MODERATOR:
Good evening from the Clark athletic center at the University of Massachusetts in Boston.
I'm Jim Lehrer of the news hour on PBS and I welcome you to the first of three 90-minute debates between the Democratic candidate for president, vice ice President Al Gore and the Republican candidate, Governor George W. Bush of Texas.
The debates are sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates and they will be conducted within formats agreed to between the two come pains.
We'll have the candidates at podiums.
No answer to a question can exceed two minutes.
Rebuttal is limite
d to one minute.
As moderator I have the option to follow up and extend any give and take three-and-a-half minutes.
No single answer can exceed two minutes.
The candidates under their rules may not question each other directly.
There will be no opening statements but each candidate may have up to two minutes for a closing statement.
The questions and the subjects were chosen by me alone.
I have told no one from the two campaigns or the commission or anyone else involved what they are.
There is a small audience in the hall tonight.
They are not here to participate.
Only to listen.
I have asked
and they have agreed to remain silent for the next 90 minutes.
Except for right now when they will applaud as we welcome to two candidates, Governor Bush and Vice President Gore.
[APPLAUSE]
MODERATOR:
And now the first question as determined by a flip of a coin, it goes to Vice President Gore.
Vice President Gore you have requested whether Governor Bush has the experience to be President of the United States.
What exactly do you mean?
GORE:
Jim, first of all I would like to thank the sponsors of this debate and the people of Boston for hosting the debate.
I would like to thank Governor
Bush for participating and I would like to say I'm happy to be here with Tipper and our family.
I have actually not questioned Governor Bush's experience.
I have questioned his proposals, here is why.
I think this is a very important moment for our country.
We have achieved extraordinary prosperity.
In this election America has to make an important choice.
Will we use our prosperity to enrich not just the few, but all of our families?
I believe we have to make the right and responsible choices.
If I'm entrusted with the presidency here are the choices I will make.
I will balance the budg
et every year.
I'll pay down the national debt.
I will put Medicare and Social Security in a lock box and protect them.
And I will cut taxes for middle class families.
I believe it's important to resist the temptation to squander our surplus.
If we make the right choices, we can have a prosperity that endures and enriches all of our people.
If I'm entrusted with the presidency I will help parents and strengthen families because, you know, if we have prosperity that grows and grow's we still won't be successful until we strengthen family by ensure that children can always go to schools that are
safe.
By giving parents the tools to protect their children against cultural pollution.
I will make sure that we invest in our country and our families.
And I mean investing in education, health care, the en environment, and middle class tax cuts and retirement security.
That is my agenda and that is why I think that it's not just a question of experience.
MODERATOR:
Governor Bush, one minute rebutal.
USH:
We come from different places.
I come from being a governor.
We know how to set agendas as a governor.
I think you'll find the difference reflected in our budgets.
I want to take one
half of the surplus and dedicate it to Social Security.
One quarter of the surplus for important projects and I want to send one quarter of the surplus back to the people who pay the bills.
I want everybody who pays taxes to have their tax rates cut.
And that stands in contrast to my worthy opponent's plan which will increase the size of government dramatically.
His plans is three times larger than president Clinton's proposed plan eight years ago.
It has expanded programs and create 20,000 new buer oh cats.
It empowers Washington.
My vision to empower Americans to make decisions for themselves
in their own lives.
MODERATOR:
I take it by your answer then in an interview recently with the "New York Times" when you said that you questioned whether or not Governor Bush has experienced enough to be president, you were talking about strictly policy differences.
GORE:
Yes, Jim.
I said his tax cut plan, for example, raises the question of whether it's the right choice for the country.
Let me give you an example of what I mean.
Under Governor Bush's tax cut proposal he would spend more money on tax cuts for the wealthyest one% than all of the new spending he proposes for health care, p
rescription drug and national defense all combined.
Now, I think those are the wrong priorities.
Now, under my proposal, for every dollar that I propose in spending for things like education and health care, I will put another dollar into middle class tax cuts and for every dollar that I spend in those two categories I'll put $2 toward paying down the national debt.
I think it's very important to keep the debt going down and completely eliminate it and I also think it's very important to go to the next stage of welfare reform.
Our country has cut the welfare rolls in half.
I fought hard from my days in the Senate and as vice president to cut the welfare rolls and we've moved millions of people in America into good jobs.
It's now time for the next stage of welfare reform and include fat
hers and not only mothers.
MODERATOR:
We're going to get a lot of those.
BUSH:
Let me just say that obviously tonight we're going to hear some phony numbers about what I think and what we ought to do.
People need to know that over the next ten years it is going to be $25 trillion of revenue and we anticipate spending $21 trillion.
Why don't we spend 1.3 trillion of that back to the people who pay the bills.
Surely we can afford 5% of the $25 trillion coming to the treasury to the hard working people that pay the bills.
There is a difference of opinion.
My opponent thinks the government, the surplus is the government's money.
That's not what I think.
I think it's the hard working people of America's money and I want to share some of that money with you so you have more money to buil
d and save and dream for your families.
It's a difference between government making decisions for you and you getting more of your money to make decisions for yourself.
MODERATOR:
Let me just follow up one quick question.
When you hear Vice President Gore question your experience, do you read it the same way that he's talking about policy differences only?
BUSH:
Yes.
I take him for his word.
Look, I fully recognize I'm not of Washington.
I'm from Texas and he's got a lot of experience but so do I.
And I've been the chef executive office of the second biggest state in the union.
I have a record of working with both Republicans and Democrats.
Our nation needs somebody that can come to Washington let's forget all the finger pointing and get positive things done on Medicare, pres
cription drugs, Social Security and so I take him for his word.
GORE:
If I could just respond.
I know that.
The governor used the phrase phony numbers but if you look at the plan and add the numbers up, these numbers are correct.
He spends more money for tax cuts for the wealthy 1% than all of his new spending propose proposals for health care, prescription drug, national defense all combined.
The surplus is the American people's money, it's your money.
That's why I don't think we should give half of up to the well wealthy 1%.
MODERATOR:
Three-and-a-half minutes is up.
New question.
Governor Bush, you have a question.
This is a companion question to the question I asked Vice President Gore.
You have requested whether Vice President Gore has demonstrated the leadership qualities necessary to
be president of resident of the United States.
What do you mean by that?
BUSH:
Actually what I've said.
I've said that eight years ago they campaigned on prescription drugs for seniors.
And four years ago they campaigned on getting prescription drugs for seniors.
And now they're campaigning on getting prescription drugs for seniors.
It seems like they can't get it done.
They may blame other folks, but it's time to get somebody in Washington who is going to work with both Republicans and Democrats to get some positive things done when it comes to our seniors.
So what I've said is there's been some missed opportunities.
They've had a chance.
They've had a chance to form consensus.
I have a plan on Medicare that's a two-stage plan that says we'll have immediate help for seniors and wh
at I call immediately helping hand a $48 billion program.
To seniors if you're happy with Medicare, fine, you can stay in the program.
But we're going to give you additional choices like they give federal employees in the federal employee health plan.
They have a variety of voices choices to choose, so should seniors.
As opposed to politicizeing an issue like Medicare.
Hoping somebody bites it and try to clobber them over the head for political purposes, this year it's time to get it done once and for all.
That's what I've been critical about the administration for.
Same with Social Security.
There was a good opportunity to bring Republicans and Democrats together to reform the Social Security system so seniors will never go without.
Those on Social Security today will have their p
romise made but also to give younger workers the option of their choice of being able to manage some of their own money in the private sector to make sure there's a Social Security system around tomorrow.
There are a lot of young workers at the rallies we go to that when they hear I'll trust them to be able to manage, under certain guidelines, some of their own to get a better rate of return so that they'll have a retirement plan in the future, they begin to nod their heads and they want a different attitude in Washington.
MODERATOR:
One minute rebuttal.
GORE:
Under my plan all seniors will get prescription drugs under Medicare.
The governor has described Medicare as a government HMO.
It's let.
Let me explain the different.
Under the Medicare prescription drug proposal I'm mak
ing.
You go to your own doctor.
Your doctor chooses your prescription.
No HMO or insurance company can take those choices away from you.
Then you go to your own pharmacy.
You fill the prescription and Medicare pays half the cost.
If you're in a very poor family or high costs, Medicare will pay all the costs.
A dollar 25 premium and much better benefits than you can find in the private sector.
Here is the contrast.
95% of all seniors would get no help whatsoever under my opponent's plan for the first four or five years.
Now, one thing I don't understand, Jim, is why is it that the wealthy 1% get their tax cuts the first year but 95% of seniors have to wait four to five years before they get a single penny.
BUSH:
I guess my answer to that is the man is running on MEDI scare.
It's not what
I think and it's not my intentions and not my plan.
I want all seniors to have prescription drugs in Medicare.
We need to reform Medicare.
This administration has failed to do it.
Seniors will have not only a Medicare plan where the poor seniors will have prescription drugs paid for but there will be a variety of options.
The system today has meant a lot for a lot of seniors and I recognize the intent of the can current system.
If you're happy with the system you can stay in it.
There are a lot of procedures that haven't kept up in Medicare with the current times.
No prescription drug benefits, no preventing medicines, no vision care.
We need to have a modern system to help seniors and the idea of supporting a federally controlled 132,000 page government bureaucracy of being a compassi
onate way for seniors and the only source of care for seniors is not my vision.
We ought to give seniors more options, make the system work better.
I know it will require a different kind of leader to go to Washington to say to both Republicans and Democrats, let's come together.
You've had your chance, vice president, you've been there for eight years and nothing has been done.
My point is is that my plan not only trusts seniors with options it sets aside money for Medicare over the next ten years.
My plan also says it requires a new approach in Washington, D.C., require somebody who can work across the partisan divide.
GORE:
Under my plan I will put Medicare in an iron clad lock box and prevent the money from being used for anything other than Medicare.
The governor has declined to endorse
that idea even though the Republican as well as Democratic leaders in congress have endorsed it.
I would be interesting to see if he would say this evening he'll put Medicaid in a lock box.
$100 billion comes out of Medicare just for the wealthy 1% in the tax cut.
Here is the different, some people who say the word reform actually mean cuts.
Under the governor's plan, if you kept the same fee for service that you have now under Medicare your premiums would go up by between 18 and 41% and that is the study of the Congressional plan that he's modeled his proposal on by the Medicare act you tears.
A man here tonight named George McKinney from Milwaukee.
He's 70 years old.
Has high blood pressure, his wife has heart trouble.
They have an income of $25,000 a year.
They can't pay for their prescrip
tion drugs.
They're some of the ones that go to Canada regularly in order to get their prescription drugs.
Under my plan, half of their costs would be paid right away.
Under Governor Bush's plan they would not get one penny for four to five years and then they would be forced to go into an HMO or to an insurance company and ask them for coverage but there would be no limit on the premiums or the deductibles or any of the terms and conditions.
BUSH:
I cannot let this go by the old style Washington politics.
If we're going to scare you in the voting booth.
Under my plan the man gets immediate help with prescription drugs.
It's called immediate helping hand instead of finger pointing he gets immediate help.
Let me say something.
MODERATOR:
Your --
GORE:
They get $25 a year income.
That
makes them ineligible.
BUSH:
This is a man who has great numbers.
He talks about numbers.
I'm beginning to think not only did he invent the Internet, but he invented the calculator.
It's fuzzy math.
It's a scaring -- trying to scare people in the voting booth.
Under my tax plan that he continues to criticize I set one-third.
The federal government should take no more than a third of anybody's check.
I also dropped the bottom rate from 15% to 10%.
By far the vast majority of the help goes to people at the bottom end of the economic ladder.
If you're a family in Massachusetts you get a 50% cut in the income taxes you pay.
The difference in our plans is I want that $2,000 to go to you and the vice president would like to be spending the $2,000 on your half.
MODERATOR:
I have no p
roblems with it we're over the three-and-a-half.
Do you want to have a quick response?
We're almost to five minutes on this.
GORE:
It's just clear you can go to the website and look.
If you make more than $25,000 a year you don't get a penny of help under the Bush prescription drug proposal for at least four to five years and then you're pushed into an HMO or insurance company plan and there's no limit on the premiums or the deduct ibls or any of the conditions.
The insurance companies say it won't work and they won't offer these plans.
MODERATOR:
Let me ask you both this and we'll move on.
Both of you want to bring prescription drugs to seniors, correct?
GORE:
Correct.
BUSH:
Correct.
GORE:
I want to bring it to 100% and he wants to bring it to 5%.
BUSH:
That
's totally false for him to stand up and say this.
Let me may sure the seniors hear me loud and clear.
They have a chance to get something done.
I'm going to work with Democrats and Republicans to be -- in the meantime we'll have a plan to help poor seniors and it could be one year or two years.
MODERATOR:
Let me call your attention to the key word there.
He said all poor seniors.
BUSH:
All seniors are covered under prescription drug in my plan.
GORE:
In the first year?
BUSH:
If we can get it done in the first year.
GORE:
It's a two-phase plan.
For the first four years only the poor are covered.
Middle class seniors like George McKinney and his wife are not covered for four to five years.
MODERATOR:
I have an idea.
If you have any more to say about this
you can say it in your closing statements and we'll move on.
New question.
Vice President Gore.
How would you contrast your approach to preventing future oil price and supply problems like we have now to the approach of Governor Bush?
GORE:
Excellent question.
Here is the simple difference.
My plan has not only a short-term component but also a long-term component.
It focuses not only on increasing the supply but working on the consumption side.
Now, in the short term we have to free ourselves from the domination of the big oil companies that have the ability to manipulate the price from OPEC when they want to raise the price, and in the long term we have to give new incentives for the development of domestic resources like deep gas in the western gulf, like stripper wells for oi
l but also renewable sources of energy.
And domestic sources that are cleaner and better.
I'm proposing a plan that will give tax credits and tax incentives for the rapid development of new kinds of cars and trucks and buses and factories and boilers and furnaces that continue have as much pollution and don't burn as much energy and help us get out on the cutting edge of the new technologies that will create millions of new jobs.
When we sell these new products here we'll then be able to sell them overseas.
Another big difference is Governor Bush is proposing to open up some of our most precious environmental treasures like the arctic national wildlife refuge for the big oil companies to produce oil there.
It would only give us a few months worth of oil and the oil wouldn't start flowing for man
y years into the future.
I don't think it's a fair price to pay to destroy precious parts of America's environment.
We have to bet on the future and move beyond the current technologies to have a whole new generation of more efficient, cleaner energy technology.
BUSH:
It's an issue I know a lot about.
I was a small oil person for a while in west Texas.
This is an administration that's had no plan.
All of a sudden the results of having no plan have caught up with America.
First and foremost we have to fully fund heat with low income people in the east pay for high fuel bills.
We need and active exploration incentive in America.
We need to explore at home.
I want to open up of a small part of Alaska.
When that field is online it will produce one million barrels a day.
Today we imp
ort one million barrels from Saddam Hussein.
I would rather have it come from our own country as opposed to Saddam Hussein.
I want to develop the coal resources in America.
Have clean coal technologies.
We better start exploring it or otherwise we'll be in deep trouble in the future because of our dependency upon foreign sources of crude.
MODERATOR:
If somebody is watching tonight and listening to what the two of you just said.
Is it fair to say the differences between Governor Bush and Vice President Gore are like this.
You're for doing something on the consumption end and you for the production end.
GORE:
I'm for doing something both on the supply side and production side and on the consumption side.
Let me say I found one thing in Governor Bush's answer that we certainly agr
ee on and that's the low income heating assistance program.
I commend you for supporting that.
I worked to get $400 million just a couple of weeks ago.
And to establish a permanent home heating oil reserve here in the northeast.
As for the proposals that I've worked for for renewables and conservation and new technologies for the last few years in the congress we've faced opposition to them.
They've only approved about 10% of the agenda I've helped to send up there.
We need to get serious about this crisis, both in the congress and in the White House and if you entrust me with the presidency I will tackle this problem and focus on new technologies that will make us less dependent on big oil or foreign oil.
MODERATOR:
How would you draw the difference?
BUSH:
He should have
been tackling it for the last seven years.
The difference is we need to explore at home.
And the vice president doesn't believe in exploration, for example, in Alaska.
There's a lot of shut in gas we need to be moving out of Alaska by pipeline.
There's an interesting issue in the northwest at well do we remove dams that produce hydro electric energy.
I'm against taking out dams.
We need to keep that in line.
I was in coal country in vest west Virginia.
I know we can do a better job of clean coal technologies.
I'm going to ask the congress for $2 billion to make sure we have the cleanest coal technologies in the world.
In the short-term we need to get after it here in America.
We need to explore our resources and we need to develop our reservoirs of domestic production.
We also need t
o have a hemispheric energy policy where Canada, Mexico and the United States come together.
The null elected president in Mexico I talked to him about how best to expedite the natural gas in Mexico and transport it to the United States so we become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil.
It's a major problem facing America.
The administration did not deal with it.
It's time for a new administration to deal with the energy problem.
GORE:
I found a couple of other things we agree upon.
I strongly support new investments in clean coal techtechnology.
I also domestic exploration, yet, but not in the environmental treasures of our country.
We don't have to do that.
That's the wrong choice.
I know oil companies have been itching to do that.
BUSH:
It's the right thing for
the consumers.
Less dependency about foreign surplus is better for consumers.
We can do so in an environmentally friendly way.
MODERATOR:
No question, new subject.
Governor Bush.
If elected president, would you try to overturn the FDA's approveal last week of the abortion pill RU-486?
BUSH:
I don't think a president can do that.
I was disappointed in the ruling because I think abortions out to be more rare in America and I'm important eed that pill will create more abortion and cause more people to have abortions.
This is a very important topic and it's a very sensitive topic because a lot of good people disagree on the issue.
I think what the next president ought to do is promote a culture of life in America.
Life of the elderly and life of those women all across the country.
L
ife of the unborn.
As a matter of fact I think a noeb all goal for this country that any child born or unborn need to be protected by law and welcomed to life.
I know we need to change a lot of mines before we get there in America.
We can find common ground on issues of parental consent or notification.
I know we need to ban partial birth abortions.
This is a place where my opponent and I have strong disagreement.
I believe banning partial birth abortions would be the first step to reducing the number of abortions in America.
It is an issue that will require a new attitude.
We've been battling over abortion for a long period of time.
Surely this nation can come together to promote the value of life.
Fight off these laws that will encourage doctors to -- to allow doctors to take the lives
of our seniors.
Surely we can work together to create a cultural life so some of these youngsters who feel like they can take a neighbor's life with a gun will understand that that's not the way America is meant to be.
Surely we can find common ground to reduce the number of abortions in America.
As to the drug itself I mentioned I was disappointed.
I hope the FDA took its time to make sure that American women will be safe who use this drug.
MODERATOR:
Vice President Gore?
GORE:
The FDA took 12 years and I support that decision.
They determined it was medically safe for the women who use that drug.
This is indeed a very important issue.
First of all on the issue of partial birth or so-called late term abortion I would sign a law banning that procedure provided that doctors have
the ability to save a woman's life or to act in her health is severely at risk.
That's not the main issue.
The main issue is whether or not the row versus wade decision will be overturned.
I support a woman's right to choose.
My opponent does not.
It's important because the next president will appoint three and maybe four justices of the Supreme Court.
Governor Bush has said he will appoint chief justices who are known for being the most vigorous opponents of a woman's right to choose.
He trusses the government to order a woman to do what it thinks she ought to do.
I trust women to make the decisions that affect your lives, their destinies and their bodies.
And I think a woman's right to choose out to be protected and defended.
MODERATOR:
We'll go to the Supreme Court question in
a moment but make sure I understand your position on RU-486.
If you're elected president you won't support legislation to overturn this?
BUSH:
I don't think a president can unilatly overturn it.
ODERATOR:
BUSH:
I think once a decision has been made it's been mad unless it's proven to be unsafe to women.
GORE:
The question you asked, if I heard you correctly, was would he support legislation to overturn it.
And if I heard the statement day before yesterday, you said you would order -- he said he would order his FDA appointy to review the decision.
That sounds to me a little bit different.
I just think that we ought to support the decision.
BUSH:
I said I would make sure that women would be safe who used the drug.
MODERATOR:
On the Supreme Court question.
Should
a voter assume you're pro life.
BUSH:
I am pro life.
ODERATOR:
Should a voter assume that any appointments you make to the court should be pro life.
BUSH:
I have no litmus test on that issue.
I'll put competent judges on the bench.
People who will interpret the Constitution and not use the bench forwrite social policy.
I believe that the judges ought not to take the place of the legislative branch of government.
That they're appointed for life and that they ought to look at the Constitution as sacred.
They shouldn't misuse their bench.
I believe in strict constructionists.
I've named four in the State of Texas and ask the people to check out their qualifications.
Their deliberations.
They're good solid men and women who have made good sound judgments on behalf of t
he people of Texas
MODERATOR:
What kind of appointment should they expect from you.
GORE:
We reach a similar language to each an opposite outcome.
I know that there are ways to assess how a potential justice interprets the Constitution and in my view, the Constitution ought to be interpreted as a document that grows with our country and our history.
And I believe, for example, that there is a right of privacy in the fourth amendment and when the phrase the strict constructionist is used and when the names of Thomas are used as bench marks for who would be appointed.
Those are code words and nobody should mistake this for saying the governor would appoint people who would overturn Roe versus Wade.
I would appoint people that have a philosophy that would uphold Roe versus Wade.
MODERATOR:
Is the vice president right?
BUSH:
It sounds like he's not very right tonight.
I just told you the criteria on which I'll appoint judges.
I have a record of appointing judges in the State of Texas.
A governor gets to name supreme court judges.
He reads all kinds of things into my tax plans and into my Medicare plan.
I want the views out there to listen to what I have to say about it.
MODERATOR:
Reverse the question.
What code phrases should we read about what you said about what kind of people you would appoint.
GORE:
It would be likely that they would uphold Roe versus Wade.
If you look at the history of a lower court judge's rulings you can get a pretty good idea of how they'll interpret questions.
A lot of questions are first impression and these questions that have
been seen many times come up in a new context and so -- but, you know, this is a very important issue.
Because a lot of young women in this country take this right for granted and it could be lost.
It is on the ballot in this election, make no mistake about it.
BUSH:
I'll tell yo