|
For portion of Debate
dealing with Gun Control (click here)
10/11/2000 Presidential Debate - Source of following CNN.com
VICE PRESIDENT GORE AND GOVERNOR BUSH PARTICIPATE IN SECOND
PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE SPONSORED BY THE PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
COMMISSION
CAMPAIGN 2000: VICE PRESIDENT GORE AND GOVERNOR BUSH PARTICIPATE
IN SECOND PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE
OCTOBER 11, 2000
SPEAKER: 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
|
|