ReferenceDesk.org The Internet's Best Reference Source! |
|
|||
|
|
OCTOBER 11, 2000
ALBERT GORE, JR., VICE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES DEMOCRATIC PARTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
GOVERNOR GEORGE
W. BUSH (R-TX) REPUBLICAN PARTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE
JIM LEHRER,
MODERATOR
LEHRER: Good evening from Wait Chapel at Wake Forest
University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. I'm Jim Lehrer of The NewsHour on
PBS.
Welcome to this second election 2000 debate between the
Republican candidate for president, Governor George W. Bush of Texas, and the
Democratic candidate, Vice President Al Gore.
These debates are
sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. The format and the rules
are those negotiated by representatives of the two campaigns. Only the subjects
tonight and the questions are mine.
The format tonight is that of a
conversation. The only prevailing rule is that no single response can ever --
ever -- exceed two minutes.
(LAUGHTER)
The prevailing rule
for the audience here in the hall is, as always, absolute quiet, please.
Good evening, Governor Bush, Vice President Gore. At the end of our 90
minutes last week in Boston, the total time each of you took was virtually the
same. Let's see if we can do the same tonight or come close.
Governor
Bush, the first question goes to you. One of you -- one of you -- is about to
be elected the leader of the single most powerful nation in the world --
economically, financially, militarily, diplomatically, you name it.
LEHRER: Have you formed any guiding principles for exercising this enormous
power?
BUSH: I have. I have.
The first question is what's
in the best interests of the United States? What's in the best interests of our
people?
When it comes to foreign policy, that'll be my guiding
question: Is it in our nation's interests? Peace in the Middle East is in our
nation's interests. Having a hemisphere that is free for trade and peaceful is
in our nation's interests. Strong relations in Europe is in our nation's
interests.
I've thought a lot about what it means to be the
president. I also understand that an administration is not one person, but an
administration is dedicated citizens who are called by the president to serve
the country, to serve a cause greater than self. And so I've thought about an
administration of people who represent all America, the people who understand
my compassionate, conservative philosophy.
I haven't started naming
names except for one person, and that's Mr. Richard Cheney who I thought did a
great job the other night. He's a vice presidential nominee who represents --
who I think people got to see why I picked him. He's a man of solid judgment,
and he's going to be a person to stand by my side.
One of the things
I've done in Texas is, I've been able to put together a good team of people.
I've been able to set clear goals. The goals are to be an education system that
leaves no child behind, Medicare for our seniors, a Social Security system
that's safe and secure, foreign policy that's in our nation's interests, and a
strong military.
BUSH: And then, bring people together to achieve
those goals. That's what a chief executive officer does. I've though long and
hard about the honor of being the president of the United States.
LEHRER: Vice President Gore?
GORE: Yes, Jim, I thought a lot about
that particular question. And I see our greatest natural -- national strength
coming from what we stand for in the world. I see it as a question of values.
It is a great tribute to our founders that 224 years later this
nation is now looked to by the peoples on every other continent and the peoples
from every part of this Earth as a kind of model for what their future could
be.
And I don't think that's just the kind of an exaggeration that we
take pride in as Americans. It's really true, even the ones that sometimes
shake their fist at us, as soon as they have a change that allows the people to
speak freely, they're wanting to develop some kind of blueprint that will help
them be like us more -- freedom, free markets, political freedom.
So
I think first and foremost, our power ought to be wielded to -- in ways that
form a more perfect union. The power of example is America's greatest power in
the world.
And that means, for example, standing up for human rights.
It means addressing the problems of injustice and inequity along lines of race
and ethnicity here at home, because in all these other places around the world
where they're having these terrible problems, when they feel hope, it is often
because they see in us a reflection of their potential.
So we've got
to enforce our civil rights laws. We've got to deal with things like racial
profiling.
GORE: And we have to keep our military strong. We have the
strongest military, and I'll do whatever is necessary, if I am president, to
make sure that it stays that way.
But our real power comes, I think,
from our values.
LEHRER: Should the people of the world look at the
United States, Governor, and say -- should they fear us? Should they welcome
our involvement? Should they see us as a friend to everybody in the world? How
do you -- how would you project us around the world, as president?
BUSH: Well, I think they ought to look at us as a country that understands
freedom, where it doesn't matter who you are or how you're raised or where
you're from, that you can succeed. I don't think they ought to look at us with
envy.
It really depends upon how our nation conducts itself in
foreign policy. If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us. If we're a
humble nation but strong, they'll welcome us.
And our nation stands
alone right now in the world in terms of power. And that's why we've got to be
humble and yet project strength in a way that promotes freedom.
So I
don't think they ought to look at us in any other than what we are. We're a
freedom loving nation. And if we're an arrogant nation, they'll view us that
way. But if we're a humble nation, they'll respect us as an honorable nation.
GORE: I agree with that. I agree with that.
I think that
one of the problems that we have faced in the world is that we are so much more
powerful than any single nation has been in relationship to the rest of the
world than at any time in history -- that I know about anyway -- that there is
some resentment of U.S. power.
GORE: So I think that the idea of
humility is an important one. But I think that we also have to have a sense of
mission in the world. We have to protect our capacity to push forward what
America's all about. That means not only military strength and our values, it
also means keeping our economy strong.
You know, in the last -- two
decades ago, it was routine for leaders of foreign countries to come over here
and say, "You guys have got to do something about these horrendous deficits
because it's causing tremendous problems for the rest of the world," and we
were lectured to all the time.
The fact that we have the strongest
economy in history today -- it's not good enough, we need to do more -- but the
fact that it is so strong enables us to project the power for good that America
can represent.
LEHRER: Does that give us -- does our wealth, our good
economy, our power, bring with it special obligations to the rest of the world?
BUSH: Yes, it does. Take, for example, Third World debt. I think -- I
think we ought to be forgiving Third World debt under certain conditions. I
think, for example, if we're convinced that a Third World country that's got a
lot of debt would reform itself, that the money wouldn't go into the hands of a
few, but would go to help people, then I think it makes sense for us to use our
wealth in that way.
BUSH: Or do you trade debt for valuable rain
forest lands? Makes some sense.
Yes, we do have an obligation in the
world, but we can't be all things to all people. We can help build coalitions,
but we can't put our troops all around the world. We can lend money, but we've
got to do it wisely. We shouldn't be lending money to corrupt officials. So we
got to be guarded in our generosity.
LEHRER: Well, let's go through
some of the specifics now.
New question, Vice President Gore, the
governor mentioned the Middle East. Here we're talking at this stage of the
game about diplomatic power that we have. What do you think the United States
should do right now to resolve that conflict over there?
GORE: The
first priority has to be on ending the violence, dampening down the tensions
that have risen there. We need to call upon Syria to release the three Israeli
soldiers who have been captured. We need to insist that Arafat send out
instructions to halt some of the provocative acts of violence that have been
going on.
I think that we also have to keep a weather eye toward
Saddam Hussein, because he's taking advantage of this situation to once again
make threats. And he needs to understand that he's not only dealing with
Israel, he's dealing with us if he is making the kind of threats that he's
talking about there.
The use of in this situation has already --
well, it goes hour by hour and day by day now; it's a very tense situation
there.
GORE: But in the last 24 hours, there has been some subsiding
of the violence there. It's too much to hope that this is going to continue,
but I do hope that it will continue. Our country has been very active with
regular conversations with the leaders there. And we just have to take it day
to day right now.
But one thing I would say where diplomacy is
concerned, Israel should -- should feel absolutely secure about one thing: Our
bonds with Israel are larger than agreements or disagreements on some details
of diplomatic initiatives. They are historic, they are strong, and they are
enduring. And our ability to serve as an honest broker is something that we
need to shepherd.
LEHRER: Governor?
BUSH: Well, I think
during the campaign, particularly now during this difficult period, we ought to
be speaking with one voice. And I appreciate the way the administration has
worked hard to calm the tensions. Like the vice president, I call on Chairman
Arafat to have his people pull back to make the peace.
I think
credibility is going to be very important in the future in the Middle East. I
want everybody to know, should I be the president, Israel's going to be our
friend. I'm going to stand by Israel.
Secondly, that I think it's
important to reach out to moderate Arab nations like Jordan and Egypt, Saudi
Arabia and Kuwait.
BUSH: It's important to be friends with people
when you don't need each other so that when you do, there's a strong bond of
friendship. And that's going to be particularly important in dealing not only
with situations such as now occurring in Israel, but with Saddam Hussein.
The coalition against Saddam has fallen apart or it's unraveling, let's
put it that way. The sanctions are being violated. We don't know whether he's
developing weapons of mass destruction. He'd better not be or there's going to
be a consequence, should I be the president.
But it's important to
have credibility and credibility is formed by being strong with your friends
and resoluting your determination. It's one of the reasons why I think it's
important for this nation to develop an anti-ballistic missile system that we
can share with our allies in the Middle East, if need be, to keep the peace; to
be able to say to the Saddam Husseins of the world or the Iranians, "Don't dare
threaten our friends."
It's also important to keep strong ties in the
Middle East, credible ties, because of the energy crisis we're now in. After
all, a lot of the energy is produced from the Middle East.
And so I
appreciate what the administration is doing. I hope you can get a sense of,
should I be fortunate enough to be the president, how my administration will
react in the Middle East.
LEHRER: So you don't believe, Vice
President Gore, that we should take sides and resolve this right now? There a
lot of people pushing, "Hey, the United States should declare itself and not be
so neutral in this particular situation."
GORE: Well, we stand with
Israel, but we have maintained the ability to serve as an honest broker. And
one of the reasons that's important is that Israel cannot have direct dialogue
with some of the people on the other side of conflicts, especially during times
of tension, unless that dialogue comes through us.
GORE: And if we
throw away that ability to serve as an honest broker, then we have thrown -- we
will have thrown away a strategic asset that's important not only to us but
also to Israel.
LEHRER: Do you agree with that, Governor?
BUSH: I do. I do think this, though. I think that when it comes to timetables,
it can't be the United States timetable as to how discussions take place. It's
got to be a timetable that all parties can agree to, other than -- like the
Palestinians and the Israelis.
Secondly, any lasting peace is going
to have to be a peace that's good for both sides, and, therefore, the term
honest broker makes sense. Whether it -- this current administration's worked
hard to keep the parties at the table. I will try to do the same thing. But it
won't be on my timetable; it'll be on a timetable that people are comfortable
with in the Middle East.
LEHRER: People watching here tonight very
interested in Middle East policy. And they're so interested that they want to
make a -- they want to base their vote on differences between the two of you as
president, how you would handle Middle East policy. Is there any difference?
GORE: I haven't heard a big difference right -- in the last few
exchanges.
BUSH: Well, I think -- it's hard to tell. I think that,
you know, I would hope to be able to convince people I could handle the Iraqi
situation better. I mean, we don't...
LEHRER: Saddam Hussein, you
mean?
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: You could get him out of there?
BUSH: I'd like to, of course. And I presume this administration would
as well. But we don't know. There's no inspectors now in Iraq. The coalition
that was in place isn't as strong as it used to be.
He is a danger.
BUSH: We don't want him fishing in troubled waters in the Middle
East. And it's going to be hard to -- it's going to be important to rebuild
that coalition to keep the pressure on him.
LEHRER: Do you feel that
is a failure of the Clinton administration?
BUSH: I do.
LEHRER: Mr. Vice President?
GORE: Well, when I got to be a part of
the current administration, it was right after I was one of the few members of
my political party to support former President Bush in the Persian Gulf War
resolution.
And at the end of that war, for whatever reasons, it was
not finished in a way that removed Saddam Hussein from power. I know there are
all kinds of circumstances and explanations. But the fact is that that's the
situation that was left when I got there. And we have maintained the sanctions.
Now, I want to go further. I want to give robust support to the
groups that are trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein. And I know there are
allegations that they're too weak to do it, but that's what they said about the
forces that were opposing Milosevic in Serbia.
And, you know, the
policy of enforcing sanctions against Serbia has just resulted in a spectacular
victory for democracy just in the past week. And it seems to me that, having
taken so long to see the sanctions work there, building upon the policy of
containment that was successful over a much longer period of time against the
former Soviet Union and the Communist Bloc, it seems a little early to declare
that we should give up on the sanctions.
GORE: I know the governor's
not necessarily saying that. But, you know, all of these flights that have come
in? All of them have been in accordance with the sanctions regime, I'm told,
except for three where they notified. And they're trying to break out of the
box, there's no question about it. I don't think they should be allowed to.
LEHRER: Are you -- did he correct you -- did he state your position
correctly? You're not calling for eliminating the sanctions, are you?
BUSH: No, of course not. Absolutely not. I want them to be tougher.
LEHRER: Let's go -- move to Milosevic and Yugoslavia. And it falls into the
area of our military power.
Governor, new question, should the fall
of Milosevic be seen as a triumph for U.S. military intervention?
BUSH: I think it's a triumph; I thought the president made the right decision
in joining NATO in bombing Serbia. I supported them when they did so. I called
upon the Congress not to hamstring the administration and -- in terms of
forcing troop withdrawals on a timetable that wasn't in necessarily our best
interests or fit our nation's strategy.
And so I think it's good
public policy. I think it worked. And I'm pleased I took the -- made the
decision I made. I'm pleased the president made the decision he made, because
freedom took hold in that part of the world.
And there's a lot of
work left to be done, however.
LEHRER: But you think it would not
have happened -- do you believe -- do you think that Milosevic would not have
fallen if the United States and NATO had not intervened militarily?
LEHRER: Is this a legitimate use of our military power?
BUSH: Yes, I
think it is, absolutely. I don't think he would had fallen had we not used
force. And I know there's some in my party that disagreed with that sentiment,
but I supported the president. I thought he made the right decision to do so.
I didn't think he necessarily made the right decision to take land
troops off the table right before we committed ourselves offensively, but
nevertheless, it worked. The administration deserves credit for having made it
work.
It's as important for NATO to have it work. It's important for
NATO to be strong and confident to help keep the peace in Europe. And one of
the reasons I felt so strongly that the United States needed to participate was
because of our relations with NATO. And NATO is going to be an important part
of keeping the peace in the future.
Now, there's more work to do. It
remains to be seen how or whether or not there's going to be a political
settlement to Kosovo. And I certainly hope there is one.
I'm also on
record as saying, at some point in time, I hope our European friends become the
peacekeepers in Bosnia and in the Balkans. I hope that they put the troops on
the ground so that we can withdrawal our troops and focus our military on
fighting and winning war.
LEHRER: Mr. Vice President?
GORE:
Well, I've been kind of a hard-liner on this issue for more than eight years.
When I was in the Senate before I became vice president, I was pushing for
stronger action against Milosevic. He caused the deaths of so many people. He
was the last Communist Party boss there. And then he became a dictator by some
other label, he was still essentially a communist dictator. And unfortunately
now, he is trying to reassert himself in Serbian politics already.
GORE: Just today the members of his political party said that they were going
to ignore the orders of the new president of Serbia,and that they question his
legitimacy. And he's still going to try to be actively involved. He is an
indicted war criminal. He should be held accountable.
Now, I did want
to pick up on one of the statements earlier. And maybe I have heard -- maybe
I've heard the previous statements wrong, Governor.
In some of the
discussions we've had about when it's appropriate for the U.S. to use force
around the world, at times the standards that you've laid down have given me
the impression that if it's -- if it's something like a genocide taking place
or what they called ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, that that alone would not be --
that that wouldn't be the kind of situation that would cause you to think that
the U.S. ought to get involved with troops.
Now, have to be other
factors involved for me to want to be involved. But by itself, that, to me, can
bring into play a fundamental American strategic interest because I think it's
based on our values. Now, have I got that wrong?
LEHRER: Governor?
BUSH: OK, yes. I'm trying to figure out who the questioner was.
If I think it's in our nation's strategic interests, I'll commit troops. I
thought it was in our strategic interests to keep Milosevic in check because of
our relations in NATO, and that's why I took the positions I took. I think it's
important for NATO to be strong and confident. I felt like an
unchecked-Milosevic would harm NATO.
BUSH: And so it depends on the
situation, Mr. Vice President.
LEHRER: Well, let's keep -- let's stay
on the subject for a moment. New question, related to this. There have been --
I figured this out -- in the last 20 years, there have been eight major actions
involving the introduction of U.S. ground, air or naval forces. Let me name
them: Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, the Persian Gulf, Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti,
Kosovo. If you had been president, are any of those interventions -- would any
of those interventions not have happened?
GORE: Can you run through
the list again?
LEHRER: Sure. Lebanon.
GORE: I thought that
was a mistake.
LEHRER: Grenada.
GORE: I supported that.
LEHRER: Panama.
GORE: I supported that one.
LEHRER: Persian Gulf.
GORE: Yes, I voted for it, supported it.
LEHRER: Somalia.
GORE: Well, of course, and that, again -- no, I
think that that was ill-considered. I did support it at the time. It was in the
previous administration, in the Bush-Quayle administration, and I think in
retrospect the lessons there are ones that we -- that we should take very, very
seriously.
LEHRER: Bosnia.
GORE: Oh, yes.
LEHRER:
Haiti.
GORE: Yes.
LEHRER: And then Kosovo.
GORE:
Yes.
LEHRER: We talked about that.
Want me to do it with
you? Go through each one?
BUSH: No.
(CROSSTALK)
LEHRER: ... be Lebanon.
BUSH: No, I'm fine. I'll make a couple of
comments.
LEHRER: Sure. Absolutely. Sure.
BUSH: Somalia.
Started off as a humanitarian mission then changed into a nation-building
mission, and that's where the mission went wrong. The mission was changed. And
as a result, our nation paid a price.
And so I don't think our troops
ought to be used for what's called nation-building.
BUSH: I think our
troops ought to be used to fight and win war. I think our troops ought to be
used to help overthrow a dictator that's in our -- and it's in our -- when it's
in our best interests.
But in this case, it was a nation-building
exercise. And same with Haiti, I wouldn't have supported either.
LEHRER: What about Lebanon?
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: Grenada?
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: Panama?
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: Obviously, the...
BUSH: Well, some of them I've got a
conflict of interest on, if you know what I mean.
LEHRER: I do. I do.
(LAUGHTER)
LEHRER: The Persian Gulf, obviously.
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: And Bosnia. And you've already talked about
Kosovo.
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: But the reverse side of the
question, Governor, that Vice President Gore mentioned -- for instance, 600,000
people died in Rwanda in 1994. There was no U.S. intervention. There was no
intervention from the outside world. Was that a mistake not to intervene?
BUSH: I think the administration did the right thing in that case, I do.
It was a horrible situation. No one liked to see it on our -- you know, on our
TV screens. But it's a case where we need to make sure we've got a, you know,
kind of an early warning system in place in places where there could be ethnic
cleansing and genocide the way we saw it there in Rwanda.
And that's
a case where we need to, you know, use our influence to have countries in
Africa come together and help deal with the situation. The administration -- it
seems like we're having a great love fest now -- but the administration made
the right decision on training Nigerian troops for situations just such as this
in Rwanda. And so I thought they made the right decision not to send U.S.
troops into Rwanda.
LEHRER: Do you have any second thoughts on that
based on what you said a moment ago about genocide and...
GORE: I'd
like to come back to the question of nation-building. But let me address this
question directly first.
LEHRER: We'll do that later.
GORE:
Fine.
We did actually send troops into Rwanda to help with the
humanitarian relief measures. My wife, Tipper, who's here, actually went on a
military plane with General Shalikashvili on one of those flights.
But I think in retrospect we were too late getting in there. We would have
saved more lives if we had acted earlier.
But I do not think that it
was an example of a conflict where we should have put our troops in to try to
separate the parties for this reason, Jim: One of my -- one of the criteria
that I think is important in deciding when and if we should ever get involved
around the world is whether or not our national security interest is involved,
if we can really make the difference with military force, if we've tried
everything else, if we have allies.
In the Balkans, we had allies,
NATO, ready, willing and able to go and carry a big part of the burden. In
Africa, we did not. Now we have tried -- our country's tried to create an
Africa crisis response team there, and we've met some resistance. We have had
some luck with Nigeria, but in Sierra Leone. And that, now that Nigeria's
become a democracy -- and we hope it stays that way -- then maybe we can build
on that.
But because we had no allies and because it was very unclear
that we could actually accomplish what we would want to accomplish by putting
military forces there, I think it was the right thing not to jump in, as
heartbreaking as it was, but I think we should have come in much quicker with
the humanitarian mission.
LEHRER: So what would you say, Governor, to
somebody who would say, "Hey, wait a minute. Why not Africa? I mean, why the
Middle East? Why the Balkans, but not Africa when 600,000 people's lives are at
risk?"
BUSH: Well, I understand. And Africa's important, and we've
got to do a lot of work in Africa to promote democracy and trade. And there's
some -- the vice president mentioned Nigeria. It's a fledgling democracy. We've
got to work with Nigeria. That's an important continent.
But there's
got to be priorities. And the Middle East is a priority for a lot of reasons,
as is Europe and the Far East and our own hemisphere. And those are my four top
priorities should I be the president. It's not to say we won't be engaged nor
trying -- nor should we -- you know, work hard to get other nations to come
together to prevent atrocity.
I thought the best example of a way to
handle the situation is East Timor when we provided logistical support to the
Australians, support that only we can provide. I thought that was a good model.
But we can't be all things to all people in the world, Jim. And I
think that's where maybe the vice president and I begin to have some
differences. I am worried about over-committing our military around the world.
I want to be judicious in its use.
You mentioned Haiti. I wouldn't
have sent troops to Haiti. I didn't think it was a mission worthwhile. It was a
nation-building mission. And it was not very successful. It cost us billions, a
couple of billions of dollars, and I'm not so sure democracy is any better off
in Haiti than it was before.
LEHRER: Vice President Gore, do you
agree with the governor's views on nation-building, the use of military, our
military to -- for nation-building, as he described it and defined it?
GORE: I don't think we agree on that. I would certainly also be judicious
in evaluating any potential use of American troops overseas. I think we have to
be very reticent about that.
But, look, Jim, the world is changing so
rapidly. The way I see it, the world's getting much closer together. Like it or
not, we are now the -- the United States is now the natural leader of the
world. All these other countries are looking to us.
Now, just because
we cannot be involved everywhere, and shouldn't be, doesn't mean that we should
shy away from going in anywhere. Now, both of us are, kind of, I guess stating
the other's position in a maximalist, extreme way, but I think there is a
difference here.
This idea of nation-building is a kind of pejorative
phrase. But think about the great conflict of the past century, World War II.
During the years between World War I and World War II, a great lesson was
learned by our military leaders and the people of the United States. The lesson
was that in the aftermath of World War I we kind of turned our backs and left
them to their own devices, and they brewed up a lot of trouble that quickly
became World War II.
And acting upon that lesson in the aftermath of
our great victory in World War II, we laid down the Marshall Plan, President
Truman did.
GORE: We got eminently involved in building NATO and
other structures there. We still have lots of troops in Europe.
And
what did we do in the late '40s and '50s and '60s? We were nation-building. And
it was economic, but it was also military. And the confidence that those
countries recovering from the wounds of war had by having troops there -- we
had civil administrators come in to set up their ways of building their towns
back.
LEHRER: You said in the Boston debate, Governor, on this issue
of nation-building, that the United States military is overextended now. Where
is it overextended? Where are there U.S. military that you would bring home if
you become president?
BUSH: Well, first, let me just say one comment
about what the vice president said. I think one of the lessons in between World
War I and World War II is we let our military atrophy, and we can't do that.
We've got to rebuild our military.
But one of the problems we have in
the military is we're in a lot of places around the world. And I mentioned one,
and that's the Balkans. I'd very much like to get our troops out of there. I
recognize we can't do it now, nor do I advocate an immediate withdrawal. That
would be an abrogation of our agreement with NATO; no one's suggesting that.
But I think it ought to be one of our priorities, to work with our European
friends to convince them to put troops on the ground. And there is an example.
Haiti is another example.
Now, there are some places where, I think,
you know, I supported the administration in Colombia; I think it's important
for us to be training Colombians in that part of the world. Our hemisphere is
in our interest, to have a peaceful Colombia.
BUSH: But...
LEHRER: If you're just going to -- you know, the use of the military, there's
-- some people are now suggesting that if you don't want to use the military to
maintain the peace, to do the civil thing, is it time to consider a civil force
of some kind that comes in after the military that builds nations or all of
that? Is that on your radar screen?
BUSH: I don't think so. I think
-- I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they
live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean, we're
going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America? Absolutely not.
Our military's meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to
do. And when it gets over extended, morale drops.
And I'm not -- I
strongly believe we need to have a military presence in the Korea Peninsula,
not only to keep the peace in peninsula, but to keep regional stability. And I
strongly believe we need to keep a presence in NATO.
But I'm going to
be judicious as to how to use the military. It needs to be in our vital
interest, the mission needs to be clear, and the exit strategy obvious.
GORE: Well, I don't disagree with that. I certainly don't disagree that we
ought to get our troops home from places like the Balkans as soon as we can, as
soon as the mission is complete.
That's what we did in Haiti. There
are -- there are no more than a handful of American military personnel in Haiti
now. And the Haitians have their problems, but we gave them a chance to restore
democracy. And that's really about all we can do.
But if you have a
situation like that right in our backyard with chaos about to break out and
flotillas forming to come across the water and all kinds of violence there,
right in one of our neighboring countries there, then I think that we did the
right thing there.
GORE: And as for this idea of nation-building. The
phrase sounds grandiose. And, you know, we can't be -- we can't allow ourselves
to get overextended. I certainly agree with that. And that's why I've supported
building -- building up our capacity. I've devoted in the budget I've proposed,
as I said last week, more than twice as much as the governor has proposed.
I think that it's in better shape now than he generally does. We've had
some disagreements about that. He said that two divisions would have to report
not ready for duty, and that's not what the Joint Chiefs say. But there's no
doubt that we have to continue building up readiness and military strength, and
we have to also be very cautious in the way we use our military.
LEHRER: In the nonmilitary area of influencing events around the world, in the
financial and economic area, World Bank President Wolfensohn said recently,
Governor, that U.S. contributions to overseas development assistance is lower
now almost than it has ever been. Is that a problem for you? Do you think --
what is your -- what is your idea about what the United States' obligations
are? We're talking about financial assistance and that sort of thing to other
countries, the poorer countries?
BUSH: Well, I mentioned Third World
debt.
LEHRER: Sure.
BUSH: That's a place where we can use
our generosity to influence, in a positive way, influence nations. I believe we
ought to have foreign aid, but I don't think we ought to just have foreign aid
for the sake of foreign aid. I think foreign aid needs to be used to encourage
markets and reform.
BUSH: I think a lot of times we just spend aid
and say we feel better about it, and it ends up being spent the wrong way.
And there's some pretty egregious examples recently, one being Russia
where we had IMF loans that ended up in the pockets of a lot of powerful people
and didn't help the nation.
I think the IMF has got a role in the
world, but I don't want to see the IMF out there as a way to say to world
bankers, "If you make a bad loan, we'll bail you out." It needs to be available
for emergency situations.
I thought the president did the right thing
with Mexico and was very strongly supportive of the administration in Mexico.
But I don't think IMF and our -- ought to be a stop-loss for people who ought
to be able to evaluate risks themselves.
And so, I look at every
place where we're investing money; I just want to make sure the return is good.
LEHRER: You think we're meeting our obligations properly?
GORE: No, I would make some changes. I think there need to be reforms in the
IMF. I've generally supported it, but I've seen them make some calls that I
thought were highly questionable. And I think that there's a general agreement
in many parts of the world now that there ought to be changes in the IMF. The
World Bank I think is generally doing a better job.
But I think one
of the big issues here that doesn't get nearly enough attention is the issue of
corruption. The governor mentioned it earlier. I've worked on this issue. It's
an enormous problem. And corruption in official agencies, like militaries and
police departments around the world, customs official -- that's one of the
worst forms of it.
And we have got to, again, lead by example and
help these other countries that are trying to straighten out their situations
find the tools in order to do it.
GORE: I just think, Jim, that this
is an absolutely unique period in world history. The world's coming together,
as I said, they're looking to us. And we have a fundamental choice to make: Are
we going to step up to the plate as a nation, the way we did after World War
II, the way that generation of heroes said, "OK, the United States is going to
be the leader"? And the would benefited tremendously from the courage that they
showed in those post-war years.
I think that in the aftermath of the
Cold War, it's time for us to do something very similar, to step up to the
plate, to provide the leadership: leadership on the environment, leadership to
make sure the world economy keeps moving in the right direction. Again, that
means not running big deficits here and not squandering our surplus; it means
having intelligent decisions that keep our prosperity going and shepherds that
economic strength so that we can provide that leadership role.
BUSH:
Let me comment on that.
LEHRER: Sure.
BUSH: Yes, I'm not so
sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, "This is
the way it's got to be. We can help." And maybe it's just our difference in
government, the way we view government. I mean, I want to empower people, I
don't -- you know, I want to help people help themselves, not have government
tell people what to do.
I just don't think it's the role of the
United States to walk into a country, say, "We do it this way, so should you."
Now, I think we can help, and I know we got to encourage democracy and the
marketplaces.
But take Russia, for example. We went into Russia, we
said, "Here's some IMF money," and it ended up in Viktor Chernomyrdin's pocket
and others. And yet we played like there was reform.
BUSH: The only
people that are going to reform Russia are Russia. They're going to have to
make the decision themselves. Mr. Putin is going to have to make the decision
as to whether or not he wants to adhere to rule of law and normal accounting
practices so that if countries and or entities invest capital, there's a
reasonable rate of return, a way to get the money out of the economy.
But Russia has to make the decision. We can work with them on security matters
for example, but it's there call to make.
So I'm not exactly sure
where the vice president is coming from. But I think one way for us to end up
being viewed as the ugly American is for us to go around the world saying, "We
do it this way, so should you."
Now, we trust freedom. We know
freedom is a powerful, powerful -- a powerful force much bigger than the United
States of America, as we saw recently in the Balkans.
But maybe I
misunderstand where you're coming from, Mr. Vice President, but I think the
United States must be humble and must be proud and confident of our values, but
humble in how we treat nations that are figuring out how to chart their own
course.
LEHRER: Let's move on. All right -- no, let's move on.
GORE: Far be it from me to suggest otherwise.
(LAUGHTER)
LEHRER: First, a couple of follow-ups from the vice presidential debate
last week.
Vice President Gore, would you support or sign as
president a federal law banning racial profiling by police and other
authorities at all levels of government?
GORE: Yes, I would. The only
thing an executive order can accomplish is to ban it in federal law enforcement
agencies.
GORE: But I would also support a law in the Congress that
would have the effect of doing the same thing. I just -- I think that racial
profiling is a serious problem.
I remember when the stories first
came out about the stops in New Jersey by the highway patrol there. And I know
it's been going on a long time. In some ways, this is just a new label for
something that's been going on for years. But I have to confess that it was the
first time that I really focused on it in a new way. And I was -- I was
surprised at the extent of it.
And I think we've now got so many
examples around the country that we really have to find ways to end this.
Because -- imagine what it -- what it is like for someone to be singled out
unfairly, unjustly and feel the unfair force of law simply because of race or
ethnicity.
Now, that runs counter to what the United States of
America is all about at our core. And it's not an easy problem to solve, but I
-- if I am entrusted with the presidency, it will be the first civil rights act
of the 21st century.
BUSH: Yes. I can't imagine what it would be like
to be singled out because of race and stopped and harassed. That's just flat
wrong, and that's not what America's all about. And so we ought to do
everything we can to end racial profiling.
One of my concerns,
though, is I don't want to federalize the local police forces.
BUSH:
I want to -- obviously, in the egregious cases, we need to enforce civil rights
law. But we need to make sure that internal affairs divisions at the local
level do their job and be given a chance to do their job. I believe in local
control of governments. And obviously if they don't, there needs to be a
consequence at the federal level. But it's very important that we not overstep
our bounds.
And I think most people -- most police officers are good,
dedicated, honorable citizens who are doing their job, putting their lives at
risk, who aren't bigoted or aren't prejudiced. I don't think they ought to be
held guilty, but I do think we need to find out where racial profiling occurs
and do something about it. And say to the local folks, get it done, and if you
can't, there'll be a federal consequence.
LEHRER: And that could be a
federal law?
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: And you would agree?
GORE: I would agree. And I also agree that most police officers, of
course, are doing a good job and hate this practice also.
I talked to
an African-American police officer in Springfield, Massachusetts, not -- not
long ago -- who raised this question and said that in his opinion, one of the
biggest solutions is in the training, and not only the training in police
procedures, but human -- human relations.
And I think that racial
profiling is part of a larger issue of how we deal with race in America.
And as for singling people out because of race, you know James Byrd was
singled out because of his race, in Texas. And other Americans have been
singled out because of their race or -- or ethnicity. And that's why I think
that we can embody our values by passing a hate crimes law. I think these
crimes are different.
GORE: I think they're different because they're
based on prejudice and hatred, which is -- which gives rise to crimes that have
not just a single victim, but they're intended to stigmatize and dehumanize a
whole group of people.
LEHRER: Do you have a different view of that?
BUSH: No, I don't really.
LEHRER: On hate crimes violence?
BUSH: No, I -- we got one in Texas, and guess what? The three men who
murdered James Byrd, guess what's going to happen to them? They're going to be
put to death. A jury found them guilty and I -- it's going to be hard to punish
them any worse after they get put to death. And it's the right cost; it's the
right decision.
And secondly, there is other forms of racial
profiling that goes on in America. Arab-Americans are racially profiled in
what's called secret evidence. People are stopped, and we got to do something
about that. My friend, Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan, is pushing a law to
make sure that, you know, Arab-Americans are treated with respect.
So
racial profiling isn't just an issue at the local police forces. It's an issue
throughout our society. And as we become a diverse society, we're going to have
to deal with it more and more.
I believe though -- I believe, sure as
I'm sitting here, that most Americans really care. They're tolerant people.
They're good, tolerant people. It's the very few that create most of the
crisis. And we just happen to have to find them and deal with them.
LEHRER: What -- if you become president, Governor, are there other areas,
racial problem areas, that you would deal with as president, involving
discrimination?
BUSH: Sure.
LEHRER: Again, you said
Arab-Americans, but also Hispanics, Asians, as well as blacks in this country.
BUSH: Let me tell you where the biggest discrimination comes: in
public education, when we just move children through the schools.
BUSH: My friend Phyllis Hunter's here. She had one of the greatest lines of all
lines. She said, "Reading is the new civil right." And she's right. And to make
sure our society is as hopeful as it possibly can be, every single child in
America must be educated -- I mean every child.
It starts with making
sure every child learns to read; K-2 diagnostic testing so we know whether or
not there's a deficiency; curriculum that works, and phonics needs to be an
integral part of our reading curriculum; intensive reading laboratories;
teacher retraining.
I mean, there needs to be a wholesale effort
against racial profiling, which is illiterate children. We can do better in our
public schools. We can -- we can close an achievement gap. And it starts with
making sure we have strong accountability, Jim.
One of the
cornerstones of reform, and good reform, is to measure because when you
measure, you can ask the question: Do they know? Is anybody being profiled? Is
anybody being discriminated against? It becomes a tool, a corrective tool.
And I believe the federal government must say that if you receive any
money -- any money from the federal government, for disadvantaged children, for
example, you must show us whether or not the children are learning. And if they
are, fine. And if they're not, there has to be a consequence.
And so
to make sure we end up getting rid of a basic structural prejudice -- is
education. There's nothing more prejudiced than not educating a child.
LEHRER: Vice President Gore, what would be on your racial discrimination
elimination list as president?
GORE: Well, I think we need tough
enforcement of the civil rights laws. I think we still need affirmative action.
I would pass a hate crimes law, as I said.
GORE: And I guess I had
misunderstood the governor's previous position. The Byrd family may have a
misunderstanding of it in Texas also.
But I'd like to shift, if I
could, to the big issue of education.
LEHRER: Well, no, hold on one
second. What is the misunderstanding? Let's clear this up.
GORE:
Well, I had thought that there was a controversy at the end of the legislative
session where the hate crimes law in Texas was -- failed and that the Byrd
family, among others, asked you to support it, Governor, and it died in
committee for lack of support. Am I wrong about that?
BUSH: Well, you
don't realize we have a hate crime statute...
GORE: I'm talking about
the one that was proposed to deal...
BUSH: Well, what the vice
president must not understand is we got a hate crimes bill in Texas. And
secondly, the people that murdered Mr. Byrd got the ultimate punishment...
LEHRER: But they were...
BUSH: ... the death penalty.
LEHRER: They were prosecuted under the murder laws, were they not...
BUSH: Well...
LEHRER: ... in Texas?
BUSH: In this case,
when you murder somebody, it's hate, Jim.
LEHRER: No, but...
BUSH: Crime is hate. And they got -- and they got the ultimate punishment.
I'm not exactly sure how you enhance the penalty any more than the death
penalty. Well, we happen to have a statute on the books that's a hate crimes
statute in Texas.
GORE: May I respond?
LEHRER: Sure. GORE:
I don't want to jump in.
(LAUGHTER)
I may have been misled
by all the news reports about this matter, because the law that was proposed in
Texas, that had the support of the Byrd family and a whole lot of people in
Texas, did in fact die in committee. There may be some other statute that was
already on the books, but certainly the advocates of the hate crimes law felt
that a tough new law was needed.
GORE: And it's important, Jim, not
only -- not just because of Texas, but because this mirrors the national
controversy. There is pending now in the Congress a national hate crimes law
because of James Byrd, because of Matthew Shepard, who was crucified on a
split- rail fence by bigots, because of others. And that law has died in
committee also because of the same kind of opposition.
LEHRER: And
you would support that bill?
GORE: Absolutely.
LEHRER:
Would you support a national hate crimes law?
BUSH: I would support
the Orrin Hatch version of it, not the Senator Kennedy version.
But
let me say to you, Mr. Vice President, we're happy with our laws on our books.
That bill -- there was another bill that did die in committee.
But I
want to repeat, if you have a state that fully supports the law like we do in
Texas, we're going to go after all crime, and we're going to make sure people
get punished for the crime. And in this case, we can't enhance the penalty
anymore than putting those three thugs to death. And that's what's going to
happen in the state of Texas.
LEHRER: New subject, new question,
another vice presidential debate follow-up.
Governor, both Senator
Lieberman and Secretary Cheney said they were sympathetically rethinking their
views on same-sex relationships. What's your position on that?
BUSH:
I'm not for gay marriage. I think marriage is a sacred institution between a
man and a woman. And I appreciate the way the administration signed the Defense
of Marriage Act. I presume the vice president supported it when the president
signed that bill and supports it now. But I think -- I think marriage is a
sacred institution.
I'm going to be respectful for people who may
disagree with me. I've had a record of doing so in the state of Texas. I've
been a person that would -- been called a uniter not divider because I accepted
some -- I accept other people's points of view. But I feel strongly that
marriage should be between a man and a woman.
LEHRER: Vice President
Gore?
GORE: I agree with that. And I did support that law. But I
think that we should find a way to allow some kind of civic unions. And I
basically agree with Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman. And I think the three of us
have one view and the governor has another one.
LEHRER: Is that
right?
BUSH: I'm not sure what kind of view he's ascribing to me. I
can just tell you, I'm a -- I'm a person who respects other people. I respect
their -- I respect -- on the one hand, he says he agrees with me and then he
says he doesn't. I'm not sure where he's coming from.
But I -- I -- I
will be a tolerant person. I've been a tolerant person all my life. I just
happen to believe strongly that marriage is between a man and a woman.
LEHRER: Do you believe in general terms that gays and lesbians should have
the same rights as other Americans?
BUSH: Yes. I don't think they
ought to have special rights, but I think they ought to have the same rights.
GORE: Well, there's a -- there's a law pending called the Employment
Non-Discrimination Act. I strongly support it. What it says is that gays and
lesbians can't be fired from their job because they're gay or lesbian, and it
would be a federal law preventing that.
Now, I wonder if the -- it's
been blocked by the opponents in the majority in the Congress. I wonder if the
Governor would lend his support to that law?
LEHRER: Governor?
BUSH: The questioner coming around again?
LEHRER: Yes. It's a
logical rebuttal.
BUSH: Well, I have no idea. I mean, you can throw
out all kinds -- I don't know the particulars of this law.
I will
tell you I'm the kind of person -- I don't hire or fire somebody based upon
their sexual orientation. As a matter of fact, I'd like to take the issue a
little further. I don't really think it's any of my, you know, any of my
concerns how you conduct your sex life. And I think that's a private matter.
And I think that's the way it ought to be.
BUSH: But I'm going to be
respectful for people. I'll tolerate people. And I support equal rights, but
not special rights for people.
LEHRER: And special rights, how does
that affect gays and lesbians?
BUSH: Well, if they're given -- if
they're given special protective status. And that doesn't mean we shouldn't
fully enforce laws and fully protect people and fully honor people, which I
will do as the president of the United States.
LEHRER: New subject,
new question.
Vice President Gore, how do you see the connection
between controlling gun sales in this country and the incidence of death by
accidental or intentional use of guns?
GORE: Jim, I hope that we can
come back to the subject of education, because the governor made an extensive
statement on it, and I have a very different view than the one he -- than the
one he expressed. But that having been said, I believe that -- well, first of
all, let me say that the governor and I agree on some things where this subject
is concerned. I will not do anything to affect the rights of hunters or
sportsmen. I think that homeowners have to be respected and the right to have a
gun if they wish to.
The problem I see is that there are too many
guns getting into the hands of children and criminals and people who for
whatever reason, some kind of history of -- of stalking or domestic abuse,
really should not be able to get guns. I think these assault weapons are a
problem.
So I favor closing the gun show loophole.
GORE: In
fact, I cast the tie-breaking vote to close it. But then the majority in the
House of Representatives went the other way. That's still pending. If we could
get agreement on that, maybe they could pass that in the final days of this
Congress.
I think we ought to restore the three-day waiting period
under the Brady Law.
I think we should toughen the enforcement of gun
laws so that the ones that are already on the books can be enforced much more
effectively. Some of the restrictions that have been placed by the Congress in
the last couple of years, I think -- in the last few years, I think have been
unfortunate.
I think that we ought to make all schools gun-free. Have
a gun- free zone around every school in this country.
I think that
measures like these are important, child safety trigger locks on a mandatory
basis, and others.
LEHRER: Governor.
BUSH: Well, it starts
with enforcing law. We need to say loud and clear to somebody, "If you're going
to carry a gun illegally, we're going to arrest you. If you're going to sell a
gun illegally, you're going to be arrested. And if you commit a crime with a
gun," there needs to be absolute certainty in the law.
And that means
that the local law enforcement officials need help at the federal law, need
programs like Project Exile where the federal government intensifies arresting
people who illegally use guns. And we haven't done a very good job of that at
the federal level recently. And I'm going to make it a priority.
Secondly, I don't think we ought to be selling guns to people who shouldn't
have them. That's why I support instant background checks at gun shows. One of
the reasons we have an instant background check is so that we instantly know
whether or not someone should have a gun or not.
In Texas, I tried to
do something innovatively, which is that, you know, there's a lot of talk
about, you know, trigger locks being on guns sold in the future. I support
that.
But I said, listen, if you want a trigger lock to make your gun
safe, come to -- come and get one for free.
BUSH: And so we're
distributing in our state of Texas for free. I think we ought to raise the age
at which a juvenile can carry a handgun from 18 to 21.
I disagree
with the vice president on this issue: I don't -- he's for registration of
guns. I think the only people that are going to show to register or get a
license -- I get licensing, like a driver's license, of a gun -- the only
people who are going to show up are law-abiding citizens. The criminal's not
going to show up and say, "Hey, give me my ID card." It's the law-abiding
citizens who will do that. And I -- I just -- I don't think that's going to be
an effective tool to make the -- keep our society safe.
LEHRER: All
right. So on guns, somebody wants to cast a vote based on your differences,
where are the differences?
GORE: Well, I'm not for registration. I am
for licensing by states of new handgun purchases so that...
LEHRER:
What does that do? What's that's mean?
GORE: A photo license ID, like
a driver's license, for new handguns. And, you know, the Los Angeles...
LEHRER: Excuse me. You would have to get the license -- a photo ID to go
in and before you could buy the gun?
GORE: Correct.
LEHRER:
All right.
GORE: At the time.
LEHRER: And who would issue
-- who would issue the...
GORE: The state. The state. I think states
should do that for new handguns because too many criminals are getting guns.
There was a recent investigation of the number in Texas who got -- who were
given concealed weapon permits in spite of the fact that they had records, and
the Los Angeles Times spent a lot of ink going into that.
But I am
not for doing anything that would affect hunters or sportsmen, rifles,
shotguns, existing handguns. I do think that sensible gun safety measures are
warranted now.
GORE: Look, this is the year -- this is in the
aftermath of Columbine and Paducah and all of the places around our country
where the nation has been shocked by these weapons in the hands of the wrong
people.
The woman who bought the guns for the two boys who did that
killing at Columbine said that if she had had to give her name and fill out a
form there, she would not have bought those guns. That conceivably could have
prevented that tragedy.
LEHRER: Back to the question about the
differences on gun control, what are they, Governor, from your point of view,
between you and the vice president?
BUSH: Well, I'm not for -- I'm
not for photo-licensing.
But let me say something about Columbine.
And listen, we've got gun laws. He says we ought to have gun-free schools.
Everybody believes that. I'm sure every state in the union has got them. You
can't carry a gun into a school, and there ought to be a consequence when you
do carry a gun into a school.
But Columbine spoke to a larger issue,
and it's really a matter of culture. It's a culture that somewhere along the
line we begun to disrespect life, where a child can walk in and have their
heart turn dark as a result of being on the Internet and walk in and decide to
take somebody else's life.
So gun laws are important, no question
about it, but so is loving children and character education classes and
faith-based programs being a part of after-school programs. Somebody -- some
desperate child, it needs to have somebody put their arm around them and say,
"We love you."
And so there's a -- this is a society that -- of ours
that's got to do a better job of teaching children right from wrong.
BUSH: And we can enforce law. But there seems to be a lot of preoccupation on,
not necessarily in this debate, but just in general on law.
But
there's a larger law: Love your neighbor like you'd like to be loved yourself.
And that's where our society must head if we're going to be a peaceful and
prosperous society.
GORE: I also believe in the Golden Rule, and I
agree with a lot of the other things that the governor has said.
We
do have a serious problem in our culture. Tipper and I have worked on the
problem of violence and entertainment aimed at children. She's worked on it
longer than I have, but I feel very strongly about that. And if I'm elected
president, I will do something about that. But I think that we -- I think we
have to start with better parenting.
But I don't think that we can
ignore the role played by guns. I mean, the fact is that even though no states
wants them, there are guns in some schools. And the reason it's so difficult
for schools to control that is because in recent years there has been a flood
of cheap handguns that are so widely available that kids are finding ways to
get a hold of them.
And I think that if you look at the situation as
it exists here in the United States compared to any other country in the world,
it seems to me pretty obvious that while we respect the rights of hunters and
sportsmen, we do need some common-sense gun safety steps to stem this flood of
guns that are getting into the wrong hands.
BUSH: Yes. No question
about that, but there's also needs to be strong enforcement of the law. Some
kid who feels like they can -- it doesn't matter where the gun comes from; it
can be a cheap gun, expensive gun. What matters is, something in this person's
head says there's not going to be a consequence.
BUSH: So in my
state, we toughened up the juvenile justice laws. We added beds. We're tough.
We believe in tough love. We say, if you get caught carrying a gun, you're
automatically detained. And that's what needs to happen.
And we've
got laws. If laws need to be strengthened like instant background checks,
that's important.
LEHRER: New question.
BUSH: New question,
as I was saying...
LEHRER: Both of you, Governor, both of you have
talked much about Medicare and health care for seniors. What about the more
than 40 million younger Americans who do not have health insurance right now?
What would you do about that?
BUSH: Well, I've got a plan to do
something about that, it's to make health care affordable and available, this
way: First, there's some who should be buying health care who choose not to.
There's some...
LEHRER: Some of the 40 million?
BUSH: Some
of the healthy folks.
LEHRER: Right.
BUSH: Healthy young
kids say, "I'll never get sick, therefore I'm not going to have -- I don't need
health care right now." And for those what I think we need to do is to develop
an investment-type vehicle that would be an incentive for -- for them to
invest, like medical savings accounts with rollover capacity. In other words,
you say to a youngster, it would be in your financial interest to start saving
for future illness.
But for the working folks that do want to have
health care that can't afford it, a couple of things we need to do. One, we
need more community health centers. I've developed -- put out money in my
budget to expand community health centers all around the country. These are
places where people can get primary care.
Secondly -- and they're
good. They're a very important parts of the safety net of health care.
BUSH: Secondly, that you get a $2,000 rebate from the government if you're
a family of $30,000 or less -- it scales down as it gets higher -- that you can
use to purchase health care in the private markets.
It'll be a huge
down payment for a pretty darn good system if you allow -- also allow --
convince states to allow -- allow states to allow the mother to match some of
the children's health insurance money with it to pool purchasing power.
And to make health care more affordable, allow business associations like
the National Federation of Independent Business or the Chamber of Commerce or
the National Restaurant Association to write association plans across
jurisdictional lines so that small business have got the capacity of national
pooling to drive the cost of insurance down.
I think that's the very
best way to go. It empowers people. It trusts people. It makes -- it -- and
it's a practical way to encourage people to purchase health care insurance.
LEHRER: Vice President Gore?
GORE: It's one of my top
priorities, Jim, to give every single child in the United States affordable
health care within the next four years. I'd like to see eventually in this
country some form of universal health care, but I'm not for a government-run
system.
In fact, I'm for shrinking the size of government. I want a
smaller and smarter government. I have been in charge of this reinventing
government streamlining project that's reduced the size of government by more
than 300,000 people in the last several years.
And the budget plan
that I've put out, according to the Los Angeles Times, again, the way these
things are typically measured as a percentage of the GDP, will bring government
spending down to the lowest level in 50 years. So I want to proceed carefully
to cover more people.
GORE: But I think that we should start by
greatly expanding the so-called Child Health Insurance, or CHIP, Program to
give health insurance to every single child in this country. I think it's
intolerable that we have so many millions of children without any health
insurance. So it's one of my top priorities.
Now, I know that we have
some disagreements on this, and I'm sorry to tell you that, you know, there is
a record here, and Texas ranks 49th out of the 50 states in health care -- in
children with health care, 49th for women with health care, and 50th for
families with health care.
So it is a priority for me, I guarantee
you. I'm not aware of any program -- well, I'll just leave it at that. I think
it ought to be a top priority.
LEHRER: Governor, did Vice President
-- are the vice president's figures correct about Texas?
BUSH: Well,
first of all, let me say, he's not for a government- run health care system. I
thought that's exactly what he and Mrs. Clinton and them fought for in 1993,
was a government-run health care system. It was fortunately stopped in its
tracks.
Secondly, we spend $4.7 billion a year on the uninsured in
the state of Texas. Our rate of uninsured, the percentage of uninsured, in
Texas has gone down while the percentage of uninsured in America has gone up.
Our CHIPs program got a late start because our government meets only
four months out of every two years, Mr. Vice President. May come for a shock
for somebody's been in Washington for so long, but actually limited government
can work in the second largest state in the Union, and therefore Congress
passes the bill after our session in 1970 -- '97 ended. We passed the enabling
legislation in '99. We've signed up over 110,000 children to the CHIPs program
for comparable states our size. We're signing them up fast as any other state.
And I -- you can quote all the numbers you want, but I'm telling you,
we care about our people in Texas, we spend a lot of money to make sure people
get health care in the state of Texas, and we're doing a better job than they
are at the national level for reducing uninsured.
LEHRER: Is he
right?
GORE: Well, I don't know about the -- all these percentages
that he throws out. But I do know that the -- I speculate that the reason why
he didn't answer your question directly as to whether my numbers were right,
the facts were right, about Texas ranking dead last in families with health
insurance and 49th out of 50 for both children and women, is because those
facts are correct.
And as for why it happened, I'm no expert on the
Texas procedures. But what my friends there tell me is that the governor
opposed a measure put forward by Democrats in the legislature to expand the
number of children that would be covered, and instead directed the money toward
a tax cut, a significant part of which went to wealthy interests. He declared
the need for a new tax cut for the oil companies in Texas an emergency need.
And so the money was taken away from the CHIP program.
There's a --
you don't have to take my word for this. There is now a federal judge's opinion
about the current management of this program, ordering the state of Texas to do
some -- and you should read that judge's language about this.
GORE:
They're -- I believe there are 1.4 million children in Texas who do not have
health insurance, 600,000 of whom -- and maybe some of those have since gotten
it, but as of a year ago, 600,000 of them were actually eligible for it but
they couldn't sign up for it because of the barriers that they had to surmount.
LEHRER: Let's let the governor respond to that.
BUSH: Well,
I...
LEHRER: Are those numbers correct? Are his charges correct?
BUSH: If he's trying to allege that I'm a hard-hearted person and I don't
care about children, he's absolutely wrong. We spend $4.7 billion a year in the
state of Texas for uninsured people, and they get health care. Now, it's not
the most efficient way to get people health care.
But I want to
remind you, the number of uninsured in America during their watch has
increased. And so he can make any excuse that he wants, but the facts are that
we're reducing the number of uninsured as a percentage of our population and as
a percentage of the population is increasing nationally.
But somehow
the allegation that we don't care, and we're going to get money for this
interest or that interest, and not for children in the state of Texas, is just
totally absurd.
And I -- let me just tell you who the jury is: the
people of Texas. There's only been one governor ever elected to back-to-back
four year terms and that was me. And I was able to do so with a lot of Democrat
votes, nearly 50 percent of the Hispanic vote, about 27 percent of the
African-American vote because people know that I'm a conservative person and a
compassionate person.
So we can throw all those kinds of numbers
around, I'm just telling you, our state comes together to do what's right.
BUSH: We come together, both Republicans and Democrats.
LEHRER:
Let me put that directly to -- to you, Vice President Gore. The reason you
brought this up is that -- are you suggesting that those numbers and that
record will reflect the way Governor Bush will operate in this area of health
insurance as president?
GORE: Yes. Yes. But it's not a statement
about his heart. I don't claim to know his heart. I think -- I think he's a
good person. I make no allegations about that. I believe him when he says that
-- that he has a good heart. I know enough about your story to -- to admire a
lot of the things that you have done as a person.
But I think it's
about his priorities. And let me tell you exactly why I think that the choice
he made to give a tax cut for the oil companies and others before addressing
this -- I mean, if you were the governor of a state that was dead last in
health care for families, and all of a sudden you found yourself with the
biggest surplus your state had ever had in its history, wouldn't you want to
maybe use some of it climb from 50th to say 45 or 40 or something, or maybe
better? I would.
Now, but here's why it's directly relevant, Jim,
because by his own budget numbers, his proposals for spending on tax cuts for
the wealthiest of the wealthy are more than the new spending proposals that he
has made for health care and education and national defense all combined,
according to his own numbers. So it's not a question of his heart, it's -- as
far as I know, it's a -- it's a question of priorities and values.
GORE: See, you know...
LEHRER: Let me just ask -- let me ask...
BUSH: First of all, that's simply not true, what he just said, of course.
And secondly, I repeat...
LEHRER: What's not true, Governor?
BUSH: That we spent -- the top 1 percent receive $223 as opposed to $445
billion in new spending. The top -- let's talk about my tax plan. The top 1
percent pay -- will pay one-third of all the federal income taxes, and in
return get one-fifth of the benefits because -- benefits, because most of the
tax reductions go to the people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.
That stands in stark contrast, by the way, to a man who's going to leave
50 million -- 50 million -- Americans out of tax relief.
We just have
a different point of view. It's a totally different point of view. He believes
only the right people ought to get tax relief. I believe everybody who pays
taxes ought to get tax relief.
Let me go back to Texas, for example
-- for a minute. We pay $4.7 billion -- I can't emphasize -- tell you how much.
I signed a bill that puts CHIPs in place. The bill finally came out at the end
of the '99 session. We're working hard to sign up children. We're doing it
faster than any other -- than any other state our size, comparable state. We're
making really good progress.
And our state cares a lot about our
children. My priority is going to be the health of our citizens. These folks
have had eight years to get something done in Washington, D.C., on the
uninsured; they have not done it. They've had eight years to get something done
on Medicare, and they have not got it done.
And my case to the
American people is, if you're happy with inactivity, stay with the horse, the
horse that's up there now. But if you want change, you need to get somebody who
knows how to bring Republicans and Democrats together to get positive things
done for America.
LEHRER: New question, new subject.
Vice
President Gore, on the environment, in your 1992 book you said, quote, "We must
make the rescue of our environment the central organizing principle for
civilization and there must be a wrenching transformation to save the planet."
Do you still feel that way?
GORE: I do. I think that in this 21st
century, we will soon see the consequences of what's called global warming.
There was a study just a few weeks ago suggesting that in summertime the north
polar ice cap will be completely gone in 50 years. Already many people see the
strange weather conditions that the old-timers say they've never seen before in
their lifetimes. And what's happening is the level of pollution is increasing,
significantly.
Now, here is the good news, Jim. If we take the
leadership role and build the new technologies, like the new kinds of cars and
trucks that Detroit is itching to build, then we can create millions of good
new jobs by being first into the market with these new kinds of cars and trucks
and other kinds of technologies.
You know, the Japanese are breathing
down our necks on this. They're moving very rapidly because they know that it
is a fast- growing world market.
And some of these other countries,
particularly in the developing world, their pollution is much worse than
anywhere else and their people want higher standards of living, and so they're
looking for ways to satisfy their desire for a better life and still reduce
pollution at the same time.
I think that holding on to the old ways
and the old argument that the environment and the economy are in conflict, is
really outdated. We have to be bold. We have to provide leadership.
Now, it's true that we disagree on this.
GORE: The governor said that
he doesn't think this problem is necessarily caused by people. He's for letting
the oil companies into the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Houston's just
become the smoggiest city in the country, and Texas is number one in industrial
pollution.
We have a very different outlook. And I'll tell you this,
I will fight for a clean environment in ways that strengthen our economy.
LEHRER: Governor?
BUSH: Well, let me start with Texas. We are a
big industrial state. We reduced our industrial waste by 11 percent. We cleaned
up more brownfields than any other administration in my state's history, 450 of
them. Our water is cleaner now.
LEHRER: Explain what a brownfield is,
for those who don't know.
BUSH: A brownfield is an abandoned
industrial site that just idly in some of our urban centers, and people who are
willing to invest capital in the brownfields don't want to do so for fear of
lawsuit. I think we ought to have federal liability protection, depending upon
whether or not standards have been met.
The book you mentioned that
Vice President Gore wrote, he also called for taxing -- big energy taxes in
order to clean up the environment. And now that the energy prices are high, I
guess he's not advocating those big energy taxes right now.
I believe
we ought to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund to -- with half the
money going to states, so states can make the right decisions for environmental
quality. I think we need to have clean coal technologies. I've proposed $2
billion worth.
By the way, I just found out the other day, an
interesting fact, that there's a national petroleum reserve right next to
Prudhoe -- in Prudhoe Bay that your administration opened up for exploration in
that pristine area, and it was a smart move because there's gas reserves up
there.
BUSH: We need gas pipelines to bring the gas down. Gas is a
clean fuel that we can burn to -- we need to make sure that if we decontrol our
plants that there's mandatory -- that plants must conform to clean air
standards, to grandfather plants. That's what we did in Texas, no excuses. I
mean, you must conform.
Now, those are practical things we can do,
but it starts with working a collaborative effort with states and local folks.
You know, if your own the land, everyday is Earth Day. And people care a lot
about their land and care about their environment. Not all wisdom is in
Washington, D.C., on this issue.
LEHRER: Where do you see the basic
difference, in very simple terms and two or three sentences, between you and
the governor on the environment? If the voter wants to make a choice, what is
it?
GORE: I'm really strongly committed to clean water and clean air
and cleaning up the new kinds of challenges like global warming. I -- he's
right that I'm not in favor of energy taxes; I am in favor of tax cuts to
encourage and give incentives for the quicker development of these new kinds of
technologies.
And let me say again, Detroit is raring to go on that.
We differ on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, as I have said. We differ on
whether or not pollution controls ought to be voluntary. I don't think you can
-- I don't think you can get results that way. We differ on the kinds of
appointments that we would make.
LEHRER: But you say it's a
fundamental difference.
GORE: I think it's a fundamental difference
and let me give you and example. He...
LEHRER: Hold on one second.
GORE: OK. Sure.
LEHRER: We've talked about -- I just want
to know, could somebody, because we're running -- we're getting close to the
end of our time here. I was wondering, does somebody want to make -- wanted to
vote on the environment, how would you draw the differences, Governor?
BUSH: Well, I don't believe in command and control out of Washington, D.C.
I believe Washington ought to set standards, but I don't -- you know, I think
we ought to be collaborative at the local levels. And I think we ought to work
with people at the local levels. And I -- by the way, I just want to make sure
we -- I can't let him just say something and not correct it.
LEHRER:
All right.
BUSH: The electric decontrol bill that I fought for and
signed in Texas has mandatory emissions standards, Mr. Vice President. And
that's what we ought to do at the federal level when it comes to grandfathered
plants for utilities.
LEHRER: Do you...
BUSH: I think
there's a difference. I think -- I think, for example, take the -- when they
took 40 million acres of land out of circulation without consulting local
officials, I thought that was...
LEHRER: That's out in the West.
BUSH: Out in the West. You know, on the logging issue, I didn't -- it's
not the way I would have done it. Perhaps some of that land needs to be set
aside, but I certainly would have consulted with the governors and elected
officials before I would have acted unilaterally.
LEHRER: Well, do
you believe the federal government still has some new rules and new regulations
and new laws to pass in the environmental area? Or do you think...
BUSH: Sure. Absolutely, so long as they're based upon science and they're
reasonable, so long as people have input.
LEHRER: What about global
warming?
BUSH: I think it's an issue that we need to take very
seriously, but I don't think we know the solution to global warming yet. And I
don't think we've got all the facts before we make decisions.
I tell
you one thing I'm not going to, is I'm not going to let the United States carry
the burden for cleaning up the world's air, like the Kyoto treaty would have
done. China and India were exempted from that treaty.
I think we need
to be more even-handed as evidently 99 senators, I think it was 99 senators,
supported that position.
LEHRER: Global -- global warming, the Senate
did turn it down.
GORE: I think that...
BUSH: Ninety-nine
to nothing.
GORE: Well, that vote was exactly...
BUSH: It's
a resolution.
GORE: A lot of supporters of the Kyoto treaty actually
ended up voting for that, because of the way it was worded. But there's no
doubt there's a lot of opposition to it in the Senate.
I'm not for
command and control techniques either. I'm for working with the groups, not
just within industry, but also with the citizens groups and local communities
to control sprawl in ways that the local communities themselves come up with.
But I disagree that we don't know the cause of global warming. I
think that we do. It's pollution, carbon dioxide, and other chemicals that are
even more potent but in smaller quantities, that cause this.
Look,
the world's temperature's going up. Weather patterns are changing. Storms are
getting more violent and unpredictable. And what are we going to tell our
children?
And I'm a grandfather now. I want to be able to tell my
grandson, when I'm in my later years, that I didn't turn away from the evidence
that showed that we were doing some serious harm. In my faith tradition, it is
written -- it's written in the book of Matthew, "Where your heart is, there is
your treasure also." And I believe that we ought to recognize the value to our
children and grandchildren of taking steps that preserve the environment in a
way that's good for them.
BUSH: Yes, I agree. I just -- I think
there's been some -- some of the scientists, I believe, Mr. Vice President,
haven't they been changing their opinion a little bit on global warming? A
profound scientist recently made an -- made a...
LEHRER: Both of you
-- both of you now have violated...
GORE: But the point is...
LEHRER: Excuse me. Both of you have now violated your own rules.
Hold that thought.
GORE: I've been trying so hard not to.
LEHRER: I know. I know. But about -- you're not -- under your rules, you are
not allowed to ask each other a question. I let you do it a moment ago. And now
you just...
BUSH: Twice.
LEHRER: Twice, sorry. OK.
(LAUGHTER)
BUSH: One I thought I...
GORE: That's an
interruption, by the way.
LEHRER: That's an interruption. OK.
But anyhow, you just did it. So now we're...
BUSH: I'm sorry.
LEHRER: That's all right. It's OK.
BUSH: I apologize, Mr.
Vice President. But...
LEHRER: And you're not allowed to do that
either.
(LAUGHTER)
I'm sorry. Go ahead, finish your
thought.
BUSH: I...
LEHRER: People care about these things,
I've found out.
BUSH: Of course, they care about it. Oh, you mean the
rules.
LEHRER: Right, exactly right.
(LAUGHTER)
LEHRER: Go ahead.
BUSH: I -- of course there's a lot of -- I mean,
look, global warming needs to be taken very seriously, and I take it seriously.
But science -- there's a lot of -- there's differing opinions. And before we
react, I think it's best to have the full accounting, full understanding of
what is taking place.
And I think, to answer your question, I think
both of us care a lot about the environment. We may have different approaches.
We may have different approaches in terms of how we deal with local folks. I
mean, I just cited an example of the -- of the administration just unilaterally
acting without any input.
And I remember you gave a very good answer
in New Hampshire about the White Mountains, about how it was important to keep
that collaborative effort in place. I feel very strongly the same way. It
certainly wasn't the attitude that took place out West however.
LEHRER: New question.
BUSH: Yes.
LEHRER: Last question for
you, Governor. This flows out some -- flows somewhat out of the Boston debate.
You, your running mate, your campaign officials have charged that
Vice President Gore exaggerates, embellishes and stretches the facts, et
cetera. Are you -- do you believe these are serious issues -- this is a serious
issue that the voters should use in deciding which one of you two men to vote
for on November 7?
BUSH: Well, we all make mistakes. I've been known
to mangle a syl-lable or two myself, you know. But...
(LAUGHTER)
If you know what I mean.
I think credibility's important. It's
going to important to be -- for the president to be credible with Congress,
important for the president to be credible with foreign nations. And, yes, I
think it's something that people need to consider.
This isn't
something new. I read a report or a memo from somebody in his 1988 campaign, I
forgot the fellow's name, warning then-Senator Gore to be careful about
exaggerating claims. And I thought during his debate with Senator Bradley,
saying he authored the EITC when it didn't happened, he mentioned in the
last...
LEHRER: EITC?
BUSH: Earned income tax credit.
Sorry.
LEHRER: That's all right.
BUSH: A lot of initials
for a guy who's not from Washington, isn't it?
Anyway, I -- he
cosponsored McCain-Feingold, and yet he didn't.
And so I think this
is an issue. I think -- I found it to be an issue in trying to defend my tax
relief package, I thought there were some exaggerations about the numbers.
But the people are going to have to make up their mind on this issue.
BUSH: And I -- I'm going to continue to defend my record and defend my
propositions against what I think are exaggerations. Exaggerations like, for
example, only 5 percent of seniors receive benefits under my Medicare reform
package, that's what he said the other day and that's simply not the case. I
have every right in the world to defend my record and my positions. That's what
debates are about, and that's what campaigns are about.
LEHRER: Vice
President Gore?
GORE: I got some of the details wrong last week in
some of the examples that I used, Jim. And I'm sorry about that. And I'm going
to try to do better. One of the reasons I regret is that it -- getting a detail
wrong interfered several times with a point that I was trying to make.
However many days that young girl in Florida stood in her classroom
however long, even if it was only one day, doesn't change the fact that there
are a lot of overcrowded classrooms in America, and we need to do something
about that.
There are seniors who pay more for their prescriptions
than a lot of other people, more than their pets sometimes, more sometimes than
people in foreign countries. And we need to do something about that. Not with a
measure that leaves the majority of them without any real basic health until
the next president's term of four years is over, but right away. And that means
doing it under the Medicare program.
I can't promise that I will
never get another detail wrong. I can promise you that I will try not to
anymore.
GORE: But I will promise you this, with all the confidence
in -- in my heart and in the world, that I will do my best, if I'm elected
president, I'll work my heart out, to get the big things right for the American
people.
LEHRER: Does that resolve the issue, Governor?
BUSH: That's going to be up to the people, isn't it?
LEHRER: Does it
resolve it for you?
BUSH: It depends on what he says in the future in
the campaign.
LEHRER: But, I mean, your folks are saying some awful
things.
BUSH: I hope they're not awful things.
LEHRER:
Well, I mean...
BUSH: ... his own words.
LEHRER: No, no,
what I mean is, you calling him a serial exaggerator.
BUSH: I don't
believe I've used those words.
LEHRER: No, but your campaign has.
BUSH: Maybe they have.
LEHRER: Your campaign officials
have.
And your campaign officials, Mr. Vice President, are now
calling -- now calling the governor a bungler, a...
BUSH: Wait a
minute.
(LAUGHTER)
LEHRER: I mean is that -- no, my point
is, should this -- is this...
GORE: I don't use language like that.
And I don't think that we should.
LEHRER: It's in your commercial...
GORE: I understand.
(CROSSTALK)
GORE: In my commercial?
BUSH: Have you seen the commercial?
LEHRER: In your...
GORE: I think -- I think that what -- I think the point of that is that
anybody would have a hard time trying to make a tax cut plan that's so large,
that would put us into such big deficits, that gives almost half the benefits
to the wealthiest of the wealthy, I think anybody would have a hard time
explaining that clearly in a way that makes sense to the average person.
BUSH: That's the kind of exaggeration I was just talking about.
(LAUGHTER)
GORE: Well, I wasn't the one having trouble explaining.
LEHRER: Gentlemen, it's time to go to the closing statements.
And Vice President Gore, you have two minutes.
GORE: Jim, one of
the issues that I would like to close with in my statement is education,
because it's an example of the overall approach that I think is important. This
race is about values, it's about change, it's about giving choices to the
American people. And education is my number one priority because I think that
it's the most important big, major change that we can bring in our country.
I agree with Governor Bush that we should have new accountability.
Testing of students, I think that we should require states to test all
students, test schools and school districts. And I think that we should go
further and require teacher testing for new teachers, also.
The
difference is, while my plan starts with new accountability and maintains local
control, it doesn't stop there, because I want to give new choices to parents
to send their kids to college with a $10,000 tax deduction for college tuition
per child, per year. I want to reduce the size of the classrooms in this
country for one basic reason, so that students can get more one-on-one time
with teachers.
And the way to do that is, first, to recruit more
teachers. I have a plan in my budget to recruit 100,000 new, highly qualified
teachers, and to help local school districts build new schools.
GORE:
I think that we have to put more emphasis on early learning and preschool.
Now, here is how that connects with all the rest of what we've been
talking about. If you have -- if you squander the surplus on a huge tax cut
that goes mostly to those at the top, then you can't make education the top
priority. If the tax cut is your number one, two, three and four priority, you
can't do education. You can't do both. You have to choose.
I choose
education and health care, the environment and retirement security. And I ask
for your support.
LEHRER: Governor Bush, two minutes.
BUSH:
Jim, thank you very much.
Mr. Vice President, thank you very much.
And I'd like to thank the folks here at Wake Forest. I want to thank
you all for listening.
I'm running to get some things done for
America. There's too many issues left unresolved. There's been too much
finger-pointing and too much name-calling in Washington, D.C. I'd like to unite
this country to get an agenda done that will speak to the hopes and aspirations
of the future.
I want to have an education system that sets high
standards, local control of schools and strong accountability. No child should
be left behind in America.
I want to make sure we rebuild our
military to keep the peace. I worry about morale in today's military. The
warning signs are clear. It's time to have a new commander in chief who will
rebuild the military, to pay our men and women more, and make sure they're
housed better, and have a focused mission for our military.
Once and
for all, I want to do something about Medicare. The issue's been too long on
the table because it's been a political issue. It's time to bring folks
together, to say that all seniors will get prescription drug coverage.
I want to do something about Social Security. It's an important priority
because now is the time to act.
BUSH: And we're going to say to our
seniors: Our promises we've made to you will be promises kept.
But
younger workers, in order to make sure the system exists tomorrow, younger
workers ought to be able to take some of your own money and invest it in safe
securities to get a better rate of return on that money.
And finally,
I do believe in tax relief. I believe we can set our priorities. I don't
believe like the vice president does in huge government. I believe in limited
government. And by having a limited government and a focused government, we can
send some of the money back to the people who pay the bills. I want to have a
tax relief for all people who pay the bills in America because I think you can
spend your money more wisely than the federal government can.
Thank
you for listening. I'm asking for your vote. And God bless.
LEHRER:
And we will return next Tuesday night, October 17, from Washington University
at St. Louis for the third and final debate.
Thank you Vice President
Gore, Governor Bush. See you next week.
For now, from Winston-Salem,
I'm Jim Lehrer. Thank you and good night.
(APPLAUSE)
END
Copyright © 2000 ReferenceDesk.org. All Rights Reserved. "The
Internet's Best Reference Source" is a registered trademark.