Good evening, next tuesday is election day, before i go to the polls voters have to understand the issues, and know the candidates positions. Tonight, voters will have the opportunity to see and hear the Major Party Candidates for the presidency state their views on issues that affect us all. The lead of women voters is proud to present this president ial debate. Our moderator, miss howard k. Smith. Thank you mrs. Hainan filled. The lead of women voters is pleased to welcome to the Cleveland OhioConvention Center music call, president jimmy carter of the democratic parted for reelection to the presidency. And governor Ronald Reagan from california, the Republican Partys candidates for the presidency. The candidates will debate questions on domestic, economic, foreign piracy policy and security issues. To questions are going to be posed by a panel of distinguished journalist who are here with me. They are marvin stone, at a tour of u. S. News and world report. Harry Ellis National correspondent other christian. William hilliard assistant managing editor to the reporter to oregonian. Barbara walters correspondent abc news. The ground rules for this it was agreed by you gentlemen, are these each panelist down here will ask a question, the same question, to each of the two candidates. After the two candidates have answered, the panelists will ask followup questions to try and sharpen the answers. The candidates will then have an opportunity each to make a rebuttal. That will constitute the first half of the debate. And i will stick the rules for the second half, later on. So these are the rules, the candidates are not allowed it to bring prepared notes to the podium but they are allowed to make notes during the debates. If the candidates exceed the allowed time agreed on, i will reluctantly but certainly interrupt them. We asked the Convention Center audience here to abide by one ground rule. Please do not applaud or express approval or disapproval during the debate. Now, based on the toss of the coin, governor reagan what response to the first question, from marvin stone. Governor, as you are well aware, the question of warren piece has emerged as a central issue in this campaign. And they give and take of recent weeks, president carter has been criticized for responding way too aggressive soviet impulses for insufficient buildup of our foreign forces. In a paralysis of dealing with afghanistan and iran. You have been criticized for being all too quick to advocate the use of lots of muscle, military action, to deal with foreign crises. Specifically, what are the differences between the two of you on the issues uses of American Military power . I dont know what the differences might be, because i dont know why mr. Carters policies are. I do know what he said about mine. And im here to tell you that i believe, with 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 is failed. And then only, with regard to our National Security. Now, i believe, also that this meeting, this Mission Force possibility for keeping the peace, which i believe is a responsibility repeal peculiar to our country, that we cannot shirk our responsibility as the leader of the free world because we are the only ones that can do. It therefore the burden to maintain the piece falls on us. And to maintain that peace requires strength. America has never gotten into a war because we were too strong. We can get into a war by letting events get out of hand, as they have in the last three and a hub here. Under the foreign policies of this administration, and mr. Carter, until we were faced its time with a crisis, and Good Management in preserving that piece requires that we control the events and try to intercept before they become a crisis. I have seen for wires in my lifetime, i am a father of sons, i have a grandson. I dont ever want to see another generation of Young Americans believe the law bullied their lives into sandy beach heads in the pacific, or jungles in asia, or bloody feels, battlefields, of europe. Mr. Stone, do you have a followup question . Yes. Governor, weve been hearing that the defense buildup you would associate yourself with would cause tens of billions of dollars more than is now contemplated. Assuming the American People are ready to bear this cost, they nevertheless keep asking the following question, how do you reconcile huge increases in military out plays, with your promise of substantial tax cuts . And balancing the budget, which in this fiscal year, ran more than 60 Million Dollars in the red. Mr. Stone, i have submitted economic plan that i have worked out in concert with a number of fine economists in this country. All of them approve it. And they believe that over a fiveyear projection, this plan can permit the extra spending foreign needed refurbishing of our defenseing posture. It can provide for a balanced project by 1983, if not earlier. And that we cant afford a long with the cost that i have proposed with spending, we can afford and probably mainly, because mr. Carters Economic Policy has built into the next five years, and gone beyond that. A tax increase that will be taking 86 billion dollars more, and next year out of the peoples pockets, then was taken this year. And my tax cut does not come close to eliminating that 86 billion dollar increase. Im only reducing the amount of the increase. In other words what im talking about is not putting Government Back to get Less Government than weve been getting, but simply cutting the increase in spending. The same question now goes to president , carter which alike to have the question repeated . Yes. President carter, the question on one piece, central issue in this campaign. Youve been criticized in the given take for responding late to aggressive soviet impulses for insufficient buildup of our armed forces, in a paralysis of dealing with afghanistan and iran. Governor reagan, on the other hand, has been criticized for being all too quick to advocate the use of lots of muscle military action to deal with a foreign crises, such as i mention. Specifically, what are the differences between the two of you on the uses of American Military power . Mr. Stone, i had to make thousands of decisions since ive been president , serving in the oval office. And with each one of those decisions to affect the future of my country, i have learned in the process i think im a much wiser and more experienced man, that i was, when i debated four years ago, against president ford. Ive also learned that there are no simple answers to complicated questions. Someone said that for every problem there is a simple answer. It would be neat and plausible and wrong. The fact is, this nation in the eight years before he became president , had its own military strength. Decreased, seven out of eight years the budget commitment for defense went down. 37 in all. Since ive been in office, weve had a steady equivalent bland, methodical but very effective increase in our commitment for defense. But what weve done, is to use an enormous power and prestige and military strength of the United States, to preserve the peace. Weve not only kept peace for our own country, but weve been able to extend the benefits of peace to others. In the middle east, weve worked for peace treaties between israel and egypt, successfully. And they have tied ourselves together with israel and egypt, in a common defense capability. This is a very good step for our nations security, and we will continue to do as weve done in the past. I might also add, that there are decisions to be made in the oval office, by every president , which are profound in nature. There are always trouble spots in the war. And how those trouble areas are addressed by the president alone in the oval office effects are 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 that serves. Thats what ive tried to do successfully by keeping our country at peace. Mr. Stoned, you have a followup . Yes, i would like to be a little more specific on the use of military power. And lets talk about one area for the moment. Under with circumstances would use military forces to deal with, for example, the shut off of parisian or no golf . Half that would occur. Or counter russian expansion beyond afghanistan, either iran or afghanistan. Ive asked this question with a view of charges that we are woefully unprepared to project and sustain, and i emphasize the sustained power and that part of the world. Mr. Stone, in my state of the Union Address earlier this year, i pointed out that any threat to the stability, and security, of the persian golf would be a threat to the security of our country. In the past, we have not had an adequate military presence in that region. Now we have two Major Carrier task forces, we have access to facilities in five different areas of that region. And weve made it very clear, working with our allies and, others that we are prepared to invest any foreseeable eventuality, which will come with a crucial area of the. World but in doing this, we have nature that 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 ensured that our interests will be protected in the persian gulf region, as we did in the middle east, and throughout the world. Governor reagan, you have a minute to comment, or rebut. Well yes i questioned the figure about the decline. And the defense spending under the two previous administrations, and the proceeding eight years to this administration. I would call to your attention that we were in a war that wound down during those eight years, which of course made a change in military spending, because returning from war to peace. I would also like to point out that republican president s in those years faced with a democratic majority in both houses of the congress, found that their requests for the fend budget were very often cut. Now, general fold forward left the fiveyear project and blend for military buildup to restore our defenses, and president s carters administration reduced that by 38 . They got 60 ships out of the Navy Building program that had been proposed. And stopped the b one delayed the cruise missiles, stop the production line, stop the or delayed the tridents submarines. And no hes hoping a military force can be delayed and places in the world, which makes me question his assault on whether i am the one to be quick to use divorce. President carter we have the last word on this question. Well one is to control Nuclear Weapons, which i hope we will get to later on, because that is a most important, single issue in this campaign. Another one is how to address troubled areas in the world. I think perpetually governor regan has advocated the injection of military forces into troubled areas. When i, and my predecessors both democrats and republicans, have advocated resolving those troubles, and those difficult areas in the world, peacefully, diplomatically, and through negotiation. In addition to that, the buildup of military forces is good for our country, because you have to have military history in order to preserve the peace. But i will always remember that the best weapons are the ones that are never fired in combat. And the best soldier, is the one who never has to lay his life down on the field of battle. Strength is imperative for peace, but the two most go hand in hand. Thank, you gentlemen. The next question is from harry ellis, to president carter. Mister president , when you are elected in 1976, the Consumer Price index stood out 4. 8 . And it now stands out about more than 12 . Perhaps more significantly, the nations broader underlying inflation rate has gone up from 7 to 9 . Now, a part of that was due to external factors beyond us beyond u. S. Control. Notably, the doubling of oil prices by opec last year. Because the United States remain vulnerable to such external shocks, can inflation in fact we controlled . If so, what measures would you pursue in a second term . Again, its important to put the situation into perspective. In 1974 we had a sole oil shock. Where in the price of opaque oil raised to an extraordinary degree. We had an even worse oil shock in 1979. In 1974 we had the worst recession, the deepest and most penetrating recession since the second world war. The recession that resulted, this time, pelosi briefest weve had, since the second world war. In addition, we brought down inflation, earlier this year of the First Quarter we did have a severe inflation pressure. Brought about by the opec price increase. Average about 18 , the First Quarter of the year. The second quarter, we had dropped it down to about 13 . The most recent figures, the last three months, the law Third Quarter of the, year inflation rate of 7 . Still to high, but it illustrates very vividly, that in addition to providing an enormous number of jobs, 9 million new jobs in the last three or three and a half years, that the inflation rate is still urgent on us. I noticed a governor reagan recently nation there reagan proposal, with his running mate, george bush described as we do economics. And said that it would result in a 30 inflation rate. And, a non democratic publications, that said that this proposal, and i quote them, was completely irresponsible and would result in inflationary prices which would destroy this nation. So our proposals are very sound, and very carefully considered to stimulate jobs, to improve the Industrial Complex at this country, to create tools for american workers, and at the same time, it would anti inflationary and nation. So with new jobs, to control inflation, and the plan for the future was an Energy Policy as a foundation is a replying for the years ahead. Mr. Alice, do you have a followup question for mr. Carter . Yes, mr. Carter you have mentioned their creation of 9 million new jobs at the same time the Unemployment Rate still hangs high. As does the inflation rate, now i wonder can you tell us what additional policies you would pursue in a Second Administration in order to try to bring down that inflation rate . And would it be an active leadership to tell the American People they are going to have to sacrifice to adopt a leaner lifestyle for sometime to come . Yes. We have demanded that the American People sacrifice, and theyve done very well. As a matter of fact we are importing today about one third less oil from overseas generally did just a year ago. Weve had 25 reduction, since the first year was in office. At the same time, as i said earlier, we have added about 9 million net new jobs in that period of time, a record never before achieved. Also, the new Energy Policy has been predicated on two factors. One, conservation which are very sacrifice, and the other one increase of production in american in the jury which is going along very well. More this year than ever before in history. As i think you Economic Revitalization Program that we have in mind, which will be implemented next year, would result in tax credits, which would lead business it to investing utility factories, to create even more new jobs. It about 1 million in the next two years. And we also have plan a Youth Employment program, which would encompass 600,000 jobs for young people. This is already passing house, and it has a great prospect to pass the senate. Now, the same question goes to governor reagan. Governor reagan which like to have the question repeated . Governor reagan during the past four years the Consumer Price index has risen from 4. 8 to currently over 12 , and perhaps more significantly, the nations broader underlying rate of inflation has gone up from seven to 9 . Now a part of that has been due to external factors beyond u. S. Control, and notably, the more than doubling of the price of the opaque oil last year. Which leads me to ask 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 . I think this idea that that has been spawn in our country that inflation somehow came upon us like a blake, and their forwards uncontrollable, and no it can do anything about, it is entirely spurious and its dangerous to say this to the people. When mr. Crammer carter became president inflation was 4. 8 , as you said, and it has been cut into by president gerald ford. It is now running at 12. 7 . President carter also had spoken of the new jobs created, while we always with a normal growth in our country and increase in, increased number of jobs. But that cant hide the fact that there are 8 million men and women out of work in america today. And 2 million of laws those lost her jobs in the last few months. Mr. Carter had also promise that he would not use unemployment as a tool to fight against inflation inflation. And yet his 1980 economic stated that we would reduce productively across the National Product and increase unemployment in order to get a handle on inflation, because in january at the beginning of the air was more than