Good evening from the Clark Athletic Center at the university of massachusetts in boston. Im jim lehrer of the news hour on pbs and i welcome you to the debate between the democratic candidate for president , Vice President al gore and the republican candidate, governor george w. Bush of texas. They will be conducted within for th formats agreed to by the two campaigns. No answer to a question can exceed two minutes, rebuttals are limited to one minute. But as moderator, i have the option to follow up and extend any particular give and take 3 1 2 minutes. No single answer can exceed two minutes. The candidates under their may not question each other directly. There will be no Opening Statements but each candidate may have up to two minutes for a closing statement. The questions and the subjects were chosen by me alone. I have told no one from the two campaigns or the commission or anyone else involved what they are. Theres a small audience in the hall tonight. They are not here to participate. Only to listen. I have asked and they have agreed to remain silent for the next 90 minutes. Except for right now when they will applaud as we welcome the two candidates governor bush and Vice President gore. [ applause ] and now the first question as determined by a flip of a coin goes to Vice President gore. Vice president gore you have questioned whether governor bush has the experience to be president of the United States. What exactly do you mean . Well, jim, first of all, i would like to thank the sponsors of this debate and the people of boston for hosting the debate. I would like to thank governor bush for participating and i would like to say im happy to be here with tipper and our family. I have actually not questioned governor bushs experience. I have questioned his proposals. Heres why. I think this is a very important moment for our country. We have achieved extraordinary prosperity and in this election america has to make an important choice. Will we use our prosperity to enrich not just the few but all of our families . I believe we have to make the right and responsible choices. If im entrusted with the presidency here are the choices that i will make. Ill balance the budget every year. I will pay down the National Debt. I will put medicare and Social Security in a lock box and protect it. And i will cut taxes for middle class families. I believe its important to resist the temptation to squander our surplus. If we make the right choices, we can have a prosperity that endures and enriches all of our people. If im entrusted with the presidency, i will help parents and strengthen families because, you know, if we have prosperity that grows and grows, we still wont be successful unless we strengthen families. By for example ensuring children can always go to schools that are safe. By giving parents the tools to protect their children against cultural pollution. I will make sure that we invest in our country and our families. And i mean investing in education, health care, the environment and middle class tax cuts and retirement security. Thats my agenda and thats why i think that its not just a question of experience. Governor bush, one minute rebuttal. We do come from different places. I come from west texas. Ive been a governor. Governor is the chief executive officer and learns how to set agendas. I think youre going to find the difference reflected in our budgets. I want to take one half of the surplus and dedicate it to Social Security. One quarter of the surplus for important projects and i want to send one quarter of the surplus back to people who pay the bills. I want everybody who pays taxes to have their tax rates cut. And that stands in contrast to my worthy opponents plan which will increase the size of government dramatically. His plan is three times larger than president clintons pro posed plan eight years ago. Its a plan that will have expanded programs that will create 20,000 new bureaucrats. In other words, it empowers washington. Tonight youll hear that my passion and my vision is to empower americans to be able to make designates for themselves in their own lives. So, i take it by your answer then mr. Vice president that in your, in an interview recently with the New York Times when you said you question whether or not governor bush was experienced enough to be president you were talking about strictly policy differences. Yes, jim. I said that his tax cut plan, for example, raises the question whether its the right choice for the country. Let me give you and example of what i mean. Under governor bushs tax cut proposal he would spend more money on tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 than all of the new spending that he proposes for education, health care, Prescription Drugs and National Defense all combined. Now i think those are the wrong priorities. Now under my proposal, for every dollar that i propose in spending for things like education and health care, i will put another dollar into middle class tax cuts. And for every dollar i spend in those two categories ill put 2 towards paying down the National Debt. I think its very important to keep the debt going down and completely eliminate it. And i also think its very important to go to the next stage of welfare reform. Our country has cut the welfare roles in half. I fought hard from my days in senate and as Vice President to cut the welfare roles and we moved millions of people in america into good jobs. But now its time for the next stage of welfare reform and include fathers and not only mothers. Well get to a go ahead. Let me just say, obviously, tonight well hear some phoney numbers about what i think and about what we ought to do. People need to know that over the next ten years theres going to be 25 trillion of revenue that comes into our treasury. We anticipate spending 23 million of that my plan says lets pass 1. 3 trillion back to the people who pay the bills. Surely we can afford 5 of the 25 trillion coming in to the treasury to the hardworking people who pay the bills. Theres a difference of opinion. My opponent thinks the government the surplus is the governments money. Thats not what i think. Its the hard making people of americas money and i want to share that money when you so you have more money to build and save and dream for you families. Its a difference of opinion. Its versus government making decisions for you and you getting more of your money to make decisions for yourself. Jim, let me follow up with one quick question. When you hear Vice President gore question your experience, do you read it the same way that hes talking about policy differences only . Yes. I take him at his word. I fully recognize im not of washington. Im from texas. And hes got a lot of experience. But so do i. I have been the chief executive officer of the second biggest state in the union. I had a proud record of working with both republicans and democrats which our nation needs. We need somebody to come to washington and say lets forget all the politics and finger pointing and get positive things done on medicare, Prescription Drugs and Social Security and so i take him at his word. Jim, the if i could respond. Quickly. We need to move on. I know that. The governor used the phrase phoney numbers. But if you add the numbers up the numbers are correct. He spends more money for tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 and all of his new spending proposals for health care, Prescription Drugs, education, National Defense combined. I agree the surplus is the American Peoples money. Its your money. Thats why i dont think we should give nearly half of it to the wealthiest 1 because the 99 had a lot to do with building this surplus and our prosperity. Three and a half minutes is up. New question. Governor bush, this came is a companion question to the question i asked Vice President gore. Okay. You questioned whether Vice President gore has demonstrated the Leadership Qualities necessary to be president of the United States. What do you mean by that . Heres what i said. I said, jim, i said that eight years ago they campaigned on Prescription Drugs for seniors. Four years ago they campaigned on getting Prescription Drugs for seniors. And now they are campaigning on getting Prescription Drugs for seniors. It seems like they cant get it done. And they may blame other folks but its time to get somebody in washington who is going to work with both republicans and democrats to get some positive things done when it comes to our seniors. And so what i said is theres been some missed opportunities. Theyve had a chance. Theyve had a chance to form consensus. I got a plan on medicare, for example thats a twostage plan that says well have immediate help for seniors and what i call immediate helping hand 48 billion program. But i also want to say seniors if youre happy with medicare the way it is fine you can stain program but were going give you additional choice just like they give federal employees in that federal Employee Health plan. They have a variety of choices from which to choose. So should seniors. And my point has been, as opposed to politicizing the tissue like medicare, in other words holding up an issue, hoping somebody bites and club them over the head with it for political purposes, this year in the year of 2000 its time to say lets get it done once and for all and thats what ive been critical of the administration for. Same with Social Security. I think there was a Good Opportunity to bring republicans and democrats together to reform the Social Security system so seniors would never go without. Those on Social Security and give younger workers a choice to manage their own money in privatesector to make sure theres a Social Security system tomorrow. Theres a lot of Young Workers in our rallies that when they hear im going to trust them at their option to be able to manage under certain guidelines some of their own money to get a rate of return so they will have Retirement Plan in the future they begin to nod their heads and they want a different attitude in washington. One minute rebuttal. Jim, under my plan, all seniors will get Prescription Drugs under medicare. The governor has described medicare as a government hmo. Its not, and let me explain the difference. Under the Medicare Prescription Drug proposal im making, heres how it works. You go to your own doctor, and your doctor chooses your prescription. And no hmo or Social Security company can take those choices away from you. You go to the pharmacy, you fill the prescription and medicare pays half the cost. If youre in a very poor family or its a very high cost, medicare will pay all the costs. A 25 premium and more than that you can find in the public sector. Heres the contrast. 95 of all seniors would get no help whatsoever under my bonus plan for the first four or five years. One thing i dont understand, jim, is why it is the wealthiest 1 get tax cuts the first year, but 95 of seniors have to wait four or five years before they get a single penny . I guess the answer is the man is running on mediscare, trying to frighten people in the voting booth. Thats just not the way i think. Thats not my intentions. Thats not my plan. I want all seniors to have Prescription Drugs on medicare. We need to reform medicare. Theres been an opportunity to do so. This administration has failed to do it. Seniors will have not only a medicare plan where the poor seniors have their Prescription Drugs paid for, but there will be a variety of options. The Current System today has meant a lot for a lot of seniors, and i really appreciate the intentions of the Current System. As i mentioned, if youre happy with the system, you can stay in it. But there is a lot of procedures that have not kept up in medicare with the current times. Theres no Prescription Drug benefits, theres no drug therapies, theres no preventing medicines, there is no vision care. We need to have a modern system to help seniors. And the idea of supporting a federally controlled 232page document for bureaucracy and the only Compassionate Care for seniors is not my vision. I believe we ought to give seniors more options, i believe we ought to make the system work better, but i know it will require a different kind of leader to go to washington to say to both republicans and democrats, lets come together. Youve had your chance, Vice President. Youve been there for eight years and nothing has been done. My point is that my plan not only trusts seniors with options, my plan sets aside 3. 4 trillion for medicare over the next ten years. My plan also says its going to require a new approach in washington, d. C. Its going to require somebody who can work across the partisan divide. If i could respond to that, jim, under my plan, i will put medicare in an ironclad lockbox and prevent the money from being used for anything other than medicare. The governor has declined to endorse that idea even though the republican, as well as democratic, leaders of congress have endorsed it. I would be interested to see if he would this evening say he would put medicare in a lockbox. I dont think he will, because under his plan, if you work out the numbers, 100 billion comes out of medicare just for the wealthiest 1 in the tax cut. Now, here is the difference. Some people who say the word reform actually mean cuts. Under the governors plan, if you kept the same fee for service that you have now under medicare, your premiums would go up by between 18 and 47 , and thats the study of the congressional plan that hes modelled his proposal on by the medicare actuaries. A quick example. There is a man here tonight named George Mckinney from milwaukee. Hes 78 years old. He has high blood pressure, his wife has heart trouble. They have an income of 25,000 a year. They cannot pay for their Prescription Drugs, so theyre some of the ones that go to canada regularly in order to get their Prescription Drugs. Under my plan, half their cost would be paid right away. Under governor bushs plan, they would not get one penny for four or five years, and then they would be forced to go to an hmo or an Insurance Company and ask them for coverage, but there would be no limit on the premiums or deductibles or terms and conditions. I cannot let this go by, the old style washington politics. Were going to scare you in the voting booth. Under my plan the man gets Immediate Health with prescriptipr Prescription Drugs. Its called the immediate helping hand. Instead of squabbling, he gets immediate help. Let me Say Something can i make one other point . Wait a minute they get 25,000 a year income. That makes them ineligible. Look, this is a man who has great numbers. He talks about numbers. Im beginning to think not only did he invent the internet, but he invented the calculator. Its fuzzy math. Hes trying to scare people at the voting booth. Under my tax plan he continues to criticize, i set a third the federal government should take no more than a third of anybodys check. But i also drop the bottom rate from 15 to 10 , because by far the vast majority of help goes to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder. If youre a family of four in massachusetts making 50,000, you get a 50 cut in the federal income taxes you pay. Its from 4,000 to about 2,000. The difference in our plans is i want that 2,000 to go to you. The Vice President would like to be spending the 2,000 on your behalf. One quick thing, gentlemen. These are your rules. Im doing my best. Were way over the three and a half. I have no problems with it, but if you want a quick response, well move on. Were already at five minutes on this. Its just clear you can go to the website and look. If you make over 25,000 a year, you dont get a penny of help under the bush Prescription Drug proposal for at least five years, and then youre pushed into an hmo or an Insurance Company plan, and there is no limit on the premiums or deductibles or any of the conditions. And the Insurance Companies say it wont work and they wont offer these plans. Let me ask you both this and well move on this subject. As a practical matter, both of you want to bring Prescription Drugs to seniors, correct . Correct. The difference is i want to bring it to 100 and he brings it only to 5 . Thats just totally false. Wait a minute, thats totally false for him to stand up and say that. Let me make sure the seniors hear me loud and clear. Theyve had their chance to get something done. Im going to work with both republicans and democrats to reform the system. All seniors will be covered, all seniors will have their Prescription Drugs paid for, and in the meantime, well have a plan to help poor seniors. It could be one or two years. Let me call your attention to the key word there. He said all poor seniors. All seniors are covered in my plan. In the first year . In the first year. If we can get it done, you bet. It takes a year to pass it, and in the first four years, only the poor are covered. Middle class seniors like George Mckinney and his wife are not covered for four or five years. I got an idea. Okay. If you have anything to say about the issue, say in your closing statement and move on. New question, Vice President president gore, how would you categorize your approach to preventing oil price and supply problems like we have now to the approach of governor bush . Excellent question, and heres the simple difference. My plan has not only a shortterm component but also a longterm component. And it focuses not only on increasing the supply, which i think we have to do, but also on working on the consumption side. In the short term, we have to free ourselves from the domination of the Big Oil Companies that have the ability to manipulate the price, from opec when they want to raise the price, and in the long term, we have to give new incentives for the development of domestic resources like deep gas in the western gulf, like stripper wells for oil, but also renewable sources of energy. And domestic sources that are cleaner and better. And im proposing a plan that will give tax credits and tax incentives for the Rapid Development of new kinds of cars and trucks and buses and factories and boilers and furnaces that dont have as much pollution, that dont burn as much energy, and that help us get out on the cutting edge of the new technologies that will create millions of new jobs, because when we sell these new products here, well then be able to sell them overseas, and there is a ravenous demand for them overseas. Another big difference is governor bush is proposing to open up some of our most precious environmental treasures like the wildlife refuge for the Big Oil Companies to go in and start producing oil there. I think that is the wrong choice. It would only give us a few months worth of oil and the oil wouldnt start flowing for many years into the future, ask i dont think and i dont think its a fair price to pay to destroy precious parts of americas environment. We have to bet on the future and move beyond the Current Technologies to have a whole new generation of more efficient, cleaner energy technologies. Governor bush, one minute. Its an issue i know a lot about. I was a small oil person for a while in west texas. This is an administration that has no plan. All of a sudden, the results of having no plan have caught up with america. We need to help lowincome folks, particularly in the east, pay for their high fuel bills. Secondly, we need an active Exploration Program in america. The only way to stop being dependent on foreign sources of crude oil is to explore at home. You can bet i want to open up a small part of alaska, because when that field is online, it will produce a Million Barrels a day. Today we import a Million Barrels from saddam hussein. I would rather that million come from our own hemisphere, our own country, as opposed to saddam hussein. I want to build more pipelines to help this hemisphere, develop coal sources in america and have coal technologies. We have an abundance of supplies here in america, and we better get after it and better start exploring it, otherwise well be in trouble in the future because of our dependency on foreign sours of crude. If someone is listening to what the two of you just said, is it fair to say, okay, the difference between Vice President gore and governor bush are the following you are for doing something on the consumption end, youre for doing something on the production and drilling let me clarify. Im for doing something on the supply side, the production side and the consumption side. I found one thing in governor bushs answer we certainly agree on and thats the lowincome heating assistance program, and i commend you for supporting that. I worked to get 400 million just a couple of weeks ago, and to establish a permanent Home Heating Oil reserve here in the northeast. As for the proposals ive worked for for renewables and conservation and efficiency and the new technologies, the fact is in the last few years in congress, weve faced a lot of opposition to them, and theyve only approved 10 of the agenda. I think that we need to get serious about this energy crisis, both in the congress and in the white house. If you entrust me with the presidency, i will tackle this problem and focus on new technologies that will make us less dependent on big oil or foreign oil. How would you draw the difference . I would first say he should have been tackling it the last seven years. Secondly, the difference is, we need to explore at home. The Vice President doesnt believe in exploration, for example, in alaska. There is a lot of shutin gas we need to be moving out of alaska by pipeline. There is an interesting issue in the northwest as well, and that is whether or not we remove dams that produce hydroelectric energy. Im against removing dams in the northwest, i dont know where Vice President gore stands, but thats a renewable source of energy we need to keep on line. I was in West Virginia yesterday. Theres an abundant supply of coal in america. We can do a better job in clean coal. We need the cleanest technologies in the world. My answer is we need to get after it here in america. We need to explore our resources and we need to develop our reservoirs of domestic production. We also need to have a hemispheric Energy Policy where canada, mexico and the United States come together. I brought this up with the president of mexico and i talked about expediting the exploration of natural gas in mexico and transport it to the United States so we become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil. This is a major problem facing america. The administration did not deal with it. Its time for a new administration to deal with the energy problem. Just briefly, jim, i know. I found a couple other things we agree on, and we may not have many, so i want to emphasize them. I strongly support new investments in clean coal technology. I made a proposal three months ago on this, and also domestic exploration, yes, but not in the environmental treasures of our country. We dont have to do that. Thats the wrong choice. I know the Oil Companies have been itching to do that, but its not the right thing for the future. Its the right thing for the consumers. Less dependency on foreign sources of crude is good, and we can do it in an environmentally friendly way. Can i have the last word on this . New question, new subject. All right. Governor bush, if elected president , would you try to overturn the fdas approval last week of the Abortion Pill . Ru486 . I dont think a president can do that. I was disappointed in the ruling because i think abortions ought to be more rare in america. Im worried that pill will create more abortion, will cause more people to have abortions. This is a very important topic and its a very sensitive topic because a lot of good people disagree on the issue. I think what the next president ought to do is promote a cultural life in america. Life of the elderly and life of those living all across the country, life of the unborn. As a matter of fact, i think a noble goal for this country is that every child born and unborn ought to be protected under the law and be welcomed to life. But i know we have to change a lot of minds before we get there in america. We can find good Common Ground on things like parental notification or consent. I know we need to ban partial birth abortions. This is a place where my opponent and i have strong disagreements. I believe banning partial birth abortion would be a positive step to reducing the number of abortions in america. This is an issue thats going to require a new attitude. Weve been battling over abortion for a long period of time. Surely this nation can come together to promote the value of life. Surely we can fight off these laws that will encourage doctors allow doctors to take the lives of our seniors. Surely we can have a culture of life so some of these youngsters who feel like they can take a neighbors life with a dwgun wi understand thats not the way america is meant to be. Surely we can find Common Ground to reduce the number of abortions in america. In the Abortion Pill, im disappointed, and i hope the fda has taken its time to be sure american women will be safe who use this drug. Jim, the fda took 12 years, and i do support that decision. They determined it was medically safe for the women who use that drug. Now, this is, indeed, a very important issue. First of all, on the issue of partial birth or socalled lateterm abortion, i would sign a law banning that procedure, provided that doctors have the ability to save a womans life or to act if her health is severely at risk. And thats not the main issue. The main issue is whether or not the roe v. Wade decision is going to be overturned. I support a womens right to choose. My opponent does not. It is important because the next president is going to appoint three, maybe even four, justices of the Supreme Court. And governor bush has declared to the antichoice groups that he will appoint justices in the mold of scalia and Clarence Thomas who are known for being the most vigorous opponents of a womans right to choose. Heres the difference. He trusts the government to order a woman to do what it thinks she ought to do. I trust women to make the decisions that affect their lives, their destinies and their bodies. I think a womans right to choose ought to be protected and defended. Governor, i will go to the Supreme Court question in a moment, but make sure i understand your position on ru486. If youre elected, you wont support legislation to overturn this . I dont think a president can unilaterally overturn it. I think the fda has made its decision. In other words, you wouldnt through appointments through the fda and ask them to reverse it . I think the decision has been made, unless its proven to be unsafe to women. Jim, the question you asked, if i heard you correctly, is would he support legislation to overturn it . If i heard the statement the day before yesterday, you said you would order he said he would order his fda appointee to review the decision. Now, that sounds to me a little bit different. I just think that we ought to support the decision. I said i would make sure that women would be safe who used the drug. All right. On the Supreme Court question, should a voter assume youre prolife, you just stated your position. I am prolife. Should a voter assume that all the judicial appointments you make to the Supreme Court or any court, federal court, should also be prolife . Voters should know i have no litmus test on that issue or any other issue. But the voters will know i will put competent judges on the bench, people who will strictly interpret the constitution and will use the bench for social policy. Thats the big difference between my opponent and me. I believe the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government, that theyre appointed for life, and that they ought to look at the constitution as sacred. They shouldnt misuse their bench. I dont believe in liberal activist judges, i believe in strict constructionists. And those are the kind of judges i will appoint. I named four Supreme Court judges in the state of texas, and i would ask the people to check out their qualifications, their deliberations, theyre good, solid men and women who have made good and sound judgments on behalf of the people of texas. What kind of appointment should they expect from you . Both of us use similar language to reach a totally opposite outcome. I dont favor litmus tests, but i know there are ways to assess how a potential justice interprets the constitution, and in my view, the constitution ought to be interpreted as a document that grows with our country and our history. I believe, for example, that there is a right of privacy in the fourth amendment, and when the phrase strict constructionist is used, and when the names of scalia and thomas are used as benchmarks for who would be appointed, those are code words, and nobody should mistake this for saying the governor would appoint people who would overturn roe v. Wade. Its very clear to me. I would appoint people who have a philosophy that i think would make it quite likely that they would uphold roe v. Wade. Is the Vice President right . Is that a code word for overturning roe v. Wade . It sounds like the Vice President is not very right many times tonight. I just told you the criteria for which ill appoint judges. Ive had a record of appointing judges in the state of texas. Thats what a governor gets to do. A governor gets to name Supreme Court judges. He also reads all kinds of things into my tax plan and my medicare plan. I just want the viewers out there to listen to what i say about it. Reverse the question. What code phrases should we read by what you said, about what kind of people youll appoint to the Supreme Court . They very likely would uphold roe v. Wade, but i do think its wrong to use a litmus test. If you look at the history of a Lower Court Judges rulings, you can get a pretty good idea of how theyre going to interpret questions. Now, a lot of questions are first impression. And these questions that have been seen many times come up in a new context, and so but, you know, this is a very important issue, because a lot of young women in this country take this right for granted, and it could be lost. It is on the ballot in this election, make no mistake about it. Ill tell you what kind of judges hell put on there. Hell put liberal activist judges who will use their bench to subvert the legislature. Thats what hell do. Thats not right. New subject, new question. Vice president gore, president malosevich of yugoslavia refuses to accept the results and leave office. What action, if any, should the United States take to get him out of there . Malosevich has lost the election. His opponent has won the election. Its overwhelming. Malosevichs government refuses to release the vote count. There is now a general vote strike going on. Theyre demonstrating. I think we should support the people of serbia and yugoslavia, as they call the serbia plus montenegro, and put pressure on every way possible to recognize the lawful outcome of the election. The people of serbia have acted very bravely in kicking this guy out of office. Now he is trying to not release the votes, and then goes straight to a socalled Runoff Election without even announcing the results of the first vote. Now, weve made it clear, along with our allies, that when malosevich leaves, then serbia will be able to have a more normal relationship with the rest of the world. Thats a very strong incentive weve given them to do the right thing. Bear in mind, milosevic had been indicted as a war criminal, and he should be held accountable for his actions. Now, we have to take measured steps, because the sentiment within serbia is, for understandable reasons, still against the United States because their nationalism has led even if they dont like milosevic, they still have some feelings lingering from the nato action there, so we have to be intelligent in the way we go about it. But make no mistake about it, we should do everything we can to see that the will of the serbian people expressed in this extraordinary election is done. And i hope that hell be out of office very shortly. Governor bush, one minute. Well, im pleased with the results of the election, as the Vice President is. Its time for the man to go. And it means that the United States must have a strong diplomatic hand with our friends in nato. Thats why its important to make sure our alliances are as strong as they possibly can be to keep the pressure on mr. Milosevic. This will be an interesting moment for the russians to step up and lead as well. It might be time for russia to step in to the balkans and convince mr. Milosevic that its in his best interest to leave office. They need to use that sway to encourage democracy to take hold. So its an encouraging election. Its time for the man to leave. What if he doesnt leave . What if all the diplomatic efforts, all the pressure from around the world and he still doesnt leave . Is this something you would consider using military force to get him gone, mr. Vice president . In this particular situation, no. We have a lot of strength in serbia right now. The people of serbia know they can escape all those sanctions if this guy is turned out of power. I understand what the governor has said about asking the russians to be involved, and under some circumstances that might be a good idea. But being as they have not yet been willing to recognize costinucia as the lawful winner of the election, im not sure its right for us to invite the president of russia to mediate this dispute there, because we might not like the result that comes out of that. They currently favor Going Forward with a Runoff Election. I think thats the wrong thing. I think the governors instinct is not necessarily bad because we have worked with the russians in a constructive way, in kosovo, for example, to end the conflict there. But i think we need to be very careful in the present situation before we invite the russians to play the lead role in mediating. Obviously we wouldnt use the russians if they didnt agree with our answer, mr. Vice president. They dont. But i wouldnt use force. You wouldnt use force . No. Why not . Because its not in our National Interest to use force in this case. I would keep pressure, i would use diplomacy. There is a difference between what the president did, who i supported, and kosovo. And this. And its up to the people in this region to figure out how to take control of their country. New question. How would you go about as president deciding when it was in the National Interest to use force, generally . If its in our vital National Interests, and that means whether or not our territory our territory is threatened, our people could be harmed, whether or not our alliances defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the middle east are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well equipped. Finally, if theres an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I dont think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we have to be very careful when we commit our troops. The Vice President and i have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. So i take my responsibilities seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power. Morale in todays military is too low. Were having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years, we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well equipped. I believe were overextended in too many places, and, therefore, i want to rebuild the military power. It starts with a billiondollar pay raise for the men and women who wear the uniform, a billion dollars more than the president recently signed into law to make sure our troops are well housed and well equipped. Bonus plans to keep some of our highskilled folks in the services, and a commander in chief who clearly sets the mission. The mission is to fight and win war and prevent war in the first place. Vice president gore, one minute. First of all, i want to make it clear, our military is the strongest, best trained, best equipped, bestled fighting force in the world and in the history of the world. Nobody should have any doubt about that, least of all our adversaries or potential adversaries. If you entrust me to the presidency, i would do whatever was necessary in order to make sure our forces stay the strongest in the world. In fact, in my tenyear budget proposal, i have set aside more than twice as much for this purpose as governor bush has in his proposal. Now, i think we should be reluctant to get involved in someplace in a foreign country. But if our National Security is at stake, if we have allies, if weve tried every other course, if were sure military action will succeed, and if the costs are proportionate to the benefits, we should get involved. Now, just because we dont want to get involved everywhere doesnt mean we should back off anywhere it comes up. And i disagree with the proposal that maybe only when oil supplies are at stake that our National Security is at risk. I think that there are situations like in bosnia or kosovo where there is a genocide where our National Security is at stake there. Governor . I agree that our military is the strongest in the world today. Thats not the question. The question is will it be the strongest in years to come. And the warning signs are real. Everywhere i go around the campaign trail, i see people who moms and dads whose son or daughter may wear the uniform, and they tell me how discouraged their son or daughter may be. A recent poll was taken with a thousand enlisted personnel, as well as officers, over half of whom are going to leave the service when their time of enlistment is up. The captains are leaving the service. There is a problem. And its going to require a new commander in chief to rebuild the military power. The other day i was flanked by general colin powell and general schwartzkopf who agreed with me. They said even though were the strongest military, if we dont do something quickly, if we dont stop sending our troops all around the world and nationbuilding missions, then were going to have a serious problem coming down the road. Im going to prevent that. Im going to rebuild our military power. Its one of the major priorities of my administration. Vice president gore, how should the voters go about deciding which one of you is better suited to make the kind of decisions weve been talking about, whether its milosevic or whatever, in the military and Foreign Policy area . They should look at our proposals and look at us as people and make up their own minds. When i was a young man, i volunteered for the army. I served my country in vietnam. My father was a senator who strongly opposed the vietnam war. I went to college in this great city, and most of my peers felt against the war as i did, but i went, anyway, because i knew if i didnt, somebody else in the small town of carthage, tennessee would have to go in my place. I served eight years and served on the Armed Services committee. For the last eight years, ive served on the National Security council. When the conflict came up in bosnia, i saw a genocide in the heart of europe with the most violent war on the continent of europe since world war ii. Look, thats where world war i started, in the balkans. My uncle was a victim of poison gas there. Millions of americans saw the results of that conflict. We have to be willing to make good, sound judgments. Incidentally, i know the value of making sure our troops have the latest technology. The governor has proposed skipping the next generation of weapons. I think thats a big mistake. I think we have to stay at the cutting edge. Governor, how would you advise the voters to make the decision on this issue . I think you have to look at how one has handled responsibility in office, whether or not same in domestic policy as well, jim, whether or not youve got the capacity to convince people to follow. Whether or not one makes decisions based upon sound principles, or whether or not you rely upon polls and focus groups on how to decide what the course of action is. Weve got too much polling and focus groups going on in washington today. We need decisions made on sound principles. Ive been the governor of a big state. I think one of the hallmarks of my relationship in austin, texas is that ive had the capacity to work with both republicans and democrats. I think thats an important part of leadership. I think of what it means to build consensus. Ive shown i know how to do so. As a matter of fact, tonight in the audience, there is one elected state senator who is a democrat, a state rep who is a democrat, one statewide officer is a democrat. There are a lot of democrats here in the debate because they want to show their support that shows i know how to lead. So the fundamental answer to your question, who can lead and who has shown the ability to get things done. If i could say were way over the three and a half minutes. Go ahead. I think one of the key points in Foreign Policy and National Security policy is the need to reestablish the oldfashioned principle that politics ought to stop at the waters edge. I worked with former president reagan to pursue arms stroll in a responsible way. When i was in the senate, i worked with president george h. W. Bush, your father, and was one of only a few democrats in the senate to support the persian gulf war. I think bipartisanship is a national asset, and we have to find ways to reestablish is in Foreign Policy. In a word, do you have a problem with that . Yeah, why havent they done that in seven years . New question. Should the americans see this domestic area as a major choice between competing political philosophies . Absolutely. This is a very important moment in the history of our country. Look, weve got the biggest surpluses in all of american history. The key question that has to be answered in this election is will we use that prosperity wisely in a way that benefits all of our people and doesnt go just to the few . Almost half of all the tax cut benefits, as i said under governor bushs plan, go to the wealthiest 1 . I think we have to make the right and responsible choices. I think we have to invest in education, protecting the environment, health care, a Prescription Drug benefit that goes to all seniors, not just to the poor, under medicare, not relying on hmos and Insurance Companies. I think that we have to help parents and strengthen families by dealing with the kind of inappropriate entertainment material that families are just heartsick that their children are exposed to. I think weve got to have welfare reform taken to the next stage. I think we have got to balance the budget every single year, pay down the National Debt, and, in fact, under my proposal, the National Debt will be completely eliminated by the year 2012. I think we need to put medicare and Social Security in a lockbox. The governor will not put medicare in a lockbox. I dont think it should be used as a piggy bank for other programs. I think it needs to be moved out of the budget and protected. Ill veto anything that takes money out of Social Security or medicare for anything other than Social Security or medicare. Now, the priorities are just very different. Ill give you a couple of examples. For every new dollar that i propose for spending on health care, governor bush spends 3 for a tax cut for the wealthiest 1 . Now, for every dollar that i propose to spend on education, he spends 5 on a tax cut for the wealthiest 1 . Those are very clear differences. Governor . One minute. The man is practicing fuzzy math again. There is differences. Under Vice President gores plan, hes going to grow the federal government in the largest increase since Lyndon Baines johnson in 1965. Were talking about a massive government, folks. Were talking about adding to or increasing 200 new programs, 200 programs, 20,000 new bureaucrats. Imagine how many irs agents its going to take to be able to figure out his targeted tax cut for the middle class that excludes 50 million americans. There is a huge difference in this campaign. He says hes going to give you tax cuts. 50 million of you wont receive it. He said in his speech he wants to make sure the right people gets tax relief. Thats not the role of a president to decide right and wrong. Everybody who pays taxes ought to get tax relief. After my plan is in place, the wealthiest americans will pay a higher percentage of taxes than they do today. And the poorest of americans, 7 Million People wont pay any tax at all. It is a huge difference. Its the difference between big, exploding federal government that wants to think on your behalf and a plan that meets priorities and liberates working people to be able to make decisions on your own. Let me just say, jim, you havent heard the governor deny these numbers. Hes called them phony, hes called them fuzzy, but the fact remains almost 30 of his proposed tax cut goes only to americans that make more than 1 million per year. More money goes to can i have a rebuttal here . Sure, but i want to see if he buys that. Let me tell you what the facts are. The facts are after my plan, the wealthiest of americans pay more taxes of the percentage of a whole than they do today. Secondly, if youre a family of four making 50,000 in massachusetts, you get a 50 tax cut. Let me give you an example, the strung family in alabama. I campaigned with them the other day. They make 50,000 in combined income. They pay 3500 in taxes. Under my plan, they get 1800 tax relief. Under gores plan, they get 145 tax relief. You tell me who stands on the side of the rich. Whose plan makes more sense . He would rather spend the strunks 1800 and i would rather them spend their money. Do you agree with that . No, i dont. Im going to tell you what the facts are. Te analysis he talks about leaves out more than half of the tax cuts i have proposed. If you add the numbers up he still hasnt denied it he spends more money on a tax cut for the wealthiest 1 than all of his proposals for Prescription Drug care, education and National Defense combined. Those are the wrong priorities. 665 billion over ten years for the wealthiest 1 . Now and as i said, almost 30 of it goes to americans that make more than 1 million per year. Every middle class family is eligible for a tax cut under my proposal. Let me give you some specific examples. I believe that College Tuition up to 10,000 a year should be tax deductible so parents can choose to send their kids to college. I believe all seniors should be able to choose their own doctors and get Prescription Drugs from their own pharmacist with medicare paying half the bill. I believe that parents ought to have more choices with Charter Schools and Public School choice to send their kids always to a safe school. I think we need to make education the number one priority in our country and treat teachers like the professionals that they are, and thats why i have made it the number one priority in my budget, not a tax cut for the wealthy. Let me talk about tax cuts one more time. This is a man whose plan excludes 50 million americans. Not so. He doesnt believe take, for example, the maris penalty. He picks and chooses. He decides who the right people are. I want my fellow americans to hear one more time, were going to spend 25 trillion. Were going to collect 25 trillion of revenue over the next ten years, and were projected to spend 21 trillion. Now, surely we can send 5 of that back to you all who pay the bills. There is a problem i want to Say Something, jim. This man has been disparaging my plan with all this washington fuzzy math. I want you to hear a problem we have in america. If youre a single mother making 22,000 a year and youve got two children, under this tax code, for every additional dollar you make you pay a higher margin on that than someone making 200,000 a year. Thats not right. My plan increases the child credit from 500 to 1,000 to make the code more fair for everybody. Not just a few, everybody who pays taxes ought to get relief. Having cleared that up, were going to a new question. Education. Governor bush. Both of you have promised dramatically to change dramatically Public Education in this country. But of the public money spent on education, only 6 of it is federal money. You want to change 100 of education with 6 of the money. Is that possible . We can make a huge difference by saying if you receive federal money, we expect to show you results. Let me give you a story about public ed. Its in houston, texas, a Charter School run by some people from teach for america. Young folks who say, i want to do something good for my country, im going to teach. Its a school for socalled atrisk children. Its, unfortunately, how we label certain children. It means basically they cant learn. Its a school of strong discipline and high standards. Its one of the best schools in houston. And here are the key ingredients high expectations, strong accountability what it says is dont put these rules on it, just hold us accountable for every grade. Thats what we do. As a result, some of these hispanic youngsters are some of the best learners in houston, texas. Our girls went to Public High School and many of the Public Schools are meeting the call. Unfortunately, a lot of schools are trapping children in schools that just wont teach and wont change. Heres the role of federal government. One is to change headstart into a reading program. If you want to access reading money, you can do so, because the goal is for every single child to learn to read. There must be diagnostic tools, teaching money available. Three, weve got to consolidate federal programs to free the districts, free the schools, encourage the innovators like michael, to let schools reach beyond the confines of the current structure to recruit teach for the children type teachers. Four, were going to say if you receive federal money, measure. Third grade, fourth grade, fifth grade, sixth grade, seventh grade, eighth grade and show us whether or not children are learning to read, write and subtract. Instead of subsidizing failure, the money will go to the parents so the parents can choose another Public School the money will go to the parent for Public School or Charter School or tutorial or catholic school. What i care about is children, and so does michael feinberg. And you know what, it can happen in america with the right kind of leadership. Vice president gore . We agree on a few things regarding education. I strongly support accountability, so does governor bush. I support local control, so does governor bush. Im in favor of testing, measuring every school. I also proposed a voluntary National Test from the fourth grade and eighth grade. And a form of testing the president has not endorsed, i think all new teachers ought to be tested, including in the subjects that they teach. Weve got to recruit 100,000 new teachers, and i have budgeted for that. Weve got to reduce the class size so that the student who walks in has more oneonone time with the teacher. We ought to have universal preschool and we ought to make College Tuition tax deductible up to 10,000 a year. Id like to tell you a quick story. I got a letter today as i left sarasota, florida. Im here with a group of 13 people from around the country who helped me prepare and we had a great time. But two days ago, we ate lunch at a restaurant, and the guy who served us lunch got me a letter today. His name is randy ellis. He has a 15yearold daughter named kaylee who is in sarasota high school. Her science class was supposed to be for 24 students. She is the 36th student in that classroom, sent me a picture of her in the classroom. They cant squeeze another desk in for her, so she has to stand during class. I want the federal government, consistent with local control and new accountability, to make improvement of our schools the number one priority so kaylee will have a desk and can sit down in a classroom where she can learn. All right. So having heard the two of you, voters have just heard the two of you. Whats the difference . Whats the choice between the two of you on education . The difference is, there is no new Accountability Measures in Vice President gores plan. He says hes for voluntary testing. You cant have voluntary testing. You must have mandatory testing. You must say that if you receive money, you must show us whether or not children are learning to read and write and add and subtract. Thats the difference. You may claim youve got mandatory testing, but you dont, mr. Vice president. And that is a huge difference. Testing is the cornerstone of reform. Do you know how i know . Because its the cornerstone of reform in the state of texas. Republicans and democrats came together and asked the question, what can we do to make our Public Education the best in the country . And weve gone a long way working together to do so. The cornerstone is to have strong accountability and in return for money, in return for flexibility, were going to ask you to show us and we ask you to post the results on the internet. We encourage parents to take a look at the comparative results of schools. Weve got a strong Charter School movement that i signed the legislation to get started in the state of texas. I believe if we find poor children trapped in schools that wont teach, we need to free the parents. I think we need to expand education savings accounts. Its something Vice President ial running mate supports. Theres big differences of opinion. He wont support freeing local districts from the strings of federal money. Governor bush is in favor of vouchers which take taxpayer money away from Public Schools and give them to private schools that are not accountable for how the money is used and dont have to take all applicants. Now, private schools play a great role in our society. All of our children have gone to both Public Schools and private schools, but i dont think private schools should have a right to take taxpayer money away from Public Schools at a time when caley ellis standing in that classroom. Let me give you another example. I went to a school in dade county, florida where the facilities are so overcrowded that children have to eat lunch in shifts with the first shift for lunch starting at 9 30 in the morning. Look, this is a Funding Crisis all around the country. There are fewer parents of School Aged Children as a percentage of the voting population and theres the largest generation of students ever. We are in an Information Age where learning is more important than ever. 90 of our kids go to Public Schools. We have to make it the number one priority, modernize our schools, reduce the class size, recruit new teachers, give every child a chance to learn with oneonone time in a quality, high quality, safe school. If its a Failing School shut it down and reopen it under a new principal with a Turnaround Team of specialists the way governor jim hunt does in north carolina. Heres another difference. The governor, if its a Failing School, would leave the children in that Failing School for three years and then give a little bit of money to the parents, a down payment on a down payment for private school tuition, and pretend that that would be enough for them to go out and go to a private school. Its an illusion. Wait a minute, governor. 30 seconds, governor. Okay. First of all, most Good Governance is at the state level. See, heres the mentality. Im going to make the state do this. Im going to make the state do that. All im saying is if you spend money, show us results and test every year, which you do not do, mister Vice President. You do not test every year. You can say you do to the cameras, but you dont, unless you change your plan here on the stage. I did say that. Secondly, and you need to test every year because thats where you determine if children are progressing to excellence. Secondly, one of the things that we have to be careful about in politics is throwing money at a system that has not yet been reformed. More money is needed and i spend more money, but step one is to make sure we reform the system. To have the system in place that leave no child behind. To stop this business about asking how old are you . If your ten will put you here, if youre 12 will put you here. Start asking the question, what do you know . If you dont know what youre supposed to know, will make sure you do early before its too late. New question. Weve been talking about a lot of specific issues. Its often said that in the final analysis, about 90 of being the president of United States is dealing with the unexpected, not with issues that came up in the campaign. Vice president gore, can you point to a decision, connection have taken that illustrates your ability to handle the unexpected, the crisis under fire etc. . When the action in kosovo was dragging on and we were searching for a solution to the problem, our country had defeated the adversary on the battlefield without a single American Life being lost in combat. But the dictator milosevic was hanging on. I invited the former Prime Minister of russia to my house and took a risk in asking him to get personally involved along with the head of finland to go to belgrade to take a set of proposals from the United States that would constitute basically a surrender by serbia. But it was a calculated risk that paid off. Now, i could probably give you some other examples of decisions over the last 24 years. Ive been in Public Service for 24 years, jim. Throughout all of that time, the people i have fought for have been the middle class families. I have willing to stand up to powerful interests like the big Insurance Companies, the Drug Companies, the hmos, the Oil Companies. They have good people and play constructive role sometimes but sometimes they get too much power. I cast my lot with the people even when it means that you have to stand up to some powerful interests or trying to turn the policies and the laws to their advantage. You can see it in this campaign. The Big Drug Companies support governor bush Prescription Drug proposal. They oppose mine because they dont want to get medicare involved because they are afraid that medicare will negotiate lower prices for seniors who currently pay the highest prices of all. Governor bush . Ive been standing up to big hollywood, big trial lawyers. What was the question . It was about emergencies, wasnt it . It was about, okay. You know, as governor, one of the things you have to deal with this catastrophe. I can remember the fires that swept parker county, texas. I remember the floods that swept our state. I remember going down to del rio, texas. I have to pay the administration compliment. James ali witte of fema has done a really good job of working with governors during times of crisis. But thats the time when you are tested, its a time to test your metal. A time to test your heart when youve seen peoples lives have been turned upside down. It broke my heart to go to the flood scene in del rio where a fellow and his family just got completely uprooted. The only thing i need to do was to get aid as quickly as possible, which we did with state and federal help. I put my arms around a man and his family and cried with them. Thats what governors do. Governors are often on the front line of catastrophic situations. The question. There can be all kinds of crises, governor. A question for you. There could be a crisis, for instance, in the financial area. The stock market could take a tumble. There could be a failure of a major financial institution. What is your general attitude toward Government Intervention at such events . Well it depends obviously, but what i would do first and foremost is i would get in touch with the Federal Reserve chairman, Alan Greenspan, to find out all the facts and all the circumstances. I would have my secretary of treasury be in touch with the financial centers, not only here, but at home. I would make sure that key members of congress were called in to discuss the gravity of the situation. And i would come up with a game plan to deal with it. Thats would, what governors end up doing. We end up being problem solvers. We come up with practical, Common Sense Solutions for problems that we are confronted with. In this case, in the case of a financial crisis, i would get all the facts before i made the decision as to what the government ought or ought not to do. Vice president gore . First, i want to compliment the governor on his response to those fires and floods in texas. I accompanied James Lee Witt down to texas when those fires broke out. And fema has been a major flagship project about reinventing government efforts. I agree, it works extremely well now. On the International Financial crises that come up, my friend, bob reuben, the former secretary of treasury is here, hes a close adviser to me and a great friend in all respects. Ive had a chance to work with him and Alan Greenspan and others on the crisis following the collapse of the mexican peso. When the Asian Financial crisis raised the risk of worldwide recession that could affect our economy. And now, of course, the euro value has been dropping, but seems to be under control. But it started for me in the last eight years when i had the honor of casting the tie breaking vote to and the old economic plan here at home and put into place a new economic plan that has helped us to make some progress. 22 million new jobs, the greatest prosperity ever, but its not good enough. My attitude is you aint seen nothing yet. We need to do more and better. So, governor, would you agree that there is no basic difference here on intervening, on the federal government intervening in what might be seen as others as a private financial crisis . No, theres no difference on that. There is a difference, though, as to where the economy has meant. I think the economy has meant more for the gore and clinton folks then the gore and clinton folks have meant for the economy. I think most of the Economic Growth that has taken place is a result of ingenuity and hard work on entrepreneurship. Thats the role of government is to encourage that. In terms of the response to the question, no. Can i comment on that . You may. You know, i think that the American People deserve credit for the great economy that we have. It is their ingenuity, i agree with that. But you know, they were working pretty hard eight years ago and they had ingenuity eight years ago. The difference is weve got a new policy. Instead of concentrating on tax cuts mostly for the wealthy, we want i want tax cuts for the middle class families and i want to continue the prosperity and make sure that it enrich is not just the few, but all of our families. Look, we have gone from the biggest deficits to the biggest surpluses. We have gone from a triple dip recession during the previous 12 years to a tripling of the stock market. Instead of high unemployment, weve got the lowest African American and latin american unemployment rates in history and 22 million new jobs. But its not good enough. Too many people have been left behind. We have got to do much more. The key is job training, education, investments in health care and education, the environment, retirement security. And incidentally, we have got to preserve Social Security and i am totally opposed to diverting one out of every six dollars away from the Social Security trust fund, as the governor has proposed, into the stock market. I want new incentives for savings and investment for the young couples who are working hard so they can save and invest on their own on top of Social Security, not at the expense of Social Security, as the governor proposes. Two points. One, a lot of folks are still waiting for the 1992 middleclass tax cut. I remember the Vice President saying this is a chance, were gonna make sure that you get tax. Cuts it didnt happen. Now hes having to say it again. They had their chance to deliver a tax cut to you. Secondly, the sheerest way to bust this economy is to increase the role and the size of the federal government. The Senate Budget committee did a study of the Vice President expenditures. Its been projected that they could conceivably bust the budget by 900 billion dollars. That means hes either gonna have to raise your taxes by 900 billion or go into the Social Security surplus for 900 billion. This is a plan thats going to increase the bureaucracy by 20,000 people. His targeted tax cut is so detailed, so much fine print that its going to require numerous irs agents. We need somebody to simplify the code, to be, fear to continue prosperity by sharing some of the surplus with people who pay the bills, particularly those at the end of the economic ladder. If i could respond, jim. What hes quoting is not the Senate Budget committee. It is a Partisan Press release by the republicans on the Senate Budget committee. Its not worth the paper that its printed on. Now, as for 20,000 across as you call, them you, know the size of the federal government will go down in a gore administration. In the reinventing Government Program you just look at the numbers. It is 300,000 people smaller today than it was eight years ago. Now the fact is, you would have a hard time convincing folks that we were a whole lot better off eight years the and then we are today. But thats not the question. The question is will we be better off four years from now than we are today . And as for the sheerest way to threaten our prosperity, having a 1. 9 trillion tax cut, almost half of which goes to the wealthy, and oh one trillion dollar Social Security privatization proposal is the sheerest way to put our budget into deficit, raise interest rates, and put our prosperity at risk. I cant let the man continue with fuzzy math. It is 1. 3 trillion mr. Vice president. It will go to everybody who pays taxes. Im not committed gonna present that says you get tax relief and you dont. Im not gonna be an apparent user. What is fair is that everybody who pays taxes ought to get relief. I thought we clear this up a while ago. New question on Social Security. Both of you have Social Security reform plans. So we could spend the rest of the evening and two or three other evenings talking about them in detail. We wont do that. But suits me. Many experts, including Federal Reserve chairman greenspan, Vice President gore, say that it will be impossible for either of, you essentially, to keep the system viable on its own, during the coming baby boomer retirement onslaught, without either reducing benefits or increasing taxes. Do you disagree . I do disagree. If we can keep our prosperity going, if we can continue balancing the budget and pinned down the debt, then the Strong Economy keeps generating surpluses. Here is my plan. Heres what i would do. I will keep Social Security in a lock box, and that pace down the National Debt. And the interest savings i would put right back into Social Security. That extends the life of Social Security for 55 years. Now, i think that its very important to understand that cutting benefits under Social Security means that people like skinner from des moines, iowa, who is here, would really have a much harder time because there are millions of seniors who are living almost cant about. And you talk to them about cutting benefits. I dont go along with it. I am opposed to it. I am also opposed to a plan the diverts one out of every six dollars away from the Social Security trust fund. Social security is a trust fund that pays the checks this year with the money that is paid into Social Security this year. The governor wants to divert anyone out of every six dollars off into the stock market. Which means that he would drain a trillion dollars out of the Social Security trust fund in this generation, over the next ten years and Social Security under that approach would go bankrupt within this generation. His leading adviser on this plan actually said that would be okay, because then the Social Security trust fund could start borrowing. It would borrow up to three trillion dollars. Now, Social Security has never done that. And i dont think it should do that. I think it should stay in a lock box and i will tell you this. I will veto anything that takes money out of Social Security for privatization or anything else other than Social Security. Governor. I thought it was interesting that on the two minutes he spent about 1 million and a half on my plan, which means he doesnt want you to know that what hes doing is loading up use for future generations. He put no real assets into the Social Security system. The revenues exceeded expenses and Social Security until the year 2015 which means all retirees are gonna get the promises made. For those of you who he wants to secure into the voting booth to vote for him him 11. Clear promised me to meet will be promise kept. You bet we want to allow younger workers to take some of their own money. Thats a difference of opinion. The Vice President thinks its the governments money. The payroll taxes are your money. You have to put it in prudent, safe investments of that one trillion over the next ten years goes to be to 3 trillion. The money stays within the Social Security system. Its a part of the Social Security system. He claims it will be out of Social Security. Its your money. Its a part of your retirement benefit. Its a fundamental difference between what we believe. I want you to have your own asset that you can call your. Own the you could pass from one generation to the next. I want you to get a better rate of return for your own money than the paltry 2 of the current Social Security trust gets today. Mr. Green span i think the opportunity to say theres a third. Way that is to get a better rate of return on the Social Security money coming into the. Trust theres 2. 3 trillion dollars of surplus that we can use to make sure that younger workers have a Social Security plan in the future. If we are smart, if we trust, workers and if we understand the power of the compound rate of interest. Here is the difference. I give a new intent for younger workers to see their own money, and invest their own money. But not at the expense of Social Security. On top of Social Security. My plan is Social Security plus. The governors plan Social Security minus. Your future benefits would be cut that by the amount that is diverted into the stock market. And if you make that bad investment, thats too bad. But even before the problem hits, because the money contributed to Social Security this year is a entitlement. Thats how it works. And the money is used to pay the benefit for seniors this year. If you cut the amount going in. One out of every six dollars, then you have to cut the value of each checked by one of every six dollars unless you come up with the money from somewhere else. I would like to know from the governor. I know were not supposed to ask each other questions. But i would be interested in knowing. Does that trillion dollars come from the trust fund or does it come from the rest of the budget . No. Theres enough money to pay Seniors Today in the court of years of Social Security. The money comes from the surplus. Surplus is more money than needed. Let me tell you what your plan. Is its not Social Security plus. Its Social Security but she did that. That is what it is. You leave future generations with tremendous use. Its time to have a leader that doesnt put off tomorrow but we should do today. Its time to have somebody to step up and say look, lets let younger workers take some of their own money and under certain guidelines investor in the private markets. The safest of federal investments yields 4 . Thats twice the amount of rate of return than the current Social Security trust. Its a fundamental difference of opinion. Here folks. Younger worker after younger worker. Heres my call it says i trust. You and you know it, this shoe is changing. Seniors now understand the promise made will be a promise kept. But younger workers now understand that we better have a government that trusts them. And thats exactly what im going to do. Could you respond to that jim . Thats a big issue. Can we do another round on it . We are almost out of time. Just. Briefly when fdr established Social Security they didnt call them ious. They called them the full faith and credit of the United States. If you dont have trust and, that i do. If you take it out of the surplus in the trust fund that means the trust fund goes bankrupt in this generation within 20 years. Go ahead. This is a government that thinks the 2 rate of return on your money is satisfactory. Its not. This is a government that says the younger workers cant possibly have their own assets. We need to think differently but the issue. We need to make sure our seniors get the promise made. But im here to tell you. If we dont trust your younger workers to manage some of their own money with the Social Security surplus, to grow from one trillion to three trillion, its going to be impossible to bridge the gap without. It would mr. Gores plan will do is cause huge payroll taxes or Mutual Benefit reductions. New question. Are the issues of character that distinguish you from Vice President gore . The man loves his wife and i appreciate that a lot. And i love. Mine the man loves his family a lot. And i appreciate that a lot because i love my family. I think the thing that discouraged to me about the Vice President was uttering those famous words, no controlling legal authority. I felt like theyre needed to be a better sense of responsibility what was going on in the white house. I believe that i believe theyve moved that sign, the buck stops here from the Oval Office Desk to the buck stops here on the lincoln bedroom. Its not good for the country and its not right. We need to have a new look about how we conduct ourselves in office. Theres a huge trust i see it all the time when people come up to me and say, i dont want you to let me down again. And we can do better than the past administration has done. Its time for first start. Its never a new look. Its time for a fresh start after a season of cynicism. And so i dont know the man well, but i have been disappointed about he and his administration have conducted the fundraising affairs. You know, going to a buddhist temple and then claiming it wasnt a fundraiser is just not my view of responsibility. Vice president gore . I think we ought to attack our countrys problems. Not attack each other. I want to spend my time making this country even better than it is. Not trying to be good to be a bad person. You may want to focus on scandals. I want to focus on results. As i said a couple of months ago, i stand here as my own man. And i want you to see me for who i am. Tipper and i have been married for 30 years. We became grandparents a year and a half ago. Weve got four children. I have devoted 24 years of my life to Public Service. And ive said this before and ill say it again. If you trust me with the presidency, amy not be the most exciting politician, but i will work hard for you every day. And i will fight for middle class families and working men and women and i will never let you down. So governor, what are you saying when you mentioned the fundraising scandals where the fundraising charges that involve Vice President gore . What are you saying that the voters should take from that thats relevant to the election . They ought to factor it in when they go to the voting booth. In what way . I think that people need to be held responsible for the actions they take in life. I think thats part of the need for cultural change. Each of us need to be responsible for what we do. People in the highest office of the land must be responsible for decisions they make in life. And thats the way ive conducted myself as governor of texas, and thats the way ill conduct myself as present of the United States. Should i be fortunate enough to earn your vote . Are you saying all of this is irrelevant, Vice President gore . No i think the American People should take into account who we are as individuals. We are experiences. But our positions are on the issues in proposals are. I am asking you to see me for who i really am. Im offering you my own vision. My own ex variance. My own proposals. And incidentally one of them is this. This Current Campaign financing system has not reflected credit on anybody in either party. And thats one of the reasons ive said before and i will pledge here tonight, if i am president the very first bill that Joe Lieberman and i will send to the United States congress is the mccain Viral Campaign finance and reform bill. And the reason it is that important is that all of the other issues, whether Prescription Drugs were all seniors that are posed by the Drug Companies or the patients bill of rights to take the decisions away from the hmos and give them to the doctors and nurses, opposed by the hmos and Insurance Companies, all of these other proposals are going to be a lot easier to get past for the American People if we limit the influence of special interest money, and give democracy back to the American People. And i wish governor bush would join me this evening in endorsing the mccain fine gold Campaign Finance reform bill. Governor bush. You know this man has no credibility on the issue. As a matter of, fact i read in the New York Times where he said he cosponsored the mckean Finals Campaign fundraising bill. But he wasnt in the senate with senator final. And so look what you need to know about me is that i will uphold the law. I would have an attorney general that enforces the. Love the time for campaign the time for campaign hundred funding reform is after the election. This man has outspent me and the special interests are out spending me. Im not going to lay down my arms in the middle of a campaign for somebody who has got no credibility on the issue. Senator mccain, excuse me one second Vice President gore senator mccain said in august it doesnt matter which one of you is president of the United States in january, theres going to be blood on the floor of the United States senate. Hell tie up the senate until Campaign Finance reform is past that includes a ban on soft money. First of all, would you support that effort by him or would you sign a bill that is finally passed that included it. I would support an effort to ban corporate soft money and labor union soft money so long as there was dues check off. Ive campaigned on this ever since the primaries. I believe there needs to be instant disclosure on the internet as to who is giving to whom. I think we need to fully enforce the law. I think we need to have an attorney general that says if laws are broken we will enforce the law. Be strict about it. Be firm about it. Look, governor bush, you have attacked my character and credibility and im not going to respond in kind. I think we ought to focus on the problems and not attack each other. One of the serious problems, hear me well, is that our system of government is being undermined by too much influence coming from special interest money. We have to get a handle on it. And like john mccain, i have learned from experience, and its not a new position for me. 24 years ago i supported full Public Financing of all federal elections. And anybody who thinks, im just saying it will be the first bill i said to the congress, i want you to know i care passionately about this and i will fight until it becomes law all. I want people to hear what he just said. He is for full Public Financing of congressional elections. Im absolutely adamantly opposed to that. I dont want the government financing congressional elections. I would just say on that wonderful note of disagreement, we have to stop here and we want to go now to your closing statements. Governor bush is first. You have two minutes. Thank, you jim. Thank you the university of massachusetts. Mister Vice President , thank you. It has been a good and lively exchange. Obviously we have huge differences of opinion. Mine is i want to empower people in their own lives. I also want to go to washington to get some positive things done. Its going to require a new spirit. A spirit of cooperation. Its going to require the ability of a republican president to reach out across the partisan divide and to say to democrats, lets come together to do what is right for america. Its been my record as governor of texas. It will be how i conduct myself if im fortunate enough to earn your vote as president of the United States. I want to finally get something done on medicare. I want to make sure Prescription Drugs are available for all seniors. And i want seniors to have additional choices when it comes to choosing their health care plans. I want to finally get something done on Social Security. I want to make sure the seniors have the promises made will be a promise kept, but i want younger workers to be able to manage some of their own money, some of their own payroll taxes in the private sector under certain guidelines to get a better rate of return on their own money. I want to rebuild our military to keep the peace. I want to have a strong hand when it comes to the United States in world affairs. I dont want to try to put our troops in all places at all times. I dont want to be the worlds policeman, i want to be the worlds peacemaker by having a military of high morale and a military that is well equipped. I want to have antiballistic mobile systems to protect ourselves and our allies from a rogue nation that may try to hold us hostage or blackmail a friend. I also want to make sure Education System fills its hope and promise. I have a strong record of working with democrats and republicans in texas to make sure no child left behind. I understand a limited role of the federal government, but it could be a constructive role when it comes to reform, by insisting that there be strong accountability systems. My intentions are to earn your vote and earn your confidence. Im asking for your vote. I want you to be on my team. And for those of you working, thanks from the bottom of my heart. For those of you making up your mind, i would be honored to have your support. Vice president gore, two minutes. I want to thank everybody who watched and listened tonight because this is indeed a crucial time in american history. We are at a fork in the road. We have this incredible prosperity, but a lot of people have been left behind. And we have a very important decision to make. Will we use the prosperity to enrich all of our families and not just a few . One important way of looking at this is to ask who are you going to fight for . Throughout my career in Public Service, i have fought for the working men and women of this country, middle class families. Why . Because you are the ones who have the hardest time paying taxes. The hardest time making ends meet. You are the ones making car payments and mortgage payments and doing right by your kids. A lot of times, there are powerful forces that are against you. Make no mistake about it, they do have undue influence in washington d. C. And it makes a difference if you have a president who will fight for you. I know one thing about the position of president its the only position in our constitution that is filled by an individual who is given the responsibility to fight not just for one state or one district or the well connected or wealthy but to fight for all of the people including, especially, those who most need somebody who will stand up and take on whatever powerful forces might stand in the way. There is a woman named winfred skinner here tonight from iowa. I mentioned her earlier. Shes 79 years old. She has Social Security. Im not going to cut her benefits or support any proposal that would. She gets a small pension, but in order to pay for her Prescription Drug benefits, she has to go out seven days a week, several hours a day, picking up hands. Sorry, cans. She came all the way from iowa in a winnebago with her poodle in order to attend here tonight. I want to tell her i am going to fight for a Prescription Drug benefit for all seniors and fight for the people of this country for perspiredy that benefits all. And we will continue this dialog next week on october 11th at Wake Forest University in Winston Salem north carolina. The format then will be more informal, more conversational with the two candidates seated at the table with me. The third will be october 17th at Washington University in st. Louis and that will follow a town hall type format. Also ahead the day after tomorrow on october 5th, theres the 90 minute debate between the democratic candidate for Vice President , senator Joe Lieberman, and the republican candidate, former secretary of defense dick cheney. It will be held at Center College in danville, kentucky. The moderator will beat bernard shaw of cnn. Thank you, governor bush, Vice President gore. See you next week. And for now from boston, im jim lehrer. Thank you and goodnight. [applause] good evening from the field house at Washington University in st. Louis. Im jim lehrer of the news hour on pbs. And i welcome you to this third and final campaign 2000
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.