The league of women voters are proud to present this president ial debate, our moderator is howard smith. Thank you. The league of women voters is pleased to welcome to the cleveland, Ohio ConventionCenter Musical president jimmy carter, the Democratic Partys candidate for reelection to the presidency, and governor Ronald Reagan of california, the Republican Partys candidate for the presidency. The candidates will debate questions on Foreign Policy and National Security issues. The questions will be posed by a panel of distinguished journalists are marvin stone, the editor of u. S. News world report. Harold ellis. Hilliard, assistant managing editor of the portland oregonian. Correspondents, from abc news. The ground rules for this as agree to you gentlemen are these each panelist will ask a question, the same question to each of the two candidates. After the two candidates have answered, a panelist will ask followup questions to try to sharpen the answers print candidates will have an opportunity to make a rebuttal. That will constitute the first half of the debate and i will save the rules for the second half that are on. The candidates are not permitted to bring prepared notes to the podium but are able to make notes during the debate. If the candidates exceed the allotted time agreed on, i will reluctantly but certainly interrupt. We ask the Convention Center audience to abide by one grand road please do not applaud or express approval or disapproval during the debate. Based on a toss of the coin, governor reagan will respond to the first question. The question of war and peace has emerged as a central issue during this campaign and the giveandtake of recent weeks, president carter has been criticized for responding late to soviet impulses for insufficient buildup of armed forces and a paralysis in dealing with afghanistan and iran. You have been criticized for being all too quick to advocate for the use of muscle and military action to deal with foreign crises, specifically, what are the differences between the two of you on the uses of American Military power . Gov. Reagan i do not know what the differences might be, because i do not know what mr. Carters are, i just know what he has said about mine. I know in all my heart that our First Priority must be world peace. And that use of force is always and only a last resort when Everything Else has failed. And then only with regard to our National Security. I believe, also, that this mission is the responsibility for meeting the peace, which is a responsibility particular to our country, that we cannot shirk our responsibility because we are the only one who can do it. The burden of maintaining the peace falls on us and to maintain that peace requires a strength. America has never gotten into a war because we were too strong. We can get into a war by letting event get out of hand as they have in the last three in a half years under the foreign policies of this administration, until we are faced each time with a crisis. In preservingt the peace requires that we control the events and try to intercept before they become a crisis. Wars in my four lifetime. I am a father of sons i have a grandson. I dont want to see another generation of Young Americans bleed their lives into sandy beachheads in the pacific or rice patties and jungles in asia or the muddy battlefields of europe. Mr. Stone, do you have a followup . We have been hearing the defense buildup you would disassociate yourself that would cost billions of dollars more than contemplated. Assuming the American People are ready to bear this cost, nevertheless, they keep asking the following question how do you reconcile huge increases in military outlays with your promise of substantial tax cuts and balancing the budget, which in this fiscal year ran more than 60 billion in the red . Gov. Reagan mr. Stone, i have submitted an economic plan that i have worked out in concert with a number of fine economists in this country, all of them approve it. They believe in a fiveyear projection that this plan can permit the extra spending for needed refurbished spending on our defensive posture, that it can provide for a balanced earlier, 1983, if not and that we can afford, along with the cut i have proposed in Government Spending, we can afford the tax cuts have proposed and mainly because mr. Carters Economic Policy has built into the next five years and beyond that a tax increase that will be taking 86 billion more next year out of peoples pockets then was to condition her. My tax cut does not come close to eliminating that 86 billion increase. Im only reducing the amount of the increase. In other words, i am not talking about government getting less money, but cutting the increase in spending. The same question now goes to president carter. Would you like to have the question repeated . Peace question of war and. You have been criticized in the giveandtake for responding late to aggressive soviet impulses for insufficient buildup of our armed forces, and a paralysis in dealing with afghanistan and iran. Governor reagan on the other hand has been criticized for being too quick to advocate the use of loss of muscle, military action to deal with a foreign crises, as i mention. Specifically, what are the differences between the two of you on the uses of American Military power . Pres. Carter mr. Stone, i have had to make thousands of decisions since i have been president , serving in the oval office. With each one of those deficient, it affected the future of my country and i have learned in the process how to become a much wiser and more experienced man than when i debated for years ago against president ford. There are no simple answers to complicated questions. Said for every problem there is a simple answer. Neat and possible and wrong. The fact is this nation and eight years before i became president at its own military strength decrease seven out of eight years. The budget commitments for defense went down 37 in all. Since i have been in office, we have had a steady, carefully planned, methodical increase in our commitment for defense. What we have done is used that enormous power and prestige and military strength of the United States to preserve the peace. We not only kept peace in our own country, but extended the benefits of peace to others. In the middle east, we have worked towards a peace treaty and others successfully. Forwarda very good step for our nations security and will continue to do what we have done in the past. I would also add there are decisions made in the oval by every president , which are profound in nature. There are always trouble spots in the world. How those troubled areas are addressed by a president alone in that oval office affects our nation directly. The involvement of the United States and also our american interests that is a basic decision that has to be made so frequently by every president who serves, that is what i am trying to do successfully by keeping our country at peace. I would like to be a little more specific on the use of military power. Under what circumstances would you use military forces to deal with, for example, a shut off of counteroil gulf or to an iran or afghanistan . I asked this question that there are charges we are woefully unable to maintain sustained power in that part of the world. Pres. Carter in my state of the Union Address earlier this year, i pointed out that any threat to the stability or security in the persian gulf would be a threat to the security of our own country. In the past, we have not had an adequate military presence in that region. Now we have two taskforces, access to facilities in five different areas of that region and have made it clear that working with our allies and others that we are prepared to address any foreseeable eventuality that by commerce with that crucial area of the world. In doing this, we have made sure we address this question peacefully, not injecting American Military forces into combat, but letting the strength of our nation be felt in a beneficial way. I believe this has assured our interest will be protected in the persian gulf region, as we have done in the middle east and throughout the world. Governor reagan, you have a minute to comment gov. Reagan i question the figure about the decline in defense spending under the two administrations in the preceding eight years. I would call your attention we were in a war that wound down during those eight years which made a change in military spending because of turning from war to peace. Would also like to point out that republican president s in those years were faced with a democratic majority in both houses of the congress and found requests for the Defense Budget were often cut. Gerald ford left a five year projected plan for a military buildup to restore our defenses and president carters administration reduce debt by 38 . They cut 60 ships out of the navy program that had been ,roposed and stopped the b1 delayed the cruise missiles, stopped the production line for the missiles, delayed the submarine and now is planning a mobile military force that can be delivered to various spots in the world, which does make me question his assaults on whether i am the one who is quick to look for use of force. President carter, you have the last word. Pres. Carter there are diverse elements of defense, one is to control Nuclear Weapons. That is the most important single issue in this campaign. Another is how to address troubled areas in the world. I, governor ricketts has advocated the injection of military forces. I and my predecessors have advocated for resolving those troubles in difficult areas of the world peacefully, diplomatically and through negotiations. In addition to that, the buildup of military forces is good for our country because we have to have military strength to preserve the peace. The best weapons are the ones that are never fired in combat, and the best soldier is one who never has to lay his life down on the field of battle. Peaceth is imperative for , but the two must go handinhand. Thank you, gentlemen. The next question is for president carter. When you were elected in 1976, the Consumer Price index stood at 4. 8 . It now stands at more than 12 . Perhaps more significantly, the nations broader underlying inflation rate has gone from 7 to 9 . Part of that was due to external factors beyond u. S. Control, notably the more than doubling of oil prices right opec last year. Because the United States vulnerable to such external shocks, can inflation in fact be controlled . If so, what measures would you pursue in a second term . Important to it is put the situation into perspective. In 1974, we had a socalled oil shock, were in the price of opec oil was raised to an extraordinary degree. We had an even worse shock in in 1974, we had the worst 1979. Recession, the deepest since the second world war. The recession that resulted this time was the briefest we have had since the second world war. In addition, we have brought down inflation. Earlier in the first quarter, we had a very severe inflation pressure that was brought about by the opec price increase. It averaged about 18 the first quarter. The second quarter, we dropped it down to 13 . The most recent figures of the third quarter, the inflation rate is 7 . Still too high, but it illustrates vividly that in addition to providing an orbis number of jobs 9 million new jobs in the last three and half years the inflation threat is still urgent on us. Governor reagan recently proposed something his old running mate described as voodoo economics. Businessweek he said it would result in a 30 inflation rate. This waseek said completely irresponsible and would result in inflationary pressures that were destroyed this nation. Our proposals are sound and carefully considered to stimulate jobs, improve the Industrial Complex of this country, create tools for American Workers at the same add 9 million jobs, control inflation, plan for the future with an Energy Policy intact as a foundation is our plan for the years ahead. Do you have a followup question . Mr. President , you mentioned the creation of 9 million new jobs. At the same time, the Unemployment Rate still hangs high, as does the inflation rate. I wonder can you tell us what , additional policies you would pursue in a Second Administration in order to bring down that inflation rate . Would it be an act of leadership to tell the American People that they are going to have to sacrifice to adapt a leaner lifestyle for some time to come . Pres. Carter we have demanded the American People to sacrifice, they have done very well. We are importing today about one third less oil from overseas than we did a year ago. We have funded 25 reduction since the first year i was in office. We have added about 9 million net new jobs in that period of time, a record never before achieved. The Energy Policy has been predicated on two factors conservation, requires sacrifice, and an increase in production of american energy. Year than ever before. Revitalization program we have in mind would be implemented next year, it would result in tax credits that would let businesses invest in new tools to create more jobs in the next two years for it we also have planned a Youth Employment program, which would encompass 600,000 jobs for younger people. This has already passed the house and has an excellent prospect to pass in the senate. Governor reagan, would you like to have the question repeated . During the past four years, the Consumer Price index has risen from 4. 8 to currently over 12 . Perhaps more significantly, the nations broader underlying rate of inflation has gone from 7 to 9 . Part of that has been due to external factors beyond u. S. Control and notably, the more than doubling Opec Oil Prices last year. It leads me to ask you whether, since the United States remains vulnerable to such external shocks, can inflation in fact be controlled . If so, specifically what measures would you pursue . Gov. Reagan i think this idea that has been spawned in our country that inflation somehow came upon us like a plague and is uncontrollable and nobody can do anything about it is dangerous to say this to the people. When mr. Carter became president , inflation was 4. 8 , as you said. It had been cut in two by president gerald ford. It is not running at 12. 7 . Spokeent carter also about new jobs created, we always with new growth and an increase in population increased number of jobs, but that cannot hide the fact there are 8 million men and women out of work in america today, and 2 million of those lost their jobs in the last few months. Mr. Carter also promised he would not use unemployment as a tool to fight against inflation. Yet, his 1980 economic statement stated we would reduce Gross National product and increase unemployment to get a handle on inflation because at the beginning of the year it was more than 18 . Since then, he has blamed for inflation opec, the Federal Reserve system, the lack of productivity of the American People, he has been accused of People Living too well, and we must share in scarcity, sacrifice and get used too doing with less. We do not have inflation because people are living too well, we have inflation because the government is living too well. The last statement was a speech to the effect that we have inflation because government revenues have not kept pace with Government Spending. I see my time is running out, i will have to get this done fast. By, you can lick inflation increasing productivity and decreasing the cost of government and are no longer crying out Printing Press money, flooding the market with it because the government is spending out more than it takes in. But economic plan calls for that. The president s economic plan calls for increasing taxes to the point where we finally take so much money away from the people that we can balance the budget in that way, but we will have a very poor nation and unsound economy if we follow that path. A followup . You have centered on cutting Government Spending on what you said about your own policies. You have also said you would increase defense spending. Specifically, where would you cut Government Spending if you were to increase defense spending and also cut taxes so that presumably federal revenues would shrink . Gov. Reagan most people when they think about cutting Government Spending, they think in terms of eliminating unnecessary programs or wiping out some service the government is supposed to perform. I believe there is enough extravagance in government as a matter of fact, one of the secretaries under mr. Carter testified he thought there was 7 billion worth of fraud and waste in welfare. And with the medical programs associated with it. We had the General Accounting Office estimator is probably tens of billions of dollars lost in fraud alone and they have added waste adds more to that. We have a program for a gradual reduction on Government Spending based on these theor