tv 1984 Vice Presidential Candidates Debate CSPAN October 2, 2016 12:35am-2:00am EDT
or you support a ticket that supports policies that will kill jobs by increasing taxes -- and that's what the track record shows, is a desire to increase taxes, increase spending -- a trillion-dollar spending proposal that's on the table, that's going to hurt ourcountry -- and saying no to energy independence -- clear choices on november 4th. ms. ifill: governor palin, you get the chance to make the first closing statement. gov. palin: well again, gwen, i do want to thank you and the commission. this is such an honor for me. and i appreciate, too,senator biden, getting to meet you finally also and getting to debate with you. and i would like more opportunity for this. i like being able to answer these tough questions without the filter, even, of the mainstream media kind of telling viewers what they've just heard. i'd rather be able to just speak to the american people like we just did. and it's so important that the american people know of the choices that they have on november 4th. i want to assure you that john mccain and i, we're going to fight for america. we're going to fight for the middle class, average, everyday american family like mine. i've been there.
i know what the hurts are. i know what the challenges are. and thank god i know whatthe joys are, too, of living in america. we are so blessed. and i've always been proud to be an american and so has john mccain. we have to fight for our freedoms, also, economic and our national security freedoms. it was ronald reagan who said that freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. we don't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. we have to fight for it and protect it and then hand it to them so that they shall do the same, or we're going to find ourselves spending our sunset years telling our children and our children's children about a time in america back in the day when men and women were free.we will fight for it, and there is only one man in this race whohas really ever fought for you, and that's senator john mccain. ms. ifill: thank you, governor.senator biden? sen. biden: gwen, thank you for doing this and the commission. and governor, it really was a pleasure getting to meet you. look, folks, this is the most
important election you've ever voted in your entire life. no one can deny that the last eight years we've been dug into a very deep hole, here at home with regard to our economy and abroad in terms of our credibility. and there's a need for a fundamental change on our economic philosophy, as well as our foreign policy. and barack obama and i don't measure progress toward that changebased on whether or not we cut more regulations and how well ceo's are doing, or giving another $4 billion in tax breaks to the exxonmobils of the world. we measure progress in america based on whether or not someone can pay their mortgage, whether or not they can send their kid to college, whether or not they're able to, when they send their child like we have abroad -- or i'm about to abroad, and john has as well i might add -- to fight, that they're the best equipped and they haveeverything they need, and when they come they're guaranteed that they
have the best health care and the best education possible. you know, in the neighborhood i grew up in, it was all aboutdignity and respect, a neighborhood like most of you grew up in. and in that neighborhood, that was filled with women and men, mothers and fathers who taught their children if they believed in themselves, if they were honest, if they worked hard, if they loved their country,they could accomplish anything. we believed it, and we did. that's why barack obama and i are running, to reestablish that certitude in our neighborhoods. ladies and gentlemen, my dad used to have an expression. he'd say, "champ, when you get knocked down, get up." well, it's time for america to get up together. america's ready, you're ready, i'm ready,and barack obama is ready to be the next president of the united states of america. may god bless all of you, and most of all, for both of us selfishly, may god protect our troops. ms. ifill: that ends tonight's debate. we want to thank the folks here at washington university in st. louis and the commission on presidential debates. there are two more debates to come: next tuesday, october 7th, with tom brokaw at belmont
greg's c-span, created by america's cable television companies and brought to you by your cable or satellite provider is a service. president making appointments to this of frame court of the united states will be president donald trump. >> with hillary clinton in the white house, the rest of the world will never forget why they have always looked up to the united states of america pulls >> c-span's campaign 2016 continues with the vice presidential debate between governor pence and senator tim kaine in farmville, virginia, beginning at 7:00 p.m. with a preview of the debate.
pre-debate reefing for the audience. then live coverage followed by viewer reaction. watch live on c-span and watch live anytime on demand at c-span.org and listen live on the free c-span radio at. >> on newsmakers this weekend, our guest is mary kay henry who heads the service employees international union. she talked about the 2016 presidential race and what makingutions seiu is after it gave an early endorsement of hillary clinton last fall. >> in the 14 and 15 election time, we got 100,000 more members who are voluntarily contributing to our political action fund so we now have more of a money investment but frankly, we think the time,
talent, and energy of our families,d their friends, and neighbors are the difference. it is trusting relationship that cuts through the negativity and people understand they have to register and get out and vote in record numbers in this election for candidates up and down the ballot. you laid out eight that your members are campaigning on and the union is brought.ng on is secretary clinton in the white the democratsw if take over the senate there will probably be only a short legislative window to do big things. we saw that with president barack obama's legislative agenda. what are some of the things seiu is using as its highest minority for clinton's legislative efforts should she become president?
>> we want president clinton and governors and senators and house members that we elect to work together to have government make it possible for more people to work together in and unions to work together and that is our number one agenda, good jobs. what are the ways in which the president together with the congress can get people to work and how can we take service work and make it to good work that people can feed their families on? >> you can watch that entire interview tomorrow at 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. eastern here on c-span. crimes as the nation elect a new president, will america have its first foreign-born first lady since it louisa adams?
for thehave a gentleman first spouse? insightadies" gives into the impact of every first lady. it features interviews with the leading first lady historians. each chapter offers read biographies of 45 presidential spouses. lady's," now available at your favorite bookseller. pastncer: our look at presidential debates continues now with geraldine ferraro and george h.w. bush in 19 84. then, between dan quayle in bidenbenenson followed by
and palin in 2008. then, the 1992 vice presidential debate when dan quayle, george gore, and stockdale squared up. geraldine ferraro became the first woman to participate in a presidential campaign debate. that debate with george h.w. bush took place in pennsylvania and was sponsored by the league of women voters. it is one hour and 20 minutes. [applause]. [applause] dorothy ridings: good evening, good evening from the civic center in philadelphia, pennsylvania. i'm dorothy ridings, president of the league of women voters, the sponsor of tonight's vice presidential debate between republican george bush and democrat geraldine ferraro. our panelists for tonight's debate are john mashek, national
correspondent for u.s. news & world report, jack white, correspondent for time magazine, norma quarrels, correspondent for nbc news, and robert boyd, washington bureau chief for knight-ridder newspapers. sander vanocur, senior political correspondent for abc news is our moderator tonight. sander vanocur: a few words about the order of the format tonight. the order of questioning was determined by a toss of the coin. congresswoman ferraro won the toss, so she elected to speak last. therefore, vice president bush will get the first question. this is from the four reporters on the panel. a reporter will ask a question, follow-up question, and then the same to the other candidate, then each candidate will get to rebut the other. the debate will be divided into two parts.
the fair will be a section, the first one on domestic affairs, the second on foreign affairs. t, the second on foreign affairs. now the matter of address was decided by the candidates. therefore it will be vice president bush, congresswoman ferraro, and we begin our questioning with john mashek. john mashek: john adams our nation's first president once said, today i am nothing. tomorrow i may be everything. with that in mind, i'd like to ask the following question. vice president bush, four years ago you ran against mr reagan for the republican nomination. you disagreed with them on such issues as the equal rights amendment, abortion, and you even labeled his economic policies as voodoo. now you apparently agree with him on every issue. if you should be called upon to assume the presidency would you , follow mr reagan's policies down the line or would you , revert to some your own ideas. ? i don't thinksh: there is a great difference
between my ideas and president reagan's. one of the reasons i think we're an effective team is that i firmly believe in his leadership. he's really turned this country around. we agree on the economic program. when we came into office, why, inflation was 21.5%, wiping out every single american, 21.5% if you can believe it. productivity was down. savings was down there was despair. in fact the leadership of the country told the people that there was a malaise out there. and this president turned it around, and i've been with him every step of the way. and of course i would continue. those kinds of programs because it's brought america back. america is better off. people are going back to work. and why mr. mondale can't understand that there's a new enthusiasm in this country, that america is back there's new strong leadership i don't know. ,he has one answer to the problem.
raise everybody's taxes. he looked right into the camera and said that out there in san francisco. he said i'm going to raise your taxes. well he's had a lot of experience and that. and he sure going to go ahead and do it, but i remember a statement of lyndon johnson's. when he was looking around why his party people weren't supporting him. and he said, hey they painted , their tails white, and they ran with the antelopes. there's a lot of democratic white tails. running with the antelopes not one single democrat has introduced the mondale tax bill into the congress. of course i support the president's economic program and i support him in everything else and. i'm not sure because of my concept of the vice presidency that if i didn't, i do what mr. mondale is done with jimmy carter jump away from it. i couldn't do that to ronald reagan. now, next year, or any other time. i have too much trust in him. i have too much. john mashek: some republicans
reagan --izing mr. mr. mondale for now claiming he disagreed privately with jimmy carter's decision to impose a grand bargain. if you ever disagreed with any decision of the reagan administration in his inner circles, and then following that up, where in your judgment does loyalty and in principle begin. ? george h.w. bush: i/o my president my judgment and then i owe him loyalty. you can't have the president of the united states out there looking over his shoulder wondering whether his vice president is going to be supporting him. mrs. ferraro has quite a few differences with vice president mondale. and i understood it when she changed her position on tuitions tax credits. they're different on bussing. she voted to extend the grain embargo. he now says that he was against it. if they win, i hope they don't, but if they win, she will have to accommodate some views, but she'll give him the same kind of loyalty that i'm giving. president reagan. one, we're not far apart on
anything. two, i can walk into that oval office. any time and get in my judgment he might agree or he might not but he also knows i won't be talking about it to the press. or i won't be nothing in the back by leaking to make me look good and complicate the problems of the present the united states. john mashek: congresswoman ferraro, your opponent has served in the house of representatives. he's been embassador to the united nations, ambassador to china director of the central , intelligence agency, and now he's been vice president for four years. how does your three terms in the house of representatives stack up against experience like that? geraldine ferraro: well, let me first say that i wasn't born at the age of 43 when i entered congress. i did have a life before that as well. i was a prosecutor from a five years the district attorney's office in queens to county and i was a teacher. it is not only what is on your paper resume that makes you qualified to run for or to hold office. it's how you approach problems. and what your values are. i think if one is taking a look
at my career they'll see that i , level with the people, that i approach problems analytically, that i am able to assess their -- various facts with reference to a problem, and i can make the hard decisions. i'm intrigued when i hear vice president bush talk about his support of the president's economic program and how everything is just going so beautifully. i too recall when vice president bush is running in the primary against president reagan. and he called the program voodoo economics, and it was and it is. we are facing absolutely massive deficits. this administration has chosen to ignore it. the president has failed to put forth a plan to deal with those deficits, and if everything believes that everything is coming up roses perhaps the vice , president should join me as i travel around the country and speak to people. people in johnstown, pennsylvania are not terribly
thrilled with what is happening with the economy because they are standing in the light of a closed plant. because they've lost their jobs . people in youngstown, ohio have stores that are boarded up. because the economy is not doing well it's not only the old industries that are failing. it's also the new ones in san jose california they're complaining they can export their high tech qualities. good to japan and other countries. the people in the north west in the state of washington oregon. about what is happening to the timber industry into the. agriculture industry so. so things are not as great as the administration is wanting us to believe in their television commercials. my feeling quite frankly is that i have enough experience to see the problems, address them, and make the tough decisions and level with people with reference to this problem. john mashek: despite the historic aspects of your candidacy how do you account for , the fact that a majority of women at least according to the polls, favor the reagan bush
ticket over the mondale ferraro ticket? geraldine ferraro: i don't. let me say that i'm not a believer in polls, and let me say further that what we are talking about are problems that are facing the entire nation. they're not just problems facing women. the issues in this campaign are the war/peace issues. the problems of deficits, the problem of trade deficits. billionow facing $120 trade deficit in this country are facing problems and the environment. i think what we're going to be doing over the next several weeks, and we're absolutely delighted that the league has sponsoring these debates and that we are, we are able to now speak to the american public and address the issues in a way such as this i think you're going to see a change in those polls. john mashek: one minute rebuttal. george h.w. bush: i was glad to get that vote of confidence
from geraldine. this is for our in my economic judgment. so let me make a statement on the economy. the other day she was a plant in a play. and she sent to the workers, why are you all voting, why are you so many of you voting for the reagan bush ticket. and there was a long deathly silence and she said come on we delivered. that's the problem. and i'm not blaming her except for the liberal voting record in the house. they delivered. they delivered 21.5% interest rates. they delivered what they called malaise. they delivered interest rates that were right off the charts. they delivered pay cuts take home pay checks that were shrinking. and we've delivered optimism. people are going back to work. six million of them. as 300,000 jobs a month being created. that's why there was that deathly silence out there in that plant. they delivered the wrong thing. ronald reagan is delivering leadership. sander vanocur: congressman one minute
rebuttal. geraldine ferraro: i think what i'm going to have to do is i'm going to start correcting the vice president's to to sticks. -- statistics. there are six million more people have jobs. and that's supposed to happen in a growing economy in fact in the prior administration with all their problems they created ten million jobs. they have interest rates. during this administration for housing for middle class americans were for it was 14.5% under the prior administration with all their problems the average rate was 10.6%. if you take a look at the number of people living in poverty as a result of this administration's six million people. , five hundred thousand people knocked off disability rolls. you know you can walk around saying things are great. and that's that's going to be hearing. we've been hearing that on those commercials for the past couple of months. i expect they expect american people to believe that. i'll become a one woman turnstile squad will start tonight. john mashek: mr. white. congressman for our own. like to ask about civil rights.
you have in the past been a supporter of tuitions tax credits for private parochial schools. and also of cost to some at the now that you are mr. mondale's running mate, have you changed your position on either of those? geraldine ferraro: with reference to the busing vote that i cast in 1979, both fritz mondale and i agree on the same goal and that is nondiscrimination. i just don't agree on the same direction he does on how to achieve it. but i don't find any problem with that. i think that's been something that's been handled by the courts and not being handled by congress and will not be handled by the white house. what we both support nondiscrimination and has an integration of neighborhoods. the goals we both set forth. with residents -- reference to the tax credits i have , represented a district in queens, which is 70% catholic. i represent my district. let me say as well that i have also been a great supporter of public school education and that is something that fritz and i
feel very, very strongly about for the future of this country. this administration over the pass several years have gutted the educational programs available to our young people. it has attempted to knock out cal grants, which are monies to -- pal grants, which are young individuals who are poor and who cannot afford to go to college. it is reduced by 25% the amount of money is going into college education and by a third those going into second primary schools. but fritz mondale i feel very strongly that if you educate your children that that's an , effort in the way that you build up and make a stronger america. with reference to civil rights , i think you have got to go beyond that. if you take a look also at my record in the congress and fritz record in the congress and as vice president we both , have extremely strong civil rights records. this is ministration does not. it is come in in the bob jones case on the side of segregated academies. it came in in the gross city case on the side of
discrimination, against women, the handicapped, and the elderly. as a matter of fact in the congress we just passed overwhelmingly the civil rights bill 184 in this of in a straight in the republican controlled senate. there is a real difference between the mondale and the failure of this administration specifically in that particular area. in the areas of affirmative action what steps do , you think government can take to increase the representation of minorities and women in the the workforce? and specifically would you support the use of quotas to achieve those goals? geraldine ferraro: i do not support the use of quotas. both mr. mondale and i feel very strongly about affirmative action to correct. inequities. we believe that steps should be taken. we have supported, set aside for minorities and women's businesses. that is a positive thing. we don't feel that you're in any
way hurting anybody else by reaching out with affirmative action to help those who've been disenfranchised. contrary, if you have a growing economy, if you have jobs, if you allow for small business the opportunity with lower interest rates to reach out and grow there will be more , than enough space for everybody, and affirmative action is a very positive way to deal with the problems of discrimination. jack white: vice president bush many critics of your , administration say that it is the most hostile to minorities in recent memory. have you inadvertently perhaps encouraged that view by credits,g tuition tax the anti-busing amendment, siding with bob jones university case before the supreme court. the original opposition to the , voting rights act extension so forth? george h.w. bush: no, i think it is a good record. you mention the voting rights extension that was extended for the longest period of time by president reagan.
but we have some problems in attracting the black vote. and i think our record deserves better. we have done more for black colleges. than any previous administration. we favor enterprise zones to give, and it's been blocked by tip o'neill and that house of representatives those liberals in that house. blocked a new idea to bring jobs into the black communities across this country. and because it's not an old handout, special federal spending program it's blocked , their a good idea. out, special federal spending program, it's blocked there, a good idea. i would like to see that tried. we brought more civil rights cases in the justice department than the previous administration by far. new to help these black teenage kids. the minimum wage differential that says, look, to an employer hire these guys. , and yes, they're willing to
work for slightly less than the minimum wage. give them a training job in a private sector. we throughout that whole seda that trained people for jobs that existed. simply ram them on to the government payroll, and we put in a thing called the job training partnership act, wonderful new legislation that is helping blacks more and more. we think of civil rights as something like crime in your neighborhoods. and for example when crime , figures are going in the right direction, that is good. that's a civil right. similarly we think of it in terms of its quality of life. and that means interest rates. you know, it's funny. mr. mondale talks about real interest rates. the real interest rate is what you pay when you get and try to buy a tv set or buy a car or whatever it is. and real interest rates, and we left office for 21.5%. inflation, is that a civil right to have that gone right off the charts so you're busting every of every american family those
that can't afford it the last? now we've got a good record. we've got it on civil rights legislation. minority set asides more help for black colleges, and we've got it in terms of an economy that's offering people opportunity and hope. jack white: many recent studies have indicated that the poor and minorities have not really shared in the new prosperity generated by the current economic recovery. was it right for your administration pursue policies , economic policies that , required those at the bottom of the ladder to wait for prosperity to trickle down from people who are much better off and then? george h.w. bush: it is not trickle down. and i'm not suggesting there's no poverty. but i am suggesting the way to work out of poverty is through real opportunity. and in the meantime, the needy are getting more help. human resource bending is way
way up. aid for dependent children spending is up. immunization programs are up almost every place you can point. contrary to mr. mondale -- well i gotta be careful. how he goes, if everybody somebody sees a silver , lining he finds a big black cloud out there. why not a harvest moon? congresswoman, your rebuttal. yes, -- w. bush: geraldine ferraro: yes, the vice president signed the voting rights act that was after he was he did not support it while i was in the congress in the senate. it was passed. despite his opposition, and he did sign it because he was required to do so in a civil rights cases that he mentioned the great number of cases that they have been forced the reason they enforced me because under the law they are required to do that and i'm delighted that the administration is following the law with reverence. jack white: this will be out of
my time, not yours. knowing the people and their diffidence about the athletic context of which this is not one, i beseech you, try to hold your applause, please. i'm sorry. geraldine ferraro: i just have to correct in my 30 seconds that are left the comment the vice president made with reference likefically to a program afdc/ if you go down the programs that suffered in this administration, the first budget cuts and those , are the ones that and the second term, second part of their term we were able to , restore some of those terribly, terribly unfair cuts to the poor people of this country. jack white: vice president bush. george h.w. bush: maybe we have it factual. maybe we can ask the experts to go to the book still do it anyway. spending for food stamps is way,
way up under the reagan administration. afdc is way up under the reagan administration. i am not going to be found wrong on that. i am sure of my facts. and we are trying to help. and i think we're doing a reasonable job, but we are not going to rest until every single american that wants a job gets a job. and until this prosperity and this recovery is benefiting many americans benefits all americans. sander vanocur: mrs. quarrels. norma quarrels: one of the most emotional issues in this campaign has been the question of the separation of church and state. what are your views on the separation of church and state specifically with regard to abortion, and you believe it was right for the archbishop of philadelphia to have a letter read in 305 churches urging catholics to fight abortion? george h.w. bush: i believe in
pluralism. i do believe in separation of church and state. i don't consider abortion a religious issue. i consider it a moral issue. i believe the archbishop have every right to do everything he wants in that direction. just as i never fall to jesse jackson. from taking his message to the black pulpits all across this country. just as i never objected when the nuclear arms, the nuclear freeze or the anti-nuclear people many of those movements , were led by a priest suddenly -- led by a priest. suddenly because a catholic bishop feel strongly on an issue people are saying it's merging , of church and state. i speak for the president. we favor separation of church and state. we favor pluralism. now somebody says well if you want to restore prayer in schools. you don't think it's right to prohibit a kid from praying in schools. for years kids were allowed to pray in schools. we don't think that's a merger of church and state to have a nonmandatory, voluntary non-government ordered prayer. ,and yet some are accusing us of
, injecting religion into politics. i have no problem with what the archbishop does, and i have no problem what the evangelists on the right do, and i have no problem what the priests on the left do. and it didn't bother me when during the vietnam war much of , the opposition to the government democrat and , republican government was led , by priests. encouraging people to break the law on the adage of you know the civil defense disobedience thing. so our position separation of , church and state, pluralism so , no little kid with a minority religion of some sort is going to feel offended or feel left out or feel uncomfortable. but yes, prayer in school on a voluntary basis worked for many many years until the supreme , court ruled differently. and i am glad we got this question because i think there's been too much said about religion in politics we don't . believe in the nomination really moving in. it wasn't our side that raised the question about our president whether he was a good christian
or not. and so i -- please. and so, that's our position, separation of church and state pluralism, respect for all. ,norma quarrels: vice president bush, four years ago you would , have allowed federal financing of abortions in cases of rape and insist as well as when the mother's life was threatened. does your position now agree with that of president reagan who in sunday's debate came very close to saying that abortion is murder? george h.w. bush: you know, there have been. , inve to make a confession evolution. there have been 15 million abortions since 1973. and i don't take that lightly. there's been a million and a this year. half the president and i do
favor a human rights amendment. i favor one they would have an exception for incest and rape and he doesn't. but we only for the life of the mother. and i agree with him on that. so yes, my position has evolved. but i'd like to see the american who faced with fifteen million abortions isn't rethinking his or -- her position, and i'll just stand with the answer. i support the president's position and comfortably. from a moral standpoint. norma quarrels: so you believe it's akin to murder. george h.w. bush: now again i support the president's position. norma quarrels: congresswoman ferraro what are your views on , the separation of church and state with regard to abortion. , and do you believe it was right for the archbishop of philadelphia to have those letters read in the puppets in the city and urge the voters to fight abortion with their vote? geraldine ferraro: let me say first of all that i believe very very sincerely and separation of , church and state taking from the historical viewpoint. if you go back to the sixteen -- 1600 people came here the
, reason they came to this country was to escape religious persecution. and that's the same reason why people are coming here today in in 1900 to escape naziism and. now in the one thousand nine -- 1994 when they can get out of the country to escape communism so they can come here and practice their religion. our country is founded on the principle that our government should be neutral. as far as religion is concerned. and what's happened over the past several years and quite frankly i'm not going to let you lay on the intrusion of the state politics into religion or religion into politics by my comments with reference to the president's policies. because it started in when this 1980 administration was running for office and the reverend jerry falwell became very very involved in the campaign. but it happened over the past four years has been i think a real fudging of the lawn with the separation of church and state. the actions of the archbishop let me say to you i feel that , they have not only a right. but a responsibility to speak , up. and even though i've been the person that the pacific enough of that i feel that they do have
the responsibility to do so, and i have no problem with that no more than i did with the priest who marched in the time of vietnam, and no more than i did at the time of martin luther king. what i do have a problem with is when the president of united states gets up in dallas and gets up and says anyone that does not support his constitutional amendment for prayer in schools is intolerant of religion. there are numerous groups who prayerupport that, that in schools. numerous religious groups. are they intolerant of religion , is that what the president is saying? i also checked when i'm told that the reverend falwell has been told that he will pick two of our supreme court justice. that's going all little bit far. and that is, let me just say to you, that is total intrusion, and i think it is in violation of our constitution. norma quarrels: congresswoman ferrara, as a devout catholic does it trouble you that so many
, of the leaders of your church >> let me tell you that i did not come to my position on abortion very lightly. i am a devout catholic and when i was running for congress in 1978, i met with the person i felt very close to, a monsignor, currently a bishop. i spoke about my personal feelings that i would not have an abortion but i was not sure if i were to become pregnant because of a rate that would be self righteous. he said that's not good enough, you can't support that position. that's my religious views and i will accept the teaching of the church, but i cannot impose my religious views on someone else. i take an oath as a public official to represent all the people, not just the catholic. when there comes a time i cannot practice my religion and do my job properly, i will resign my job. >> vice president bush, your
rebuttal? >> i respect that statement, i really and truly do. morale a different question here on abortion. i notice mr. mondale keeps talking in the debate and now has come up here about mr. falwell. i don't know where this canard could have come from. ronald reagan has made one superb about standing to the only one he has made, appointed to the supreme court. that was sandra day o'connor. mr. falwell opposed her nomination. we still have respect for him, but he opposed it. i hope this lays to rest this slander against the president. we want justices who will interpret the constitution cannot legislate. >> congresswoman ferraro, your rebuttal? >> i find it difficult to believe because the platform the republican party passed in dallas, one of the things they did was they said the position
on abortion would be a litmus test not only for supreme court justices but other federal justices. that seems to me a blurring of lines of the separation between church and state. >> the next question for mr. boyd. >> like many americans, each of you has recently had an unhappy experience with the internal revenue service. [laughter] >> i am going to prolong your ordeal. congresswoman ferraro, you disagree with the rule that says a candidate must report the income or assets of his or her spouse if you get any benefit from them. your husband's tax returns show you did benefit because he paid the mortgage and property taxes on your homes. the house ethics committee is examining this question, but it will not report its findings until after the election. would you be willing to ask that committee controlled by democrats to hurry up its work and report before the election? >> let me say to you that i already did that. i wanted them to move ahead.
if you recall, i spent about one hour and 45 minutes speaking to 200 reporters on august 21, the day after i was required to file my financial statement. i sat for as long as they had questions on the issue and i believe they were satisfied. i filed more information that than any other candidate for national office in this country. not only did i agree to file my tax returns after a little bit agreedding, my husband to file his with not only the ethics committee but that fec. the action you are speaking about with the ethics committee was started by a right wing legal organization, foundation, no way i would have to, that there would be an automatic inquiry. we have filed the necessary papers. i have asked them to move along. unfortunately, the house went
out of session today. i would like that to be taken care of any way because i just want it cleared up. >> since that press conference on your family finances, you filed a new report with the ethics committee and this showed your previous reports were full of mistakes and omissions. do you think that showed good leadership to blame all of this on sloppy work by your accountant? >> what it shows, and it was truly that i hired an accountant who had been with our family for well over 40 years, he was filling out those ethics forms. i did not spend the time with him. i just gave him my tax information and he did it. i have to tell me what we have done since. i have hired a marvelous accountant, i have spent a lot
of time having him again go through those ethics forms, and he will be do my taxes over the next eight years while we are in the white house. the american public can be sure it is all taken care of. bush, lastsident year, he paid 13% of your income in federal taxes. according to the irs, someone in that bracket normally pays 28% of his income. what you did was perfectly legal. do you think it's fair or do you think there's something wrong with tax laws that allow such deductions for wealthy individuals? >> i liked the way mrs. ferraro reported. they reported federal taxes and state and local taxes. that year, i happened to pay a lot of state and local taxes , which are deducted from the other. i looked at the other day and we have paid 42% of our gross income in taxes. mr. mondale the other night took -- i will be honest, i thought it was a cheap shot at me. we did little looking around to see about his.
we can not find his 1981 tax return. it might have been released. maybe my opponent knows whether it was released. hiswe did find estimate of his income for those three years is $1,400,000. i think he paid about the same percentage i did in total taxes. he also made a reference that troubled me very much. he was talking about my chauffeur. i am driven to work by the secret service. so is mrs. ferraro. so is mr. mondale. they protected his life for four years and now they have done a beautiful job for barbara and i , and they saved the life of the president of the night of states. i thought that was a cheap shot to try to divide class, rich and poor. the big question isn't whether mrs. ferraro is doing well. i think they are doing pretty well. i know barbara and i are doing well. mr. mondale is doing well with
$1.4 million in income. the question really is, is the tax cut fair? are people getting a fair break? the answer is the rich are paying 6% more on taxes and the poor are getting a better break. those lower and middle income people that have borne the burden for a long, long time. yes, i favor disclosure. i have always disclosed. this year, i have my taxes and everything i own in a blind trust. i didn't even sign my tax return . there seemed to be an interest in it so we went to the ethics committee and they agreed to change the trust and the trust has been revealed and i was glad to see i paid 42% of my gross income in taxes. [applause] >> mr. vice president, how can you claim your home is in maine
for tech or expenses -- tax purposes and at the same time claim your home is in texas for voting purposes? are you a texan? >> i am a texan, but i have one house. under the law, every taxpayer is allowed when he sells a house to buy a house and get the rollover. i may hire -- she says she has a new good accountant. i would like to get his name and phone number. [laughter] >> i think i paid too much in the way of taxes and residents, legal residents for voting is very the very -- is a very different. the domicile, very different. they say you are living in the vice president's house. i've got problems with the irs. so do a lot of people out there. i think i paid too much. i would like to get some money back. [laughter] >> congresswoman ferraro, your rebuttal? >> let me just say i would be glad to give the vice-president , but i will warn you
he is expensive. i think the tax system and our government uses is fair. i think the tax system is unfair but it's not something we can address in the short term. the tax cut we got last three years that the president gave out, it is not fair. if you earn $200,000, you got a $25,000 tax cut. if you earn between $20,000 and a $40,000, you may have got $100. if you made less than $10,000, he suffered a loss of $400. that is not there. -- fair. it is not only unfair, but economically has near destroyed this country. that is one of the reasons we are facing these enormous deficits we have today. >> mr. vice president? >> i think i have said all i want to say. i did not fully address myself to the question of disclosure. hello the fight in 1968 in the
house of representatives. i led the fight for disclosure. i believe in it. before i went into this job, i disclosed everything we had. we did not have any private corporations, but i disclosed absolutely everything. arthur andersen made out at the assets of liability statement that went further than any other one. to protect the public interest, we went into this blind trust. i believe in the blind trust because i believe a public official in this kind of job ought not to know whether he's going to benefit directly or indirectly by some holding he might have or something of that nature. i support full disclosure. >> thank you. ends the part of this debate devoted to domestic affairs. we will now turn to foreign affairs. >> vice president bush, since your administration came to power, the president has
threatened a stern response against terrorism. yet murderous attacks have continued in london and the middle east. who is to blame in lebanon and the middle east? you have been the director of the central intelligence agency, was committed to stop? >> terrorism is very, very difficult to stop and i think everybody knows that. we have ambassadors killed in sudan and lebanon some time ago. we see the israeli building in lebanon after the death of our marines, you see that hit by terrorism, the israelis, with all their experience fighting terrorism, you know it is difficult. when you see ayatollah khamenei with his radical islam resorting to government-sponsored terrorism, it is very difficult. the intelligence business can do a good job and i am one who
always defends the central intelligence agency. i believe we ought to strengthen it and i believe we still have the best foreign intelligence business in the world. but it is very difficult to get the source information you need to go after something as shadowy as international terror. there was a difference between iran and what happened in lebanon. in iran, you have a government holding the u.s. embassy, the government sanctioning the takeover of that embassy by those students. the government negotiating with the united states government for the release. in lebanon, the terror that happened at the embassy, you have the government there that wants to help fight against terrorism. -- because of the malay melee in the middle east that is there today and has been there yesterday and the day before, everyone who has had experience in that area and knows it is a very different thing. what we have got to do is get absolutely the best security possible. i do not think you can go
assigning blame. the president is the best i've ever seen accepting that. he has been wonderful about that and everything that happens. but fair minded people who understand international terror know it is hard to guard against. the answer really lies in the middle east and terrorism happening all over the world is a solution to the palestine question. but to follow on to camp david under the umbrella of the reagan september of 1982 initiative. that will reduce terror. it will not eliminate it. >> you mentioned ayatollah khomeini. some charge the previous administration to be almost helpless against him and at muammar gaddafi. what have you done against arab states that foment this kind of terrorism? >> what have we done to support arab states that want to stand up against international terrorism. we believe in supporting without
uprising the security of israel in any way, because they are our one strategic ally of the area, one democracy in the area, our relationship with them has never been better. we believe in reaching out to the gulf cooperative council states anderate arab help them with defensive weapons to guard against international terror or radical islam perpetuated by ayatollah khomeini. i believe we have helped keep the peace in the persian gulf. , youngresswoman ferraro and former vice president mondale have criticized the president over the bombings in lebanon. what would you do to prevent such attacks? me first say that terrorism is a global problem and let me say secondly that mr. bush has referred to the embassy
that was held in iran -- while i was at the white house in january in 1981 when those hostages, all 52 of them came home alive, it was at that time that president reagan gave a speech welcoming them home as america did, we were so excited to see them back. but what he said was the united states has been embarrassed for the last time. we're going to stand tall and if this ever happens again, there will be swift and immediate steps taken to address the wrong our country has suffered. in april of 1983, i was in beirut and visited the ambassador at the embassy. two weeks later, that embassy was bombed. at that time, take a look at the crazy activity of terrorists, you can't blame anybody. they're going to do crazy things in -- and you don't know what's going to happen. the following october, there is another bombing. that took place at the marine barracks where there were 242 young men who were killed. right after that bombing
occurred, there was a commission set up called the warren it did a study of arrangements where the marines were sleeping and found there was negligence. they did not have proper precautions to stop the trucks from coming in. the long commission issued a report and president reagan got got up and said i am commander-in-chief, i take responsibility. we all waited for him to take responsibility. last month, we had our third bombing. the first embassy there was no gate. the second time with our marines, the gate was open. the third time, the gate was there but had not been installed. what was the president's reaction? the security arrangements were not in. our people were placed in that embassy in an unsecured time and the marines who were guarding it
were left to go away and there were other people guarding the embassy. i would like to know what that means. are we going to take proper precautions before we put americans in situations where they are in danger or are we just going to walk away or is this president going to take some action? >> some democrats cringe at the word spying and covert activity. do you believe both of them have a legitimate role in countering terrorist activity around the world? >> i believe they have a legitimate role in gathering information. the cia in the last bombing gave information to our administration with reference to the actual threats that it was going to be bombed. it wasn't the cia was at fault. there is legitimate reason for the cia -- to gather intelligence information. but when i see them doing things like they're doing in central america, supporting a covert war, i don't support that kind of activity. the cia is there to protect our
government, not there to subvert other governments. >> vice president bush? >> i think i just heard mrs. ferraro say they should do away with all covert action. if so, that has very serious ramifications as the intelligence community does. this is serious business and sometimes it's quiet support for a friend. i will leave that one there. but let me help you with the difference between iran and the embassy in lebanon. iran, we were held by foreign government. -- there wase terrorist action where the government opposed it. we went to lebanon to give peace a chance, to stop the bombing of civilians in beirut, to remove 13,000 terrorist from lebanon, and we did.
we saw the formation of a government of reconciliation and for somebody to suggest as our opponents have that these men died in shame, they better not tell parents of those young marines. they gave peace a chance and our allies were with us, the british, french and italians. >> congresswoman ferraro? >> let me just say that i always resent vice-president bush and your patronizing attitude that you have to teach me about foreign policy. [applause] >> i have been a member of congress for six years and i was there when the embassy was held hostage in iran that i have seen what has happened in the past several months, 17 months of your administration. secondly, please don't categorize my answers, either. leave the interpretation of the -- to the american people who are watching this debate. [applause] >> let me say further that no one has ever said those young men were killed and the negligence of this administration or others died in shame. no one who has a child who is 90
or 20 years old would say that about the loss of anyone else's child. >> mr. white? [applause] >> congresswoman ferraro, you have repeatedly said he would not want your son to die in an undeclared war for an uncertain cause. recently, your running mate, mr. mondale, suggested that may become necessary to erect a military quarantine on nicaragua. under what circumstances would you advocate the use of military forces in central america? >> i would advocate the use of force to protect the security of our country, protect our security interests, or protect our people or the interest of our friends and neighbors. when president -- i am jumping the gun a bit. when mr. mondale referred to the quarantine of central america, a country lead central america, to as awas referring
last resort after all other means of attempting to settle the situation in that region of the world have been exhausted. quite frankly, what is being done in this administration, they are moving militarily instead of promoting the process , which is the process in place in support of mexico and colombia and panama and venezuela. instead of supporting the process, our administration has in nicaragua in supporting covert activities to keep that revolution going to overthrow the sandinista government. el salvador is not pushing the head of the government to move toward a correction of the civil rights and human rights problems that existed there. now, this administration seems almost befuddled by the fact that nicaragua is moving to participate in the process. and el salvador, through its
president is reaching out in order to negotiate peace. what we feel about the situation is deal first through negotiation. force is not a first resort, but certainly a last resort in any instance. >> follow-up, please? >> many times in its history, the united states has gone to war to defend freedom of the land. would you be willing to forgo the use of military force even if it meant the establishment of a soviet dictatorship so close to our borders? >> i assume you're speaking about the government of nicaragua? we would work with that government to achieve a pluralistic society. they have elections coming up on november 4. we have to work with them to achieve a peaceful solution to bring about a pluralistic country. no, i am not willing to live
with a force that could be a danger to our country. certainly i would see our country would be there putting all kinds of pressure on the neighboring countries of honduras, costa rica, el salvador, to promote the kind of society we can live with in this country. >> vice president bush, both cuba and nicaragua are reported to be making preparations to defend themselves against an american invasion which they claim could come this fall. some of your opponents in congress say the administration could be planning a december surprise invasion. can you tell us what circumstances a reelected reagan administration would consider using force in central america? >> we don't think we would be required to use force. let me point out there are 2000 cuban military and 7500
so-called cuban advisers in nicaragua. there are 55 american military and el salvador. down on the instructions of the president to speak and el salvador. i told them that they had to move with the president of el salvador to respect human rights. they are moving well. the difference between el salvador and nicaragua the difference between night and day. el salvador went to the polls. it was a certifiably free election. in nicaragua it is very different. they have aborted their democracy and humiliated the holy father and cracked down on the only press there.
that should concern every american. they do not have human rights at all, they will not promote -- hold free elections. the ground rules were so unfair that a campaign to not even be waged. of humanry is devoid rights and the other is trying to perfect democracy. we'll like it when nicaragua were exports its revolution. froms supplies coming in places like north korea and russia in an effort to destabilize el salvador. toward to see the trend democracy continue. there have been some thing like 13 countries since we've come and move toward democracy.
-- gave those for tiny caribbean countries a chance. we saved lives. grenada was a proud moment because we stood up for democracy. in terms of a threat of these countries of nuclear weapons, no, there is no threat. [applause] considering the country's long respect for international law, was it right for the united takes to be involved in mining the harbors of nicaragua, a country we are not at war with and subsequently refuse to let the world court adjudicate? vice pres. bush: i support what we are doing. he was supported by congress under the law. concern was eight for the contras. they want to see democracy
perfected in nicaragua. my i to understand that nowhere in the world would we do something just off-base? would miss ferraro never supported if it was necessary for freedom fighters? yes, we are for the contras feared -- contras. everyone who wants to allow the government to prevail, the contras are not so messy stuff these are people that wanted a revolution. they thought the revolution was the trade. these are people who support human rights. yes, we should support them. ms. ferraro: i spent a good deal of time in central america in january and have the opportunity to speak to the contras.
let me just say that the situation that exists now because of this administration's policies are not getting better we are not moving toward a more secure area of the world. the number of troops the sandinistas are accumulating has risen. support the horrors of nicaragua. congress not supported, and this week congress voted to cut off covert aid nicaragua and left a unless a- until and request is made. the covert activities i oppose covertua, those cia activities are not supported by the congress and not supported
by the majority people in the country. >> vice president bush? vice pres. bush: i would sadly like to make the distinction again between the country thinking democracy and the handful of countries that have totally violated human rights and are going to mark this route . the sandinistas is an avowed marxist. they don't believe in the church or free elections. they don't believe in all of the values we believe in. we have to support the democracies there. when you have freedom fighters the want to go the democratic route come a we believe in giving them support. we're for negotiation. three dollars out of every four dollars we have sent has been for economic aid, to support the
people. one fourth only is military. vice president bush, the last three republican administrations , none of them were soft on communism. they met with the soviets and got agreements on arms control. why presidents reagan has not met with the soviet ministers at all and only met with prime minister less than a month ago? vice pres. bush: yes i can. meterntioned the gromyko -- meeting. there are been three separate soviet leaders. in three and a half years, three separate leaders. the soviets have not been willing to talk. in inf. to the table
proposal, ban nuclear force weapon. don't leave your allies in europe in a monopoly position. we did not think that is the way to deter aggression and keep the peace. the first thing the president did when he came into office was make a proposal to destabilize weapons. when the soviets said, we'll like that proposal, we said we would be more taxable. -- flexible. i laid on the table a treaty to ban all nuclear weapons. we said, let us come together, you come over here and see what we're doing, we go over there and see what you're doing. let us save the kids of this world from chemical weapons. the soviets said no.
reducing conventional forces, they are not even willing to tell us the base of how many troops they have. we have an agreement with them on the hotline. senate, theyratic were a democratic administration, the senate would not ratify the agreement. it was flawed and unverifiable and not good. our president wants to reduce, not just stop but reduce dramatically nuclear weapons. -- when the soviets know they have to deal with the , then they will talk. if they think the opposition is going to give up, all of these things unilaterally before they're willing to talk, they may sweat it out for four more weeks.
asyou were once quoted saying a nuclear war is winnable. you still believe that? vice pres. bush: i was quoted wrong because i never believed that. inc. -- think there would be any disagreement based on that of the concept. nuclear weapons should never be fought with. encourage the's soviets to come to the table as we did at the gromyko meeting. i wish everyone could of seen that. excellent, right on top of the subject matter. i bet you he would back to the soviet union saying this president is calling the shots, we had better move. i think we are getting an agreement because it is in the
interest of the soviet union to make it just as it is in the interest of the united states. they are not deterred by rhetoric. rhetoric that decides agreements, it is self-interest of the country. >> congresswoman ferrero, you haver. for -- mr. mondale been for a freeze. how would you make sure that the soviets are not cheating? ms. ferraro: let me say that i think there is no issue more important in this campaign than the issue of war and peace. on eleanor roosevelt's birthday, let me quote her. you must not just want peace, you must believe in it and you must work for it. this administration's policies have indicated the opposite. the last time i heard vice president bush blame the fact that they did not meet with the
soviet leader, and this is the first leader -- president not to meet with the soviet leader. i went and got a computer printout, five pages of world leaders that the soviet leaders have met with. they are not all little people. cyprus, fiveny, pages of people the soviet leaders of ministry with and somehow they cannot meet with the president of united states. in addition to not meeting with the soviet counterpart am a this is the first president, you are right, since the start of negotiation -- negotiating arms control agreement that is not negotiated and arms control agreement and has opposed to every single one of the other presidents have negotiated including eisenhower and nixon. with reference to the vice president, about the
intent and desire of the united , thes administration soviet union did walk out of the talks. 982, -- to me that 1982, it was not a realistic postal. it dealt just with land-based nuclear missiles. in 1982 i believe, their own negotiator came out with a proposal that would have limited the number of nuclear arms in europe. that proposal was turned down by the administration, a proposal by its own administrator. i'm delighted they met with mr. gromyko. but they could've met with him in 1981 when he came to the u.s. -- u.n.
>> sorry, i have to impose a limit. vice president bush. vice pres. bush: i think there is a big difference between the leader of cyprus and the president of the united states. the soviet union will meet with a lot of different people. we've been close touch with many who have met with leaders of the soviet union. that is quite different than meeting with the president of the united states. the soviets have said they will be when there has been progress. i would like to correct my opponent on the proposal. it was the soviet union unwilling to discuss it. the record is very clear on that. mentioned in flexibility of our position on arms. yes, we offered to get rid of
those. did we said, if that is not good enough, there is flexibility, let us talk about the planes. that is an important point in terms of negotiation. havengresswoman, you will two minutes to rebut. congresswoman, americans feel that the republicans when the democrats are better able to keep the u.s. out of war. we have had four years of relative these under president reagan. how can you convince americans that the world will be a safer place under mondale? ms. ferraro: you have to take a look at the current situation. we have 50,000 new their warheads. we're building at the rate of five-x per day and we have been
doing that since the administrators -- administration came at office. build, but an arms race only leaves to another arms race. thatondale has indicated the first thing he would do is contact his soviet counterpart and set up an annual summit meeting. that is number one. i don't think you can negotiate until you start talking. secondly, he would issue a challenge in the nature of temporary mutual, verifiable testing in thelt air, in the atmosphere. that would respond with a challenge from the soviet union that we hope to sit down and negotiate a treaty. 1960.as done in
>> you have another minute. ms. ferraro: it would give us the opportunity to sit down and negotiate a treaty. that was done in 1960 by president kennedy. 1963, he issued a challenge to the soviet union and said he will not test in space, in the atmosphere, if you will not. they did not. they negotiated a treaty. we now do not have to worry about that type of testing. it can be done, it will be done if we have the will to do it. it is mutual, verifiable and a challenge, that once the challenge is not met, testing would resume. >> our last series of questions on foreign affairs. >> congresswoman ferrero, you have had or no experience in military matters and yet you
might someday find yourself commander-in-chief of the armed forces. how can you convince the american people that you would know what to do to protect this nation security and you think the soviets might be tempted to take advantage of you something because you are a woman? ms. ferraro: are you saying i would have to have fought in a war to love these -- peace. >> you know what i asked. ms. ferraro: i think what happens is you try to a way whether or not i have had military experience, that is the natural conclusion. it is about as valid as saying you would have to be black in order to despise racism. you would have to be female to be offended by sexism. that is not so. i think if you look at where i have been both in congress and where i intend to go, the type of person i am, i think the
people of the country can rely on the fact that i will be a leader. uniont believe the soviet for one minute can sit down and make a determination on what i will do if i'm ever in a position to have to do something with reference to the soviet union here it i'm prepared to do whatever is necessary in order to secure this country and make sure that security is maintained. unionly, if the soviet ever believed they could challenge the united dates -- states with nuclear forces or otherwise, if i was in a position of leadership they would be met with swift, concise and certain retaliation. let me just say one other thing. the most important thing i think as a leader, what one has to do areet to the point when you not put in a position.
fromyou are moving away having to make a decision on force, you have to move toward arms control. that has not been done the past four years. that would have to be the number one failure of this administration. i would not visit -- put myself in that position as a leader of this country. will borrowllow, i a leaf from my principles, what is the single most question -- single question you would most like to ask your wine -- opponent on foreign policy? ms. ferraro: i think i have a concern as a vice residential candidate in his it is an -- and as a citizen that we are not doing anything to stop the arms race. if we keep talking about military and or you're ready --
inferiority that we do not have, our joint chiefs of staff has said they could never exchange our military power for there's -- theirs. vice president bush, four years ago president reagan and his to that a military buildup bring the soviets to negotiate seriously. since then we've spent almost $1 trillion on defense but the soviets are still building their military forces as rapidly as we are and there are no negotiations. with the original premise or strategy wrong? vice pres. bush: no, i think it was correct in his correct. when mcammond office, the american people recognized that we had flipped on inferiority and varies -- various things.
some of the planes world is in older than there pilots and morality not good. morale was not good. we have to get that back. at the same time, we have made proposals onund producing -- reducing nuclear weapons. the soviets left the table. talks were sound talks and i wished they had continued them. the ban on chemical weapons was our issue, not theirs. we wish they would move forward so that everyone would know whether the other side was
keeping his word. it would also reduce the level of terror. talking with them about conventional force reductions. we talk with them about human rights. abouttion and try to talk the human rights question, the soviet oppression of jews is intolerable. forwardto keep pushing on the moral grounds as well as arms reduction. it is my view that because the president has been strong and because we have addressed the the soviets are more likely to make a deal. y whenviets made a treat that that we would deploy a system. will get negotiation when they see