ABC News - Democratic Debate - 1992-03-05 (partial)

Channel: malgent

Transcript

Language: English (original, YouTube automatic captions)

[0:02] And that's tonight's entertainment

[0:04] report. Well, you missed it. I was

[0:06] singing the whole time along with me.

[0:08] And he was singing very well.

[0:10] >> Fortunately, they cut his mic.

[0:11] >> Yeah.

[0:12] >> Cut an album soon.

[0:13] >> Sometime soon.

[0:14] >> You have the floor now, Jim.

[0:15] >> Yeah. Let's take a last look at the

[0:17] weather and see what's going on. Still

[0:18] some scattered showers around tomorrow.

[0:20] It'll be in the 40s. By noon, though,

[0:22] showers ending and partly cloudy skies.

[0:24] And we'll call it partly cloudy and

[0:25] about 59 for a high temperature

[0:27] tomorrow. Looks like a nice day.

[0:28] >> Yeah, great day. Thanks.

[0:30] >> We're glad you're with us everybody.

[0:31] Once again, stay tuned for the

[0:32] Democratic debate.

[0:43] >> This is an ABC News special,

[0:47] the 92 vote. Tonight, the Super Tuesday

[0:50] debate.

[0:53] Now from Dallas, Peter Jennings.

[0:56] >> Good evening. As I'm sure you know, this

[0:58] is an important occasion for the

[1:00] candidates. Super Tuesday with primaries

[1:01] or caucuses in 11 states is only 5 days

[1:04] away. Now, this is not the first time

[1:07] that these men have all been together.

[1:08] They're actually quite accustomed to one

[1:10] another. Governor Bill Clinton, former

[1:13] Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Tom

[1:15] Harkin, and former Senator Paul Sunis.

[1:18] Now, you at home may have heard them

[1:19] debate once or several times, or perhaps

[1:22] not at all. But on previous occasions,

[1:24] they've been questioned by journalists

[1:26] and sometimes invited citizens. Our own

[1:29] totally unscientific survey suggests

[1:31] that some people, us included on

[1:33] occasion, have had difficulty

[1:34] comprehending exactly where they stand

[1:37] on a given issue. And it is, gentlemen,

[1:40] sometimes difficult to pin you down on

[1:41] specifics. We would venture that no one

[1:43] knows their various positions better,

[1:46] nor spots their weaknesses quicker than

[1:48] they do themselves. which is why we've

[1:50] decided that this evening as much as

[1:52] possible they shall conduct their own

[1:54] debate that they should be the ones to

[1:56] press each other for specific answers.

[1:59] Should also tell you at home this debate

[2:00] was taped this evening for their

[2:02] convenience because some of them have

[2:04] campaign commitments elsewhere early

[2:06] tomorrow morning. We'll be back in just

[2:08] a moment to begin

[2:14] this ABC News special. Continuing

[2:16] coverage of the 92 votes, the Super

[2:19] Tuesday debates is brought to you by

[2:21] Etna.

[2:27] I'm a nurse and I'm a nurse first and

[2:29] I'm an Etna employee second.

[2:34] The care is first.

[2:36] Now, is that patient being handled

[2:38] appropriately?

[2:42] I would hope that we would all care

[2:43] about patients the way we would

[2:45] ourselves or our own family members

[2:48] and that's the way I see it that you

[2:50] know that's my job.

[2:57] >> Mom sent pictures. They're as big as a

[2:59] house.

[3:00] >> Oh, you should see me.

[3:02] >> Moments like this were made for Gold

[3:04] Mastercard

[3:06] with the added credit you've earned.

[3:08] It's a long drive and you'll need the

[3:10] map.

[3:11] >> Plus, no card is more welcomed at home

[3:13] or abroad. Not American Express, not

[3:16] even Visa.

[3:19] >> Oh, Lori, I can't believe it. How in the

[3:22] world?

[3:23] >> Gold Mastercard. The best gold card to

[3:25] master the moment.

[3:29] >> Once you taste new Kellogg's Neutrorain

[3:31] nuggets, you'll forget about Postgra

[3:33] Nuts.

[3:33] >> Hey, this tastes better than uh you

[3:36] know.

[3:36] >> Oh, yeah. Better than um our old

[3:38] nuggets,

[3:39] >> right? It's much better than old what's

[3:41] its name?

[3:42] >> Tastes so much better. People prefer New

[3:44] Kellogg's Neutrorain nuggets by 2 to

[3:47] one. Two to one.

[3:50] >> What were we talking about?

[3:52] >> We were talking

[3:53] >> New Kellogg's Neutrorain Nuggets. The

[3:55] taste will make you forget your old

[3:56] nuggets.

[4:00] >> Portland Antique Company spectacular

[4:02] winter sale. All prices slash 20 to 60%

[4:05] off everything in two huge buildings.

[4:07] Grab this chance to furnish for less

[4:09] than you could pay for new furniture.

[4:11] Tables, chairs, china cabinets, hall

[4:12] stands, living room furniture, bedroom

[4:14] sets, and much more. All on sale now

[4:17] through Sunday, March 8th. Portland

[4:19] Antique Company is open every day from

[4:21] 10 to 6 at the corners of 12th and 13th

[4:24] on Northwest Gleason.

[4:29] People who read news watch ABC News. The

[4:32] Washington Journalism Review 1992

[4:34] Readers Poll voted ABC News the best in

[4:37] the business. Peter Jennings, Night Line

[4:39] with Ted Cppel, Jeff Greenfield, Britt

[4:42] Hume. When news matters, it matters

[4:44] where you get your news. ABC News.

[4:56] This ABC News special, the Super Tuesday

[4:59] debate continues here again from the

[5:01] studios of ABC affiliate WFAA in Dallas.

[5:04] Peter Jennings. Gentlemen, I think you

[5:06] already know that I will try not to

[5:07] intrude except as a timekeeper and on

[5:10] those occasions when I really honestly

[5:11] don't understand what you're saying. I

[5:13] appeal to you all for plain English

[5:16] because you do sometimes lose us, I'm

[5:18] sorry to say, with your government

[5:19] jargon or at least when you use

[5:20] government jargon. Um, it goes without

[5:22] saying that we hope for an exchange um

[5:25] and not for speeches and I hope uh we

[5:27] also enjoy ourselves. I'd like to start

[5:29] with you, Governor Brown, if I may. Um,

[5:30] how do you differ

[5:32] from the other candidates on what you

[5:34] would do for those people in America

[5:36] today who are clearly suffering because

[5:39] of the recession?

[5:41] >> How I would differ,

[5:43] I embrace the concept of a total

[5:46] revamping of the tax code. I think it is

[5:48] 4,000 pages of ambiguity, double

[5:51] taxation, contradiction, and unfairness.

[5:54] I would sweep it all away and I would

[5:56] create a flat tax of 13% on business, on

[6:00] individuals, and thereby free up the

[6:03] saving and investment that every single

[6:04] economist wants. And more than that, I

[6:07] would take immediate action to develop

[6:10] jobs to deal with the central issue of

[6:13] energy waste in this economy, which is

[6:15] costing us $300 billion a year. And

[6:18] President Bush and certainly the next

[6:20] president could start within 24 hours

[6:22] putting thousands of people to work

[6:25] retrofitting buildings, double painting

[6:27] windows, redoing and re-engineering

[6:29] heating and lighting, and other things

[6:30] like that. that would over a 10-year

[6:32] period generate enormous savings that

[6:35] would pay for the employment of millions

[6:37] of people who don't have any jobs today.

[6:39] And that is a goal that is within our

[6:41] grasp and it's totally financable uh by

[6:44] the gains that it would make in energy

[6:46] efficiency and make the whole economy

[6:48] better.

[6:48] >> Senator, what what's wrong with that?

[6:50] What's wrong with a flat tax, for

[6:52] example? Well, first of all, uh, some of

[6:54] what Governor Brown says is is is viable

[6:56] and should be done, but I think he's

[6:58] putting the cart before the horse. Uh

[7:00] where I differ, I think, is that uh I

[7:03] have a plan that I put into effect uh

[7:05] called a blueprint to build a new

[7:06] America in which next year I propose we

[7:09] take $35 billion and put it right down

[7:12] to our cities and communities because

[7:14] they have plans on the shelf right now

[7:16] for road repair, bridges, uh sewer and

[7:19] water systems, school renovation, things

[7:21] like that that they can get people to

[7:22] work right away. With that money, we can

[7:24] put about a million people back to work

[7:26] next year immediately. And out of that

[7:28] what we get is a better infrastructure

[7:31] and that will let our private sector be

[7:33] a little bit more efficient and more

[7:35] productive. Last year the international

[7:37] bank of settlements in Geneva

[7:38] Switzerland came out with a study and

[7:40] said that one of the major reasons for

[7:42] the lack of productivity growth in the

[7:43] United States is our lack of investment

[7:45] in infrastructure as a percent of

[7:47] output. Japan spends 23 times more than

[7:50] we do on infrastructure and they're

[7:52] going to spend $3 trillion more in the

[7:54] next decade. Germany spends about 15

[7:56] times more than we do. So we've got to

[7:58] start putting our investments in

[8:00] infrastructure, both physical physical

[8:03] resources and human resources. So what I

[8:05] would do immediately as president is to

[8:07] get that money down to our communities.

[8:09] They can start putting people to work.

[8:11] And secondly, I would implement what I

[8:13] call my children's trust initiative to

[8:15] begin the process immediately of

[8:17] reaching down to our young children,

[8:19] getting them healthy starts in life,

[8:21] fully funding the Head Start program,

[8:24] making sure that every kid in America is

[8:26] ready to go to school by the age of

[8:27] five.

[8:27] >> Governor Clinton,

[8:30] >> well, let we're supposed to talk about

[8:32] what Governor Brown said, I think, but

[8:34] but let me just take a few seconds and

[8:35] then I'd like to ask a follow-up

[8:36] question.

[8:38] I agree with much of what he said about

[8:40] energy conservation. I think there are

[8:42] >> um

[8:43] >> forgive me I don't think he spoke about

[8:44] energy.

[8:45] >> Yes, he did. But investing in energy

[8:46] efficiency as a way to put work

[8:49] immediately.

[8:50] >> If you're looking if you're looking at

[8:51] how to free up capital in this country

[8:53] to reinvest in public initiatives that

[8:56] doesn't require a tax increase. There

[8:57] are basically three places in defense

[8:59] reductions and cost of control of health

[9:02] care cost and in energy efficiency. So I

[9:04] agree with that. Uh, I believe we need a

[9:08] short and a long-term economic strategy.

[9:10] In the short term, I agree with much of

[9:12] what has been said. I also think we have

[9:14] a six-year highway plan that we've

[9:15] played for with President uh Bush in the

[9:18] Congress passing the gas tax last year.

[9:20] Uh, all that money could be spent in two

[9:22] years simply by accelerating the letting

[9:23] of all the contracts. I think that

[9:25] should be done. I think we should do

[9:27] some things to stimulate the housing

[9:28] market. We need a short-term plan, but

[9:30] we really need a long-term plan for

[9:32] America's economic revival and one that

[9:34] goes well beyond what was done in the

[9:35] 1980s. In the 1980s, there was too much

[9:38] emphasis given to keeping the cost of

[9:39] capital and taxes down on upper income

[9:42] people. You see this New York Times

[9:44] story today that will be in every

[9:45] newspaper in America tomorrow that in

[9:48] the 80s the top 1% of the people had 60%

[9:52] of the net economic growth in the 80s.

[9:54] That's because we concentrated too much

[9:56] on just keeping the cost of money down

[9:58] and increasing the value of the stock

[10:00] market. Now, the stock market tripled in

[10:01] the 80s. We can't do any better than

[10:03] that. I certainly don't want to hurt it,

[10:04] but it tripled. Average wages went down,

[10:07] the work week increased, productivity

[10:09] declined, and the working poor exploded.

[10:11] What I think we need to do is to have a

[10:13] people-based economics. We need to

[10:15] invest more in education and training

[10:17] and set up a system literally for

[10:19] permanent training and retraining of the

[10:20] workforce, not just for kids, but for

[10:22] workers. If I'm one of these people who

[10:24] really is hurting from the recession, I

[10:25] apologize for intruding. When am I going

[10:27] to feel this relief?

[10:29] >> Well, on the short term, if you on the

[10:31] on the worker initiatives, if you get

[10:33] the economy going again, if you keep the

[10:35] interest rates down, if you get the

[10:36] housing market going, if you make some

[10:38] of these other public investments,

[10:39] you'll begin to see it. But let's be

[10:40] honest, you have two problems. You have

[10:42] a three-year recession, which is the

[10:44] worst since before World War II. But

[10:46] every one of us would agree that

[10:47] America's productivity has been going

[10:49] downhill for well over a decade and you

[10:51] need a long-term economic strategy. We

[10:53] got to tell the people the truth about

[10:54] that.

[10:54] >> Senator,

[10:56] >> well during the Reagan Bush years, the

[10:59] United States increasingly lost its

[11:01] capacity to compete. I mean, Japan has

[11:04] an economic strategy. Germany has an

[11:06] economic strategy. They know where

[11:08] they're going. Taiwan has an economic

[11:10] strategy. If you walk out here in the

[11:12] street and ask anybody what is George

[11:14] Bush's economic battle plan to rescue

[11:18] this country, they could not tell you.

[11:20] Now MIT did a study two years ago what

[11:23] was happening to this economy. We've

[11:25] lost 1.2 million jobs in manufacturing.

[11:28] So the Japanese and the Germans and

[11:30] everybody else is simply adding away our

[11:33] manufacturing base. And the conclusion

[11:34] of the MIT report was very simple. If

[11:37] you wish to live well, you must produce

[11:39] well. No, there was an article in the

[11:41] New York Times this Sunday. Japan has

[11:44] now exceeded us not only in capital

[11:46] investment but in R&D and they are half

[11:50] our size. So it is inevitable if that

[11:52] continues they will get the high paid

[11:55] jobs and we will end up as we are now

[11:58] losing competitive advantage. So

[12:00] ultimately what it comes down to you

[12:02] have to invest in the infrastructure the

[12:05] personal the manufacturing base the

[12:07] engine that drives the economy. People

[12:10] need to work. The average working man or

[12:12] woman in this country, all they want is

[12:15] a job. Give us the jobs that we can

[12:17] provide for our people. So you have to

[12:19] look at where the engine is, the engine

[12:20] is manufacturing. If you look at, for

[12:22] example, the the age of American

[12:24] equipment in the factory floor on farms,

[12:27] that kind of thing. We are simply

[12:29] falling further and further behind.

[12:30] >> Help us pick out the differences between

[12:32] you a little better, though.

[12:33] >> Can we follow up on that? I have some

[12:35] real differences that I think we can

[12:37] point out.

[12:38] >> Governor Brown.

[12:39] >> Well, wait, wait, wait. Senator Brown,

[12:41] everybody got their plan out. You You

[12:43] cut me off. I didn't get to say what I

[12:44] thought we ought to do, but go ahead,

[12:45] Jerry. Well,

[12:46] >> um, well, because this doesn't go just

[12:48] to the plan. It goes to the basis of

[12:50] power.

[12:51] >> You see, you're going to hear a lot of

[12:52] things about tax cut. He has his tax

[12:54] cuts for what he calls the middle class.

[12:56] He has some tax cuts for what he calls

[12:58] business. Uh, well, it is business. And

[13:00] I'm saying the problem is that we have a

[13:02] rigged system that it's very cozy. It's

[13:04] very tightly connected. That the money

[13:07] that go to these gentlemen come from

[13:08] lawyers and investment bankers and

[13:10] people who are in the top 1% the people

[13:12] who did very well in that New York Times

[13:14] article there. These people pay for

[13:16] these gentlemen's campaigns. Then the

[13:19] whole system is rigged. So that for

[13:20] example, the SNL scandal, which is a

[13:23] product of the politicians in Washington

[13:25] and their SNL campaign contributors, is

[13:28] now being cleaned up by lawyers on Wall

[13:30] Street getting paid $600 an hour.

[13:33] They've rigged the system. So there's

[13:34] not enough money to pay a nurs's aid or

[13:37] a teacher's aid even $6 an hour. So you

[13:40] have that imbalance. Where do Wait a I

[13:42] have one more thing that we haven't

[13:44] heard any talk about the strengthening

[13:46] labor unions uh having employees buy

[13:48] ownership in the management and the

[13:51] reason why the rich are always going to

[13:52] get richer is because most people in

[13:54] this country don't have the tools to

[13:56] take back power and I think that's the

[13:59] trouble why this imbalance is growing

[14:02] and my campaign is highlighting that by

[14:04] the campaign limitation of $100 but also

[14:07] calling for greater empowerment of trade

[14:10] union people uh employees. We've got to

[14:13] balance this thing so that the

[14:15] management doesn't pay themselves $2

[14:17] million. Uh the the the lawyers and all

[14:20] the people who go to these thousand

[14:22] fundraisers, which you are the champion

[14:23] at, Bill, and you're coming up, but

[14:25] you're still a a distant second. These

[14:27] are the people

[14:28] >> said he pointing at Senator Song.

[14:29] >> Uh these are the people who are doing

[14:31] very well. And those plain folks, don't

[14:33] wait for me to interrupt. They may be

[14:35] watching. They have no power because

[14:36] they don't pay the money and they're

[14:38] just ghosts in this political campaign.

[14:40] And that's why this is a campaign of

[14:42] insurgency. We're fighting that.

[14:43] >> The only problem is, of course, Jerry

[14:44] Brown's a born again insurgent. He was

[14:46] the biggest of the big money raisers

[14:47] until just till he decided to run for

[14:49] president. But look, I want to ask you a

[14:51] question about your

[14:51] >> I'll answer that in due course

[14:52] >> just a minute. However, I do agree that

[14:56] the organized interest groups brought us

[14:58] the savings and loan debacle, which is

[14:59] the worst thing that ever happened. But

[15:01] I was the first person even before you,

[15:04] who said we ought to limit the

[15:05] deductibility of excess excessive

[15:07] executive pay. I said we ought to raise

[15:09] income taxes on high-income people to

[15:12] give middle class people and low-income

[15:13] people a break. I came up for an

[15:15] empowerment strategy for lower-income

[15:16] working people. Let me ask you a

[15:17] question about your plan. Wait, let me

[15:18] ask you a question about your plan.

[15:20] Don't you also require in addition to

[15:22] the 13% income tax, a 13% value added

[15:25] tax,

[15:25] >> right, on business.

[15:26] >> All right. So if that tax gets passed

[15:29] along, won't everybody really be paying

[15:31] 26% of their income directly or

[15:32] indirectly?

[15:33] >> No, it'll have no price effect because

[15:35] we abolish the same amount of taxes as

[15:37] we replace with a 13%. That would happen

[15:40] as you describe if we did it as an

[15:42] add-on. This is a substitution. No

[15:45] social security tax, no gasoline tax as

[15:47] our friend Paulis wants. This eliminates

[15:50] all the taxes we now pay

[15:53] 13. If I'm making $25,000 a year and I'm

[15:56] just trying to figure out if I elect

[15:57] Brown president,

[15:58] >> right?

[15:59] >> You know, I'm going to get rid of my

[16:00] social security tax, my gas tax, and

[16:02] income tax at the federal level, right?

[16:03] >> And I'm going to pay a 13% flat income

[16:06] tax

[16:06] >> minus your rent

[16:07] >> minus my rent

[16:08] >> and your charity charity. And I'm going

[16:10] to pay indirectly and and and I'm going

[16:12] to pay indirectly a 13% VAT tax.

[16:15] >> No, because the management, the business

[16:17] will not be paying the withholding tax

[16:19] on social security and they're not going

[16:20] to be paying any corporate tax. So net

[16:22] to the whole economy, it has a zero

[16:24] price effect.

[16:25] >> Yeah. But to the average person, they're

[16:27] either going to be paying money out of

[16:28] their pocket or they're not. I just

[16:30] don't want people to think they're only

[16:31] going to pay 13% under your plan because

[16:33] you're going to make us all look like

[16:34] we're going to tax them twice and I

[16:35] don't believe that.

[16:36] >> No, they're only going to pay.

[16:37] >> This is not a rabbit in the hat. I mean,

[16:38] you're going to still pay 26%.

[16:40] >> This we collected a trillion dollars two

[16:43] years ago in the federal government.

[16:44] >> Will there be a value

[16:45] >> under this 13%

[16:47] the value added and on the personal you

[16:49] still collect the same trillion. It's

[16:51] revenue neutral, so it shouldn't

[16:52] increase the price to the total cost.

[16:54] >> Peter, if if I may, I think we just lost

[16:56] half of our audience.

[16:58] >> Yeah, we did

[16:59] >> in this discussion. Let me just correct

[17:01] um Governor Broad at one point. Um I

[17:03] grant you I'm not quite in the big

[17:05] leagues of money raising. The fact is

[17:07] that I have gotten money from 22,000

[17:10] people. Okay. 85% of them contributed

[17:15] $115 or less. So I, you know, I will

[17:19] grant that Jerry's done a better job in

[17:21] that respect, but I'm not too far behind

[17:23] you and I just want to get those facts

[17:26] on the table.

[17:26] >> Well, there's one point though. We were

[17:27] talking about power and as long as the

[17:30] Wall Street folks that put on these

[17:31] these big fundraisers and they become

[17:33] co-chairs, they were in the Dakus

[17:35] campaign, the Montdale campaign, as long

[17:37] as they're playing the role they're

[17:38] playing in the Democratic party, you're

[17:40] not going to see uh trade unions

[17:41] developing more power to give average

[17:43] working people the kind of tools and the

[17:45] clout they need to get better wages.

[17:47] There's a reason why people get paid so

[17:49] little. They don't have any clout. It's

[17:51] a bargain. That's why.

[17:52] >> Could I answer that,

[17:53] >> please? Let me say that. I started my

[17:55] campaign two days from now. It'll be a

[17:57] year. One year. I did one fundraiser on

[18:01] Wall Street and that was three days ago.

[18:03] You know who put it on? A Greek

[18:05] restaurant owner.

[18:07] >> So,

[18:07] >> well, you start coming up to the polls.

[18:09] They like to give you more money. That's

[18:10] the way the system works.

[18:11] >> Well, thank God owning restaurants.

[18:13] >> How much did you raise?

[18:14] >> Excuse me.

[18:15] >> How much did you raise

[18:16] >> in that event?

[18:17] >> 70,000.

[18:18] >> That the most you ever raised in one

[18:19] event?

[18:20] >> Um, no. I did a Greek event in New York.

[18:23] We raised the all total about $200,000.

[18:26] >> Okay, Senator Hart.

[18:27] >> Well, first of all, uh there's another

[18:30] problem with this tax I'm going to get

[18:31] to in a second. But, uh you know, for

[18:34] the last decade, uh Governor Brown as

[18:36] chairman of the Democratic Party out in

[18:38] California and as other things, as

[18:41] Governor Clinton has said, has been one

[18:42] of the biggest money raisers in America.

[18:43] He's done that. And now he sits there

[18:46] and sort of in a self-righteous manner

[18:47] paints us all with one brush.

[18:50] I I kind of resent that. I'll tell you

[18:52] why. Because yes, I have taken money

[18:54] from people who probably are on Wall

[18:56] Street and I've taken money from

[18:57] lawyers. You bet I have, Jerry. But I'll

[18:59] tell you one other thing. Congressional

[19:01] Quarterly did a study last year of those

[19:04] senators who had the biggest opposition

[19:06] to George Bush. Guess who was number

[19:08] one? Tom Harkin. For the eight years

[19:11] that Ronald Reagan was in office, I was

[19:12] tied with number one in opposition to

[19:14] Reagan's trickle down economic policies.

[19:16] So, you see, it doesn't make any

[19:19] difference. It it depends on who you are

[19:20] and how much gut you got and whether you

[19:22] got the courage to stand up to people

[19:24] and to fight for working people, for

[19:26] laboring people, for family farmers.

[19:28] That's who I fought for. Governor Brown

[19:30] likes to portray himself as an outsider

[19:33] and that I guess we're insiders. I guess

[19:35] I don't know what. Or maybe I'm the

[19:36] insider since I've served in Congress

[19:38] for 17 years. But as I've said so many

[19:40] times, it's not outsider inside,

[19:43] Governor Brown. It's whose side you're

[19:44] on. And you take a look at my record. I

[19:46] have been on the side of union people.

[19:48] That's why labor unions are supporting

[19:49] me because I fought for them. Even

[19:51] though yes, I've gotten money from a lot

[19:52] of different people who have given me

[19:54] money, but look at the record. I've been

[19:56] there. You say you've got how many?

[19:58] 20ome,000 contributors. I've got 35,000

[20:00] contributors nationwide. Average

[20:02] contribution $50. I bet you don't have

[20:04] that many.

[20:05] >> I've got 35,000 contributors. I'll tell

[20:07] you this.

[20:07] >> I got 35,000 that that I started with a

[20:10] long time ago and it keeps building up.

[20:11] But here's what I'm again. My point is

[20:13] simply this. You can't sit there and

[20:15] with a straight face and honestly paint

[20:17] us all with a brush and say that we're

[20:18] all corrupt, Jerry. You just can't.

[20:20] >> Do you know what I'm going to I'll tell

[20:21] you what I'll say. I'll say that

[20:22] Congress is stuck. It is confirm

[20:25] Clarence Thomas. It won't pass labor law

[20:27] reform. It won't eliminate uh the tip

[20:30] credit so that waitresses have to pay

[20:32] out of their own tips their minimum

[20:34] wage. It's not protecting workers for

[20:37] situs picking. I think that the working

[20:39] people are neglected. Not that you won't

[20:41] cast some good votes, Tom, but we have

[20:42] to join together and break the chokeold

[20:44] that's holding Congress in bondage.

[20:46] >> What we need is a president. What we

[20:47] need, what we need is a president who

[20:50] hasn't been sitting on the sidelines

[20:52] like you have been. But we need a

[20:54] president who's been in there fighting

[20:55] in the trenches like I have for 17

[20:57] straight years. I've been in those

[20:59] trenches, fighting for working people,

[21:01] fighting for our labor unions, fighting

[21:03] for women, fighting for minorities on

[21:05] civil rights bills and things like that.

[21:07] I've been in there and the record is

[21:08] clear. Is that enough to qualify him to

[21:10] be president, governor?

[21:11] >> Well, I think he's qualified by his

[21:13] service to be president. I think I'd be

[21:15] a better one. But let me let me make a

[21:17] point. I think that

[21:20] Jerry's got something to this. You know,

[21:22] break down the power of the special

[21:23] interest in Washington and I'm for

[21:25] limiting pack contributions and limiting

[21:27] the cost of congressional campaigns and

[21:28] all that. But Tom made the real point

[21:30] and I I think we should all we need I

[21:33] agree with you. We ought to try to show

[21:34] our differences to the voters here

[21:35] tonight. But we need to tell them why

[21:37] we're running, too. And and the truth is

[21:40] that for 12 years, for different

[21:41] reasons, the American people have voted

[21:43] for divided government. And a lot of

[21:45] what you're complaining about is the

[21:47] fact that America's problems have been

[21:49] neglected. If we had a president who was

[21:51] leading this country and working with

[21:52] the Congress and trying to move us off

[21:54] dead center and trying to get us to the

[21:55] point where we could compete and win

[21:56] again, I think it would make a big

[21:58] difference. I I agree there's some

[21:59] problems in the system, Jerry. But you

[22:01] got to admit, I mean, for different the

[22:03] American people thought, well, we'll

[22:04] vote for Reagan and Bush. They'll

[22:06] restrain spending. They'll be tough

[22:08] overseas. They'll think government's bad

[22:10] and hold it down. But we better keep the

[22:12] Democrats in there. They'll restrain

[22:13] Reagan and Bush's worst instincts and

[22:15] preserve the gains of the past. And

[22:17] that's hunky dory if people perceive

[22:18] things are going along all right.

[22:20] Meanwhile, the country's going downhill

[22:21] because, as Paul says, we have no

[22:23] economic strategy. The key is to elect a

[22:26] president who will lead and work with

[22:27] Congress. I think that's even more

[22:29] important than anything you can say

[22:30] about organized interest groups. If we

[22:32] get elected, any of us, on a plan to

[22:34] reform healthcare, on a plan to have a

[22:36] national economic strategy for a change,

[22:38] the Congress will enact it in a

[22:39] heartbeat because the people will be

[22:41] sending them a message. I think that's

[22:43] more important.

[22:44] >> You mentioned President Bush, so perhaps

[22:45] I could try to get a little more

[22:46] specific. Senator Shangas, Governor

[22:48] Clinton has been saying recently that

[22:49] your economic proposals mirror those of

[22:52] President Bush and will not improve the

[22:55] lives of middle and lowerass Americans.

[22:57] Is he right?

[22:58] >> Well, let me say that um Tom voted

[23:01] against the Reagan tax proposal. Um

[23:05] there were 11 senators who did so. I was

[23:07] one of them.

[23:09] 11. And so we were a small ban. It was

[23:12] obvious that what George Bush and Ronald

[23:14] Reagan were proposing was economic

[23:17] nonsense. It was morning in America. You

[23:19] can have it all. We'll cut your taxes.

[23:21] We'll massively increase defense

[23:23] spending. And somehow it all work itself

[23:25] out. It was on a napkin. It was Arthur

[23:28] Lafer put down all this on a napkin,

[23:30] handed it to Ronald Reagan and that's

[23:32] what's happened to this country. $3

[23:34] trillion of debt. But the problem they

[23:37] have no strategy was just this mystical

[23:39] you simply lower tax that somehow the

[23:42] economy will come around the Japanese

[23:46] Democratic primaries. Forgive again my

[23:48] interruption. Their Democratic primaries

[23:50] coming up next week in 11 states or

[23:52] caucuses. voters are going to have to

[23:54] choose between the two of you or the

[23:56] four of you, whatever the case may be.

[23:58] Can you at least four of us can you

[23:59] address the question of uh of of what he

[24:03] has had to say about your economic

[24:05] proposals? He says you sound like

[24:06] President Bush.

[24:07] >> Well, I was endorsed um last Sunday by

[24:10] the Atlanta Constitution.

[24:12] And that's not a newspaper in my

[24:14] backyard. And what they said was that I

[24:16] had a progrowth economic growth policy

[24:19] with a progressive social agenda. What

[24:21] I'm saying very simply is look, I've

[24:23] been in politics a long time. I would

[24:26] love to have come out for the middle

[24:27] class tax cut. You don't think my

[24:28] advisers beat on me to be for it?

[24:31] >> I assume so.

[24:32] >> They did. So why did I say no?

[24:34] >> I have to be the alternative that says

[24:37] whatever bullets we have, whatever

[24:38] economic bullets we have have to be used

[24:41] to drive the economy. So you give people

[24:43] jobs. you have all these people um who

[24:46] are unemployed who go home and cannot

[24:49] provide for their families who say to

[24:50] their kids well I'm not sure what the

[24:51] future is for you so I have to be the

[24:54] alternative that says I'm going to do

[24:56] what is necessary irrespective of the

[24:58] pony data and the reason

[25:01] that sounds I want to make a point right

[25:02] there governor

[25:04] Clinton's turn

[25:05] >> I think we need to be specific if I

[25:07] might because all four of us have

[25:08] different positions and maybe if we

[25:09] could just give our positions and why

[25:11] without characterizing them it would be

[25:13] good Well, except Governor, you were the

[25:14] one who characterized him as sounding

[25:16] like President Bush, which is rather

[25:17] damning in the middle of a Democratic

[25:19] campaign.

[25:19] >> What I said was I quoted the Time essay

[25:22] saying it was trickle down economics.

[25:25] >> Senator Songis and I agree on a lot of

[25:27] things. Number one, we agree you got to

[25:29] have a progrowth strategy. You can't

[25:30] just divide a pie that's not growing. I

[25:33] have worked hard to grow my economy. My

[25:35] states created manufacturing jobs at 10

[25:37] times the national average. I think I

[25:39] know something about that.

[25:41] But I believe the only tax incentives

[25:42] that work in a global economy are those

[25:45] that are specifically targeted that you

[25:47] cannot access unless you invest in

[25:49] American goods, American services, and

[25:51] American jobs. And I think everybody

[25:53] here has probably voted for some kind of

[25:54] incentives like that in the past. An

[25:56] investment tax credit, a new business

[25:58] tax credit, uh a low-income housing tax

[26:01] credit, a research and development h tax

[26:03] credit, energy conversion tax credits,

[26:05] changes in the real estate rules for

[26:07] people that are investing in this

[26:08] economy. I'm all for that. My objection

[26:10] is to an acrosstheboard capital gains

[26:12] cut on stocks traded on the stock

[26:14] exchange, which is where Senator Songis

[26:16] concentrates is. And let me argue why.

[26:19] We tripled the stock market in the 80s.

[26:21] That's fine. We can't do any better than

[26:23] that in the '90s. We can't do better

[26:24] than tripled. But average wages went

[26:26] down. The work week lengthened. Poverty

[26:28] exploded. We lost our competitive edge.

[26:31] So my argument is this inequality that

[26:34] we got was accompanied by declining

[26:36] economic growth. I want to give business

[26:37] incentives to invest in this economy.

[26:39] Focus far more on how to reorganize the

[26:42] economy so we can compete with other

[26:43] countries. Export finance for example

[26:45] and and greater R&D targeted to new

[26:48] technologies and put more emphasis into

[26:50] education and training. Put people

[26:52] first. Our real difference here is over

[26:54] whether we should have targeted or

[26:56] across the board uh tax cuts. And that's

[26:58] how I feel about it. Now, Senator

[27:00] Harkin, I think, thinks we should take

[27:01] the money and put it directly in

[27:03] infrastructure. And you can argue that.

[27:05] And I don't I don't know where Senator

[27:06] and Governor Brown says have a flat tax

[27:09] across the board. But my argument is if

[27:12] you look at the way the world works,

[27:13] money's mobile, management's mobile. All

[27:15] we got in this country is our people,

[27:17] our infrastructure, and the natural

[27:18] resources God gave us. We don't have

[27:20] anything else. And to give these across

[27:22] the board cuts to people who got, look

[27:24] at this, that's who's going to benefit

[27:25] from an across the board capital gains.

[27:27] The people that got 60% of the wealth in

[27:29] the last decade. And it did not make us

[27:31] a richer country. It was only in the

[27:33] 1980s that people said growth now,

[27:35] fairness on down the road. Nobody ever

[27:38] thought that was possible before. Now we

[27:39] know it's not possible now.

[27:41] >> I I Well, I

[27:43] >> You don't need me to interrupt you. I

[27:45] can explain what

[27:46] >> I think there's a very good point here

[27:47] that I want to make. All that growth is

[27:50] reflected in these big corporate

[27:52] managers that are making 150 times more

[27:55] than their workers are making. 10 years

[27:57] ago, they only made 60 times more. Now,

[28:00] that's not a function of the

[28:01] >> whatever. It's not a function of the tax

[28:03] code. It's a function of the

[28:04] disproportionate power that the

[28:06] management group now has in relationship

[28:09] to the ordinary working people. And what

[28:11] I say, it's not enough to play with

[28:12] either your targeted taxes or what Paul

[28:15] Sonus has, he wants a temporary

[28:17] investment tax credit of 5 billion. And

[28:19] that's like a temporary car rebate. As

[28:21] soon as you stop paying the rebate, you

[28:23] stop selling the cars. So, I don't think

[28:24] that gets you very far. I think you got

[28:26] to give real power to people. That's why

[28:28] I say you've got to strengthen the power

[28:31] of people to organize collectively. And

[28:33] number two, you've got to give shares in

[28:35] the management to working people and

[28:37] make that as easy as possible. So those

[28:40] who work in a factory or an office own

[28:42] part of the management. Then you're not

[28:44] going to see those gross salary perks to

[28:46] the top. And third, we have to use our

[28:48] public pension funds that constitute

[28:50] half the investment capital to promote a

[28:53] greater social and economic justice in

[28:55] this society. I think that gets us to

[28:57] the goal.

[28:58] >> Can I can I risk being a little more

[28:59] specific and all of you favor cuts in

[29:01] defense funding the south where most of

[29:03] next week's

[29:07] >> I have a job and that is true in Germany

[29:09] as well. So there is an inevitability to

[29:12] what happens if you don't invest. The

[29:14] great American dream is by men and women

[29:16] in small garages that have great ideas

[29:19] that become companies that employ

[29:21] people. Talk to those people today. You

[29:23] know what's going on? there was no

[29:25] capital for them to grow their companies

[29:27] and start companies. So what happens?

[29:28] They have two choices. Starve and that's

[29:31] what's happening today or eventually

[29:33] sell that technology to the Japanese and

[29:35] the Germans and everybody else. This is

[29:37] something the Reagan Bush people have no

[29:39] sense of. So my capital gains is very

[29:41] simple. It says if you invest in those

[29:44] things which grow the economy, you're

[29:46] going to get a capital gains tax cut if

[29:49] you hold it long term. So if you're a

[29:50] speculator, I charge you a higher

[29:52] capital gains tax. If you hold it

[29:54] longterm, it comes down. And the other

[29:56] interesting thing is that my capital

[29:58] gains tax is paid for by the wealthy. So

[30:00] what I'm saying to the wealthy of this

[30:02] country very simply is you invest in

[30:04] America, you do very well. If you don't

[30:06] invest in America, you're going to get

[30:08] hurt. You have to give the people who

[30:10] have the funds the incentive not to go

[30:12] out and consume with yachts and this

[30:14] kind of thing, but to invest so people

[30:16] have jobs. Ultimately, we're going to

[30:18] get overwhelmed by the foreign

[30:20] competition. It's a very Darwinian world

[30:22] out there and my job is to provide the

[30:25] economic strategy. That's why these

[30:26] endorsements have come because there's

[30:28] an economic strategy in putting this

[30:31] thing together.

[30:31] >> Well, wait a minute. I think

[30:32] >> let Tom answer and then

[30:34] >> again that's really trickle down. Uh

[30:36] that's what we've seen for the last 12

[30:38] years. We take your tax dollars and we

[30:41] give it to the few at the top. We

[30:43] deregulate business and trust them to do

[30:45] what's right. Look what it's got us.

[30:47] leverage buyouts, junk bonds, mergers,

[30:49] SNLs, the whole paniply of things that

[30:51] have caused all the pain that we see in

[30:53] America today. And as a matter of fact,

[30:56] the facts don't bear out, Paul, what

[30:58] you're saying. In the mid1 1980s, we

[31:00] actually reduced the capital gains

[31:02] exclusion or you might say the other

[31:04] conversely, we increased capital gains

[31:06] tax and venture capital actually

[31:07] increased. We actually had more venture

[31:09] capital. People invest in these things

[31:12] not because of a tax exclusion, because

[31:15] they think that something's going to

[31:16] grow and they're going to make a profit

[31:17] on it. Let's face it, it has nothing to

[31:19] do with a capital gains. A capital gains

[31:21] tax you get when you sell a business,

[31:23] when you sell something. Investment tax

[31:25] credit, which I'm in favor of, you get

[31:27] it right up front to buy new plant and

[31:29] equipment and put people to work. That's

[31:31] the way we had to go. Investment tax

[31:33] credit. Now, secondly, let me just let

[31:34] me just finish one other thing. The

[31:37] blueprint for building a new America

[31:38] that I have come up with does two

[31:40] things. It provides short-term and

[31:41] long-term growth. First of all,

[31:43] short-term stimulus gets the money down

[31:45] and puts people to work next year, over

[31:47] a million people. And those million

[31:49] people will make a lot of money and

[31:50] they'll spend that money. Gets the

[31:51] wheels. It's bottom up, not top down.

[31:53] It's bottom up. Secondly, I've proposed

[31:55] what I call a children's trust

[31:57] initiative. And I'm telling you, it's

[31:59] not going to come on the cheap. I'm

[32:01] proposing over the next 5 years to

[32:03] invest $25 billion in our kids. That

[32:07] means maternal and child health care

[32:08] programs, women, infants, and children's

[32:10] programs, fully funding Head Start,

[32:13] getting these kids ready to go in life,

[32:14] fully funding the immunization program,

[32:17] the children's, get these kids started

[32:19] early in life on the right path. We know

[32:21] that if we do that, it's going to save

[32:23] us a ton of money later on. So, you get

[32:25] the shortterm term stimulus of putting

[32:27] people to work and then you're looking

[32:29] down the road. The best place if you

[32:31] want to invest in the future of this

[32:33] country is invest in our children.

[32:35] That's the best place you can invest.

[32:36] >> We have to take a break. I regret. And

[32:38] we'll be back in just a moment.

[32:50] They come for you.

[32:53] It's your bed. Your sort of perfect

[32:56] sleeper, but it's the most comfortable

[32:58] spot in the house. The Serta surface and

[33:01] support only Serta builtin makes it that

[33:03] way, the way it should be. It's why

[33:06] people are saying, "I want my Serta."

[33:09] Hurry, it's the Great American Serta

[33:11] mattress sale at participating retailers

[33:13] everywhere. They're blasting prices on

[33:16] Perfect Sleeper today.

[33:19] >> I'm alive. Sonia Scoffield.

[33:27] For a free list of cars with airbags,

[33:31] >> see your Allstate agent.

[33:34] >> Yeah, we milk about 200 head a day.

[33:37] >> No, couldn't drink a drop.

[33:40] I'm the dairy farmer who couldn't drink

[33:42] milk.

[33:43] >> You want his legs?

[33:45] >> I think he's

[33:46] >> My stomach would go crazy. No milk and

[33:48] cookies for Miriam.

[33:51] But then I found this dairy ease milk.

[33:53] It's great. Finally, I can enjoy real

[33:56] milk like anybody else. Even the cows

[33:58] seem to respect me more.

[34:00] >> And to enjoy other dairy products, try

[34:02] Dairy Ease tablets.

[34:05] >> Hey, Sleeping Beauty, wake up.

[34:07] >> Is Prince Charming coming?

[34:08] >> No, but the new boss may be. Better

[34:10] revive with Vivin.

[34:11] >> Vibrant? It wakes me up and it's safe as

[34:14] coffee.

[34:15] >> Great proposal, Stacy. You really alert

[34:16] me.

[34:17] >> Revive with Vin.

[34:22] Okay, I know you're probably not looking

[34:24] for fresh, tender asparagus at just 79

[34:27] cents a pound this very moment. Or maybe

[34:29] not even fast, tasty noodleon entre for

[34:32] just 88 cents each. But if you were to

[34:34] jump up from your couch and come down to

[34:36] Thriftway right this very moment, why

[34:38] you'd find dozens of specials at great

[34:40] prices. Surely there's something you

[34:42] need.

[34:43] >> At Thriftway,

[34:45] you always get a

[34:50] How fast can you change a John Deere

[34:52] tricycle mower from a multer to a rear

[34:54] bagger than a side discharger?

[35:00] Under 10 seconds. I think I could have

[35:02] done it faster. The tricycle mower from

[35:04] John Deere.

[35:05] >> Call this number and get a $20 discount

[35:07] certificate on a John Deere mower.

[35:11] >> 18008580100.

[35:16] >> CUTE. Now you want to use the phone.

[35:22] >> Brother me preaches the world will end

[35:24] soon and only his followers will

[35:25] survive. So why are their children

[35:27] dying? 2020 takes you inside the strange

[35:30] group. Friday

[35:44] welcome back. All of you favor cuts in

[35:45] defense spending. Um, but the South,

[35:47] where most of next week's primaries take

[35:49] place, has got a lot of defense industry

[35:51] and people are going to be thrown out of

[35:52] work if you cut back on defense. How do

[35:55] you balance those two interests? Senator

[35:57] Sus,

[35:59] >> well, there is going to be a defense and

[36:00] we're going to have a strong defense and

[36:02] that will continue. But the fact is the

[36:04] defense budget will start running down.

[36:06] But the fact is that most people in that

[36:08] industry have skills, very good skills.

[36:12] So it gets me back to my original idea.

[36:14] You have to grow new companies so people

[36:17] who are displaced from the defense

[36:18] industry have someplace to go to take

[36:21] their very considerable skills. It's

[36:22] probably in in a technical sense the

[36:25] most competent and talented workforce

[36:28] that we have. The question is going to

[36:29] be what do we then give them to do for a

[36:32] job. So when we talk about growing the

[36:34] economy, this is the cutting edge. So

[36:36] the average person who wants a job can

[36:39] get a job because we like the Japanese

[36:41] and the Germans grow new companies. So

[36:43] there are new companies for people to

[36:44] take their skills to. I think the danger

[36:46] of what Reagan and Bush have done is

[36:49] they went through this massive increase

[36:50] in defense spending and now that we end

[36:52] up with the cold war over and this

[36:54] contraction taking place, they have not

[36:57] provided the mechanism for new companies

[36:59] to start up to employ people who are

[37:01] going to desperately need that

[37:02] employment. I

[37:03] >> I just think I agree there should be

[37:06] incentives for new companies to start.

[37:08] But I think this shows another fatal

[37:11] weakness between our country comparing

[37:12] our country to Germany or Japan for

[37:14] example. Uh we have to downscale the

[37:17] defense budget because it's all

[37:18] structured against the Soviet threat

[37:20] that isn't anymore. And I think all of

[37:21] us agree with that. But not very far

[37:23] from here in Tarant County, Fort Worth,

[37:25] you have more defense related

[37:27] unemployment than in any other county in

[37:29] America, I think. And and the already in

[37:32] Southern California where Jerry's from,

[37:34] you've got you've got scientists and

[37:35] engineers driving taxi cabs. got factory

[37:38] workers out on the street because this

[37:40] is the only country in the world that

[37:41] would even consider uh this kind of

[37:44] buildown of its scientific and

[37:46] engineering and high-tech manufacturing

[37:48] and servicemen and women workforce with

[37:51] no strategy. So I think while we do need

[37:53] a fertile growing ground for new

[37:55] companies, we also need a real strategy.

[37:56] I mean a real strategy. Number one,

[37:58] every dollar you reduce defense research

[38:00] and development, increase commercial

[38:02] research and development. Number two,

[38:04] set up an advanced products research

[38:05] agency just like we have now for defense

[38:07] products for commercial projects to help

[38:09] take those ideas into the workplace.

[38:10] >> Advanced products research

[38:12] >> agency. Yeah, it's a government private

[38:14] partnership, public private partnership

[38:16] to create new products in America.

[38:18] Number three, give these plants some

[38:19] extra time on their contracts to convert

[38:21] the plants and to retrain the workers.

[38:24] And fourth, target the areas that we

[38:27] know we're going to need high-tech

[38:28] investment in in the future.

[38:30] environmental cleanup, environmental

[38:31] technology, space technology, the super

[38:34] collider, these kinds of

[38:36] technology-based

[38:37] areas of the future where you can put

[38:39] all these people to work. I don't think

[38:40] just creating an environment unless you

[38:42] have a strategy will work. Let me just

[38:44] give you one example and I'll seed the

[38:45] floor.

[38:45] >> Can I just ask about all those

[38:46] scientists you you said referring taxes?

[38:48] What do they're listening to you

[38:50] tonight? And how long are they going to

[38:51] have to wait?

[38:52] >> Well, they'll wait a lot less if I'm

[38:54] president than if George Bush is

[38:55] reelected.

[38:57] Let me give you a comparable example.

[38:59] Japan, contrary to a lot of people's

[39:01] belief, they lose jobs, too. Even Taiwan

[39:04] is now losing jobs to lower income

[39:05] countries. The difference is they have a

[39:07] plan. The Japanese lost their ship

[39:09] building industry to the Koreans and the

[39:11] Brazilians. They had all these

[39:12] high-skilled factory workers. What would

[39:14] they do in America? They'd work around,

[39:16] walk around till their unemployment ran

[39:18] out. Then they'd take a job making half

[39:20] what they used to make. And like Jerry

[39:21] says or Tom says, it would break the

[39:23] local labor union because they wouldn't

[39:24] have any members left. What' they do in

[39:26] Japan? They phased the thing out over 10

[39:28] years. They retrained all the workers.

[39:30] They moved up, not down the economic

[39:32] ladder because they had a strategy.

[39:33] That's what we ought to do with the

[39:34] defense workers. They are too precious a

[39:36] resource not to not only have a good

[39:38] environment to move into, but a definite

[39:41] economic strategy. If we downplay this

[39:43] defense without a strategy to do

[39:45] something with those people, we're going

[39:46] to kill them and hurt the economy.

[39:48] >> You want to be specific about defense.

[39:50] from Ronald Reagan and the Congress

[39:53] increase defense on the basis of the

[39:55] Soviet threat by 100% going up. It's 150

[39:59] billion. All right, the Soviet threat's

[40:01] gone. So coming down, we know we're

[40:03] going to cut it by 150 billion, which is

[40:05] half. We know that we're going to do it

[40:07] in 5 years. And the sad thing is when

[40:09] there's no conversion plan, it's the

[40:11] working people who pay the price, not

[40:13] the executive of Boeing or the executive

[40:15] of Lockheed. They still get their

[40:17] payraises. And it's the workers who walk

[40:19] because the politicians are not

[40:20] acknowledging we do need a strategy.

[40:22] High-speed trains, rebuild the shipping

[40:24] industry, expand the civilian space

[40:26] industry, get into various forms of

[40:29] energy. My whole program of millions of

[40:32] jobs to make America energy efficient.

[40:34] We'll need a lot of engineers, a lot of

[40:36] trained people. You need a goal. That's

[40:38] that's the way you get there. I just

[40:40] want to say something about these

[40:41] targeted tax cuts. They make me a little

[40:43] nervous. I'll tell you why. Because they

[40:45] keep changing them. In 1986, capital

[40:47] gains was increased and the investment

[40:49] tax credit was abolished. Now, everybody

[40:52] wants to reduce capital gains. Not

[40:54] everybody, Tom doesn't, but these two

[40:55] do. And they want to bring back

[40:57] investment tax credit. Well, if it's so

[40:59] good now, why was it bad 5 years ago?

[41:01] You churn the tax code. My 13% proposal

[41:04] will allow business to expense new

[41:07] equipment 100% the first year. No need

[41:10] for tax accountants and lawyers and half

[41:13] the IRS. This thing is simple. It takes

[41:15] effect immediately and it'll drive this

[41:17] economy forward in a way that these

[41:20] politically determined targets never

[41:21] will.

[41:22] >> You're smiling, Senator Hung.

[41:24] >> You're taking a pro business position.

[41:27] >> Couple with my pro-Justice,

[41:29] pro-mpowerment of working people

[41:31] position.

[41:32] >> Well, I quote the Atlanta Constitution

[41:33] when they endorsed me. Pro-conomic

[41:36] growth with the progressive social

[41:38] agenda. I'm proud of that. I'm very

[41:40] proud of that. Well, but your social,

[41:42] let me say that abortion and gay rights

[41:44] is not real economic power.

[41:45] >> I spoke in Florida two days ago to

[41:48] exactly the group you were talking

[41:49] about, people with great skills who are

[41:51] unemployed. And I said to them, if I

[41:54] give a 97 cents a day middle class tax

[41:56] cut, you're going to get a job. See, for

[41:59] them, it's not theory. For them, it's

[42:01] real because they know that giving out

[42:03] 97 cents a day provides no jobs. You

[42:05] have to stimulate. Let me finish. Let me

[42:07] finish. How's it?

[42:09] >> You have to stimulate the economy. They

[42:11] need to have growth in the private

[42:13] sector so they can take their

[42:14] considerable skills someplace and get a

[42:17] job. So, it's one thing to say to people

[42:19] who, you know, have a job, well, we'll

[42:21] give you this tax cut. But the ultimate

[42:23] responsibility is that working men and

[42:25] women in this country need a capacity to

[42:28] get out there, have a job, and provide

[42:30] for their families. That's the kind of

[42:32] audience that's the cutting edge. I

[42:34] mean, that's where our responsibility

[42:35] ultimately lies. How's he who's heating?

[42:38] >> Well, because he argues that the middle

[42:40] class tax cut undermines growth. I we

[42:43] both rate we rose we both raise taxes on

[42:45] upper income people. I argue for a

[42:47] modest tax cut and fairness for the

[42:49] middle class. He argues instead for a

[42:51] long-term capital gains tax. Now, let's

[42:53] not all this growing new companies.

[42:55] We're both for a new company tax credit.

[42:57] We're both for an investment tax credit.

[42:59] We're both for those things. He says if

[43:01] you hold General Motor stock for a long

[43:03] time, you ought to get a lower tax. Now,

[43:05] we had a we had four capital gains tax

[43:07] cuts, as Tom Harkkins always saying,

[43:09] between 1978 and 1986. Four. During that

[43:12] time, we lost 2 million manufacturing

[43:14] jobs. Look at General Motors. We gave

[43:16] them capital gains, tax cuts, tax cuts,

[43:19] regulatory relief. The union gave them

[43:21] concessions. And what happened? We lost

[43:23] market share because the company didn't

[43:26] make the right decisions and because the

[43:27] workers weren't retraining, they didn't

[43:28] have the right kind of equipment and

[43:30] they weren't organized. To think that

[43:32] this across the board capital gains cut

[43:33] something for nothing in the stock is

[43:36] going to make a difference is wrong.

[43:38] Senator Strongus gave a speech in which

[43:40] he said, "I want to be or an interview,

[43:42] I want to be the best president Wall

[43:44] Street ever had." Wall Street tripled in

[43:46] the 80s. That's not where the real

[43:48] economy is. Look at what we did in my

[43:50] state. We created manufacturing jobs.

[43:52] I'm pro growth. But but to say that this

[43:55] middle class tax cut, number one, is the

[43:56] center of anybody's economic package is

[43:58] wrong. And number two,

[44:00] >> a lot of people have that impression.

[44:01] I'm sure you know.

[44:01] >> Yeah. Thanks to his ad, which is false,

[44:03] which says that I'd pay for it by

[44:05] increasing the deficit. It that's wrong.

[44:08] But it's also wrong to say that an

[44:10] acrosstheboard capital gains cut and

[44:12] relaxing the antitrust laws, which was

[44:15] condemned even by experts in the field,

[44:17] and relaxing the accountability of

[44:19] corporate executives to shareholders is

[44:21] good for the for the economy. I think

[44:22] that's just dead wrong. That's exactly

[44:24] what we did in the 1980s, and the

[44:26] economy went downhill. I think it's

[44:27] wrong. I believe

[44:29] >> Senator Harkin we haven't heard from for

[44:30] a while.

[44:30] >> I believe the question was had to do

[44:31] with the cut back in military spending.

[44:33] >> Precisely.

[44:34] >> Uh much of what Governor Brown said is

[44:36] correct and others uh that we have to

[44:38] have a plan for economic conversion. By

[44:41] the Pentagon's own estimates, for every

[44:43] billion dollars that we convert from

[44:44] military spending to civilian spending

[44:46] in our military bases, it creates 6800

[44:50] more jobs

[44:52] >> because civilian spending has much more

[44:53] of a ripple effect than military

[44:55] spending. And so we have to have a plan.

[44:58] And I think what we ought to be rather

[44:59] than going after each other, we

[45:01] >> talk about our plans. What are we doing?

[45:02] >> Talk about our plans and talk about what

[45:03] Bush's plan is not. George Bush

[45:05] basically is letting these people, as I

[45:07] think Governor Clinton said, go out and

[45:08] drive taxi cabs. I look upon these

[45:10] people who worked in our defense

[45:12] industries as our cold war veterans.

[45:14] They were the ones that really won the

[45:16] Cold War for us. They did everything we

[45:18] asked them. They worked hard. They paid

[45:20] their taxes. They raised their families.

[45:23] They were bright. A lot of them are

[45:24] scientists, engineers, the best sheet

[45:26] metal workers in in America, the best

[45:28] machinists, and now we're saying go flip

[45:30] hamburgers. That's not what we ought to

[45:32] be about. We ought to be about job

[45:34] retraining and economic conversion in

[45:36] these plants. Jerry said it right.

[45:38] Building building the next generation of

[45:40] commercial aircraft, the next generation

[45:41] of commercial shipping, high-speed rail,

[45:44] renewable energy systems in America.

[45:46] I'll give you one good example of what I

[45:49] mean by this. George Bush wants to buy

[45:51] five more B2 bombers.

[45:53] absolutely no use. You know, they were

[45:55] supposed to evade, radar, bomb a country

[45:57] that no longer even exists. But he says,

[45:59] "We want to buy five more at about a

[46:00] billion dollars a copy." And yet, right

[46:02] near where we sit here tonight in Fort

[46:04] Worth, there's an aircraft called the

[46:06] V22. I don't mean to get into specifics.

[46:08] The V22, it's a tilt rotor. The whole

[46:09] wing tilts. It takes off vertically,

[46:11] flies very fast, and can land

[46:13] vertically. While Cheney is asking for

[46:16] money and Bush is asking for money for

[46:18] the B2, they're cutting the money for

[46:19] the V22, which we can sell commercially.

[46:23] In fact, statistics show that for this

[46:26] V22,

[46:27] we could build 12 vertical ports in our

[46:31] biggest cities on the east coast. 12 of

[46:32] those buy 165 of these aircraft for the

[46:36] price of one half of a new large

[46:39] airport. These are aircraft we can build

[46:41] commercially, sell here, sell around the

[46:44] world. Yet Bush is cutting the funds for

[46:46] that, putting the money in the B2

[46:48] bomber. It makes no sense.

[46:49] >> Let me say just in support of that in

[46:51] our defense budgets at least, I don't

[46:53] remember the other. We both left. I

[46:55] support the B22. I also think we ought

[46:58] to have a submarine program out, but but

[47:00] >> should have a submarine program.

[47:01] >> Yeah. Because we need force mobility. We

[47:03] need but I I favor far fewer forces in

[47:05] Europe than the president does.

[47:06] >> Would you bring them all home?

[47:07] >> No. Why would you leave some there?

[47:11] >> Uh for two reasons. One is uh let me say

[47:14] something nice about President Bush. I

[47:16] thought he handled himself pretty well

[47:17] at the NATO conference in Rome last

[47:18] summer and he just put it put it on the

[47:20] line of the Europeans. He said, "Do you

[47:21] want us here or not?" And they said,

[47:22] "We'd like you to stay a while longer.

[47:24] Uh we may need you in Yugoslavia. We may

[47:26] need you in the former Soviet republics.

[47:28] We don't know what's going to happen."

[47:29] So I'd leave a force there for that.

[47:31] Would you would you be would you be in

[47:32] favor of sending American forces in to

[47:35] keep the peace in Yugoslavia

[47:36] >> if it were part of a United Nations

[47:38] effort? I might or if it were part of an

[47:40] agreed upon

[47:42] why leave all those in Europe. How many

[47:45] would you ridiculous?

[47:46] >> Well, wait a minute. There's a second

[47:48] reason. There's a second reason.

[47:50] >> The biggest security threat we're going

[47:51] to face, I think, in the near term are

[47:53] all these dictators, some of which are

[47:55] in the Middle East. Some of whom are in

[47:56] the Middle East trying to become nuclear

[47:57] powers. Iraq, Iran, uh, President Bush's

[48:01] friends in China, rewarded him for

[48:03] Tianaan Square for what he did there by

[48:05] opening negotiations with the Iranians

[48:07] on nuclear transfer.

[48:08] >> Would you be in favor of using American

[48:10] forces to put Saddam Hussein in his

[48:12] place?

[48:13] >> Well, let let's answer the European

[48:15] question first. I don't think

[48:16] >> Well, I mean, the American forces in

[48:17] Europe.

[48:17] >> I don't think we need 150,000 troops

[48:19] there, but I would leave a much smaller

[48:21] force there. I agree with Jerry there. A

[48:23] lot of them are richer than we are now

[48:24] in Europe. We ought to bring some of

[48:26] most of them home or half of them home.

[48:27] But we ought to leave a sizable force

[48:29] there for a time until we see what

[48:31] happens in the former Soviet republics

[48:34] and until we work out a long-term

[48:35] relationship with NATO and until we

[48:37] develop a UN security peacekeeping force

[48:39] that we know is more reliable. So I

[48:41] would leave some there. Yes. But not

[48:43] >> I just don't agree with that. I think

[48:44] >> would you bring them all home?

[48:46] >> I'd bring them I maybe leave a thousand

[48:48] there and just as an exchange program

[48:50] have them send a thousand over here so

[48:51] we can just keep a sense of solidarity.

[48:53] I think and I'm a student of of history,

[48:57] a classics scholar, at least I got my

[49:00] degree in Latin and Greek and tell you

[49:01] the Roman Empire collapsed not because

[49:03] it couldn't keep off the barbarians but

[49:06] because internally it began to rot

[49:09] injustice, people hanging around getting

[49:11] uh bread in circuses, the rich living in

[49:14] their decadent life and the poor falling

[49:16] by the wayside. What we have here is

[49:19] gangs, dope crack salesmen, murders. I

[49:22] mean, we got to take care of business

[49:24] right here. That is a much greater

[49:25] threat than anything over in the Middle

[49:27] East or in Russia. And I think the

[49:28] trouble with Washington is they're so

[49:30] preoccupied elsewhere. I want to come

[49:33] right back here and start putting all

[49:35] our attention. How do we stop this

[49:36] crime? How do we put these kids to work?

[49:38] How do we make sure they get out of

[49:40] school? And that's going to take more

[49:42] attention than the Iraq war or any of

[49:44] this other stuff.

[49:46] First of all, I I've written a paper on

[49:48] this. In fact, a year ago, I published a

[49:49] book on this very subject. Uh so if you

[49:51] want to get it, you can buy it at the

[49:52] bookstore. Okay. Uh about force

[49:54] reductions in Europe and how we should

[49:55] restructure our military forces. First

[49:58] of all, we have to recognize the cold

[49:59] war is over. It is over, finished, done.

[50:02] And therefore, we have to move to new

[50:03] institutions. We can't keep thinking

[50:06] about NATO. NATO was set up for one

[50:08] reason, to defend Western Europe from

[50:09] the Warsaw Pack. Warsaw Pack's no longer

[50:12] there, no longer a threat. We ought to

[50:13] be thinking about a new kind of an

[50:15] institution in which we can cooperate

[50:18] with our European allies and friends. I

[50:21] have suggested phasing out NATO and

[50:24] building the CSC, the the Committee on

[50:26] Security and Cooperation in Europe

[50:28] because that covers not just military,

[50:30] it covers all of the other elements on

[50:33] which we want to be involved in Western

[50:36] Europe, for example, in Eastern Europe.

[50:37] I think that would be a much better

[50:39] vehicle for us to be involved in Europe.

[50:41] I've suggested that we would withdraw

[50:42] our troops from Europe down to a level

[50:45] of about 20,000. 20,000 would provide

[50:47] some forward basing just in case we

[50:49] needed forward basing. But I think with

[50:51] 20,000 troops in Europe, uh, we could

[50:53] have

[50:53] >> 20,000, Senator Sus.

[50:55] >> Well, I think you have to keep enough

[50:57] troops in Europe so the commitment to

[50:59] NATO is unquestioned. You know, the NATO

[51:02] >> Wait a minute.

[51:03] >> I didn't interrupt you.

[51:05] >> I'm sorry.

[51:06] >> The number of troops I would say would

[51:08] be between 50 and 90,000. That's it. We

[51:11] don't need all those troops there. We

[51:12] don't need all the troops um in the

[51:14] Middle East in uh in the Pacific Rim.

[51:17] But the fact is, and I think Jerry

[51:19] pointed to that, that this country is in

[51:21] trouble economically that when great

[51:24] powers have no capacity to have their

[51:26] economics uh in place, they will implode

[51:29] and they simply collapse uh from

[51:31] without. So, it seems to me that at some

[51:33] point that this administration has never

[51:35] understood that you have to go into this

[51:37] conversion. When I was a young intern

[51:40] for a congressman, this is back in the

[51:42] mid60s, he was talking about conversion

[51:45] because he saw that eventually this

[51:47] problem will be upon us and I let me

[51:50] just use my time now if I could answer

[51:53] some of the um points that were made

[51:55] earlier. My position about American

[51:58] business was very clear. I said to the

[52:00] American entrepreneur, I'll be the best

[52:02] friend you've ever had because I'll help

[52:05] you grow, help you be profitable. That's

[52:07] the good news. The bad news is I'm going

[52:09] to hold you to a much higher standard of

[52:11] accountability in terms of corporate

[52:13] giving, in terms of involvement with

[52:15] education, in terms of involvement with

[52:17] philanthropic activities like culture,

[52:20] like music, like art.

[52:21] >> How are you going to do that?

[52:22] >> Because you set a standard. Look at

[52:24] Minneapolis. In Minneapolis, they set a

[52:27] standard. Nothing, no law, no

[52:29] promulgation. They simply say, "We look

[52:32] for 2.5% of your pre-tax profits." and a

[52:35] community sets a standard. Let me make

[52:37] one other point. This issue of

[52:39] accountability. Do I want to change the

[52:41] laws on director liability? I sure do. I

[52:44] speak as a director. Now, under the

[52:46] American law, the way it is now, a

[52:48] director can get sued if that director

[52:51] votes for something long-term as opposed

[52:54] to giving money out to the shareholder.

[52:56] That's the reverse of what the Japanese

[52:58] do. What I'm trying to say is that

[53:00] directors have the courage to invest

[53:02] long-term, take a long-term perspective,

[53:05] can have that as a defense against

[53:07] shareholder lawsuit because what's

[53:08] happening now United States is in

[53:11] America, we think in three-month terms.

[53:13] I want to abolish quarterly reports.

[53:16] Make it semianual. The United States

[53:17] cannot compete if it thinks in

[53:20] three-month terms with Japan that thinks

[53:22] in 10 months terms, 10ear terms. And the

[53:25] final point I would make, could I just

[53:27] on that one point? Am I being naive when

[53:29] I when when I say that I think it sounds

[53:32] a little bit like pie in the sky,

[53:34] >> I live

[53:35] >> what you would what you would do to

[53:37] encourage American business to change.

[53:39] >> If the American entrepreneur does not

[53:42] begin to think long term, there is no

[53:44] future. There is no future. Now, I

[53:47] always presume that quarterly reports

[53:49] were somehow given by mandate. Our

[53:52] competitors do not do that. We have to

[53:54] change the way management thinks, the

[53:56] way labor thinks, the way government

[53:57] thinks. It has to be a partnership.