. It is exactly opposite to the senators. And its because of my belief that if america is going to have the broke that he talks about that i talk about. We want. The thing to do is not to discourage individual enterprise. Not to discourage people to go out and discover more oil and minerals but to encourage. And so he would be doing exactly the wrong thing. One other thing. He suggests that there are a number of other items in this whole depletion field that could be taken into account. You also said a moment ago that we would get more money to finance his programs by revising the tax laws including deflation. I should point out that as far as depletion allowance is a concern. All the Oil Depletion allowance is one that provides eighty percent of all of those involved in depletion or youre not going to get much from revenue. And so virus depletion allowance is a concern unless you move in the area that he had to kate. But i oppose. I oppose it for the reasons that i mentioned. I oppose it because i want us to have more Oil Exploration and not less gentleman if i may remind you time is growing short so please keep your questions and answers as brave as possible consistent with clarity of mr bond for Vice President next. Mr Vice President and the past three years there has been an exodus of more than four billion dollars of gold from the United States apparently for two reasons. Because exports of slumped and have uncovered in parts and because of increased American Investments abroad. If you were president how would you go about stopping this departure of gold from our shores. The first thing we have to do is to continue to keep confidence abroad. In the american dollar. That means that we must continue to have a balanced budget here at home. And every possible circumstance that we can. Because the moment that we have of confidence in our own physical policies of home. It results in gold blowing up. Secondly we have to increase our exports as compared with our imports. And here we have a very Strong ProgramGoing Forward in the department of commerce. This one must be stepped up beyond that. As far as the gold supply is concerned. And as far as the movement of gold is concerned. We have to bear in mind that we must to get more help from our allies abroad. In this great venture in which all three men are involved winning the battle for freedom. Now america has been carrying a tremendous load in this respect. I think we have been writing curry. I have favored. Our programs abroad for economic assistance and for military assistance. But now we bind that the countries of europe for example that we have aided and japan that we baited in the far east. These countries. Some are former enemies. Some our friends have now recovered completely. They have got to bear a greater share of this load of economic assistance abroad. Thats why i am advocating. And will develop during the course of the next administration. If of course i got the opportunity. A program in which we list. More aid from the other countries on a concerted bases in the programs of Economic Development for africa asia and latin america. United states cannot continue to carry the major share of this burden by itself. We can tear a big share. But weve got to have more help from our friends abroad and these three factors i think will be very helpful in reversing the goal for which you spoke about. Senator kennedy. Depletion that is recognize correct the record mr nixon said on depletion that is recognize the opposite of mine what i said was this knowledge would be fairly gone in to make sure that there are loopholes. Is wreck it is the opposite of that that means he doesnt want to go into it. Now on the question of the goal. The difficulty of course is that we do have heavy obligations abroad. That weve had to maintain not only a favorable balance of trade. But also send a good deal of our dollars overseas to pay our troops. Maintain our bases and sustain other economies and other words if were going to continue to maintain opposition in the sixtys. We have to maintain a sound monetary and fiscal policy. We have to have control over inflation. And we also have to have a stable balance of trade. We have to be able to compete in the world market. We have to be able to sell abroad. More than we consume. From abroad. If were going to be able to meet our obligations. In addition many of the countries around the world. Still keep restrictions against ah good. Going all the way back. After the days when there was a dollar short it. There isnt a dollar short. And yet many of these countries continue to move against. I believe that we must be able to compete in the market. Steel and all the basic commodities abroad we must david compete against them because we always did because of our technological lead to be sure to maintain that we have to persuade these other countries. Not to restrict our goods coming in to act as if there was a dollar. And third we have to persuade them to some of the responsibilities. Now weve maintained. Underdeveloped countries in africa latin american asia. Make an economic breakthrough on their own senator kennedy. A question on american prestige. In light of the fact that the end there was recently. Spelled from the congo. And the master chef has this week. Canceled his trip to cuba. For fear of stirring resentment throughout all latin america. I would like to ask you to spell out some more fully. How you think we should make american. Press to determine whether it is rising or whether it is falling. I think there are many tests of the significance of christies really is because were so identified with the cause of freedom. Therefore we are wrong the mile. We are rising power influence is spreading. Then we stand now on the razor edge of decision between or between the communist system wondering whether they should use the sin. Freedom to develop their countries or the system of communism. They will be persuaded to follow our example. They have been several indications that george allen the head of our Information Service said that a result of our being second in space and sputnik in 1957. And i told him i believe you said that many of these countries. Developments with scientific productivity and scientific advancement and therefore he said many of these countries now. Which was once so backward. Is now an apology United States. Secondly the Economic Growth of the soviet union is greater than us is dollars adjusted from two to three times as great as this is a great effect on the underdeveloped World Problems of low income and population density and inadequate resources a gallup poll taken in february. Asked people in ten countries. Which country they thought would be first in one hundred seventy. Both scientifically and militarily. And a majority in every country except that it would be the soviet union by nine hundred seventy votes at the u. N. Particularly the vote dealing with red china. Saturday. We receive the support on the position that we had taken of only two african countries. Liberia. More than a century in the other union of south africa which is not a popular country in africa. Every other african country either abstain or voted against us. More countries voted against asia. On this issue than voted. On the neutralised resolution which we were so much opposed to same thing happened. The candidate who was a candidate for the president of brazil. Took a trip to cuba to call him mr castro during the election in order to get the benefit of the castro supporters within brazil. There are many indications guinea and guyana. Two independent countries within the last three its guinea and fifty seven ghana within the last eighteen months. Both now are supporting the soviet Foreign Policy at the un mr herder said so himself is moving in that direction. So i would say our prestige is not so high. No longer do we give the image of being on the rise along to give an image of vitality. As i would say first of all the senators kennedys statement that he just made is not going to help our gallup polls abroad. Isnt going to help our prestige either. Lets look at the other side of the coin. Lets look at the vote in the congo the vote was seventy to nothing against the soviet union. Lets look at the situation with regard to Economic Growth as it really is. We bind the soviet union is a very primitive economy. Its growth rate is not what. Its whether it is catching up with us. And it is not catching up with us where well i had. And we can stay ahead. Provided we have confidence in america. And dont run or down in order to build up. We go also add other items which senator kennedy has named. But i will only conclude by saying this. And this whole matter of prestige in the final analysis. Whether you stand for whats right and getting back to this matter that we discussed at the outset. A matter of chemo. Oh and map so i can think of nothing that will be a greater blow to the prestige of the United States. Among the free nations in asia. And for us to take senator kennedys of that advice. Go against what a majority of the members of the senate. Both democrat and republican david said and one theme that the five. And the say in advance. We will surrender and area to the communists. In other words that the United States is going to maintain its strength and his presidency jury must not only be strong militarily and economically. We must be Firm Diplomatic with the certainly. We have been speaking i know of whether we should have retreat or the feet. Lets remember that the way to win. Is not to retreat. And not to surrender. Thank you gentlemen as we mentioned that the opening of this program the candidates agreed to the clock alone would determine who had the last word to candidates wish to thank the networks for the opportunity to appear for this discussion. I would repeat the ground rules likewise agreed upon by representatives of the two candidates. From the radio and television network. The entire hour was devoted to answering questions from the reporters. Aides candidate was questioned in turn on each had the opportunity to comment on the answer of his opponent. The repaired or zwerg as any question. On any subject. Neither candidate was given any advance information on any question. That would be asked. Those were the conditions for this third meeting of the candidates tonight. I might add. Also agreed upon was the fact that when the hour got downs of the last minute. There was not sufficient time left for another question and suitable time for answer and. And the questioning would end. That is the situation at this moment. And after reviewing the rules for theres a voting on the remaining moments of the hour. To tell you something about the other arrangements but this debate and then the part. I would emphasize each candidate was in a studio alone except for three photographers and reporters. Identical in every detail of lighting, background, physical equipment, even to the paint used in decorating. I will remind you the fourth in the series of these appearances scheduled for friday, october 21. At that time, the candidates will share the same platform it is just Foreign Policy. Good night. American history tv is on social media. Follow us at cspan history. Announcer next on American History tv, we are joined by barbara perry, president ial studies director at the university of virginias miller center. She looked back at the four debates in the fall of 1960 between incumbent Vice PresidentRichard Nixon and massachusetts senator john f. Kennedy. The firstever televised debates between president ial candidates. First, a brief look at mr. Nixon and mr. Kennedy during their first meeting in chicago on september 26, 1960. The television and radio stations of the United States and their affiliated stations are proud to provide facilities for a discussion of issues in the current Political Campaign by the candidates for the presidency. The candidates need no introduction. The republican candidate, vice pr